Super Watch: Superman Returns (2006)

Watched:  04/26/2026

Format:  HBOmax

Viewing:  Unknown

Director:  Bryan Singer

I was maybe ten minutes into this rewatch of Superman Returns (2006) when I messaged Stuart that we needed to bring back the podcast just to do a ten-part series on this movie.  The pre-history of the movie is worth discussing, as is the production, months up to the release, the lackluster response to the movie, what came after with a reboot in the form of the Snyder movies, and that both the director and Spacey were canceled.  

It's also a movie from the wild west, excited days of the superhero explosion that came after two great Spider-Man and X-Men movies, Batman Begins and a terrible Catwoman film.*  But no real rules had been written yet for how superhero films should work.  

The DVD releases of the Superman quadrilogy had really brought the Donner film and its sequels back to the public consciousness, and looking for a safe bet, with Batman done and Wonder Woman the only other DC IP that seemed possible - but that was a girl and Catwoman had failed - they went back to DC's original moneymaker.  

Here, I'm just really going to cover the movie - but really what I thought at the time versus where I am in 2026.

Leading up to Superman Returns, I was in my late 20's, and was 31 when the movie was released.  At the time, the movie felt like a gift.  I was a huge fan of those four movies from the 70's and 80's, and was being told the first two, anyway, were the basis for this new movie - just with an all-new cast.  I was enthused by the casting of Kevin Spacey, Frank Langella and Parker Posey.  Curious about what role Marsden would play.  And it was very hard to know what the movie was actually about.  

It turns out the movie jumped five years in time from Superman's ongoing adventures - which we'd only seen snippets of in Superman: The Movie and Superman II.  The Man of Steel heard astronomers found Krypton, or something, and without much pre-amble, Superman jumped in a Kryptonian vessel, got there, found it was - in fact - destroyed, and came home.  

The movie serves as a way to reintroduce you to old favorites like Perry, Jimmy, Lois and Lex.  It gives us a new not-quite Miss Teschmacher in Posey.  And then scary friends Lex made in prison.  Lex has hatched a scheme that takes a while to fall into place - but is even grander than his desire to remove Western California from the map, and instead will get him an all-new piece of land.

Meanwhile, Clark is realizing everyone has moved on without him.  Well, maybe not Jimmy.

Lois Lane (Kate Bosworth) is living with a guy (James Marsden) and shares a child with him, Jason (Tristan Lake Leabu).  But Clark remains in love with Lois who he did not say good-bye to before he left - at least as Superman.  

Lex launches his plan, which is to launch one of the Kryptonian crystals into the sea, laced with Kryptonite, and grow a new continent which will usurp much of North America's space.  

Superman quasi stops him/ picks up the new island and chucks it into space.  

Everything remains largely unresolved and we went on to enjoy a half-dozen more movies and a sprawling DC Universe of movies.  Or, what really happened, was some people had a lukewarm reception to a sequel to a movie that was 26 years in the past, had no superhero battles, and made Superman into a kind of a weirdo who seemed super only in powers.  

Why I have sympathy now for people who love a bit of media I think is maybe not all that great is more or less Superman Returns.  At the time of the movie's release, I was bouncing off the walls, so excited for the new movie - and that it so clearly knew the first two movies so well.  

And it does.  Too well.  While also wanting to play fast and loose with its dedication to the original movie.  And at the end of the day, among the issues the movie has is that it leaves massive plot holes and still has the gumption to say "it's a superhero movie, don't worry about it" - something Marvel Studios figured out is the polar opposite of how superhero comics fans operate.  And it makes for better storytelling in any genre if you don't have to wonder - wait, when did Richard enter the picture, and who does he think the father is?  Did Lois babytrap Richard?

And who could blame her - unless Lois was just wildly popular at the Daily Planet, it seems she'd have been able to narrow down who got her knocked up.  And it's absolutely wild this is the set-up and there's no conversation about it - no acknowledgement of what Superman left Lois with.  I mean, you'd think the guy who stands for "Truth, Justice... all that stuff" would have wanted to tell the woman he was bedding he was planning to bounce.  

Especially when, let's be honest, Clark isn't just heartbroken here - he's the nerd who is obsessing over the fact the girl he liked is with someone he kind of can't compete with.  Richard is accomplished, a pilot, handsome as hell, and possibly happily raising someone else's kid while laying down cover for Lois with Perry.  Clark Kent is just a guy she doesn't think about, and Superman leaves for five years without leaving a note.

In 2026, I have no idea what they were thinking.  This is actually very bad writing.  It makes Lois and Superman look pretty terrible, especially when Lois is clearly still into Superman and Richard has to be supportive of this?  You just know the next movie starts with Richard getting crushed by a boulder.

And, as a co-worker opined to me in 2007 to which I had no real retort - "it's just Superman lifting a progressively larger series of objects".  

You can guess why Gunn thought it was so important to do a few things with the 2025 Superman, among those finally showing Superman not just in action, but what it means for him to fight an equal and for him to fight an array of challenges and opponents.  We've barely tapped in a movie what Superman can do (and credit to Snyder/ Whedon for doing some of this with Justice League.  Maybe the only gauge of what he can do happens during the post-resurrection fight.).  

I also get why - if you're not just seeing Superman as a huge metaphor of some sort - why seeing him lift the crystalline mass complete with Kryptonite outgrowths is a problem.  It makes no sense when a wee bit took his ass out completely fifteen minutes ago.  I get why they did it, and from a poetic standpoint - lovely.  But it's a bit confusing, isn't it?

Now, I really enjoy the super-feats shown in Superman Returns.  Aside from some aesthetic choices, seeing Superman save the plane, rescue Metropolis after the earthquake, lift the boat, etc...  is all neat stuff.  It's actually fantastic - I don't want to undersell this part.  Not only is the airplane rescue one of those things that is just visually stunning and emotionally engaging - it's all very on brand with Superman as a firefighter more than a super-cop.  He's here to rescue people.  And this movie pulls it off with great panache.  This is the kind of stuff that I like to see punctuate my Superman stories.  (In fact, those of you who think Superman saving people and animals during the Kaiju scene on the new movie was hokey, maybe you don't get Superman?  Just saying.)

Is Superman super-stalking Lois?  I mean - yeah.  Just watch it now and see how they cut the movie.  And in the last scene he fully enters her house uninvited and hangs out with her sleeping kid...  I mean.  Ugh.  It just reads so weird now.  And it feels like an excuse to use the excellent dialogue from Superman: The Movie again - which seems to be the only point.

This movie is so beholden to the original movies, and what seemed like something I desperately wanted in 2006 now feels like the source of much of the movie's trouble.  Neither Singer nor the performers nor the editors pull off the vibe they're trying to get with the movie as newspaper movie - a la His Girl Friday, and you'd think they're not even trying except for Bosworth slipping into MidAtlantic Accent for two or three lines in Perry's office.

But it also meant the scheme they came up with Lex was, again, a land scheme (gotta have a call back).  But this plan makes zero sense.  First, why would Lex even think the crystals were great for creating a continent sized landmass?  The Fortress of Solitude is maybe the size of a shopping mall.  Second, why would he think creating the land mass would protect him from a flotilla of US Marines coming in and capturing or killing him?  He says he'll have futuristic tech, but he's sitting around smoking a cigar in this movie, not playing with a disintegrator ray.  It just doesn't make a lick of sense except he thinks he built a trap to kill Superman - and if he has access to kryptonite, sure feels like there's easier ways to do it.  

Again, this is just weak writing.  And as much as I wanted to forgive it even in 2006, I knew this was a major problem.  But was excited about the movie, and so I let it slide, telling myself "Lex just needs more time".  But...  no.  It just doesn't work.  

Assuming people understand the connection between Lois and Superman is another hang up from he prior movies, but here it just seems like two people who kinda dated a while back having mixed feelings seeing each other again.  Which is a legitimate story, but when it's Superman, bringing in children makes it messy, to say the least.  Especially if people don't know Superman turned back time to save the woman he felt finally understood him.

The film *is* beautifully designed.  So well, in fact, I think other films including Gunn's could learn something from it.  The Daily Planet is such an amazing bit of art deco fantasy architecture, and it looks just right for Superman, full stop.  

It's been years since I've watched this movie - and I'm glad I can revisit it and be maybe a bit honest with myself.  I was all in on this movie and made it everyone else's problem for a long time.  But at some point I came to the realization - you know, if it were a better movie, I'd want to rewatch it more often.  And I don't think I've seen it in over a decade now.  This is the last time I posted I'd watched it, 2012.  And I now disagree with some of what I said back then.

What's wild is that I still think this is light years ahead of the horrendous JJ Abrams script to which McG was attached, and whatever we would have had with Brett Ratner (who was officially named for a while).  And I can see why WB thought Snyder - who had done well with 300 and Watchmen - was their guy.  And I don't even really blame Snyder for anything that happened - it's like blaming a gorilla for being a gorilla.  

Again - I semi-jokingly, but would probably maybe actually do it - proposed a multi-episode series on this movie.  There's so much baggage - I couldn't possibly get it all into a post.  But maybe one day.

*this is not a site that ironically enjoys Catwoman or is going to give the movie credit for feminist issues it neither intended to embody nor mistakenly tripped over in the dark.  It is a bad movie, full stop.