Who else likes Superman Returns's idea of reinventing 3 & 4?

[Corky]

Who else thinks Bryan Singer's idea of continuing off part 2 and pretending that the "Third" and "Fourth" films didn't exist is ingenius? well i think so, "Superman Returns" definitely honored the awesome first 2 movies quite well just like how "Batman Begins" re-invented the original franchise.

[MythicBrawn]

I thought it would have been cool if the execution was better. There were entirely too many plot holes in Superman Returns. It would have been better to restart the franchise ala Batman Begins. Christopher Reeve was a good Superman. So, why must every movie made after his death be built upon what he created? Start fresh and get the franchise re-invigorated. As it stands now, it is bogged down with too much baggage.

[Frankie Dennis]

Ingenius? the movies stink. It's natural to pretend they never happened.

[TROUBLEZ]

At first I thought it was a cool idea, that way you don't have to worry about waisting time establishing the supportin cast (perry, jimmy, lois) and retelling the origin, that this would give the filmmakers an opportunity to have more action, more in depth story. But after finding out that this movie reused so many elements from the first one either sounds lazy, or sounds like they didn't believe think they had what it takes to make a better film, so they just thought, "well the first Superman is a classic, let's just work off of that." They didn't want to take chances and do new theme music, have a new version of the Fortress of Solitude, a different version of Luthor, or atleast a completely different villain not related to Luthor...

[shyguy]

I actually think it was a pretty dumb idea for the first Superman movie in 20 years to be a sequel to a couple of old movies that haven't aged very well.

It's definitely been long enough since the last Superman movie that Singer would have been way better off just starting from scratch. The Superman basics are fairly well-known from the previous movies and other media, so he wouldn't have had to do that much setup.

Of course, I think Singer's entire premise was really stupid, so I'm not sure how much the movie not being a sequel would've helped.

[Kaos]

it sucked...why o why couldnt it be a fresh start?

[Paul Dee]

I actually think it was a pretty dumb idea for the first Superman movie in 20 years to be a sequel to a couple of old movies that haven't aged very well.

It's definitely been long enough since the last Superman movie that Singer would have been way better off just starting from scratch. The Superman basics are fairly well-known from the previous movies and other media, so he wouldn't have had to do that much setup.

Of course, I think Singer's entire premise was really stupid, so I'm not sure how much the movie not being a sequel would've helped.

It's not a sequel though is it? It's just using the rough plots of the first 2 movies as a starting point for another movie so that a lot of the characters and relationships are already set up wethout having to treat on familiar ground. You can't just assume that all of the events in I and II occured before Superman Returns, if you do then I presume you'll run into many plot holes.

[MythicBrawn]

It's not a sequel though is it? It's just using the rough plots of the first 2 movies as a starting point for another movie so that a lot of the characters and relationships are already set up wethout having to treat on familiar ground. You can't just assume that all of the events in I and II occured before Superman Returns, if you do then I presume you'll run into many plot holes.

That's the problem. SR was built off the first 2 movies. If it wasn't, then you as a viewer feel like you walked in on the middle of a story. Since it was built on the first two, the plot holes are numerous. As it is, the movie should have started fresh.