Superman is back, and not a moment too soon. The world is falling apart, and now even Lex Luthor is being let out of jail. Does the world need a savior? That’s a question pondered by the characters of the exciting new “Superman Returns.” But can there be any doubt that it does?
The first new Superman movie in 19 years, “Superman Returns” is a worthy successor to the iconic 1978 original “Superman: The Movie” (forget its three increasingly bad sequels). Director Bryan Singer hits all the right notes here in honoring the look and feel of that movie–literally, when it comes to the score, which borrows heavily from its predecessor–while successfully making an original, relevant film that avoids any taint of mere literal-minded homage.
This is not a Superman of the ironic and cynical, in the way that many superhero movies have been lately; the Man of Steel in 2006 is still a man who struts around, unabashed, in a red cape and blue body suit with a big ‘S’ on it. And yet, he’s also not the same stoic, don’t-show-your-weakness 1950s father figure of the past.
Singer spares us any extended explorations of Superman’s dark past or troubled psyche, and there are no moments when he hangs up his cape to go find himself in Tibet. But those moments of despair, longing, and doubt are there, all the more powerful for the fact that they’re hinted at and alluded to rather than tackled head on. How can they not be there? In “Superman Returns,” our hero comes back to Earth after five years away, during which he confirmed that, with his home planet of Krypton destroyed, he is indeed the only survivor; once back, he finds that the love of his life, Lois Lane, has moved on and is engaged to someone else. Sitting in a bar as Clark Kent, brooding over a beer, he hears of a tragedy in progress–innocent civilians imperiled, and one of them is none other than Lois herself. After the briefest moment of hesitation, he snaps into action, of course. Does he do it for love or altruism? In this case, it doesn’t matter.
I’ll leave it to others to explore the Christ parallels in this film–suffice it to say they’re there in force–but I was struck by a very different side of it. Yes, the Man of Steel is the powerful other-worldly superhero, come to defend truth and justice. But this Superman film makes clear that it’s not a one-man show. Superman has his vulnerabilities–physical and spiritual–while conversely and more importantly, the world is saved by a lot of people reaching deep inside themselves to find their own inner superman, the spark of moral and physical greatness that they didn’t know was within them. It is only then that salvation truly comes. Call it the Gnostic Superman.
None of this is entirely new to “Superman Returns”–little can be fully new in a story told and retold for almost 80 years–but it is an exciting, fresh, and refreshing take, one that is true to the spirit of Superman while also presenting us all with a unique challenge for today: Don’t look to the heavens for anything more than a bird or a plane; look inside yourself for Superman.
posted June 28, 2006 at 8:17 pm
You write that the film makes clear that “the world is saved by a lot of people reaching deep inside themselves to find their own inner superman,” but that certainly wasn’t clear to me. I would love some examples of where this was made “clear” because I thought very much the opposite.>
posted June 29, 2006 at 4:12 pm
Why is it that Christians put Jesus into every movie they see? Why all the “Christ Parallels”? Why can’t christians just realize that their Jesus story is simply that, a story, a plot, just like that of many other religious stories.>
posted June 29, 2006 at 7:47 pm
Kwind, you answered your own question. The story of Jesus is an archetypal one that is highly important to hundreds of thousands of people in America. The archetype even predates Christianity–check out the tale of Dionysus, and Osiris, and Prometheus to see some of the parallels. Christians don’t put Jesus into every movie they see; he’s already there. Archetypes are often used continuosly in creative ventures–The tough guy who is really a teddy bear, the woman who seems nice but is a seductress, and, the man who sacrifices himself for others. In this case, the validity of religion isn’t even important–just the fact that it is valid for so many people, and is integrated into their psyches, a key place where creativity wells forth.>
posted June 29, 2006 at 8:08 pm
Personally, I like the somewhat silly Superman 2 with the three Kryptonian villains (though I fast forward through some parts). Superman is just a nice guy who loves a girl and saves the world. It’s just a romantic comedy mixed with comic book battles. These reviews make the new film sound like a somber ‘Narnia’-type fantasy. I’m less likely to see it now.>
posted June 29, 2006 at 8:18 pm
kwind, Christians put Christ into every movie because it justifies their overarching need to dominate other religions and “prove” the viability of their own. Sometimes a story is just a story.>
posted June 29, 2006 at 9:00 pm
You have a point. Even the movie trailers were described as a ‘second coming’ by Entertainment Weekly. Superheroes are interesting when they’re like the Greek gods and heroes with feet of clay (like many of the Marvel comics characters). But Superman is so powerful he comes closer to the Christian ideal of all-powerful messiah, emphasizing the super-strong Christ figure instead of the suffering deity. But couldn’t he just be a powerful ‘mensch’ (proper term?) from the Jewish perspective? But again, the reviews make it sound overtly Christian. Superman the movie and Superman 2 may have touched on those messianic themes, but they were offset by the comedy. Bryan Singer didn’t get much comedy into those X-men movies.>
posted June 29, 2006 at 9:08 pm
Maybe it’s noteworthy that Superman’s creators (Seigal and Shuster) were Jewish.>
posted June 29, 2006 at 11:37 pm
I don’t think the original creators of Superman the comic strip at all envisioned Christ-Jesus parallels in a motion picture. IMHO>
posted June 30, 2006 at 4:44 pm
Well, like I said, they were Jewish, so of course they wouldn’t. But belief in a messiah who comes to put things right is a very Jewish concept. I think Superman may appeal to Christians because of their own notions of a messiah (in Jesus). But I guess all that is beside the point. I just like to think of Superman as a hero who romances Lois. (Or in the case of Smallville, Lana Lang. By the way, Smallville is a great version of Superman that portrays him as very human.)>
posted June 30, 2006 at 7:56 pm
It’s easier to see Superman as a Christ figure when the director paints him as such. I don’t know how else to decipher the image near the end of the movie, when Superman marters himself then falls to Earth in a Christ on the cross pose. If you don’t want to infer such stuff, don’t use such blatent imagery.>
posted July 5, 2006 at 6:33 am
Funny….I just saw this movie with my 8 year old son. I recall seeing the 1977 (or was it ’78?) version in theatres when I was about his age. This current movie borrowed moderately from that version….especially a lot of the dialog. As a devout Christian, of course I noticed the “imagery.” Was it done in an irreverent way? No. Did I shout Hallelujah in the theatre? No. Quite frankly, a lot of that imagery and dialog (that had religious overtones) are in the 1977 movie as well. I can only suggest to all it was a great movie, great special effects. To the Christians, don’t read too much into it, and to the non-Christians the same, no need to be “jumpy” or insulted by certain overtones that are clearly there. Sheesh guys, it’s just a movie. Hmmmm, I wonder if I’ll see any deeper meaning or hidden codes if I see “Cars”…..
>