Actor Brandon Routh was supposed to being flying high after nailing the lead role in the 2006 reboot “Superman Returns.”
Instead, the handsome actor is about to appear in a film held back from critics for fear of their collective wrath.
“Dylan Dog: Dead of Night,” based on an Italian comic book, casts Routh as a paranormal investigator battling an assortment of otherworldly creatures. The film co-stars Peter Stormaire, Sam Huntington and Taye Diggs.
It’s a far cry from the projects one imagined Routh would tackle after tugging on those iconic blue tights.
Getting cast as a superhero typically supercharges an actor’s career. Michael Keaton felt it after starring in Tim Burton’s “Batman,” and it took the actor a few years to squander that clout with “Speechless” and “Multiplicity.” Tobey Maguire’s post-”Spider-Man” career led to prime roles in films like “Seabiscuit” and “Brothers.”
But Routh never got that super bounce. The best he got was a small role in “Zack and Miri Make a Porno” and a similarly weak gig in the straight-to-video “Unthinkable.”
Reeve himself used his “Super” role to land a bevy of prime gigs, including “Somewhere in Time” and “Deathtrap.”
“Superman Returns” wasn’t the smash either “Batman” or “Spider-Man” proved to be. But it certainly was no bomb, earning some respectable reviews en route to a $200 million box office haul. Only in Hollywood does that rank as “under-performing.”
Perhaps Routh hurt his own cause by sticking too closely to the Christopher Reeve template. Routh’s Superman was so faithful to Reeve’s version in nearly every way it was more homage than performance. That fit the film’s needs perfectly, but it didn’t make people insist a big-time movie career was in the cards.
“Dylan Dog” may have to outperform humble expectations to get people talking about Routh once more.
(Photo: Brandon Routh hangs on for dear life during a scene from “Dylan Dog: Dead of Night.” Freestyle Releasing)
Related posts:
on 
on 
{ 6 comments… read them below or add one }
Possibly because, bomb or no, Superman Returns sucked eggs? I think you’re probably right about the pretend-you’re-Reeve factor hurting, but that movie, just in general, was lame. I mean, that’s the one with the thugs, in Metropolis, who think trying guns on Big Blue might be worth a try. And Deadbeat Dad Superman. And kinder, gentler Lois (Lois is, pretty much always, a smartass; people who think that was some feminist thing in the first movie are simply announcing they’re not acquainted with the source material).
Actually, it co-stars Sam Huntington, who apparently was Jimmy Olsen in Superman Returns (I don’t actually remember Jimmy Olsen appearing in that film, unless you count the cameo from Jack Larson).
Fixed JIC … thanks for catching that.
I actually enjoyed the Super reboot up until Act III.
I think it might be my comics obsession; for me to watch that movie is like a military historian watching 300, or a geologist watching The Core. The little voice going “wait a second, what?” every three seconds prevents me enjoying whatever parts of it are good (I think “sucked eggs” may’ve been a little harsh).
The main difference between Keaton, Maguire, etc. and Routh is that Routh has become associated with a mangled version of a popular superhero, whereas the other actors’ films were more faithful and thus more popular. Personally, I thought Routh was good as Superman; it’s not his fault the script sucked, after all.
He also had a good recurring role on the last season of “Chuck” and a funny supporting role in “Scott Pilgrim vs. the World”, so I wouldn’t say that all of his post-Superman roles have been bad.
“Only in Hollywood does that rank as “under-performing.””
To be fair, “Superman Returns” had a budget well-over $200 million. That doesn’t even count marketing costs. Suffice to say, that’s why they’re rebooting Supey for the next go-around.