The Four Color Media Monitor

According to a writer for the Hollywood-studying site The Wrap, the audience's lack of interest in good morals and justice is what did in the 2006 movie:

So let's break this down into superheroes and its current trend in film. “Superman Returns,” the 2006 Bryan Singer dirge, didn't fail because audiences no longer resonate with a super being that can fly, shoot heat from his eyes and is immune to bullets. It failed because Superman is the epitome of good morals and justice, which today's audience find boring and childish.

No, no, no. The movie failed because the screenwriters' politics overwhelmed much of the script, which resulted in the omission of The American Way from the movie, because they thought that the audience, even on the homefront, wouldn't like it, which is just plain stupid.

If the movie scene reflects the times, it most certainly reflects its audience too. I'm not immune. I don't care to watch Superman pining for Lois Lane for 90 minutes in some “Lois and Clark” retread. I want to see him bust some heads and kick some ass -- but the problem writers run into is how to make a guy that can't die … seem human. We can't identify with something like that and if '00s audiences can't identify with the protagonist then the movie "sucks.”

A guy who can't die? I think that's awfully exaggerated. If they need to come up with a menace who can give the Man of Steel a run for his money, they can look to all the examples of the more formidable opponents he's had in past years, including Darkseid, who's certainly a formidable force without even having to use Kryptonite.

Superman's problems in the movie business today, from what I can tell, are screenwriters and producers who'd rather let absurd leftism get in the way of telling something tasteful.

Labels: Superman