"Superman Returns" deleted opening sequence to DVD

Comicbookfan-V2 Mon Jun 06, 2011 6:35 pm

I know alot of fans of "Superman Returns" (Even though there's not any of them here on this site) have been waiting for the "Return to Krypton" scene to be added to the film since the film's DVD release and it looks like WB finally decided to release it along with the film to the "Superman Motion Picture Anthology" DVD set aleast according to an article from Comicbookmovie.com! Personally dispite of all this I don't think it made any difference that adding a lost scene won't make the film any better just maybe longer!

Here's the link... http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/rorschachsrants/news/?a=38879

Apologist Puncher Mon Jun 06, 2011 7:49 pm

non_amos Tue Jun 07, 2011 12:46 am

Apologist Puncher wrote:

Apparently EUNUCH:

http://www.supermanhomepage.com/news.php?readmore=9854

June 1, 2011: Return to Krypton Sequence from "Superman Returns"
Superman Anthology The other day I received a nice surprise delivery from Warner Bros... "The Superman Motion Picture Anthology" Blu-ray collection. Warner Bros. sent it to me to write a review on the 8-disc collection. There was just one small problem, I didn't own a Blu-ray player.

Unable to get to the shop for a few days, I sat with the box on my desk, teasing me with content yet unseen. Top of this list was the never-before-shown "Return to Krypton" sequence from "Superman Returns".

Today, with new Blu-ray player purchased, I sat it on the floor in front of my TV, plugged it in to the side of the TV, plugged in the electrical cord into the closest available outlet, and inserted the "Superman Returns" disc into the player. I select the Deleted Scenes menu item, selected "Return to Krypton" and sat back to watch.

Now my newly purchased Blu-ray player is still sitting on the floor, as I wanted to get to the computer and type this up straight away.

The "Return to Krypton" sequence is pretty much what I imagined it would be...

Kal-El A small speck moves through the stars of space. We then move inside a crystal capsule, with crystals growing and changing in front of our eyes. Lights reveals a space inside the craft within which we find Kal-El, wearing a tight-fitting grey-ish suit with S on his chest. He rises and walks to a crystal control panel (which rises to meet his touch).

With a few hand movements Kal-El instructs the outer wall of the spacecraft positioned in front of him to turn transparent, so that it becomes a shield-shaped window through which he can see what's outside. With more movements of his hands over the control crystals he pilots the spacecraft through the rocky remains of his home world, Krypton. While most of the planet is destroyed, there are large sections that remain somewhat intact. As the craft flies around, spotlight searching this way and that, Kal-El's heart rate starts to increase. Beads of sweat dot his forehead.

Krypton The spacecraft comes to a large structure. Kal-El increases the size of the search light to reveal a giant beveled "S" shield - the crest of the House of El. However his heart rate continues to escalate, his hands start to shake, and he collapses in pain as we see that the remains of the planet all around the ship are actually heavily infused with deadly Kryptonite radiation. Unable to stand, Kal-El tries to pilot the spacecraft away from the Kryptonite, but it is everywhere. The spacecraft, under Kal-El's unsteady hand, careers through the debris, crashing into large shards of rock and Kryptonite, breaking off parts of the spires that make up the crystal spacecraft.

Kal-El desparately reaches for the control console, bringing up the navigational map, and selecting the planet Earth as the ship's next destination. The craft responds to the new command just in time to miss crashing into another large piece of the planet, flies through the debris field of Kryptonite, and heads into deep space for the planet Earth.

We pan down from the stars of space... to the Kent Farm in Smallville at night.

And that is where this 5 minute and 23 second deleted scene leaves off, leading into the start of the movie where Martha says goodbye to Ben Hubbard just before her adopted son's firey return.

I have to say that I was quite impressed with Brandon Routh's performance in this deleted sequence. He has no dialog, but his facial expressions really carry the scene. The sound effects (escalating heartbeat and Kryptonite crackle) help to set the mood. I understand however why this was not included in the theatrical release of the film. It is a bit slow, may have dragged down the pace for the start of the film, and doesn't necessarily add anything to the over all story.

Look for a full review of "The Superman Motion Picture Anthology" in the not-too-distant future.

· Steve Younis on June 1, 2011 1:51am EST· 35 Comments · 7659 Reads ·Print

First of all, you've first got to actually have Kal-El, not BJ the Bartender as Singerman aping Reeve. Such a scene, under a more competent director for SUPERMAN, could've actually worked. Can't you imagine if this same scene had been done by CHRISTOPHER REEVE back in the day?! Even under Lester? Reeve would've really conveyed emotion & feeling in such a scene! And he would've sold it too! Ruth? Not so much. Remember, wood is made from trees, & trees just sit there.....boring. But Eunuch was obviously impressed. Rolling Eyes

thecolorsblend Tue Jun 07, 2011 1:37 am

I'd like to go on record right now (if I never have before) for never understanding the fascination the Apologists have for this scene.

non_amos Tue Jun 07, 2011 1:49 am

thecolorsblend wrote:I'd like to go on record right now (if I never have before) for never understanding the fascination the Apologists have for this scene.

My guess is it's because they get their 'BJ' in that scene. Primary reason. Had the producers of Smallville chosen to do a similar scene, before or after Singerman, with Tom Welling, duh apologists would've been singing a different tune. They'd have been crying foul! Ya know? Because, among other things, Welling can't ..........act. Suspect

thecolorsblend Tue Jun 07, 2011 3:36 am

non_amos wrote:
thecolorsblend wrote:I'd like to go on record right now (if I never have before) for never understanding the fascination the Apologists have for this scene.

My guess is it's because they get their 'BJ' in that scene. Primary reason. Had the producers of Smallville chosen to do a similar scene, before or after Singerman, with Tom Welling, duh apologists would've been singing a different tune. They'd have been crying foul! Ya know? Because, among other things, Welling can't ..........act.

As if. You're TOTALLY making shit up now. You're speculating! I mean, EVERYBODY knows that there was NEVER an episode of Smallville where Clark went back to Krypton.

But even if there HAD been such an episode, OF COURSE the Apologists wouldn't have bashed on it, sheer intellectual honesty demands it!

...

Oh, 7.18- Apocalypse, yikes, you're right, forgot about that. And yeah, the Apologists pissed all over it...

non_amos Tue Jun 07, 2011 11:09 am

thecolorsblend wrote:
non_amos wrote:
thecolorsblend wrote:I'd like to go on record right now (if I never have before) for never understanding the fascination the Apologists have for this scene.

My guess is it's because they get their 'BJ' in that scene. Primary reason. Had the producers of Smallville chosen to do a similar scene, before or after Singerman, with Tom Welling, duh apologists would've been singing a different tune. They'd have been crying foul! Ya know? Because, among other things, Welling can't ..........act.
As if. You're TOTALLY making shit up now. You're speculating! I mean, EVERYBODY knows that there was NEVER an episode of Smallville where Clark went back to Krypton.

But even if there HAD been such an episode, OF COURSE the Apologists wouldn't have bashed on it, sheer intellectual honesty demands it!

...

Oh, 7.18- Apocalypse, yikes, you're right, forgot about that. And yeah, the Apologists pissed all over it...

Actually, it didn't even cross my mind at all those episodes you speak of that actually were on Smallville. I was thinking more in the context of what duh apologists are 'creaming' themselves over concerning their 'BJ'. You know, the whole 'crystal ship returning to Krypton' crapola. Finding the remains. Showing the facial expressions, which both Eunuch and duh apologists seem to 'get off' on so much. This is their 'holy grail'. But like I said earlier, Christopher Reeve would've pulled off this scene, even if the rest of the film sucked. He would've saved the film. I guess the point about Welling though is that I know even from my own time at duh Homopage that they can be very 'anti-Welling', everything from 'he can't act' to 'he doesn't even want to be Superman', ad nauseum. So the point is that for some reason BJ the bartender gets accolades by default but Welling can't win to save his life! I was just thinking that if Smallville had done an identical scene to that in Singerman, the one that 'BJ' gets accolades for, but with Welling instead, then Welling would've gotten 'Rotten Tomatoes'. But it does show the hypocrisy of duh apologists if you really think about it. They're definitely not an unbiased lot, that's for sure!

As for Eunuch, WB sent him his own free Blue-Ray set to 'review', but he didn't even own a Blue-Ray player! The least 'the brothers Warner' could've done is to also have sent him a player. Instead he goes out & spends his own money because he wanted to see this particular scene so badly. If it'd been me, I'd have requested WB cough up a player too. I mean, how do you guys expect me to review it when I can't watch it?! Then watch. Voila! Player arrives by UPS or something.

But I guess Eunuch didn't think of that?! Rolling Eyes

webhead2006 Tue Jun 07, 2011 9:49 pm

Still sounds like crap.

thecolorsblend Thu Jun 23, 2011 8:09 pm

thecolorsblend wrote:A review of the infamous Return To Crapton scene from the Singerman Blu-Ray.

URL- http://www.supermanhomepage.com/news.php?readmore=9854#comments

Mind you, the Apologists are creaming themselves because this turd nugget scene has been their holy grail for years now. Once again they demonstrate their ignorance about film (of course, the ignorance was implied to begin with because we're talking about people who love Singerman here). Based on the descriptions of the scene, I wasn't surprised that it was cut from the movie. What I found amazing was that the scene made it completely through post production before it was cut.

Every movie scene needs to set up, advance or resolve something. But the RTK scene? You go into it knowing Krypton is rubble and that Singerman is pretty much the last of his kind. Every numbnuts watching the movie already knows that. During the course of the scene, nothing is revealed that wasn't already apparent. After the scene is over, nothing has been introduced, advanced or resolved in any way. Plus, it introduces the main character in a way that makes him instantly look weak (although, again, we're talking about Singerman here).

I mean, from 'A' to 'Z', the Return To Crapton scene pretty much epitomizes every single thing you look for in extraneous scenes to cut out of your movie.

And yet, the Apologists are spraying their pants because... well, I don't know why. But whatever, let 'em have one final helping of their BJ and their Singerman.

Remember that?

Keep all that in mind as you watch...

Of course, the Apologists all probably have spooge in their pants over this because dA ruTh is backz! Still, it's completely stunning to me how this scene is even more worthless than I could've ever imagined. If I'm wrong on anything from my rant up there, it's in underestimating just how pointless this scene truly is.

Apologist Puncher Thu Jun 23, 2011 9:41 pm

thecolorsblend wrote:
Remember that?

Keep all that in mind as you watch...

*Removed In Reply Due To Suckitude

Of course, the Apologists all probably have spooge in their pants over this because dA ruTh is backz! Still, it's completely stunning to me how this scene is even more worthless than I could've ever imagined. If I'm wrong on anything from my rant up there, it's in underestimating just how pointless this scene truly is.

Wow. A whole 'lotta NOTHING happened there. But gee, that sure made me change my mind about Singerman Peeps! wat uh epik seen dat wuz!! da ruth shoe al kinda emoticons n stuf dint he?? bring ruth backside!!!

But seriously, that scene was a complete waste, and only brings up even MORE criticism of that piece of shit. Such as, why didn't Singerman show ANY kind of regret or shame about leaving on such an idiotic "quest", when common-sense should have been telling him not to?

Since his father told him his Krapt-on EXPLODED, was he then in the mind-frame that he was a LIAR? Did he disregard everything else he told him?

Did he feel like a complete piece of shit for not verifying that Krapt-on was actually there, and not total bullshit? I mean, his Fortress Of Shititude can make a fucking SPACESHIP, but doesn't have a goddamn TELESCOPE??

I would love for an Apologist to join-up here, and attempt to refute our criticism of their beloved Singerman Peeps. There would be no name-calling, no personal attacks, just discussion. Oh, but there will be a caveat:

They cannot say "maybe" OR "I think".

None of them could do it.

non_amos Fri Jun 24, 2011 12:26 am

Apologist Puncher wrote:

But seriously, that scene was a complete waste, and only brings up even MORE criticism of that piece of shit. Such as, why didn't Singerman show ANY kind of regret or shame about leaving on such an idiotic "quest", when common-sense should have been telling him not to?

Ya know what really gets me about this whole debacle? The 'premise' was that 'when astronomers spotted Krap-ton, he had to see if it was really there'. But I understand that there was supposedly a deleted scene where Landloving-Luthor told the mute Kumar that he himself had 'faked' that message about Krap-ton so that Singerman would leave Earth. That way he was cleared, right? Well, if this continued from SUPERMAN II, the 'whole planet Houston' knew that Luthor was guilty, so why would Singerman being absent automatically mean that he'd be exonerated? I'm not an expert in law but even I know there's something flawed in that logic.

But moreso than that, there's an even bigger problem with this picture. Remember at the end of S2 that SUPERMAN brought the AMERICAN FLAG back to the White House, apologized to the President for being gone, & told him that, "I won't let you down again!" Now in S2 he had only been gone for a SHORT TIME so that he could bang Lois. However, in Singerman Peeps, he was gone for FIVE YEARS! So what happened to that loyalty to the President & the USA?! And to Lois?! But SINGERMAN leaves anyway & let's the country and the world go 'to hell in a handbasket'?!

Like I said, what's wrong with this picture?!

thecolorsblend Fri Jun 24, 2011 1:07 am

non_amos wrote:Ya know what really gets me about this whole debacle? The 'premise' was that 'when astronomers spotted Krap-ton, he had to see if it was really there'. But I understand that there was supposedly a deleted scene where Landloving-Luthor told the mute Kumar that he himself had 'faked' that message about Krap-ton so that Singerman would leave Earth. That way he was cleared, right? Well, if this continued from SUPERMAN II, the 'whole planet Houston' knew that Luthor was guilty, so why would Singerman being absent automatically mean that he'd be exonerated? I'm not an expert in law but even I know there's something flawed in that logic.

But moreso than that, there's an even bigger problem with this picture. Remember at the end of S2 that SUPERMAN brought the AMERICAN FLAG back to the White House, apologized to the President for being gone, & told him that, "I won't let you down again!" Now in S2 he had only been gone for a SHORT TIME so that he could bang Lois. However, in Singerman Peeps, he was gone for FIVE YEARS! So what happened to that loyalty to the President & the USA?! And to Lois?! But SINGERMAN leaves anyway & let's the country and the world go 'to hell in a handbasket'?!

Like I said, what's wrong with this picture?!

All of these could easily have been addressed had Singer dealt more specifically with continuity. But nooooooooooooooo...

Of course, the above pre-supposes you had to carry on from STM and S2 and we ALL know better than THAT.

Even so, I think there's a good story lurking behind the core concept. Superman would never willingly turn his back on Earth, esp not for some bullshit, windmill-chasing stupidity like that. So if you want to tell a story where he comes back after a prolonged absence in the context of the Donner continuity, you simply make his absence due to external forces beyond Superman's control. For example, you retroactively set up that, following the defeat of Zod and his minions, Superman's powers were temporarily suspended by Jor-El again and he was recalled to the FOS for remedial lessons for a few years, during which time he was completely isolated from the outside world.

That accomplishes the same task of removing Superman from the equation for a few years WITHOUT butchering his character and it ALSO loosely continues/resolves a story thread Donner/Lester had toyed with but not really explored to the full potential. It's also a hell of a lot better tribute to Christopher Reeve and his memory than bullshit Singerman could ever be.

The comics had their own play on it in the Up, Up & Away/One Year Later arc right after Infinite Crisis. In fact, that entire storyline felt like Geoff Johns and Kurt Busiek saying "no Singer, you idiot, THIS is how you tell a return of Superman story!" You'll never convince me that it's a coincidence that the story came out right about the same time Singerman did.

Anyway. Of course, Singer never thought about any of this stuff because he didn't give two shits about how his lazy writing would affect the characters. The above is just the tip of the iceberg so far as that's concerned.

non_amos Fri Jun 24, 2011 1:31 am

I guess that's what happens when you erase S3 & S4 from continuity & then choose to continue your film from S2 but..........instead you treat the whole affair as a VAGUE SEQUEL!

Yeah, nothing wrong with that logic, huh?! Rolling Eyes

non_amos Fri Jun 24, 2011 2:19 am

Oh, & just watched that video. Maybe they should've let that stay at the beginning of the film. That way Singerman might've flopped even harder than it did! Nearly 6 minutes of NO SPEECH?! And really no musical score either? Shouldn't the ship itself have even spoken to Singerman or something?! Shouldn't BJ Wood have at least uttered something?! How about 'EARTH'? And if I recall correctly, in STM, Krypton was blown to smithereens! Along with its' red sun! Wasn't this even duplicated at the beginning of Singerman? So why then is so much of the planet intact? Oh, I know..........vague sequel! See, works like a charm! Wink

thecolorsblend Fri Jun 24, 2011 2:44 am

non_amos wrote:Oh, & just watched that video. Maybe they should've let that stay at the beginning of the film. That way Singerman might've flopped even harder than it did! Nearly 6 minutes of NO SPEECH?! And really no musical score either? Shouldn't the ship itself have even spoken to Singerman or something?! Shouldn't BJ Wood have at least uttered something?! How about 'EARTH'? And if I recall correctly, in STM, Krypton was blown to smithereens! Along with its' red sun! Wasn't this even duplicated at the beginning of Singerman? So why then is so much of the planet intact? Oh, I know..........vague sequel! See, works like a charm!

Ah yes, of course. The sequel is so vague that even it's own internal continuity is spotty and all over the place.

Singer, pure genius, dude. Rolling Eyes

But seriously, it's been so long since I saw the movie that I totally forgot about that stuff but I think you're right. Good catch.

webhead2006 Fri Jun 24, 2011 3:15 pm

It is such a wasted scene and wasted money.

Bug-Eyed Earl Sun Aug 07, 2011 2:20 pm

You know, we have the technology now to tell if a planet is habitable, here on Earth. It's just a matter of finding a likely suspect- one more reason why a five year sojourn to Krypton makes no sense. That's why I find this scene especially hilarious, that and the first scene of the movie showed Krypton being torn to shreds by its sun being destroyed.

thecolorsblend Sun Aug 07, 2011 3:55 pm

Bug-Eyed Earl wrote:You know, we have the technology now to tell if a planet is habitable, here on Earth. It's just a matter of finding a likely suspect- one more reason why a five year sojourn to Krypton makes no sense. That's why I find this scene especially hilarious, that and the first scene of the movie showed Krypton being torn to shreds by its sun being destroyed.

I can't recall ever seeing a post from you before, Earl. Even so, obviously I can't argue with your logic here.

non_amos Sun Aug 07, 2011 4:08 pm

thecolorsblend wrote:
Bug-Eyed Earl wrote:You know, we have the technology now to tell if a planet is habitable, here on Earth. It's just a matter of finding a likely suspect- one more reason why a five year sojourn to Krypton makes no sense. That's why I find this scene especially hilarious, that and the first scene of the movie showed Krypton being torn to shreds by its sun being destroyed.
I can't recall ever seeing a post from you before, Earl. Even so, obviously I can't argue with your logic here.

Yeah, I almost wondered if we had another one of those spammers but this guy actually talks sense.

Apologist Puncher Sun Aug 07, 2011 8:32 pm

Bug-Eyed Earl wrote:You know, we have the technology now to tell if a planet is habitable, here on Earth. It's just a matter of finding a likely suspect- one more reason why a five year sojourn to Krypton makes no sense. That's why I find this scene especially hilarious, that and the first scene of the movie showed Krypton being torn to shreds by its sun being destroyed.

I'll try to find posts from Apologists actually DEFENDING this scene, and pointing out how "duh plandit exploode but mabe it leaf dat beheinz n it don mean it dint exploode" or some shit.

Besides REALITY, know what else contradicts their entire "argument"?

The beginning of the fucking movie!

Apologist Puncher Sun Aug 07, 2011 8:37 pm

And here you go:

http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showthread.php?t=378404&page=2

08-03-2011, 07:40 AM #22
The Batman
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: London, Ontario, Canada!
Posts: 7,378

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flashpoint
And then there is Bryan Singer's insane choice to create a giant Superman symbol in the middle of Krypton for no good reason at all. Jor-El and his family were branded treasonous rebels and criminals by their own government, sentenced to execution by the Kryptonian Council. What government authorizes a giant Mount Rushmore-like monument to traitors and criminals who have been sentenced to death?

Um, that happened, at most, hours before Krypton's destruction. He's only labeled a traitor by the Council when they notice the unusual energy readings coming from his lab and that's him powering up Kal-El's spaceship. Hardly time for them to do too much about Jor-El's public memory. Prior to that he's one of Krypton's greatest minds, descendant of one of the leading families, and an important member of the Council. Given all that, I'm not sure that it would be "insane" for the El family crest to be featured on a Kryptonian monument.

Also, planets are very big things. Though large in comparison to Kal-El and his spaceship, that bit or Krypton he was exploring would've been relatively small compared to the planet itself. It didn't look to be much larger than the size of Luthor's New Krypton from the end of the movie. Hardly something that couldn't have survived the planet's destruction.

Nothing makes Apologists look stupid more than Apologists.

webhead2006 Sun Aug 07, 2011 10:21 pm

Totally earl the scene is waste and more crap singer didn't know what the heck he was doing and blew ten mill on this scene alone.

Rduce Sun Aug 07, 2011 11:59 pm

I have not much doubt that in his mind Singer was hoping and fully expected SR to be his Titanic. Proof that he was the wonder boy many thought he was. Which, I also think is the reason why so many of the critics felt compelled to give SR such an outstanding review initially, only Ebert told it like it was, none wanted to get on his bad side. Instead he really has become the next Michael Cimino, the one film that he has directed since SR, tanked at the box office and you really don’t hear much about the whiz kid any longer.

In the immortal words of Terry Malloy, “You don't understand. I coulda had class. I coulda been a contender. I coulda been somebody…” which fit Singer to a tee. If he only hadn’t take that dive to turn Superman into a namby pamby wretch, “instead of a bum”…

webhead2006 Mon Aug 08, 2011 12:14 am

singer's big problem was he made the film a chick flick and a love letter to richard donner take on superman, and couldnt even strike the same cord donner did 30 yrs old.

thecolorsblend Mon Aug 08, 2011 12:36 am

Rduce wrote:I have not much doubt that in his mind Singer was hoping and fully expected SR to be his Titanic. Proof that he was the wonder boy many thought he was.

No doubt. In one of those online video diaries, he went on and on about the budget and how massive it was. He toned that down BIG TIME when the movie came out and the company line changed to playing down the budget (although the damage had mostly been done by that point).

Which, I also think is the reason why so many of the critics felt compelled to give SR such an outstanding review initially,

I've long wondered that many of those reviews were bought and paid for by WB. But even if they weren't, movie critics love deconstruction of popular myths and heroes. Even if their reviews were truly heartfelt, I still wouldn't place any stock in them because critics generally cherish everything that turns off comic book fans.

Well. That, and I wouldn't place any stock in them because Singerman sucks but hey...

only Ebert told it like it was,

In large part because he understands the genre (at least more than Singer ever did). Besides that, why would he EVER need to sell out? Hell, he's probably one of the few critics with an opinion you can trust (even if you disagree about a give movie).

Sponsored content

"Superman Returns" deleted opening sequence to DVD

"Superman Returns" deleted opening sequence to DVD

Re: "Superman Returns" deleted opening sequence to DVD

Re: "Superman Returns" deleted opening sequence to DVD

Re: "Superman Returns" deleted opening sequence to DVD

Re: "Superman Returns" deleted opening sequence to DVD

Re: "Superman Returns" deleted opening sequence to DVD

Re: "Superman Returns" deleted opening sequence to DVD

Re: "Superman Returns" deleted opening sequence to DVD

Re: "Superman Returns" deleted opening sequence to DVD

Re: "Superman Returns" deleted opening sequence to DVD

Re: "Superman Returns" deleted opening sequence to DVD

Re: "Superman Returns" deleted opening sequence to DVD

Re: "Superman Returns" deleted opening sequence to DVD

Re: "Superman Returns" deleted opening sequence to DVD

Re: "Superman Returns" deleted opening sequence to DVD

Re: "Superman Returns" deleted opening sequence to DVD

Re: "Superman Returns" deleted opening sequence to DVD

Re: "Superman Returns" deleted opening sequence to DVD

Re: "Superman Returns" deleted opening sequence to DVD

Re: "Superman Returns" deleted opening sequence to DVD

Re: "Superman Returns" deleted opening sequence to DVD

Re: "Superman Returns" deleted opening sequence to DVD

Re: "Superman Returns" deleted opening sequence to DVD

Re: "Superman Returns" deleted opening sequence to DVD

Re: "Superman Returns" deleted opening sequence to DVD

Re: "Superman Returns" deleted opening sequence to DVD