PeterDavid.net

Superman Returns

Short answer: It was a film that surpassed the quality of the script, making up with special effects and human drama what it lacked in coherent plot.

Longer answer below, with spoilers (sorry, couldn't be helped.):

I’ve always been a firm believer in judging various creative works for themselves, rather than comparing them to previous works. The problem in this case is that Superman Returns screams for exactly that sort of comparison. Basically it’s a sequel to Superman: The Movie and Superman II, and it places itself against its predecessors every chance it gets. From repeated music to repeated shots to repeated dialogue, it cries out to be held up next to what went before, unlike “Batman Begins” and that movie’s determination to create a film with a totally different atmosphere from the Burton or (God help us) Schumacher incarnations. The simple fact is that, without the first two Superman films, there is no “Superman Returns.”

So let’s compare them—

Scripts: Let’s face it, neither of them were Pulitzer or even Oscar material. “Superman Returns” has holes you could drive Krypton through. (1) Superman’s departure without a word of explanation to Lois cannot be excused by the concept that he just found it too hard to say good-bye. His unexplained absence was simply cruel. For that matter, why wasn’t she worried about his safety? Contrast the genuinely human reaction of Sarah Jane Smith in “School Reunion” who, after encountering the Doctor after thirty years absence, at first is overjoyed and then cries in an accusing fashion, “I thought you died!” Not Lois, no. She writes a rage-fueled essay about why the world doesn’t need Superman. She acted like a woman who knew she was unceremoniously dumped, but she couldn’t actually have known it. So not accepting the basic premise is something of a problem for me. (2) Luthor’s plan is unclear and confusing. It threatens to cause a tidal wave that would swamp Metropolis, but it never does. Menacing the world, he creates an environment that protects him from Superman. Swell. But there’s nothing protecting him from, say, 500-pound bombs. Or the 82nd Airborne. The notion is that the world will want to do business with him. I’m thinking not. I’m thinking they see him as a threat and act accordingly. (3) I know it’s always been a conceit that the intrepid reporters of the Daily Planet are too stupid to connect Clark and Superman, but c’mon. Clark goes away, Superman goes away. Clark comes back, Superman comes back. There’s stupid and then there’s moronic.

On the other hand, there was nothing truly wince worthy. The film didn’t crash to a halt while Lois Lane recited poetry. There was no WTF moment such as Superman reversing the world or sucking Lois’ memory out of her head through her mouth…in other words, a sequence that erased the necessity of some large chunk of the movie. There was no Otis. The filmmakers trusted the material, as opposed to the original film where it often seemed they didn’t.

“SUPER”ior script: “Superman Returns”

Director: Richard Donner basically made a breakthrough film. It was the first time there had been any serious treatment (at least for the first hour) of a comic book superhero. And what treatment! The screenplay by Mario Puzo gave Superman a sense of scope on par with a biblical epic, and Donner came through. The problem was that Donner made no effort to meld the tone of Puzo’s work with that of the so-campy-you-wondered-where-Adam-West-was work of the three other screenwriters. Consequently, the tone of the film lurches wildly. You can sense it skid off the rails the moment Ned Beatty shows up. The human and heroic elements of the Superman storyline jar wildly with the campy Lex Luthor material.

At least Singer keeps a much firmer hand on his tale. It doesn’t hang together, but at least it’s consistent. We don’t go from high-heroics to high-camp, and the bit where Superman gets the crap kicked out of him by Luthor’s goons is quite possibly the most heart-wrenching sequence ever depicted in a superhero film, surpassing even the death of Uncle Ben. People in the audience was gasping, groaning, even looking away because it was so brutal. Plus there’s all the aforementioned winks and nods to the original (Lois fainting after being rescued and still unable to spell; Glenn Ford’s photograph on the mantle in the Kent home; an extended sequence where Luthor watches a miniature city get shaken to bits was probably a nod to Superman: The Movie where very obvious models were used for the earthquake sequence, as if to say, “Watch: We’re going to do better than this.") And if Donner dropped hints as to Messianic intent (“And so I give them you…my only son”) Singer drops anvils (Superman drifting helpless and unconscious in a classic crucifixion pose—dying for our sins, presumably, the sin being lack of faith in our “savior”…and, yes, there’s even a resurrection. Plus I loved the Aquaman pajamas, which had nothing to do with anything, but I want me a pair.) He’s even sly enough to re-create the cover to Action Comics #1 as Superman hefts a car over his head.

So, even though we must acknowledge Donner’s breakthrough work, just for the quality of the final product, SUPERior director: Bryan Singer.

Brandon Routh: I did not come out of Superman the Movie thinking that a man could fly. I did, however, believe that a man could fool people into thinking he was two different guys using basically skilled acting and a pair of glasses.

Not so Routh. His Superman is…competent. Decent. Classically handsome, strong jawed, looks great in tights. But in order to be Superman, he needs the tights, the cape, the spitcurl and the special effects.

Chris Reeve, by contrast, could be Superman by simply removing his Clark Kent glasses, straightening his back, deepening his voice, and saying, “Lois…there’s something I have to tell you.” Yes, his Clark was over-the-top, but let’s face it, so is wearing blue and red tights with your underwear on the outside. Reeve’s Superman radiated charisma, power, and a sense of humor. Routh’s Superman, when he’s not juggling real estate or planes, is so low-key he’s almost subliminal. Actually, he’s so low-key he’s almost Clark, glasses or no. He holds our interest without quite piquing it.

SUPERior Superman: Chris Reeve.

Lois Lane: Boy, this one’s a toughie. The problem stems from the fact that Lois is in such two radically different points in her life. Margot Kidder was all throaty wonderment and discovery as she encountered Superman for the first time and fell in love with him. It was all so charming. Kate Bosworth isn’t charming. She’s a mother, she’s in another relationship, she’s got no sense of closure, she’s bitter. There’s a glorious irony in that Kidder’s Lois Lane dreamt of Superman and of winning the Pulitzer Prize, whereas Bosworth’s Lois Lane still nurses anger and is winning the Pulitzer prize for shattering her own dreams of Superman. Some people have also complained that Bosworth is a bit callow to play Lois, especially considering that five years have passed. Bosworth is 23 and looks it. However, despite her youth, I believe her more as a reporter than I did Margot Kidder. But I believe Margot Kidder as Lois Lane more than I do Kate Bosworth.

SUPERior Lois: Tie.

Luthor: Despite the comic opera aspects of the original Luthor, Hackman somehow came across as more menacing. Perhaps that’s because there was a wider contrast in his activities. As much as I feel the comedic nonsense and camp aspects hurt the film, they did serve to set up the chilling moments such as Luthor’s calm response to Superman’s outraged demand, “Is this how a twisted mind like yours get its kicks? By planning the deaths of millions of innocent people?” (“No. By causing the deaths of millions of innocent people.”) and his subsequent advancing on Superman with Kryptonite. But Spacey owes his success as Luthor to the more consistent overall tone of the script and film. The sequence where Kitty freaks out on him upon discovering that he deliberately placed her in harm’s way and he cold-bloodedly explains his reasoning is truly marvelous. Plus, bottom line, Hackman was unwilling to embrace the Luthor trademark of baldness while Spacey happily shaved his head. They were both great, but bottom line, I have to say…

SUPERior Lex: Kevin Spacey, by a hair (or lack thereof).

Luthor’s floozy: They basically both go through the same character arc: They come to appreciate the greatness that is Superman and wind up undercutting Lex’s plan, earning his wrath. The difference is that Parker Posey doesn’t look like she knows why she’s there much of the time, whereas Valerie Perrine is…well, she’s Valerie Perrine, for God’s sake. The sex goddess of my youth.

SUPERior Floozy: Valerie Perrine.

Music: This isn’t even close. There isn’t a note of memorable score in Superman Returns that wasn’t lifted from John Williams.

SUPERior Score: Superman: The Movie.

So basically, in terms of the one-to-one comparisons, it’s a dead heat. That leaves us with the things that don’t match up exactly, and in those, I have to say, Superman Returns leaves its predecessor in the dust. Contrast the absence of someone as over-the-top as Otis with the presence of Richard White, whom Singer wisely chooses to portray—not as a schmuck—but a heroic individual whom Lois could easily fall in love with. Yes, he’s not Superman…but he doesn’t have to be. Consider the far better use of cameos: Noel Neill and Kirk Allyn, the original serial Lois and Clark, had their brief cameo whittled nearly into non-existence in Superman the Movie. Here Noel actually gets to act as the dying old woman in the beginning, and Jack Larson—the TV series Jimmy Olsen—gets a nice sized scene as Bo the bartender. Then there’s the matter of Lois’ son. I mean, let’s face it, with all his physical frailty, the writers tried too hard. They went overboard trying to convince us that Jason’s father isn’t who we all knew he was before seeing a single frame of the film. (Although it sets up an interesting conundrum: Presuming he was conceived during Clark and Lois’ assignation in the Fortress—an involvement that Lois would now have no recollection of—basically his presence is the equivalent of an immaculate conception from Lois’ point of view.) Nevertheless, the young actor does a marvelous job, the timing of the reveal is nicely done, and the scene toward the end with Superman and the sleeping Jason is, quite simply, the best Superman scene ever committed to film.

Overall, then, kudos to the movie makers. They’ve outdone that which they modeled their film on.

Now about that Superman/Batman crossover…

PAD

OUT THIS WEEK: X-FACTOR #8

So on the one hand fans decry my getting involved with tie-ins. On the other hand, I'm reading fans on other sites saying, "Hey, I just bought X-Factor because of the Civil War tie-in, and whoa, I'm on board for this series from now on." Go figure.

Whad'ja think?

PAD

HOLY CRAP, I'M QUOTED IN "VARIETY"

In the June 26-July 9 issue of Variety, there's a story on page five headlined "Entourage Floats Faux Feature." The article discusses the two-page ad that ran in June 16's Variety congratulating James Cameron and Vince Chase for the $116+ million opening of Cameron's "Aquaman" feature. Anyone who watches the hit HBO series knows full well that this record-setting event happened two Sundays ago in the fictional showbiz world of "Entourage."

Yet the bogus ad has stoked interest in the prospect of Cameron directing a genuine "Aquaman" feature (although astoundingly the WB, missing the opportunity to cash in on it, passed on the proposed "Aquaman" TV series "Mercy Reef.") And Denise Martin's article concludes with the following:

"The ad has lit a flame under Cameron fans, who hope the director will make the pic his follow-up to 'Titanic.' "Now all we need is for Cameron to really make an Aquaman film and we're good to go," Aquaman's comicbook scribe Peter David cracked."

Somewhere, DC execs are spitting tacks over THAT one.

And hey, Jim...if you're reading this...I've got some great ideas. Have your person call my person, we'll do a thing.

PAD

Comments temporarily off

We're trying to track down some performance problems and server errors. We hope to have them up for later this afternoon. --GH

Sports fans

So Kathleen happened to have the radio on this morning, tuned to a sports radio talk show. And it seemed that the volume and intensity of the discussion was inversely proportional to the degree of importance-in-the-grand-scheme-of-things that the subject matter had.

And all I could think of was how grotesquely unfair it is that science fiction and comics fans are tagged as nerds and dweebs and treated in a condescending manner when sports fans are just as "bad" if not "worse." I mean, where the hell does the media get off being snotty about fans who are dressed as Klingons when you can go to any Yankees game and see 1800 guys wearing jerseys that say "Jeter" on the back. The Klingon language may be incomprehensible, but no less so than watching two sports fanatics tossing around stats, names and abbreviations ("When he wasn't able to DH he was HBP and wound up on the DL when his ERA was 0.73, or else he would have been MVP.") How is it 1500 people, mostly sober, spending a weekend enjoying a mutual interest at a hotel and talking about space exploration, how to avoid global warming, and whether the Hulk can beat Superman...how is that automatically inferior to 43,000, mostly drunkly drunk, spending a day enjoying a mutual interest at a stadium and talking about playoffs, how to avoid the line at the bathroom, and whether the 1953 Dodgers could beat the 1962 Yankees?

Plus science fiction fans have only the Sci-Fi Channel. Sports fans have ESPN, ESPN 2, ESPN Classic. Golf. There's a golf channel. A whole channel dedicated to Golf, for God's sake. That's like having a whole channel devoted to "Voyager." And how are fantasy baseball leagues any weirder than local chapters of Starfleet? And where do people get off being snotty about Renfaires when there are those fantasy baseball camps that some organizations offer, where you pay big bucks to dress up like a baseball player for a week? At least Renfaire's don't set you back a few thousand bucks.

So what makes us nerdy and them "mainstream? Because it's "big business?" Maybe the only way science fiction and comic book conventions will gain genuine respectability is if they become designed, not for socialization or debate, but about being as aggressive as possible about separating fans from their money. You know: LIke pro sports.

PAD

This is so weird

Everyway I look, there's articles about Superman being gay, or all this subtext about him being gay.

WTF?

When the hell did this happen? Are these people all stupid or something.

BATMAN is gay.

Superman was the one who was a symbol of totalitarianism. Batman was the one who was the gay icon, hanging out in his mansion, wearing lounging pajamas or a smoking jacket and having fun with Dick. For a while there Bruce Wayne was so synonymous with homosexuality that the very name "Bruce" had gay connotations ("Match Game" always used "Bruce" to convey gay guys in their questions, and the network insisted Bruce Banner's name be changed to David Banner for the Hulk TV series.)

But when "Batman Begins" came out, there was no discussion of whether Bruce Wayne was gay. I didn't see any articles along those lines; certainly not in the mainstream media, which is where I'm seeing it everywhere. I guess when you dress in black leather and scare the crap out of people, you're just too butch to have anyone question your sexuality. But poor Clark...suddenly he's a gay icon.

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

PAD

OUT THIS WEEK: HULK ANNUAL, FALLEN ANGEL #6

A Hulk special edition, featuring--among other things--a Champions story and a long-clamored-for reprint of "Hulk: The End," and the first of a "Fallen Angel" two parter featuring her first experiences after having fallen to earth. Whad'ja think?

PAD

Todd Nauck on Newsarama

There's a nice interview up with Todd Nauck in which he talks about his three issue stint (which, who knows, may be more; part of it depends on sales, I suppose) on "Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man," issues 10-12. There's two pages of his artwork accompanying. So check out www.newsarama.com, and you have ANY fond memories of Todd and me on "Young Justice" and you're not reading FNSM...now's the time.

PAD

Peter's Predictive Powers Persist

A while back, Peter wrote a Hulk story with Nightmare, and his growing power after a warm day in September, with millions of people wishing, "Please, let it all be a dream..." which allowed Nightmare a permanent foothold in the real world.

Now we have this:

New Study Finds That Dream Imagery Became More Intense After 9/11:

The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, have not only affected the real world that we live in today, but also the intensity of our dreams. Dream imagery became more intense following that fateful day, according to a research abstract that will be presented at the 20th anniversary SLEEP meeting of the Associated Professional Sleep Societies (APSS) at Salt Lake City's Salt Palace Convention Center from June 17-22.

The study, conducted by E. Hartmann of Tufts University in Newton, Mass., consisted of 44 persons living in the U.S. who had been keeping a record of their dreams both before and after 9/11. The results showed that while dream imagery became more intense after 9/11, dreams were not longer, more dreamlike or more nightmarelike. There was also no direct ("replay") incorporation of 9/11 content. This, noted the author, is consistent with the "Contemporary Theory of Dreaming", which states that the connections of a dream, along with the imagery, are guided by the dominant emotion of the dreamer. It also adds that the intensity of the central image of a dream is a measure of emotional arousal.

(Via News Unfiltered.)

What'cha wanna know?

It's been a while since I've done a straight up Q&A thread. So anything you want to ask me, feel free. I'll answer your questions the best I can, although it may take me a little bit to reply.

PAD

ADDED at 7:51: Okay...the five, ten, fifteen question thing? Not happenin'. One per person. Those people who posted enough questions to fill out an interview: Choose the one you most want to know and ask that. My fault; I should have repeated that condition since it's been a while since I've done this.

Fallen Angel #6 preview

For those interested, over on www.silverbulletcomicbooks.com, there's a preview of "Fallen Angel #6" on the sidebar. Check it out for the different art style J.K. is using for this two parter.

PAD

Paul McCartney--a long standing query answered

Blogger O.V. Hawkins made the following observation:

Paul McCartney wondered musically forty years ago, "Will you still need me, will you still feed me, when I'm Sixty Four?"

Paul turns 64 this weekend.

His wife has filed for divorce.

So apparently that answers THAT question.

PAD

BOOKS OF MINE OUT ON THE STANDS

You can find the following in better bookstores everywhere: FALL OF KNIGHT, the last of the King Arthur trilogy, and WRITING FOR COMICS WITH PETER DAVID. Knock yourselves out.

PAD

Civil War #2--Sound-off thread

Well, the New York Post blew the reveal of the end of Civil War #2 before the book was on the stands. Then again, I suppose anyone who actually reads that rag deserves what they get so, y'know, that'll teach ya.

We, however, will allow those who don't know what's going down with Spider-Man to frequent the board without having it ruined for them. For those who do want to discuss it--and you know you do--I provide the space below. Have at it.

PAD

A future guest for "The Colbert Report?"

Colbert has a thing about bears. He's always listing them as a major threat to America. So then this article hits:

"WEST MILFORD, N.J. (June 10) - A black bear picked the wrong yard for a jaunt, running into a territorial tabby who ran the furry beast up a tree - twice.

Jack, a 15-pound orange and white cat, keeps a close vigil on his property, often chasing small animals, but his owners and neighbors say his latest escapade was surprising.

"We used to joke, 'Jack's on duty,' never knowing he'd go after a bear," owner Donna Dickey told The Star-Ledger of Newark for Friday's editions.

Neighbor Suzanne Giovanetti first spotted Jack's accomplishment after her husband saw a bear climb a tree on the edge of their northern New Jersey property on Sunday. Giovanetti thought Jack was simply looking up at the bear, but soon realized the much larger animal was afraid of the hissing cat.

After about 15 minutes, the bear descended and tried to run away, but Jack chased it up another tree."

I think Colbert should have the cat on as a guest. Maybe give him a medal or something.

PAD

RIP Tim Hildebrandt

I first met Greg and Tim Hildebrandt at an exhibition a bunch of years ago of artwork they had done for a set of Marvel playing cards. One of the pieces was of Random, a character I'd created for X-Factor. I wound up buying the piece. Wasn't cheap, but how many Hildebrandt originals with characters I'd created was I going to find?

I encountered them again on occasion at various conventions. Always gentlemanly, patient with the fans, and incredibly talented.

Tim passed away at age 67. He will be missed. The artwork hangs on my office wall to this day.

PAD

Mr. and Mrs. Smith Go to Washington

Okay, see, this is how my mind works. I was channel surfing, and one movie channel was running "Mr. and Mrs. Smith," and another was running "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington." So I think they should do a sequel called "Mr. and Mrs. Smith Go to Washington."

It pretty much writes itself. The assassins are hired with the understanding that they're to test the Secret Service's "secure location" where the President is locked down during times of extreme danger. They manage to penetrate it and make a mock hit, except they find the president already dead, and discover they're now framed for a presidential assassination. Something like that.

PAD

Fallen Angel TPB back to press

DC has decided to go back to press with the long out-of-print Fallen Angel trade paperback. It will be available in August.

No word on any interest in collecting the rest of the DC run.

PAD

Al Zarqawi (but you can call him Al)

Naturally, from a justice point of view, I'm as pleased as anyone else that this brutal creature who has killed so many innocent people is gone. However, I'm moved to ask two things:

1) Considering Al Qaeda had no presence in Iraq before we invaded it, aren't the chances pretty good that all of his victims would still be alive if we hadn't attacked?

2) Correct me if I'm wrong, but I could swear the Pentagon just got done explaining why outtakes from his recruitment video showed that, militarily, the guy didn't know his ass from his elbow. So should we be worried that, if an incompetent yutz was able to give us this much trouble, whoever replaces him might be even worse?

PAD

If I were a conservative voter, I'd be insulted

I mean, honestly: How could any conservative with a scintilla of common sense not be?

With Bush's approval ratings at lethal lows, with the GOP chokehold on government apparently threatened, with civilians and soldiers dying at a stunning rate in Iraq, gas prices through the roof, citizens being spied on, the courts and politicians finally taking a long hard look at Bush's historic power grabs...NOW Bush et al suddeny haul out a marriage amendment? NOW?

I mean, yes, the ploy worked wonders in energizing the conservative base and getting votes out in 2004 in a dazzling, multi-state display of voting bigotry. But no one's mentioned it in two years. Suddenly, NOW, they announce that "marriage is under attack" and start talking about adding the first amendment since prohibition (which, y'know, worked out so well) that would restrict freedoms rather than expand them. It could not possibly be a more obvious gambit to try and appeal to the many voters who have had buyers' remorse ever since they voted for Bush and the GOP in 2004 and slowly came to the realization they'd been hosed. It's genuinely insulting to conservative voters' intelligence, that their leaders think they're THAT easily manipulated. That they're going to overlook the very real assault that our soldiers are under, needlessly, in Iraq, because of the fake assault that the institution of marriage is allegedly under.

Is it that Bush et al believe that conservatives must be monumentally stupid because the fact that conservatives voted for them proves it?

I've said it before but it bears repeating: If politicians are really worried about marriage being undermined, the key is not to prevent people from getting married. It's to make it difficult-to-impossible to get divorced. But they'll never do that because Bush and his cronies aren't REALLY concerned about marriage being under attack. They're worried their numbers are under attack. But they're clinging to the notion that conservatives are Just That Stupid that they'll fall for this crap a second time.

The question is, will they?

PAD

Mr. Butts comes to our World?

I don't know about you but that coming at me would put me off smoking.
Kath

1602

Since it's been announced at the Philadelphia, I'll tell you guys that I'm going to be doing a 1602 limited series. It's going to be focusing on "The Fantastick Four," and will feature von Doom, the Four Who Are Frightful, a kidnapping plot with Shakespeare as the target, and an epic adventure to the ends of the earth--literally.

There will be more details on newsarama.com in the next couple of days.

PAD

Harvey Nomination

Hunh. "X-Factor" has been nominated for a Harvey for best new series. I'm fairly sure it's the first time that anything I've worked on has gotten a Harvey nomination. Who'd've thought?

PAD

Why were they surprised?

The evening news in NY last night had interviews with people-in-the-street and NY execs expressing "outrage," "Surprise," "shock" over the fact that the government has slashed the terror defense budget by forty percent. This brilliant decision to cut back on funding for a city that's been attacked twice in thirteen years, claiming that there are "no national icons" that would present targets (because the Statue of Liberty, Brooklyn Bridge, Empire State Building, Radio City Music Hall, etc., apparently don't count) while stepping up money and protection for cities that would not seem to be on anyone's radar--Jacksonville, FL, St. Louis, MO, Milwaukee, WI, Louisville, KY, and Omaha, NE--has officials claiming they're stunned. Stunned!

Why are they stunned? Beats me.

New York didn't vote for Bush. Not only that, but one of the major Dem challengers for 2008, Senator Clinton, represents New York. Nothing like trying to slap a black eye on NY's representation ("Our funding got cut! Why weren't you watching out for us?") Florida, meantime, is Jeb Bush's backyard. Missouri voted for Bush. Kentucky went for Bush. Nebraska went for Bush. Wisconsin went for Kerry, but only by 49.8 as opposed to Bush's 49.4. Close enough to flip in 2008.

I have no idea how anyone can think that this administration, which outs its own CIA operatives in order to exact vengeance, would have done any different.

PAD