Superman Returns (2006) and the Comics

[Silver Nemesis]

I started working on this back in 2013 but never got around to finishing it until now. While this analysis will be chiefly focused on Bryan Singer's movie, I'll also briefly touch upon some of Brandon Routh's other performances as Superman – in deleted scenes, the 2006 Superman Returns videogame, and the 2019-20 Crisis on Infinite Earths TV event.

This is not intended to be a defence or critique or Singer's movie, but rather an attempt to examine how closely it resembles the comics. As always, many of these parallels will be coincidental (the vast majority in fact), but in a few instances I'll highlight connections to support the argument that certain similarities might be intentional. I'm not going to bother listing all the things that were inspired by the Donner films, as that subject's probably best reserved for a separate thread.

Director Bryan Singer cited the work of comic artist Alex Ross as an influence on the movie, and when promoting the film he occasionally made broad references to 'the comics' without naming specific stories. I haven't been able to find any quotes from Singer or the screenwriters identifying which particular comic arcs might have influenced the movie's plot. Most of the time they would just talk about the influence of the earlier Superman films, and in particular Superman: The Movie (1978) and Superman II (1980). SuperHeroHype noted the following at a Comic-Con panel with Singer in 2005:

According to Singer, Alex Ross was his favorite Superman artist as far as visual style, but he also recommended the Max Fleischer cartoons, as well as the George Reeves television show for anyone interested in his film, which he admitted will be spring boarded from Richard Donner's 1978 film, and its 1980 sequel.

https://www.superherohype.com/features/89177-bryan-singer-on-superman-returns

One of the film's central themes is whether or not the world needs Superman. This might have been influenced by the writing of Elliot S. Maggin, who first suggested the possible negative ramifications of Superman's existence in 'Must There Be a Superman?' (Superman Vol 1 #247, January 1972). In this comic the Guardians of the Universe question whether humanity's dependency on Superman might be hindering its advancement, and consequently whether mankind mightn't be better off without Superman watching over them. Apparently Maggin revisited these themes in his 1978 novel Superman: Last Son of Krypton, which was released with an image of Christopher Reeve on the cover to coincide with the first Richard Donner Superman movie.

The theme of whether or not the world needs Superman was also later referenced in Kingdom Come (1996) by Mark Waid and Alex Ross. The second chapter features a headline reading 'Must There Be a Superman?' – similar to Lois's 'Why the World Doesn't/Does Need Superman' headlines in the film.

Kingdom Come is one of several comic storylines to portray Superman returning to active duty after a prolonged absence. In Waid's story, Superman had retired to the Fortress of Solitude for 8 years after rival hero Magog was lauded for executing the Joker. Superman eventually returns to confront Magog and lead an army of yesterday's idealistic heroes against the younger and more cynical generation of vigilantes that have supplanted them. Behind-the-scenes materials show the Superman Returns production team referencing numerous samples of Alex Ross's art in the development of the film's visuals, including excerpts from Kingdom Come. The film's 'bible' even had one of Ross's paintings on the cover. So the filmmakers were certainly familiar with his work.

Another story that deals with Superman leaving and returning to Earth is the 'Exile' arc that ran from February to July in 1989. This storyline took place in the wake of 'The Price' (Superman Vol 2 #22, October 1988), in which the Man of Steel visited the Pocket Universe created by the Time Trapper and killed alternate versions of General Zod, Quex-Ul and Zaora. Superman then suffered a mental breakdown triggered by the guilt of his actions, and this prompted him to embark on a self-imposed exile from Earth beginning in 'Superman in Exile' (Superman Vol 2 #28, February 1989). He does eventually return to Earth, but not before visiting numerous planets in search of penance. His exile included a subplot in which he encountered Mongul and was forced to fight as a gladiator on War World. The Superman Returns videogame begins with a training sequence loosely adapted from this storyline, where Brandon Routh's Superman is captured by Mongul on his way back to Earth and must win his freedom in War World's arena.

Brandon Routh was a decent physical match for the Superman in the comics. He stands at around 6'2 ½, which is only half an inch shy of Kal-El's 6'3 height in the comics. He also trained for several months to cultivate a comic accurate physique. The padding in his costume tends to conceal this in the finished film, however behind-the-scenes footage gives a clearer look at the kind of shape he was in. His eyes are brown, but were coloured blue in the movie.

The first time we see Superman in the film is when he emerges from the wreckage of his Kryptonian spacecraft and collapses in his mother's arms. The reason for his weakened state in the finished film is never explained. However the Blu-ray includes an elaborate deleted prologue (which apparently cost $10 million!) in which we see Superman exploring the remnants of his birth planet. This sequence has strong parallels with a comic story titled 'Return to Krypton' (Superman Vol 2 #18, June 1988). Coincidentally (or not), the deleted scene in the movie is also titled 'Return to Krypton' on the Blu-ray.

In both stories Superman uses a spaceship to journey to the site of Krypton's destruction. In the comic he travels on a Thanagarian ship piloted by Hawkman, while in the movie he travels alone using a Kryptonian vessel.

In the comic Superman discovers the debris cloud that was once Krypton has now coalesced to form a new planet comprised entirely of kryptonite, not unlike the kryptonite continent featured in Singer's movie. He then proceeds to explore a ring of debris that is orbiting that planet. In the movie he explores the hollowed out remnants of Krypton until he discovers a lethal deposit of kryptonite within its canyons. He attempts to escape the canyons, only to encounter more kryptonite floating in the surrounding debris field.

The k-radiation soon starts to affect him in both stories and he becomes ill.

Superman then has to escape the debris field and set a course for Earth before the kryptonite overwhelms him completely.

It's a shame this sequence was cut from the finished film as it offers an intriguing prologue to the central narrative. Although this prologue did not make it into the finished movie, it was included in the comic book adaptation by Martin Pasako, Matt Haley, Mike Collins and Ron Randall.

Superman does not wear his signature costume when he first returns to Earth. Instead he sports a new outfit, sans cape, with a silver s-shield emblazoned across his chest. This was probably inspired by the outfit he wore during The Reign of the Supermen/Return of Superman arc.

This is also the outfit he wears during the Warworld prologue of the videogame adaptation. The Return of Superman is of course another comic story that deals with Kal-El returning to active service following a prolonged absence. The producers of Superman Returns had spent several years trying to adapt this storyline in the form of Tim Burton's unmade Superman Lives, so the similarities between that particular comic and Singer's movies could well be intentional.

Eva Marie Saint plays Martha Kent in Singer's film.

One of Saint's most famous screen roles was opposite Marlon Brando in Elia Kazan's classic film On the Waterfront (1954). Brando himself posthumously reprises his role as Jor-El in Superman Returns thanks to a combination of digital effects and repurposed footage from Donner's Superman films.

Martha's introductory scene begins with her bidding farewell to a man as he drives away from her home. This character is Ben Hubbard, played by James Karen, although this is not made clear in the theatrical cut of the film. Hubbard was first mentioned in Superman: The Movie and was later incorporated into the comics.

There was originally meant to be a whole subplot about Ben dating Martha, and Clark's discomfort with the situation, but it was cut from the finished film. You can however see these deleted scenes on the DVD/Blu-ray.

Kevin Spacey was originally cast as Lex Luthor in Tim Burton's Superman Lives, and he was the only cast member from that unmade production to carry over into Singer's film. For much of the movie he wears a white coat similar to the ones Lex has often sported in the comics.

One of his sidekicks in the film is a woman named Kitty Kowalski. She was probably inspired by Eve Teschmacher, a character who debuted in the Richard Donner Superman films and was later referenced in several comics. The following panel shows Miss Teschmacher as she appears in JLA: Earth 2 (2000).

The grey and gold Art Deco look of The Daily Planet building reminds me a little of the version from Superman: Red Son (2003).

Hollywood producer Tom DeSanto wrote the introduction to the trade paperback edition of Red Son, praising it as "a sharp social commentary on capitalism vs. communism and current American foreign policy [...] RED SON is great writing." While DeSanto was not directly involved in Superman Returns, he did produce several of Bryan Singer's earlier films, including Apt Pupil (1998), X-Men (2000) and X-Men 2 (2003). So it's possible he may have discussed the Superman project with Singer, perhaps recommending this book as a useful reference. There's one scene in the movie that is practically identical to a scene from Red Son, but I'll get to that later. Incidentally, Red Son is another comic that features the character Eve Teschmacher.

Working at The Daily Planet are Lois Lane, Perry White and Jimmy Olsen. Obviously these three characters were all introduced in the earlier Donnerverse films and there's not too much to say about Singer's take on them, so I'll move on.

The barman who serves Jimmy and Clark is played by Jack Larson, who had portrayed Jimmy Olsen in the Adventures of Superman (1952-1958) television show, as well as the 'Brutal Youth' (s04e05) episode of Lois & Clark: The New Adventures of Superman (1993-1997). Larson's character is referred to as 'Bo the bartender' in the movie's credits, but the novelisation makes it clearer that he is intended to be Ace O' Clubs bartender Bibbo Bibbowski, who first debuted in the comics in 'Personal Best' (Adventures of Superman Vol 1 #428, May 1987). Bibbo featured prominently during the Return of Superman arc.

Routh's Superman costume is faithful to the comics.

The sequence where Clark rescues the experimental shuttle with Lois on board was almost certainly inspired by the first chapter of John Byrne's Superman: The Man of Steel (1986) miniseries.

In the Post-Crisis canon, this marked the first time Lois met Superman. In the movie it marks the first time Lois meets Superman after his return to Earth. The sequence with the shuttle is also visually indebted to the animated Superman film 'Japoteurs' (1942). Singer cited this series of animated shorts as an influence on Superman Returns when promoting the movie.

[Silver Nemesis]

Lois is in a long-term relationship with Richard White, the nephew of Perry White, and together they have a child named Jason. I'm not aware of Perry having a nephew Richard in the comics. So where does the name come from?

Well, Superman Returns was intended to be an alternate sequel to Superman II, effectively supplanting Richard Lester's Superman III (1983) in the new Singerverse timeline. Both Superman III and Superman Returns feature a love interest that is mother to a small boy. In Superman III this boy's name is Ricky and he is the son of Lana Lang. Ricky's surname is never spoken in the film's dialogue and his father is only ever referred to by his first name, 'Donald'. However, a picture at Clark's school reunion reveals Donald's surname to be 'White'.

Which means Ricky's full name is in fact 'Richard White'. Coincidence?

Regarding the canonicity of Superman III in the Singervere timeline, it's worth mentioning that in the 2019-2020 Crisis on Infinite Earths TV crossover Routh's Superman mentions a previous occasion when he went crazy and fought himself. This would appear to be an allusion to the junkyard fight in Superman III. So while Singer had originally intended for Lester's sequel to be apocryphal, Crisis on Infinite Earths suggests otherwise. This does of course create a problem regarding where Superman III fits in with the Singerverse timeline. Does it occur after Superman II, but before Clark leaves Earth for Krypton, with Lois simply not mentioning that she's pregnant? Or does Superman III occur after the events of Superman Returns, with Superman and Lois forgetting to mention that they have a son?

Later in the film it is revealed that Jason is the son of Superman, not Richard. The idea of Clark and Lois having a child together has several precedents in the comics. In the Richard Lester cut of Superman II, Clark slept with Lois after relinquishing his powers using red sunlight. This would mean that he fathered Jason while human, and yet Jason still manifests superhuman strength. This follows Alan Moore's 'Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow?' (Superman Vol 1 #423-Action Comics Vol 1 #583, September 1986), in which Kal-El relinquishes his powers after breaking his Kryptonian oath against killing and then settles down to raise a child with Lois. Clark strips himself of his powers in the comic by exposing his body to gold kryptonite, and yet the son he subsequently fathers is shown crushing coal into a diamond in the final panel. This suggests that the child has inherited his father's powers, even though Clark was human at the time of his conception.

Alternatively, the Donner Cut of Superman II has Kal-El sleeping with Lois before he relinquishes his powers. Numerous 'what if' stories in the comics have depicted Lois conceiving a child with Superman while the latter retains his powers. One example would be John Byrne's Elseworlds story Superman & Batman: Generations (1999) in which Superman and Lois have two children. Their son, Joel, was exposed to gold kryptonite in the womb and consequently has no powers. But their daughter, Kara, begins to manifest powers as she grows, much like Jason is implied to do in Singer's movie.

However, Superman Returns doesn't really work as a sequel to the Donner Cut of Superman II, because that film ended with Superman reversing time to undo the damage caused by the Phantom Zone criminals. The reversal of time would presumably also mean that Clark had no longer slept with Lois.

The image of Superman gazing down on the Earth from space recalls a scene from Alex Ross's Justice Vol 1 #2 (December 2005).

The image of Superman holding Kitty's green car over his head is a direct recreation of the cover art for Action Comics Vol 1 #1 (June 1938), which was Superman's debut story.

The classic opening lines of The Adventures of Superman (1940-1951) radio series are referenced in an exchange between Jimmy, Lois and Perry as they are examining a photograph of Superman.

JIMMY: Look, in the sky, Chief.
LOIS: It's a bird.
PERRY: It's a plane.
JIMMY: No, look it's--
CLARK: Uh, you wanted to see me?

At one point Gotham is referenced by a news anchor, making this the first time a Superman movie had acknowledged the Batman mythos (assuming you don't count the 1997 Steel movie as a Superman film).

The moment where Superman uses his heat vision to destroy shards of glass that are raining from the broken windows of a skyscraper is similar to a scene from 'The Phantom Touch of Death!' (Action Comics Vol 1 #472, June 1977).

The sequence where the globe falls from the roof of The Daily Planet building, and Superman catches it, might have been inspired by an almost identical scene in Superman: Red Son.

Note that Perry is standing directly beneath the falling globe in both versions of the scene. In the movie he says, "Great Cesar's ghost," which is his catchphrase in the comics.

Superman flies to Lex Luthor's island, unaware that the expanding landmass is veined with kryptonite. Luthor is then able to deliver a vicious beating to the Man of Steel that leaves Superman on the brink of death. Lex executes a similar trap in 'The Girl Who Mourned for Superman!' (Superman's Girl Friend, Lois Lane Vol 1 #43, August 1963), where he lures Superman to an island (appropriately named 'Vengeance Island') using a holographic projection of Lois. When Superman lands on the island, Luthor triggers an explosion that causes liquefied kryptonite to vent to the surface.

This comic story took place on Earth-Forty-Three, and the Superman of that universe actually died as a result of Lex's island trap. In the movie Lois is able to save him.

Superman lifting the kryptonite landmass recalls a scene from 'The Super-Foes from Planet X' (World's Finest Vol 1 #96, September 1958) where he lifts an island to remove it from the path of a tidal wave.

Another similar scene can be found in 'Heart of Stone' (Superman Vol 2 #1, January 1987).

The image of Superman lying in the crater after he falls to Earth is reminiscent of the imagery in The Death of Superman.

The injured Superman is rushed to a hospital, but when the doctors try injecting him the needle breaks against his super strong skin. This also happened when Superman was hospitalised in 'The Ultimate Battle!' (Superman Vol 1 #242, September 1971).

The doctors also try using a defibrillator, but to no avail. A defibrillator proved equally ineffective at reviving Clark during the Funeral for a Friend/World Without a Superman storyline, as depicted in 'Death of a Legend' (Adventures of Superman Vol 1 #498, January 1993).

While he awaits news of Superman's fate, Perry contemplates two possible newspaper headlines. One reads 'Superman is Dead' and evokes a headline from Funeral for a Friend/World Without a Superman.

The other headline reads 'Superman Lives' and is almost certainly a reference to Tim Burton's unmade film of the same name.

One of the deleted scenes reveals that the kryptonite continent has settled into orbit around the sun somewhere between Mars and Jupiter. Lois suggests they name it New Krypton. This scene is included in the novelisation.

And that's all I've got on Superman Returns. Routh's Superman would of course return in the CW-verse, where the connections between his incarnation of the character and the Alex Ross version were more strongly emphasised. During the Crisis on Infinite Earths TV crossover event it was revealed that Kate Bosworth's Lois Lane shared the same fate as her counterpart in Kingdom Come: both were killed when the Joker conducted a poison gas attack on The Daily Planet building.

Perry makes reference to a "birthday clown massacre" in Superman Returns, which in retrospect could be seen as an allusion to the Joker and a foreshadowing of the tragedy to come. According to Crisis on Infinite Earths, Perry and Jimmy were also victims of the Joker's lethal attack.

Routh's Superman, like his Kingdom Come counterpart, subsequently adopted a new costume with a black s-shield.

Alex Ross himself also posted a sketch online depicting Routh as the Kingdom Come version.

Anyway, I'll end this analysis here before it ventures any further beyond Singer's movie. Did I miss anything?

[thecolorsblend]

I have very little positive to say about Superman Returns. But in the interest of keeping this thread relevant as a resource for Superman Returns/comics information, we can skip the ranty stuff.

Superman does not wear his signature costume when he first returns to Earth. Instead he sports a new outfit, sans cape, with a silver s-shield emblazoned across his chest. This was probably inspired by the outfit he wore during The Reign of the Supermen/Return of Superman arc.

The capeless aspect of this uniform probably is inspired by the Reign Of The Supermen story. But the inspiration for the grey bodysuit is a VERY deep cut. It comes from the outfit George Reeves wore for the first couple of seasons of the Adventures Of Superman TV show from the Fifties.

Many modern audiences are surprised to discover that costumes (of almost any kind) used in black and white media were themselves black and white. The purpose for doing this was to control the color balance. Compare the black and white uniform Reeves wore on the black and white era of the AOS TV show to the color uniform Reeves wore on the black and white episode of I Love Lucy to see the differences for yourself. The black and white uniform looks powerful and eye-catching whereas the color uniform in black and white is just lost in the grey with very little definition.

Anyway. So yeah, you're part right. But as I say, the inspiration for the gray bodysuit comes from George Reeves.

Another interesting bit of business is Martha cradling Superman. Special thanks to SN for providing this pic for me.



I see two principal influences behind this. For openers, there's the cover to "The Death Of Superman" (i.e., Doomsday) trade paperback, featuring Lois cradling a mortally wounded/dead Superman.



There is a very high probability of an influence with that. More than you might think. I read a stat once that claimed that the original DOS trade (pictured above) outsold Superman #75 (i.e., the concluding chapter of the Doomsday storyline) as a standalone issue. Either way, whether that claim is true or not, sales of the original DOS trade were through the roof and that cover (masterfully done by the masterful Jon Bogdanove) is nearly as iconic as anything from Superman #75.

On the other hand, Superman Returns is clearly awash in Christian symbolism. From the star-shaped ship (i.e., the Star of Bethlehem) to Routh's pseudo-crucifixion pose after lifting the Kryptonite continent into space, there's no shortage of Christian imagery going on. So, it's quite possible (and certainly would be more literal) if Martha cradling the injured Superman was an allusion to La Pieta, the best example of which I could find is:



Admittedly, the idea of Our Lady cradling Our Lord at the foot of the cross does seem to be a more salient influence for Martha cradling Superman.

Of course, when it comes to Christian imagery and Superman imagery, it doesn't take long before you start questioning whether the chicken or the egg came first. So, I thought I would mention La Pieta as an alternative explanation, albeit one without any obvious connection to Superman comic books. You all can decide for yourself what (if anything) the visual of Martha cradling the injured Superman alludes to.

To shift gears, there's another possible influence going on with Superman Returns.



With apologies to SN, I don't actually recall which issue of SUPERMAN the above comes from. However, it DOES come from SUPERMAN, without question it comes from the mid-late Seventies and it was obviously illustrated by Curt Swan (Tex Blaisdell is the inker, I would guess) (but don't hold me to that). I deleted my scans of comics many years ago, save for the scans of comics I own legit copies of.

Point being that the image of Clark entering an elevator, changing into Superman, flying through the top of the elevator and then through the ceiling of his place of employment is a pretty specific visual and sequence of events. Frankly, I'd be flabbergasted if this is purely coincidental.

In a broader sense, I always connected Lex wandering through the Arctic wastes and invading the Fortress in the movie to be reminiscent of Lex wandering through the Arctic wastes in search of Brainiac in the Whatever Happened To The Man Of Tomorrow? storyline. Similarly, Lex breaking into the Fortress reminded me of Lex/Brainiac's efforts to break into the Fortress in that exact same storyline.

Not specifically comics-related, but an alternative headline that says "SUPERMAN LIVES" is also featured in the film. This seems like a kind of self-evident reference to the Tim Burton film that never quite happened.

[Silver Nemesis]

I see two principal influences behind this. For openers, there's the cover to "The Death Of Superman" (i.e., Doomsday) trade paperback, featuring Lois cradling a mortally wounded/dead Superman.



There is a very high probability of an influence with that. More than you might think. I read a stat once that claimed that the original DOS trade (pictured above) outsold Superman #75 (i.e., the concluding chapter of the Doomsday storyline) as a standalone issue. Either way, whether that claim is true or not, sales of the original DOS trade were through the roof and that cover (masterfully done by the masterful Jon Bogdanove) is nearly as iconic as anything from Superman #75.

On the other hand, Superman Returns is clearly awash in Christian symbolism. From the star-shaped ship (i.e., the Star of Bethlehem) to Routh's pseudo-crucifixion pose after lifting the Kryptonite continent into space, there's no shortage of Christian imagery going on. So, it's quite possible (and certainly would be more literal) if Martha cradling the injured Superman was an allusion to La Pieta, the best example of which I could find is:



Admittedly, the idea of Our Lady cradling Our Lord at the foot of the cross does seem to be a more salient influence for Martha cradling Superman.

Of course, when it comes to Christian imagery and Superman imagery, it doesn't take long before you start questioning whether the chicken or the egg came first. So, I thought I would mention La Pieta as an alternative explanation, albeit one without any obvious connection to Superman comic books. You all can decide for yourself what (if anything) the visual of Martha cradling the injured Superman alludes to.

This is one of the more powerful images in the film, though perhaps that's owing more to the religious connotations it evokes than its dramatic context in Singer's movie. The Pietà has also been referenced a number of times in Daredevil stories through images of Maggie holding her wounded son Matthew. Below are examples from Born Again and 'Purgatorio' (Daredevil Vol 1 #348, Jan 1996).

And the first episode of Daredevil season 3.

The capeless aspect of this uniform probably is inspired by the Reign Of The Supermen story. But the inspiration for the grey bodysuit is a VERY deep cut. It comes from the outfit George Reeves wore for the first couple of seasons of the Adventures Of Superman TV show from the Fifties.

Many modern audiences are surprised to discover that costumes (of almost any kind) used in black and white media were themselves black and white. The purpose for doing this was to control the color balance. Compare the black and white uniform Reeves wore on the black and white era of the AOS TV show to the color uniform Reeves wore on the black and white episode of I Love Lucy to see the differences for yourself. The black and white uniform looks powerful and eye-catching whereas the color uniform in black and white is just lost in the grey with very little definition.

Anyway. So yeah, you're part right. But as I say, the inspiration for the gray bodysuit comes from George Reeves.

I hadn't considered this, but it sounds plausible given that Singer cited the Reeves' series as an influence. Superman Returns was arguably shaped more by previous Superman screen media than it was by the comics.

To shift gears, there's another possible influence going on with Superman Returns.



With apologies to SN, I don't actually recall which issue of SUPERMAN the above comes from. However, it DOES come from SUPERMAN, without question it comes from the mid-late Seventies and it was obviously illustrated by Curt Swan (Tex Blaisdell is the inker, I would guess) (but don't hold me to that). I deleted my scans of comics many years ago, save for the scans of comics I own legit copies of.

Point being that the image of Clark entering an elevator, changing into Superman, flying through the top of the elevator and then through the ceiling of his place of employment is a pretty specific visual and sequence of events. Frankly, I'd be flabbergasted if this is purely coincidental.

Excellent find. I've never see this before, but it looks identical to the movie scene.

In a broader sense, I always connected Lex wandering through the Arctic wastes and invading the Fortress in the movie to be reminiscent of Lex wandering through the Arctic wastes in search of Brainiac in the Whatever Happened To The Man Of Tomorrow? storyline. Similarly, Lex breaking into the Fortress reminded me of Lex/Brainiac's efforts to break into the Fortress in that exact same storyline.

I considered that too. I don't know any earlier comics where Lex gets that close to penetrating the Fortress of Solitude, which makes me wonder if perhaps Moore was influenced by Lex's Arctic excursion in Superman II.

With these threads we always try to give the filmmakers the benefit of the doubt and assume they might have referenced these things on purpose. But in Singer's case, I'm confident that most of the parallels really are just coincidental. The only comics I believe might have been consciously referenced to some degree are:

•   The Alex Ross stuff, since it was directly cited by Singer and behind-the-scenes footage shows them using his art during the production design process.

•   The Doomsday/Reign of the Superman material, simply because the studio and producers had spent so many years trying to adapt that saga. Some of its themes and images must inevitably have trickled down into Superman Returns.

•   Action Comics #1, because it's an obvious cover recreation that's too precise to be accidental.

•   Red Son, because the scene with Superman catching the globe is so similar and because Tom DeSanto, who is a friend of Singer's and produced his two previous superhero movies, is such a vocal fan of that book.

Other than that, I expect everything else is coincidence.

I have very little positive to say about Superman Returns. But in the interest of keeping this thread relevant as a resource for Superman Returns/comics information, we can skip the ranty stuff.

I don't mind people using this thread to critique the movie if they want to. There probably isn't much more else to say about the comic influences. I watched all of the Superman films again recently, and I even picked up a cheap DVD of the Crisis on Infinite Earths miniseries just to revisit Routh's return. Seeing SR again in 2023, I was struck by how similar it is to The Force Awakens. Both are reverent and melancholic movies that exist in the shadow of a much better film that they fail to match. Both rely too heavily on nostalgia without adding sufficiently interesting fresh elements to carry the story forward in a compelling new direction. Both were critically acclaimed on their release, but are now generally held in low esteem by the core fan base.

In spite of all this, I do feel a certain measure of nostalgia for Superman Returns. I recall feeling disappointed when I first went to see it with my family. Maybe my expectations were too high after Spider-Man 2 set such an impressive benchmark for 2000s CBMs, but Singer's film just didn't live up to the hype. By time the DVD was out my opinion of the movie had mellowed and I'd begun to feel optimistic about the sequel. I thought Singer was going to pull an X-Men II and deliver a much better follow up that would make amends for the first film's shortcomings.

I was a student back in 2006, and I remember at the time enjoying Richard Donner's run on Action Comics and Morrison's All-Star Superman. I was regularly watching Smallville and reruns of Lois & Clark. I also picked up the complete series of Fleischer Studios animated films on DVD that year and saw some episodes of the short-lived Krypto cartoon. 2006 was also the year I first saw the extended 2000 cut of Superman: The Movie, which I now regard as the definitive version. 2006 gave us Hollywoodland, the Donner Cut of Superman II and several interesting documentaries, including The Science of Superman and Look, Up in the Sky! The Amazing Story of Superman. I got the anthology DVD set that year for Christmas, along with the Superman Returns videogame for the Playstation 2.

The game wasn't very good, but I enjoyed Colin O'Malley's score. I always thought this track would have made a good theme for a Superman TV show.

Basically, 2006 felt to me like an exciting time to be a Superman fan. There were some good comics on sale, there was a lot of Superman on TV, and while the cinematic re-launch hadn't been as successful as I'd hoped I still retained some optimism for the franchise's future. At least that's how I remember it. Could be nostalgia talking.

Anyway, I'm glad we finally looked at this one. We've now analysed all the live action Superman films except Superman and the Mole Men and the 1984 Supergirl. I've got some comic influences noted for Supergirl, but I'm not sure I can think of any for the Mole Men film.

[thecolorsblend]

I have very little positive to say about Superman Returns. But in the interest of keeping this thread relevant as a resource for Superman Returns/comics information, we can skip the ranty stuff.

I don't mind people using this thread to critique the movie if they want to.

Fair enough.

First off, I simply have reservations about continuing the Donner canon (however ambiguously Singer might've attempted to do so) in 2006. STM might be beloved by fans. But it NEVER achieved the level of recognizability and general "market penetration" of Star Wars. Reeve as Superman is obviously amazingly iconic. But STM itself clearly isn't as iconic. So, by the time you start getting into 2006, I think a reboot was very much in order. But obviously, that didn't happen.

Second, elements of the production design are pretty exquisite. The Kent farm, the Daily Planet newsroom and the Fortress all look solid. I particularly enjoy the Daily Planet building's deco architecture. It always rings true to me when the Daily Planet building is presented in an Art Deco style. I can't even explain why. But the costumes are absolutely neurotic. Lois is frequently dressed in throwback Forties styles, Lex is often dressed like a twentieth century American robber baron, Clark begins the movie wearing a vintage three piece Seventies-style suit before switching over to something more fashionable (circa 2006) and everyone else is wearing more or less modern fashions. A viewer can get dizzy trying to follow all these different costuming influences.

Third, for better or worse (I say worse), Singer chose to shoot the movie on the Panavision Genesis. An odd choice considering that (the purpose of this thread notwithstanding) SR's principal influence is a Seventies New Hollywood movie shot on conventional film stock. What's even stranger, and ultimately detrimental to the film, is that the Genesis system was barely out of prototype at the time it was selected to be used for SR. Simply put, the Genesis system wasn't ready for what Singer needed it to do. If you want to get an idea of that, some of the tests of the Genesis system were included on the 2006 DVD. Color reproduction is questionable (esp with the red spectrum), black level is murky and there were other problems going on too. Many of those kinks had been worked out by the time Fincher used Genesis to shoot Zodiac. That's why I was shocked to discover that the same model of camera was used to shoot both films. Because Zodiac looks great while SR... doesn't. Now, I can give Genesis a bit of a handicap in this case because Singer's post-production color timing made an already bad situation even worse. The movie just looks like sludge. But at the core of it all is the undeniable reality that Genesis simply wasn't ready to do what Singer needed it to do. In retrospect, the film would've been better served if Singer had either used the Sony HDC-F950 camera (which Lucas had already used for Revenge Of The Sith) or else bitten the bullet and shot SR on 70mm. But visually, the movie never recovered from the decision to use Genesis for principal photography.

Fourth, Routh is just plain not a good actor. He sounds stiff, wooden and awkward in literally everything he does. When Christopher Reeve says the "still the safest way to travel" line in STM, he sounds slightly naive and slightly self-aware and also (somehow) slightly earnest. It's an interesting balance act of three different tones/delivery in just six words. When Routh repeats that line in SR, he sounds like a credit card commercial. "Don't leave home without it". Ugh.

Fifth, the cast as a whole is about ten or fifteen years too young. These aren't the characters in the same time of life that we saw them in STM. They've grown, aged and matured as people. Casting babyfaces like Routh and Bosworth in the lead roles obscures the fact that these characters should be somewhere in their mid-thirties to early forties. They're nearing middle age and they both have good reason to question if they've made the best decisions in their lives. But you completely lose all that by casting such CW-ready actors.

Sixth, on a related note, this is a story that Singer is either unqualified to tell or simply lacked the life perspective to tell. Superman has been gone for five years in SR. And as above, he and Lois should both be questioning the decisions they've made in their lives. Simply evaluating what the movie presents to us, Superman's arc in the film is running off to find his people but eventually discovering that his own son has been on Earth all along. This should be a profound moment of insight and understanding for Superman. And in the hands of a more capable filmmaker, it would've been. As it is, we completely lose the Return To Krypton scene and the moment where Superman realizes that Jason is his son isn't the pivotal character moment in the film that it should be. Jason represents the culmination of everything Superman has ever wanted. The fact that his fondest wish is finally coming true should merit more than the one'ish minute of screen time it gets.

Seventh, on another related note, Singer set the precedent of giving Superman a son. That concept has been baked into the cake with Superman ever since. First came Chris Kent in the comics (who wasn't really Superman's son) (but may as well have been) and now Superman having multiple sons seems to be all but inviolable canon. I object to giving Superman biological offspring for the same reason I would object to Batman having children. It simply hampers the character in dramatically inappropriate ways.

Eighth, the film apparently cost in the neighborhood of $270 million to produce. But you're hard-pressed to see that anywhere onscreen most of the time. The action sequences were pretty mediocre even by 2006 standards. It's a mystery where the budget went. There are plenty of gossipy stories and conspiracy theories about that, which I'll skip for the time being. The point is that you'd expect a film with such a bloated budget to have more than a whoppin' three or four action sequences. And in SR's case, you'd be very mistaken about that.

Frankly, the list goes on (and on) from there. But I'm concerned that I've already ranted too much. And I haven't even mentioned the rather silly Superman uniform used in the film.

What it comes down to for me is that Singer was simply the wrong director to lead this movie. As I get older, I'm coming to accept the possibility that Superman simply isn't a viable film property anymore. But even if there's a way to make an entertaining Superman film that will appeal to wide audiences, there's simply no question in my mind that Singer was always the wrong guy to hire for the job.

Basically, 2006 felt to me like an exciting time to be a Superman fan. There were some good comics on sale, there was a lot of Superman on TV, and while the cinematic re-launch hadn't been as successful as I'd hoped I still retained some optimism for the franchise's future. At least that's how I remember it. Could be nostalgia talking.

Good things did come out of SR, admittedly. There was very real concern among the fans that the remaining seasons of Lois & Clark wouldn't be released on DVD because the first season (released back in 2005) wasn't a big seller.

But the advent of SR led to WB emptying out the vaults. The remaining seasons of Lois and Clark were released in 2006 along with the Kirk Alyn serials, the George Reeves TV series, two different movie boxed sets, the first season of the Superboy TV series from the Eighties and other things as well.

The comics released during this period were some of the best Superman comics in a long time. In particular, the One Year Later/Up, Up & Away storyline of Clark Kent gradually regaining his powers (following the events of Infinite Crisis) often came off like DC Comics critiquing Superman Returns as a film. It's almost like they were saying "No, dummies, THIS is how you do it". The parallels between UUAA and SR are too numerous (and, frankly, too critical) for me to think someone at DC didn't have a grudge against Singer.

In the final analysis, the best thing I can say about SR is that it (mostly) eliminated the possibility of anyone else attempting to revisit the Donner/Reeve canon. The message appears to have been well received in Hollywood. Do your own version of the character rather than attempt to resurrect STM.

I don't know if learning that lesson is worth the price that we fans have paid. But that does seem to be the abiding lesson. So, at least there's that.

[The Dark Knight]

Excellent find. I've never see this before, but it looks identical to the movie scene.

I'm not a fan of Singerman for the reasons which colors thoroughly explained above. But I do love this small moment from the film, and would like to see something like it again in the future. The logic of it doesn't matter to me, such as how many suits Clark owns and what happens to the clothes in the elevator shaft. This is classic Superman and has the type of tone that evokes something feel good, which I do believe the character needs more of - and I say this as a supporter of what Snyder was doing. More taking off glasses, shirt rips and the like. As I say, I like the scene, but it leads nowhere exciting - natural disasters don't excite me in the same way galactic supervillains do.

[thecolorsblend]

As a complete aside, part of my baggage relates to the exact situation on the ground with Superman fandom in 2006.

Superman had received multiple comic book origin stories starting in 1986. Heck, another origin/revision was underway even in 2006, although nobody knew that at the time. The result of all these origins was division in the fanbase. People were divided over which one should be THE origin. Compare that to Batman, where Year One's supremacy went virtually unchallenged for years. Even now, I think Year One is still canon in some form or another. But there was no clear winner in Superman comics at this time.

Worse, Superman Returns didn't premiere in a vacuum. It existed in the same media ecosystem as Smallville. This was another point of division. Were you Team Smallville or Team Singer? My prejudices on this should be obvious. I was in the Smallville jersey the entire time. Not even a question. Again, this wasn't a problem for Batman. Yes, other Batman media came out during this era. But Nolan's films were top dog in Batmanworld and nobody challenged that. But again, there was no clear "winner" (yet) in Superman media at the time.

And here we arrive at actual damage done to the fanbase. Superman Homepage (SH) was, by default, THE Superman fansite at the time. The admins of SH could've done a lot to be ecumenical and encourage fans to be unified. "It's okay to appreciate one, the other, both or neither, it's cool, we're all fans around here". But I think SH did more to stoke resentment, division and hard feelings than anyone else. Their news coverage of Superman Returns couldn't be more fawning. Meanwhile, Smallville could do no right. I've never forgiven SH for the damage done to the fanbase from 2006-2009.

And this, again, didn't appear to be an issue in the Batman fandom. There wasn't anyone out there creating unnecessary drama or starting trouble. Yes, BOF undeniably had an editorial point of view during the Nolan era. But say whatever you want about Jett, I didn't get the idea that he meant anyone any harm (I have reasons for saying this too; I'm not pulling stuff out of my hat). I can't say the same thing for SH, where it was made clear that certain fans are persona non grata in their comments and message boards. Specifically, I was among those banned from SH for not toeing the line.

All in all, a great many Superman fans envied Batman fans from 2006-2009. I love Batman but Superman was always my guy. And I wished Superman fans could have what Batman fans had in being largely unified without a self-serving, high-profile fan/villain taking every opportunity to start nonsense. Ragebait wasn't a thing back then. SH did what they did to be a-holes.

Anyway. Lots of drama up there. But no matter how immature that stuff may be, it's still part of the package for Superman Returns with me.

[The Dark Knight]

All in all, a great many Superman fans envied Batman fans from 2006-2009. I love Batman but Superman was always my guy. And I wished Superman fans could have what Batman fans had in being largely unified without a self-serving, high-profile fan/villain taking every opportunity to start nonsense. Ragebait wasn't a thing back then. SH did what they did to be a-holes.

Batman is a lot more forward looking and resilient as a brand. Burton's two movies are loved, but nothing since then really sought to replicate that era. It came and went and things moved on. Schumacher, Nolan and even Reeves did their own thing, which has undoubtedly been for the best. Come to think of it, Keaton coming back for The Flash is the only time the Batman movies have gone back to the past for a nostalgia hit.

In contrast, Superman: The Movie has been a ball and chain anchored around the character's legs ever since it came out. The obligatory fawning and eventual creep back to that style of film is a warm blanket that actually smothers. It's why I loathe the concept of Superman Returns, and it took Man of Steel to do what was necessary. In 2005, Nolan did a complete reboot with a different tone suited to the sensibilities of the day. In 2006, Singer did a weird Donner timeline side timeline thing that had no place in the modern world.

[BatmanFurst]

Great jobs as always Silver and Colorsblend. Somehow this thread initially got by me so I'm just now checking it out.

Returns is a film that I've always loved. It's sad that it didn't resonate more with people like it did for me. It's my second favorite Superman film.

[thecolorsblend]

Was flipping through a trade paperback and found this.



It sort of reminded me of this bit from SR.





Sorry, couldn't find a screenshot of Superman zipping past the window.

Anyway. Bryan Singer and other crew members all mentioned "the Return of Superman" (e.g., Reign Of The Supermen) as an influence on the film in some documentary or another.

So, the visual of Lois riding on an airplane, looking out a window and unexpectedly seeing Superman fly by seems like it could be a realistic influence.

Separately, my headcanon is that the figure whom comic book Lois saw was the Cyborg on his way to melt the Superman memorial plaque in front of the Daily Planet.