Schoollll'ssss Out For Summer!

Thoughts on a couple movies I've recently seen:

Superman Returns - As a kid, I was a big fan of these movies and made it a point to watch the first two before seeing this new one since Bryan Singer's version is supposed to take place after Superman II. After rewatching the first two, I was reminded of how fantastic they are. The limited special effects do little to deter from the overall enjoyment of the films because the story is ripe with interesting characters that are worth giving a shit about. Not to mention, perfect casting was in order here as Christopher Reeve seemed absolutely born to play Superman and Gene Hackman delivers the kind of scene-chewing gusto necessary to make Lex Luthor a villain that is more interesting than the standard mustache-twirling, menacing-laugh-inducing psycho we're usually subjected to in these kinds of films. It just goes to show that while special effects eventually become dated, good acting and proficient character development never go out of style. In Bryan Singer's film, it's hard to openly hate the film because you can tell he earnestly tried to do the franchise justice. However, Singer really adds nothing to the series that hasn't already been accomplished by Donner and Lester's versions. I can't fault Brandon Routh, who gives such a sincere performance, or Kevin Spacey for essentially doing what Hackman did with Luthor (albeit, he did make him a little more diabolical), but the story itself does nothing to earn its keep. Kate Bosworth may be a better looking Lois Lane, but no way in hell is she better than Margot Kidder was in the role. Margot Kidder had that fast-talking swagger that was so characteristically Lois Lane, whereas in Singer's film, Bosworth takes on the stereotypical damsel-in-distress role waiting for someone to save her. Maybe that's the script's doing and it's not Bosworth's fault, but either way, Kidder and Reeve had great chemistry and you actively rooted for them. In Returns, I didn't really give a shit about THESE characters. The only reason I cared in the first place was because I kept thinking about the original films and how much I rooted for those characters. I like Bryan Singer and I can definitely appreciate his intentions/effort, but this may have been a case of letting sleeping dogs lie.

Lady in the Water - The venom being spewed in the direction of Shyamalan's latest is surprising to me. Although, maybe it shouldn't be since despite the reputation of being able to spit acid in print every which way possible, critics very rarely have shown the ability to take what they are able to dish out. The backlash stems from the movie critic character played by Bob Balaban. A character that Shyamalan has no problem um...disposing of. I remember critics bitching about the same thing with Todd Solondz's Storytelling. Get over it. It's unbecoming of you to reflexively criticize one guy for doing the very thing you are doing. It's his movie and it's a very small part of the movie at that, so let it go and let your insecurities play out through your work like everyone else. That being said, I enjoyed LitW. Certainly not for everyone, but if nothing else, you gotta applaud the guy's ambition. I've never been Shyamalan's number one fan, but I've always said that if you're gonna make a failure, at least make it interesting. And while I don't think that LitW is a failure, most would beg to differ, but I challenge them to honestly answer this question before destroying this movie in their reviews, would you rather watch John Tucker Must Die? That's right. Count your blessings.