The Official Jason White Thread

[The Kid]

Let's try this again since my last jason thread was closed for noooooooo reason. :cmad:

This time I know it will stay open.

1. This has never been discussed here before.
2. It's going to generate good discussion.
3. I'm not drunk

So let's do this.

What I would like to discuss today with my friends at the hype is the possibility of a custody battle over the best character ever, Jason Lane White Kent. He has, as you all know, no idea who his real daddy is, but as lois disovered on that boat during the great "piano chucking incident" the daddy is supes. Now, let's get down to business.

Richard is legally the boy's daddy, I believe. Well... I guess... cuz I don't know how that works. Do you fathers out there have to sign a paper that says you are legally a parent and all that? i know my uncle did that for me when I was in his custody... he had to sign a paper that legally made him responsible for me etc...

So I figure that Richard might not want Superman to be involved with his son's upbringing. This is interesting stuff. What will superman do now?

We all sat there for a loooong time watchnig superman save a plane and then get beaten and then go lift a huge chunk of rock in to space and then go to the hospital and rest a bit before going to his kid's house and repeating his own father's last words to his son that he said because he was going to die, but of course superman's not going to die. He's "always around!" so I guess he was just saying brando's words to be spiritual and all that...

Anyway what's supey going to do? Should he fight for his boy? Certainly he would have discovered Lois' son was his eventually whether she told him or not. Sure it'd be a surprise but I'm more than sure he'd want to raise his boy, not let some other guy do it.

On the other side of the coin is Richard. He thinks the kid is his! :wow: UH oh... When he finds out that his little troopers didn't quite swim as fast as a speeding bullet, there's so much emotionally that he'll need to endure now that he's been REALLY put in the ring with Superman contending for Lois. Before he had the edge of being Lois' kid's pappa. uh uh not anymore, bub....

So I'm thinking perhaps that'll ignite his jealously of supes even more and he'll try to keep Jason from him, and that nice guy we all thought was nice and cool will become the jealous stalker guy instead who trys to keep jason from supes. :cmad:

This is great drama. People don't see how much potential there is for interesting drama here, I swear. Imagine jason having so many issues after the trials about being different and an outcast that can be explored... Kids at school will hang him on scarecrows and paint an S on his chest, and he'll be hesitant to play sports now with his powers.

And Part of him will want to be with supes, and the other part of him will want to be with Richard.

Who will he be with? That's the question!

And so now I leave it up to you to decide, speculate upon, whatever... go nuts...:dew:

[patrickbateman]

bruce wayne steps in and makes him Robin

[The Kid]

Anything's possible... any other ideas?

[Kid_Kaos]

Well, let's summarise: Superman screwed Lois - Lois screwed Richard - Luthor screwed Superman - and Singer screwed pretty much all Fans

Now, if we follow the logic from the movie - anything that would happen in our world isn't going to happen, cause that actually would make sense - and so Supes either just leaves Jason alone or spys on him untill Richard is annoyed enough to leave Lois. Then he pulls a Robin on him and takes Jason in for some superhero training once he's 18 and totally confused with his life. (Superhero in training!)

Really, whatever happens now - it's gonna be campy, cheesy, corny - in short: Welcome back to the 60s!

:word: Thank you Bryan. :word:


--> I wonder if Adam West will play ZOD so Supes and Jason can battle him? ...

[The Kid]

I agree. THANK YOU, BRYAN!!!:woot:

http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/7121/supes23lw1.jpg

[Garzo]

Excellent manip -- ha ha ha -- I love it. Shouldn't the kid have lace-up boots?

But seriously, Supes can always fly super fast counterclockwise around the world back to the point when he got naked with Lois and.. and put on a rubber. Remember kids, play safe!

[TripXyDE]

i agree with Wesyeed & Lionel Luthor

there's just GOING TO BE A WHOLE LOT OF CHEESY, CAMPY MESS
if the franchise goes on after what has transpired in Superman Returns
not only about the kid....

-there's Luthor...so after the first movie, he'll eventually be a fugitive...a fugitive who isnt as sly as the corporate Luthor who knows how to believably pull off something that wil keep him off the hands of the law and/or have a believable hideaway where he can develop weapons for his revenge with Supes. of course, after the events in SR, the govt will go ballistic in finding Luthor, the Luthor in SR seems like just a smalltime hassler who doesnt have enough capacity to con the government...he's nothing...he's a ranting smart-a$$ stuck in a small desert island

[The Kid]

heh

well guys don't underestimate the power of Jason.

He's in this to be the new Harry Potter for WB. They figure super powered kids are popular nowadays. So maybe it's good for supes to have his own Harry potter.

The question I have is will Richard let Superman teach Harry about his magic powers and true heritage?

[Immortalfire]

Well, let's summarise: Superman screwed Lois - Lois screwed Richard - Luthor screwed Superman - and Singer screwed pretty much all Fans The circle is complete.

[Venom71]

Richard & Lois will raise Jason and they will let Superman spend time with him as well....one big happy family. No Jason becoming Superman's mini me or side kick...just his son.

[The Kid]

I very much disaprove of Richard continuing to parent Jason.

1. He's not the boy's biological father.
2. It's an insult to Superman's parental skill
3. He'll feel inadequate considering the boy's father is freakin superman.
4. Lois will dump him and go back to the man of steel instead of the man of flesh
5. I've seen the Notebook
6. Jason kisses his real daddy so he probably likes him more anyway
7. Richard doesn't know how to raise alien babies
8. and superman > richard
9. He reminds me of a washed up Robin
10. And he's cyclops, come on.

[Venom71]

I very much disaprove of Richard continuing to parent Jason.

1. He's not the boy's biological father.
2. It's an insult to Superman's parental skill
3. He'll feel inadequate considering the boy's father is freakin superman.
4. Lois will dump him and go back to the man of steel instead of the man of flesh
5. I've seen the Notebook
6. Jason kisses his real daddy so he probably likes him more anyway
7. Richard doesn't know how to raise alien babies
8. and superman > richard
9. He reminds me of a washed up Robin
10. And he's cyclops, come on.

1. Men raise other men's babies in the real world all the time.
2. Don't see how...he will be able to spend time with Jason and help in his upbringing.
3.I don't see Richard as that type of guy...I see him and Superman being friends.
4. I sure hope not...I would rather she be with Richard in these movies now...they are good together.
5. Whats your point?
6. So him kissing Superman in his hospital bed means he likes Superman more? I hope you are joking.
7. Pa Kent didn't know how to raise an alien baby either and he did a fine job with Clark...Jason will most likely turn out to be a good kid and adult who is hard working like Richard.
8. Superman is greater then all men...whats your point?
9. Don't see how...after Dick Grayson stops being Robin he becomes Nightwing.
10. No he is the actor who played Cyclops....did you see Spacey as Lex or Kaiser Sose as Lex?

This is a great discussion. :woot:

[The Kid]

1. Men raise other men's babies in the real world all the time.
2. Don't see how...he will be able to spend time with Jason and help in his upbringing.
3.I don't see Richard as that type of guy...I see him and Superman being friends.
4. I sure hope not...I would rather she be with Richard in these movies now...they are good together.
5. Whats your point?
6. So him kissing Superman in his hospital bed means he likes Superman more? I hope you are joking.
7. Pa Kent didn't know how to raise an alien baby either and he did a fine job with Clark...Jason will most likely turn out to be a good kid and adult who is hard working like Richard.
8. Superman is greater then all men...whats your point?
9. Don't see how...after Dick Grayson stops being Robin he becomes Nightwing.
10. No he is the actor who played Cyclops....did you see Spacey as Lex or Kaiser Sose as Lex?

This is a great discussion. :woot:

1. Men raise other men's kids when the biological dad is dead or the child is given a way for adoption. Jason's dad was thought to be Dick, but Lois was full of **** and he's back so Supes WILL take the helm from here.
2. He could but he doesn't have to. So forget that. He'll be at the beach sipping on some mango juice with some hot chicks now while supes takes over like i said before.
3. Are you friends with your wife's ex lover? no. they'll be enemies and Dick won't stand a chance against freakin superman.
4. Richard's got nothing left now that supes has wrecked his home.
5. Go rent the Notebook.
6. If I kissed you, what would that mean???
7. Pa Kent died trying to raise an alien baby. See what happens?
8. He's greater than all men. What's your point in asking what's my point?
9. And after he stopped being Nightwing he moved to Metropolis and somehow became related to Perry white. Anything's possible. It's comics.
10. yes i saw lex as Kaisewyerey whatever that name is.

This is the best discussion on hype. I don't know if that's a good or bad thing.

[DogofKrypton]

Well, let's summarise: Superman screwed Lois - Lois screwed Richard - Luthor screwed Superman - and Singer screwed pretty much all Fans
Now, if we follow the logic from the movie - anything that would happen in our world isn't going to happen, cause that actually would make sense - and so Supes either just leaves Jason alone or spys on him untill Richard is annoyed enough to leave Lois. Then he pulls a Robin on him and takes Jason in for some superhero training once he's 18 and totally confused with his life. (Superhero in training!)

Really, whatever happens now - it's gonna be campy, cheesy, corny - in short: Welcome back to the 60s!

:word: Thank you Bryan. :word:


--> I wonder if Adam West will play ZOD so Supes and Jason can battle him? ...

Post of the Month right here, folks!

[DogofKrypton]

Yes Jason needs to be erased from existance somehow.

I posted it in the film board, but easy answer: Red Sun chamber in the Fortress.

Jason still alive? Check. No threat of "Son of Superman" down the line, no matter what Wesyeed is pushing for? Super-Duper Double-Check on that one!

[Venom71]

1. Men raise other men's kids when the biological dad is dead or the child is given a way for adoption. Jason's dad was thought to be Dick, but Lois was full of **** and he's back so Supes WILL take the helm from here.
And I still say they all can live happily ever after..one big family.
2. He could but he doesn't have to. So forget that. He'll be at the beach sipping on some mango juice with some hot chicks now while supes takes over like i said before.
Nah...Superman and Richard will be good buds..it is a comic book movie you know.
3. Are you friends with your wife's ex lover? no. they'll be enemies and Dick won't stand a chance against freakin superman.
Don't have an ex wife but I would like to think if I did I would be mature enough to understand things didn't work out between me and my wife...and that I could be friends with my ex'x new husband.
4. Richard's got nothing left now that supes has wrecked his home.
I don't recall seeing Superman wreck Richard's home in SR....did you see a different version?
5. Go rent the Notebook.
I might just add it to my Netflix queue :yay:
6. If I kissed you, what would that mean???
I hope I never find out....and my guess is Jason has hugged and kissed his father Richard also..so that really is not a good point.
7. Pa Kent died trying to raise an alien baby. See what happens?
Not in Lois & Clark :woot:
8. He's greater than all men. What's your point in asking what's my point?
I agree with you on this..because it is fun!
9. And after he stopped being Nightwing he moved to Metropolis and somehow became related to Perry white. Anything's possible. It's comics.[
Yeah..not seeing that at all..sorry.
10. yes i saw lex as Kaisewyerey whatever that name is.
I seen Lex Luthor on that screen..not Spacey or Sose

This is the best discussion on hype. I don't know if that's a good or bad thing.
Don't know the answer to that either.

[The Kid]

And I still say they all can live happily ever after..one big family.

Unfortunately that won't be the case. Name me one woman who has two husbands and then get back to me.

Nah...Superman and Richard will be good buds..it is a comic book movie you know.

Buds like wolverine and Cyclops? That was a comic book movie you know.:whatever:

Don't have an ex wife but I would like to think if I did I would be mature enough to understand things didn't work out between me and my wife...and that I could be friends with my ex'x new husband.

You'd sit and grab a beer with the guy doing your wife? Ok...

I don't recall seeing Superman wreck Richard's home in SR....did you see a different version?

Superman is exposed to be the father of jason. So when Richard discovers this. Home = Wrecked. It happens all the time on General Hospital. Check it out.

I might just add it to my Netflix queue :yay:

You'll enjoy it, I'm sure.

I hope I never find out....and my guess is Jason has hugged and kissed his father Richard also..so that really is not a good point.

Notice how you have to say "guess". You keep guessing. I'll keep knowing the fact that Jason kisses supes.

Not in Lois & Clark :woot:

Let's make the sequel based on Lois & Clark, then. :yay:

I agree with you on this..because it is fun!

The fun's just beginning.

Yeah..not seeing that at all..sorry.

Well some people have more of an imagination than others.

I seen Lex Luthor on that screen..not Spacey or Sose

I saw spacey as hackman and sose.

Don't know the answer to that either.

:hyper:
:heart:

[Venom71]

:heart:
Nothing there but a heart...I win this discussion! :woot:

[Immortalfire]

the best character ever, Jason Lane White Kent. No.

[hypeSUPERMAN]

Whatever happens, Singer has already ruled out Jason being a superhero. He was asked in an interview if Jason could end up being like a Robin and Singer said he certainly won't let that happen. It would alter the Superman mythology too much.

[The Kid]

-_-

right...

[FanboyX_Returns]

Well, let's summarise: Superman screwed Lois - Lois screwed Richard - Luthor screwed Superman - and Singer screwed pretty much all Fans

Now, if we follow the logic from the movie - anything that would happen in our world isn't going to happen, cause that actually would make sense - and so Supes either just leaves Jason alone or spys on him untill Richard is annoyed enough to leave Lois. Then he pulls a Robin on him and takes Jason in for some superhero training once he's 18 and totally confused with his life. (Superhero in training!)

Really, whatever happens now - it's gonna be campy, cheesy, corny - in short: Welcome back to the 60s!

:word: Thank you Bryan. :word:


--> I wonder if Adam West will play ZOD so Supes and Jason can battle him? ...

The circle is complete.

Indeed.... Well, let's summarise: Superman screwed Lois - Lois screwed Richard - Luthor screwed Superman - and Singer screwed pretty much all Fans! Well said. :ninja:

[Matt]

Richard has no legal rights to Jason. Despite the fact that he has raised him, no blood = no rights.

If Lois and Supes decided to keep Jason from Richard, he couldn't even get visitation.

Due to Superman's....different...life style (constant Supervillian attacks, mortal peril to those around him, etc)... and lack of involvement with Jason for the first 5 years of his life, he would probably get supervised visitation at first (Supervision would probably be Lois).

He may gradually move into unsupervised visitation.

Lois would retain full custodial rights.

[TrailerCues]

He was asked in an interview if Jason could end up being like a Robin and Singer said he certainly won't let that happen. It would alter the Superman mythology too much.

Singer has lied flat out to fans faces during production of SR. He can be doing the same here. Honestly I dont think you can trust Singer or anyone on the team / WB with what they say.. They have prooved they are willing to lie to hide certain things. I know I wont be trusting any word said by anyone on the production of the sequel

[Immortalfire]

Whatever happens, Singer has already ruled out Jason being a superhero. He was asked in an interview if Jason could end up being like a Robin and Singer said he certainly won't let that happen. It would alter the Superman mythology too much. Yeah, we wouldn't want to disappoint Richard Donner :whatever:

[Bad Superman]

I agree. THANK YOU, BRYAN!!!:woot:

http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/7121/supes23lw1.jpg

http://www.geocities.com/sanmaiolo/immagini/damned.gif

NNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B000BYB0I6.01-A3DYB20QS3MEI2._SCMZZZZZZZ_.jpg

But if you want to kill the franchise, go right ahead. . . .

[WormyT]

Hahahah!!
That Manip is hilarious.

Oh man, I hate SR so much it's not even funny anymore. I must be at peace. Wake me up in 20 years when we get a real Superman movie.

[Steelsheen]

bruce wayne steps in and makes him Robin

great minds...... :D

[Tony Stark]

Let's try this again since my last jason thread was closed for noooooooo reason. :cmad:

This time I know it will stay open.

1. This has never been discussed here before.
2. It's going to generate good discussion.
3. I'm not drunk

So let's do this.

What I would like to discuss today with my friends at the hype is the possibility of a custody battle over the best character ever, Jason Lane White Kent. He has, as you all know, no idea who his real daddy is, but as lois disovered on that boat during the great "piano chucking incident" the daddy is supes. Now, let's get down to business.

Richard is legally the boy's daddy, I believe. Well... I guess... cuz I don't know how that works. Do you fathers out there have to sign a paper that says you are legally a parent and all that? i know my uncle did that for me when I was in his custody... he had to sign a paper that legally made him responsible for me etc...

So I figure that Richard might not want Superman to be involved with his son's upbringing. This is interesting stuff. What will superman do now?

We all sat there for a loooong time watchnig superman save a plane and then get beaten and then go lift a huge chunk of rock in to space and then go to the hospital and rest a bit before going to his kid's house and repeating his own father's last words to his son that he said because he was going to die, but of course superman's not going to die. He's "always around!" so I guess he was just saying brando's words to be spiritual and all that...

Anyway what's supey going to do? Should he fight for his boy? Certainly he would have discovered Lois' son was his eventually whether she told him or not. Sure it'd be a surprise but I'm more than sure he'd want to raise his boy, not let some other guy do it.

On the other side of the coin is Richard. He thinks the kid is his! :wow: UH oh... When he finds out that his little troopers didn't quite swim as fast as a speeding bullet, there's so much emotionally that he'll need to endure now that he's been REALLY put in the ring with Superman contending for Lois. Before he had the edge of being Lois' kid's pappa. uh uh not anymore, bub....

So I'm thinking perhaps that'll ignite his jealously of supes even more and he'll try to keep Jason from him, and that nice guy we all thought was nice and cool will become the jealous stalker guy instead who trys to keep jason from supes. :cmad:

This is great drama. People don't see how much potential there is for interesting drama here, I swear. Imagine jason having so many issues after the trials about being different and an outcast that can be explored... Kids at school will hang him on scarecrows and paint an S on his chest, and he'll be hesitant to play sports now with his powers.

And Part of him will want to be with supes, and the other part of him will want to be with Richard.

Who will he be with? That's the question!

And so now I leave it up to you to decide, speculate upon, whatever... go nuts...:dew:

If that is the movie, then the sequal will do even worse than Returns.

[X Knight]

Hey all,

Now that Singer has been confirmed for the sequel.........what route should he take in dealing with Jason?

As you know, the KID was a major point of contention in SR. For many fans, like myself, that was probably the major turn off in the movie. Without the kid being Superman's, I probably would have enjoyed much more.

But, the past is done and cannot be changed. Jason is now part of Superman's universe, and Singer MUST address him in the sequel.

So, how should he do it? How should he explore the fact that Jason is Superman's son, not Richard's, but he doesn't even know his real father?

Would Jason feel more loyal to Richard, much like Superman feels more loyal to Jonathan Kent? After all, they were the men who actually raised their respective "sons."

Or, will Singer surprise us and reveal Jason to NOT be Superman's son? Maybe, things weren't all what they seemed in SR regarding Jason?

Will Singer give Jason new powers than his Dad?

Will Superman take Jason to Batman and have the Dark Knight forge Jason into a half-Kryptonian, half-human bad ass ninja????

So....let the speculation begin!!

[X-Maniac]

There are a lot of things that need careful consideration

1) Lois is with Richard
2) Jason
3) Lex knows where the FOS is
4) Lex is still free and alive on an island with Kitty
5) the FOS crystals (which allow Jor-El's vision/voice, and allow Superman to actually do things in the FOS) are on an island in space

All those things need careful consideration.

They've written themselves into a corner (as they did with final character outcomes in X3).

They also have to remember that, at the end of S2, Zod and the others were taken away and put in jail and had no super powers.

I hope anyone connected with the next Superman film bears all these things in mind.

[dark_b]

There are a lot of things that need careful consideration

1) Lois is with Richard
2) Jason
3) Lex knows where the FOS is
4) Lex is still free and alive on an island with Kitty
5) the FOS crystals (which allow Jor-El's vision/voice, and allow Superman to actually do things in the FOS) are on an island in space

All those things need careful consideration.

They've written themselves into a corner (as they did with final character outcomes in X3).

They also have to remember that, at the end of S2, Zod and the others were taken away and put in jail and had no super powers.

I hope anyone connected with the next Superman film bears all these things in mind.S is not a direct sequel to the old donner movies.

[Robin91939]

S is not a direct sequel to the old donner movies.

Yeah. AND, Zod, Ursa and Non died...they didn't go to jail. They are dead in the depths of the fortress somewhere.

-R

[Delete]

Kill the kid.

[Weadazoid]

Kill him

[C. Lee]

Yeah. AND, Zod, Ursa and Non died...they didn't go to jail. They are dead in the depths of the fortress somewhere.

-R
Actually....the theatrical cut of Superman II left it ambiguous as to their fate....while the first showing of the movie on network TV showed the deleted scenes of them being hauled away by the police (yes, some kind of Arctic Police Force was at the FOS with enclosed snowmobiles and took them away).


As for Jason.....does anyone remember the famous "Bobby in the shower scene" from "Dallas"?:woot:

[X Knight]

no, SR2 will be called........Superboy Begins!!!

Distraught over learning his true heritage, and unable to seek answers from the FOS ( cuz Daddy was careless and left it unattended ), a young Jason journeys around the world on a quest to find his purpose and hone his emerging powers.

After accidentally laying waste to an entire village with a super-sneeze, Jason is thrown into a Butanese prison cell.....when suddenly a shadowy figure emerges........

Jason: "You're heartbeat gave you away"

Shadowy Figure: "Damn it!! I was going to surprise you......anyways, I'm Batman!!" I'm a friend of your fathers."

Jason: "That's funny, my Dad never mentioned you."

Batman: "Never?"

Jason: "Nope"

Batman: (Sobs)........."Jason....my presence here is of utmost importance.......I can show you a path.......I can give you the answers you have been seeking......."

Jason: Stares at Batman blankly.......

Batman: "Jason....if you devote yourself to an ideal.....if you become more than a man...........YOU CAN REALLY KICK SOME SERIOUS A**!!!!"

Jason: "Ok, I'm in! Now let me out of here.....I gotta pee!!"

[TheComicbookKid]

the kids powers are coming in violently. Richard and lois can't handle it. Lois is torn between bring in Supes versus Richard's feelings knowing that it's Supes son.

I don't understand peoples hatred for the kid. The basic premise is "What If Jor-el survived and came back for Clark at age seven?"

[aquiles]

Hey all,

Now that Singer has been confirmed for the sequel.........what route should he take in dealing with Jason?

As you know, the KID was a major point of contention in SR. For many fans, like myself, that was probably the major turn off in the movie. Without the kid being Superman's, I probably would have enjoyed much more.

But, the past is done and cannot be changed. Jason is now part of Superman's universe, and Singer MUST address him in the sequel.

So, how should he do it? How should he explore the fact that Jason is Superman's son, not Richard's, but he doesn't even know his real father?

Would Jason feel more loyal to Richard, much like Superman feels more loyal to Jonathan Kent? After all, they were the men who actually raised their respective "sons."

Or, will Singer surprise us and reveal Jason to NOT be Superman's son? Maybe, things weren't all what they seemed in SR regarding Jason?

Will Singer give Jason new powers than his Dad?

Will Superman take Jason to Batman and have the Dark Knight forge Jason into a half-Kryptonian, half-human bad ass ninja????

So....let the speculation begin!!waste the son of a *****!!!!!!!!!

[mego joe]

SUperboy-Prime continuity punch SR out of existence.

[darthlaney]

Jason's here to stay - as predicted a couple of months ago, DC couldn't be far away from creating a 'new superboy'. As of Action Comics 844 this is happening.

We are now stuck with Jason - he is now part of lore.

Check out images below-

http://www.imageuploading.com/ims/pic.php?u=11985N1GCk&i=72392 http://www.imageuploading.com/ims/pic.php?u=11985N1GCk&i=72393 http://www.imageuploading.com/ims/pic.php?u=11985N1GCk&i=72394

Also the \S/ on the belt is in, the belt loops on the jocks have become angled and the jocks themsleves are more short-like, the lower boots are also in- check out this image-

http://www.imageuploading.com/ims/pic.php?u=11985N1GCk&i=72396 http://www.imageuploading.com/ims/pic.php?u=11985N1GCk&i=72395
The comics and movies are aligning - new fortress of solitude to match the movies, \S/ shield is drawn looking 3D, boots are lower, belt \S/, collar is higher and Jason is in.

The yellow shield on the cape is still in, in the comics - hopefully this might go the other way and end up in the movies.

DC Comics has accepted Singers changes to the character and are really trying to bring the worlds together.

[The Caped Knight]

I want them to explore Jason relationship with SUPERMAN . Also Lois needs to know the truth now.

[X Knight]

hmmm......while those comic book pics do include some of Singer's costume designs........they look much better in those comic pics than they did in the movie....lol.

I really think if the S shield had been a tad bigger, and the red in the costume a bit brighter and more vibrant......the movie costume would look so much better. And, perhaps if Routh bulked up a little more........

wait....does that mean Superman in the comics has a kid too????

[Rizor]

It's not his, but it looks like he'll be adopting him.

I personally didn't mind the kid in the movie. I actually thought it worked out pretty well, but the further exploration of it is what I'm fearing. I certainly hope it doesn't go down the Superboy path.

Actually, the coolest idea regarding a sequel would be something along the lines of a King Arthur/Mordred type thing where maybe the kryptonite has activated Jason's powers and turns into an evil spawn who Superman must fight in an epic battle.

[CConn]

I never get why people automatically assume Jason has to become Superboy or something in the next movie. Yeah, while he may have shown some powers in SR, that wasn't his point in the film. He was about showing Superman, showing Kal-El, that he isn't alone in the universe. That he has a family. That he, and his species, have a lineage.

In the sequel, I would only expect that plot line to continue. Maybe have Jason, or probably more importantly, have Richard discover he's the son of Superman, and have more development into their relationship.

Personally, I'd be pretty disappointed if they integrated Jason into the action any time soon. By the time I'd think he'd actually be ready for some action (y'know, maybe 16-18 or so), he probably won't even be in the film series for one reason or another.

[Super Kal]

Jason's here to stay - as predicted a couple of months ago, DC couldn't be far away from creating a 'new superboy'. As of Action Comics 844 this is happening.

We are now stuck with Jason - he is now part of lore.

Check out images below-

http://www.imageuploading.com/ims/pic.php?u=11985N1GCk&i=72392 http://www.imageuploading.com/ims/pic.php?u=11985N1GCk&i=72393 http://www.imageuploading.com/ims/pic.php?u=11985N1GCk&i=72394

Also the \S/ on the belt is in, the belt loops on the jocks have become angled and the jocks themsleves are more short-like, the lower boots are also in- check out this image-

http://www.imageuploading.com/ims/pic.php?u=11985N1GCk&i=72396 http://www.imageuploading.com/ims/pic.php?u=11985N1GCk&i=72395
The comics and movies are aligning - new fortress of solitude to match the movies, \S/ shield is drawn looking 3D, boots are lower, belt \S/, collar is higher and Jason is in.

The yellow shield on the cape is still in, in the comics - hopefully this might go the other way and end up in the movies.

DC Comics has accepted Singers changes to the character and are really trying to bring the worlds together.
only for this certain part... after this thing is over, it'll go back to the original one that's been used for almost a century.

[Kabuki_Jo]

I want them to explore Jason relationship with SUPERMAN . Also Lois needs to know the truth now.

You want another soap opera?

[Kabuki_Jo]

Kill him or pretend he was never born in the first place.

[CConn]

Jason's here to stay - as predicted a couple of months ago, DC couldn't be far away from creating a 'new superboy'. As of Action Comics 844 this is happening.

We are now stuck with Jason - he is now part of lore.

Check out images below-

http://www.imageuploading.com/ims/pic.php?u=11985N1GCk&i=72392 http://www.imageuploading.com/ims/pic.php?u=11985N1GCk&i=72393 http://www.imageuploading.com/ims/pic.php?u=11985N1GCk&i=72394

Also the \S/ on the belt is in, the belt loops on the jocks have become angled and the jocks themsleves are more short-like, the lower boots are also in- check out this image-

http://www.imageuploading.com/ims/pic.php?u=11985N1GCk&i=72396 http://www.imageuploading.com/ims/pic.php?u=11985N1GCk&i=72395
The comics and movies are aligning - new fortress of solitude to match the movies, \S/ shield is drawn looking 3D, boots are lower, belt \S/, collar is higher and Jason is in.

The yellow shield on the cape is still in, in the comics - hopefully this might go the other way and end up in the movies.

DC Comics has accepted Singers changes to the character and are really trying to bring the worlds together.No, DC isn't. The SR-influenced belt, and other costume designs are decisions made purely by the artist in question. In fact, DC's editorial staff actually made Adam Kubert (the artist on the above pics) limit SR's influence on his suit.

Storyline-wise, the kid in the comics is pretty much purely from the minds of Goeff Johns and Richard Donner. Supposedly this arc of Action Comics is what Donner's Superman III would've been like.

[CConn]

You want another soap opera?I want slight amount of drama and actual character growth in a film series, yes.

[mego joe]

No, DC isn't. The SR-influenced belt, and other costume designs are decisions made purely by the artist in question. In fact, DC's editorial staff actually made Adam Kubert (the artist on the above pics) limit SR's influence on his suit.

agreed


Storyline-wise, the kid in the comics is pretty much purely from the minds of Goeff Johns and Richard Donner. Supposedly this arc of Action Comics is what Donner's Superman III would've been like.

Actually, the next arc with Braniac was Donner's idea for Superman III, not this arc. But yes, this is a Johns-Donner concept unrelated to the film. I don't think the kid will make it out of the arc though.

[mego joe]

Jason's here to stay - as predicted a couple of months ago, DC couldn't be far away from creating a 'new superboy'. As of Action Comics 844 this is happening.

We are now stuck with Jason - he is now part of lore.

Check out images below-

http://www.imageuploading.com/ims/pic.php?u=11985N1GCk&i=72392 http://www.imageuploading.com/ims/pic.php?u=11985N1GCk&i=72393 http://www.imageuploading.com/ims/pic.php?u=11985N1GCk&i=72394

Also the \S/ on the belt is in, the belt loops on the jocks have become angled and the jocks themsleves are more short-like, the lower boots are also in- check out this image-

http://www.imageuploading.com/ims/pic.php?u=11985N1GCk&i=72396 http://www.imageuploading.com/ims/pic.php?u=11985N1GCk&i=72395
The comics and movies are aligning - new fortress of solitude to match the movies, \S/ shield is drawn looking 3D, boots are lower, belt \S/, collar is higher and Jason is in.

The yellow shield on the cape is still in, in the comics - hopefully this might go the other way and end up in the movies.

DC Comics has accepted Singers changes to the character and are really trying to bring the worlds together.

That's not Jason. Did you read the comic? Plus Carlos Pacheco over in SUperman, draws SUpes in the classic uniform. Bizarro is in the next issue looking for the kid, there is somethng else going on.

[CConn]

Actually, the next arc with Braniac was Donner's idea for Superman III, not this arc.Huh, I didn't know that. Thanks for the correction. :up:

[wellsy]

I think that Jason provides a very intruiging story possibilities. For example, how will Richard feel when he finds out his "son" is actually Superman's (that'll go down like a lead balloon)? How would Jason react? How would Superman respond to any threats to Jason?

With Luthor knowing Jason's lineage, methinks that could be a good subplot in the next movie. Even if its Braniac or Zod as the main bad guy, Luthor is probably going to suck up to them - he wants Supes dead and himself as ruler of the world.

And i daresay, that would be quite interesting, at least to me.

But seeing him become "Superboy" is not something I want quite yet. I'm not sure I'd actually want it at all, because it would introduce so many horrible cliches :wow: .

[xwolverine2]

killing the kid might make things interesting

[blind_fury]

I have the solution.

Have Mxyzptlk transport him to another dimension. :woot:

[X-Maniac]

Actually....the theatrical cut of Superman II left it ambiguous as to their fate....while the first showing of the movie on network TV showed the deleted scenes of them being hauled away by the police (yes, some kind of Arctic Police Force was at the FOS with enclosed snowmobiles and took them away).

Yes, that's right. In either scenario, Zod, Ursa and Non are de-powered. In one case they are in jail, in another they are at the bottom of a glacial crevasse!

These things must be borne in mind by the writers of the next movie since they have established a vague history/homage/requel/whatever-the-hell-it-was....

[ultimatefan]

I think the kid is gonna be less bland now that he´s manifested his powers.

[Jasomius]

Obviously Lex Luthor will be after the kid. Superman and Lois will be talking to each other about how to handle him. And what about Richard? How will he take it?

All thse things will make a great film, along with a great villain. I'm hoping Braniac.

[DavidTyler]

What if it were revealed that Clark's journey home from deep space actually took him to a parallel universe and, when he finds his way back to his own, there is no Jason.

I mean, Lois gave birth to him in this continuity so there is no just killing him off without serious repercussions.

[Jasomius]

What if it were revealed that Clark's journey home from deep space actually took him to a parallel universe and, when he finds his way back to his own, there is no Jason.

I mean, Lois gave birth to him in this continuity so there is no just killing him off without serious repercussions.How about we.. don't try and get rid of Jason? That's a simple solution.

[Jochimus]

Killing Jason is a rather irrational and harsh solution, IMO, but I do believe Jason's life would be in immediate danger. I say pull an Obi-Wan and get him into hiding. Then wait about two sequels (at the average space of about every three or four years), then have Doomsday show up to kill Kal-El dead dead DEAD, and then bring in Jason as a teenager to assume his father's mantle. Uninventive, perhaps, but it gets the kid out of the way until he can be a useful character.

[DavidTyler]

How about we.. don't try and get rid of Jason? That's a simple solution.

The question was: "What should Singer do with Jason in the sequel?"

My answer is find some way to get rid of him without disrupting all of continuity.

If you like the kid, fine. Singer's your man .. er... so to speak. For me, I don't like the idea of the kid. I'd like it better if Singer got rid of him.

Since the WB has invited Singer back for another shot.

[Cyrusbales]

KILL OFF THE KID!!!! Simple, it would give superman more character to have his son killed, also he is a crap character that is detracting away from superman, standing for justice, and infidelity.....

[Jasomius]

The question was: "What should Singer do with Jason in the sequel?"

My answer is find some way to get rid of him without disrupting all of continuity.

If you like the kid, fine. Singer's your man .. er... so to speak. For me, I don't like the idea of the kid. I'd like it better if Singer got rid of him.

Since the WB has invited Singer back for another shot.Yeah, and my response is the solution to the problems your solution causes.

Singer shouldn't get rid of Jason like that because it would confuse audiences and he would be lampooned by critics.

You can't kill him because that is a sure audience repellant.

And besides, Jason creates so many oppurtunities Singer would be a fool to get rid of him.

[mego joe]

Yeah, and my response is the solution to the problems your solution causes.

Singer shouldn't get rid of Jason like that because it would confuse audiences and he would be lampooned by critics.

You can't kill him because that is a sure audience repellant.

And besides, Jason creates so many oppurtunities Singer would be a fool to get rid of him.

But to the other half of fandom, Jason's very existence IS an audience repellent.

Following your other reasoning then, Singer will get rid of him. (hint: Singer is a fool)

[Jasomius]

But to the other half of fandom, Jason's very existence IS an audience repellent.Fans make up a tiny percentage of the movie going audience.

Following your other reasoning then, Singer will get rid of him. (hint: Singer is a fool)I'm not so childish as to call a director names because he made a film I didn't like :o

[Superman Pwnage]

Keep Jason alive and follow whatever route the comics are taking with it;

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y31/tifflover/supeson.jpg

Personally, I would want them to attempt the Death of Superman arc in about 10 years with the 4th film. Jason would be 16ish by then and old enough to take on the name Kon-El.

[C. Lee]

I still think they should do some version of the "Dallas Scenerio".....and make Jason just a dream of Lois's.

[Jasomius]

I still think they should do some version of the "Dallas Scenerio".....and make Jason just a dream of Lois's.The movie would be laughed out of theaters.

...Or are you joking?

[C. Lee]

The movie would be laughed out of theaters.

...Or are you joking?
Nope...not joking. Too many people were dissappointed by the Jason plot (fanboys and non fans alike). Superman is a fantasy/science fiction genre....so, having the first movie a dream or other dimension or some other similar idea would work.

The way the "dream" was used in Dallas was laugh provoking...because it wasn't a sci-fi show....but it could work here. Think of it...Superman may have left Earth to explore Krypton....but he hasn't really returned yet. He was captured by Brainiac, who is using some kind of mind control device to break him. He makes Supes believe that he has gone back to Earth and everything has gone wrong (demoted in his job, Lois no longer likes him, she's moved on with another man and has a kid, Lex was set free because of his leaving, etc...).....the old sci-fi staple of the "it's all a dream/mind control" trick.

[X Knight]

hmm......that's an interesting idea C. Lee.....

but.....if Singer was planning that scenario....wouldn't he had left some kind of "hint" at the end of the 1st film? A hint that all is not what it seems.......

Also, wouldn't that kind of make the first film a 2 and a half hour, $200+ million dream plot that never happened????

[DavidTyler]

Nope...not joking. Too many people were dissappointed by the Jason plot (fanboys and non fans alike). Superman is a fantasy/science fiction genre....so, having the first movie a dream or other dimension or some other similar idea would work.

The way the "dream" was used in Dallas was laugh provoking...because it wasn't a sci-fi show....but it could work here. Think of it...Superman may have left Earth to explore Krypton....but he hasn't really returned yet. He was captured by Brainiac, who is using some kind of mind control device to break him. He makes Supes believe that he has gone back to Earth and everything has gone wrong (demoted in his job, Lois no longer likes him, she's moved on with another man and has a kid, Lex was set free because of his leaving, etc...).....the old sci-fi staple of the "it's all a dream/mind control" trick.


Not only do I really like your plot, I think it would make for a great movie. I'd love to see this.

[C. Lee]

hmm......that's an interesting idea C. Lee.....
Thanks...I actually only thought of it today.

but.....if Singer was planning that scenario....wouldn't he had left some kind of "hint" at the end of the 1st film? A hint that all is not what it seems.......I didn't say that that was what he was planning, just a possible scenerio. After the bad feelings many have expressed of some of the plot lines in the first movie, it is very easy to write the second one with this change in mind...shoot some new scenes to be inserted into a re-release of the SR DVD to explain it (similar to the extended versions of the Lord of the Rings movies that filled in some plot holes)...and there you have it.

Also, wouldn't that kind of make the first film a 2 and a half hour, $200+ million dream plot that never happened???? There have been several movies that have been dream plots...so there's precedent for it.

[X Knight]

well....if Singer does something like that......then I can forgive him.........other than that...I'm really not excited to see the sequel.....

[batlovescatDC]

Perhaps they should just have it where Lois and Richard are split up... have shared custody... and Jason's at his dad's house for the entire movie and feature neither Jason nor Richard. Just a thought. Although... I do have to admit it that what I've seen of the SON OF SUPERMAN (Which came out b4 SR and, yes, it was actually Superman's biological off-spring) is actually pretty good.

I just want more action... and the villains being BRAINIAC, DARKSEID, and METALLO. (Or just Brainiac and Darkseid. Or hell... even just Brainiac).



RALPH FIENNES FOR BRAINIAC DAMMIT!!!!!!!!!!!!

[mego joe]

Nope...not joking. Too many people were dissappointed by the Jason plot (fanboys and non fans alike). Superman is a fantasy/science fiction genre....so, having the first movie a dream or other dimension or some other similar idea would work.

The way the "dream" was used in Dallas was laugh provoking...because it wasn't a sci-fi show....but it could work here. Think of it...Superman may have left Earth to explore Krypton....but he hasn't really returned yet. He was captured by Brainiac, who is using some kind of mind control device to break him. He makes Supes believe that he has gone back to Earth and everything has gone wrong (demoted in his job, Lois no longer likes him, she's moved on with another man and has a kid, Lex was set free because of his leaving, etc...).....the old sci-fi staple of the "it's all a dream/mind control" trick.

That is a great idea, I only saw SR because I was hoping for a similar ending but involving Mr. Myxzptlk instead. I would go see that sequel.

[mego joe]

Fans make up a tiny percentage of the movie going audience.


B/c most people who went to see it don't like SUperman? And what did they feel about the movie?


I'm not so childish as to call a director names because he made a film I didn't like :o

It's not because he make a movie I didn't like, it's b/c he has not idea who Superman is and tried to make a movie about it. I'll rephrase, "Singer's interpretation of Superman is silly. I wish he knew that SUperman wasn't an immature, irresponsible, cowardly , "I make all my own problems" kind of character.

[Slipping_Halo]

I just want to wake up and find that none of this ever happened. If they start incorporating Singer's disgusting version of the suit and that friggin' superpowered kid into the comics I'm going to find Bryan Singer and choke him to death.

Can somebody explain this "Son of Superman" thing to me? What's going on?

[animexcel]

Killing Jason would only make Superman turn back the world again.
<<round and around and around....

[Octoberist]

I think Superman should eat him.

[Jasomius]

B/c most people who went to see it don't like SUperman? And what did they feel about the movie?Just because a person may go see a Superman movie doesn't mean he/she is a fan.

It's not because he make a movie I didn't like, it's b/c he has not idea who Superman is and tried to make a movie about it. I'll rephrase, "Singer's interpretation of Superman is silly. I wish he knew that SUperman wasn't an immature, irresponsible, cowardly , "I make all my own problems" kind of character.None of those traits were found in Singer's Superman. They are merely things you see in him that you have convinced yourself to see.

[Jasomius]

I just want to wake up and find that none of this ever happened. If they start incorporating Singer's disgusting version of the suit and that friggin' superpowered kid into the comics I'm going to find Bryan Singer and choke him to death.Get ready to become a murderer then, cause it's happened.

[DavidTyler]

Get ready to become a murderer then, cause it's happened.

Only in a limited run arc in Action written by Donner and Johns. Once that run is over, that should be the end of it.

If, however, DC decides to keep those movie elements, I won't be buying those books anymore.

I think it's amazing that there are people who are reading these blogs who are completely oblivious to just how much of a ****storm this film has stirred up.

Batman Begins has instilled confidence in Nolan while Superman Returns has only served to widen the split between fans. Whether you agree or disagree w/one side or the other - how can anyone not acknowledge that? It's been months since it came out and people still are arguing over it.

[Bad Superman]

Hey all,

Now that Singer has been confirmed for the sequel.........what route should he take in dealing with Jason?

As you know, the KID was a major point of contention in SR. For many fans, like myself, that was probably the major turn off in the movie. Without the kid being Superman's, I probably would have enjoyed much more.

But, the past is done and cannot be changed. Jason is now part of Superman's universe, and Singer MUST address him in the sequel.

So, how should he do it? How should he explore the fact that Jason is Superman's son, not Richard's, but he doesn't even know his real father?

Would Jason feel more loyal to Richard, much like Superman feels more loyal to Jonathan Kent? After all, they were the men who actually raised their respective "sons."

Or, will Singer surprise us and reveal Jason to NOT be Superman's son? Maybe, things weren't all what they seemed in SR regarding Jason?

Will Singer give Jason new powers than his Dad?

Will Superman take Jason to Batman and have the Dark Knight forge Jason into a half-Kryptonian, half-human bad ass ninja????

So....let the speculation begin!!

Kill him off. He was an unnecesary adition IMO. If he turns into a sidekick the franchise could turn into a Batman and Robin masterpiece. . . :cmad:

[The Sage]

Kill him off. He was an unnecesary adition IMO. If he turns into a sidekick the franchise could turn into a Batman and Robin masterpiece. . . :cmad:

I say keep him. He could actually be useful.:cmad:

[MFM]

Think of it...Superman may have left Earth to explore Krypton....but he hasn't really returned yet. He was captured by Brainiac, who is using some kind of mind control device to break him. He makes Supes believe that he has gone back to Earth and everything has gone wrong (demoted in his job, Lois no longer likes him, she's moved on with another man and has a kid, Lex was set free because of his leaving, etc...).....the old sci-fi staple of the "it's all a dream/mind control" trick.
Whoa, C. Lee. Forgive me for saying this, but I have exactly the same idea before. Make Superman being kidnapped by someone who could manipulate his mind by envisioning these events in Superman Returns, just to make Superman's morale going down and lose his hopes and ideals. And on tops of all villains that is capable of doing this, it's Braniac that comes first to my mind. So yeah, I'm with you on this one. Make it while Braniac keeps Superman company, he could be unleashing his army or whatever on earth. And after a while (probably on his own or with the help of any useful character) Superman snaps out of his illusion and faces off with Braniac mano-a-mano. Besides of the obvious action-packed battle that could ensue, it is, in my opinion, probably the best way to introduce Braniac to the movie universe. :woot:

[Bad Superman]

I say keep him. He could actually be useful.:cmad:

For torture scenes? That's a great idea. :cmad: :up:

[lazur]

I think Doomsday should show up and kill the kid, enraging Superman and creating the most epic battle ever seen in a movie!

[AirKnight82]

I think Jason would walk in on Lois having sex with Superman on top of the daily planet and this would end the relationship.

Either that or just have him killed off by having something fall on him while Superman saves Lois.

Or maybe Superboy will throw a ball at his face while they are palying catch and it crashes his skull in...

damn I am so cruel!

[jrd550]

Think about it, unless Superman is attacked he never truly fights - he just saves people, which after a while gets boring. In Superman 2 things got exciting because he was pitted against three other people who shared his powers -it was nice to see Supes fight and have a challenge. Now what would make Superman angry? Killing Lois. What would make him enraged? Killing Jason. Let's see Superman lose it.

[Immortalfire]

But, the past is done and cannot be changed. Tell that to Mister "Vague History" Singer.

[AirKnight82]

dammit now Lose it by Eminem is stuck in my head, lol.

But maybe he should have Supergirl show up and be so dumb founded of her powers and reak havok to smallville and metropolis and Superman gets ticked cause she is ruining everything in his life. Then he loses it or We could just have Bizarro be born!

[Superman Pwnage]

Can somebody explain this "Son of Superman" thing to me? What's going on?

As far as I know its making Clark and Lois into parents, the same way Bruce is now a father.

[Jasomius]

Only in a limited run arc in Action written by Donner and Johns. Once that run is over, that should be the end of it.

If, however, DC decides to keep those movie elements, I won't be buying those books anymore.

I think it's amazing that there are people who are reading these blogs who are completely oblivious to just how much of a ****storm this film has stirred up.

Batman Begins has instilled confidence in Nolan while Superman Returns has only served to widen the split between fans. Whether you agree or disagree w/one side or the other - how can anyone not acknowledge that? It's been months since it came out and people still are arguing over it.People are still arguing because comic fans are pedantic, relentless irrational people. They will argue a topic into the ground no matter how irrelevant or a non-issue.

[Superman Pwnage]

lol so I've noticed.

[Thot]

People are still arguing because comic fans are pedantic, relentless irrational people. They will argue a topic into the ground no matter how irrelevant or a non-issue.

Poppycock......, this is, after all, SuperheroHYPE, a site created for exactly the purpose of discussing, debating and over-analyzing everything superhero related. Let the games continue!

Oh, and as for Jason. With Singer returning we are, tragically, stuck with the retarded kid in some way. I see no graceful way to eliminate the twerp without making it too obvious that he's being marginalized. With Singer back, we are simply screwed no matter what.

[Jasomius]

Oh, and as for Jason. With Singer returning we are, tragically, stuck with the retarded kid in some way. I see no graceful way to eliminate the twerp without making it too obvious that he's being marginalized. With Singer back, we are simply screwed no matter what.Can you tell me exactly what was so bad about Jason? From a character point of view.

[X Knight]

actually.....from a character point of view......I actually liked Jason.

He wasn't the typical whiny, bratty, annoying male kid that is sooooo typical in hollywood movies ( think Phantom Menace or Mummy Returns ).

In fact, he was good natured, docile, shy, sickly..........but with tremendous power and potential inside.

I think the main problem that some people, like myself, have is HOW Jason was brought about. IOW, the circumstances surrounding his birth and the implications it has about Superman's conduct and behavior.

Superman had the balls ( no pun intended ) to sleep with Lois and get her pregnant. But, he didn't have the balls to stick around and support his woman. He left Lois ( and the world and his mom and his duties ) for 5+ years, without saying a word.

Consequently, Lois was essentially left to raise THEIR kid by herself, as a single mom. Fortunately, she met Richard, who helped her raise Jason and is now regarded by Jason as DAD.

And, there's another problem......Superman, above all else, should know what it feels like to never know your biological parents. And, from being raised by a loving mom and dad ( Kents ), Superman should also have a strong sense of the value of FAMILY, especially a strong FATHER figure. Indeed, that is the central premise of Smallville.

But now, when it comes to his own kid, Superman has been ABSENT in the first 5 years of his kid's life, and those are very formative years. Superman has not been burdened with the responsibility of raising his own son. Superman has not been around to watch his son grow up. All of that has been RICHARD's job ( at least that's what the movie implies ).

So, for me, it's not really with Jason himself that I have an issue. It is the way he was born and how that reflects ( badly, imo ) on Superman.....

[AirKnight82]

Dude Superman was away for 5 years looking for some sign of others like him... Plus I bet if he had known he would of stayed and clark would of told her the truth of who he was.

I like Jason in the Movie but it just doesn't fit - It is supposed to be Lois and Superman who get together have a child ect ect.

imo

[GreenKToo]

Ok,this is a little far fatched,......but,......while supes was gone to Krypton searching for survivors,Brainaic and Lex schemed to take over the earth,and created the false readings from krypton togeather.It was all a setup, and controlled secretely by Brainiac.,finding the F.O.S.,the crystals,everything....Brainiac came to earth searching for a heir,he needed a human female to carry a child..Lex wants superman to think its his son,so he suggested Lois for Brainiac to use as the carrier.So Brainiac secretly kidnapped Lois and impregnated her by artificial insemination. When supes finds out the truth,it will be the ultimate pain,the worst Lex could ever hope to do to Superman..Lex would have his victory,and Brainiac would have what he wanted,a heir...Lex would also get technology from brainic,making it possible for him to form Lex-Corp...Brainiac takes Jason.He would mutate him,and give him far,far more power and intellect. jason would grow up,learning to hate Superman...He would become a despot, ruleing a planet Brainiac gave him, renaming it......Apolkolips.

[Sebastos]

Jason should be killed off by a villain.

[Jasomius]

Jason should be killed off by a villain.I don't think the audience would enjoy taking their kids to see a film where a child is killed.

It just doesn't belong in a Superman movie.

[Thot]

Can you tell me exactly what was so bad about Jason? From a character point of view.

My basic gripe with Jason and any other "kid" character introduced in "hero" franchises (Zorro, for example) is that it unnecessarily complicates their universe and detracts from the main character. I've never liked "sidekicks" either, ala Robin. I prefer my heroes be independent and self sufficient (they are SUPER-heroes after all). The kid characters are all too often used to soften the hero's image and add levity (needed or not) to the story. All too often it just ends up being annoying and/or irritating. In
Superman's case, the "Kid" is unnecessary in every way and complicated Superman's world, IMO, in a bad way.
A) Superman has unmarried, unprotected sex with girlfriend (bad decision in Superman II, why bring it back in SR?)
B) Not only is (A) wrong in so many ways, Singer has to insist on conception taking place, resulting in a son. (ugh, shades of
SuperTyke come to mind)
C) Once Supes/Clark learns the kid is his, he cannot be any sort of father he should and needs to be. So, unless he takes off the cape and becomes a full time daddy, he has to be a deadbeat dad instead. More badness....
D) I want the focus to be on the main hero of the story,without the villains, girlfriend, and certainly not the illegitimate child diluting the mix.

Jason must die.............................

[mego joe]

actually.....from a character point of view......I actually liked Jason.

He wasn't the typical whiny, bratty, annoying male kid that is sooooo typical in hollywood movies ( think Phantom Menace or Mummy Returns ).

In fact, he was good natured, docile, shy, sickly..........but with tremendous power and potential inside.

I think the main problem that some people, like myself, have is HOW Jason was brought about. IOW, the circumstances surrounding his birth and the implications it has about Superman's conduct and behavior.

Superman had the balls ( no pun intended ) to sleep with Lois and get her pregnant. But, he didn't have the balls to stick around and support his woman. He left Lois ( and the world and his mom and his duties ) for 5+ years, without saying a word.

Consequently, Lois was essentially left to raise THEIR kid by herself, as a single mom. Fortunately, she met Richard, who helped her raise Jason and is now regarded by Jason as DAD.

And, there's another problem......Superman, above all else, should know what it feels like to never know your biological parents. And, from being raised by a loving mom and dad ( Kents ), Superman should also have a strong sense of the value of FAMILY, especially a strong FATHER figure. Indeed, that is the central premise of Smallville.

But now, when it comes to his own kid, Superman has been ABSENT in the first 5 years of his kid's life, and those are very formative years. Superman has not been burdened with the responsibility of raising his own son. Superman has not been around to watch his son grow up. All of that has been RICHARD's job ( at least that's what the movie implies ).

So, for me, it's not really with Jason himself that I have an issue. It is the way he was born and how that reflects ( badly, imo ) on Superman.....

Well said!

[mego joe]

Dude Superman was away for 5 years looking for some sign of others like him... Plus I bet if he had known he would of stayed and clark would of told her the truth of who he was.

I think the thing is that SUperman should have explained to Lois why he was leaving and what his intentions were. He just slept with her and did not use any contraceptive, then almost immediately leaves for 5 years. (It's unclear how the amnesia kiss plays into Singer's movie). If he explains himself, the whole situation ahs a different and better outcome. I still wouldn't be thrilled, but in the movie by leaving and not explaining to Lois he emotinally as well as physically abandons her.


I like Jason in the Movie but it just doesn't fit - It is supposed to be Lois and Superman who get together have a child ect ect.

imo

That would certainly have been more acceptable. If you want SUperman to become a dad, why not have them get married and then bring the kid along.

[mego joe]

I don't think the audience would enjoy taking their kids to see a film where a child is killed.

It just doesn't belong in a Superman movie.

I don't think SUperman fathering an illegitimate child is a movie you should take your kids to either, but that's what we got in SR.

And you're right, it doesn't belong in a SUperman movie, and neither does an illegitimate child for Superman, but that's what we got in SR.

[mego joe]

My basic gripe with Jason and any other "kid" character introduced in "hero" franchises (Zorro, for example) is that it unnecessarily complicates their universe and detracts from the main character. I've never liked "sidekicks" either, ala Robin. I prefer my heroes be independent and self sufficient (they are SUPER-heroes after all). The kid characters are all too often used to soften the hero's image and add levity (needed or not) to the story. All too often it just ends up being annoying and/or irritating. In
Superman's case, the "Kid" is unnecessary in every way and complicated Superman's world, IMO, in a bad way.
A) Superman has unmarried, unprotected sex with girlfriend (bad decision in Superman II, why bring it back in SR?)
B) Not only is (A) wrong in so many ways, Singer has to insist on conception taking place, resulting in a son. (ugh, shades of
SuperTyke come to mind)
C) Once Supes/Clark learns the kid is his, he cannot be any sort of father he should and needs to be. So, unless he takes off the cape and becomes a full time daddy, he has to be a deadbeat dad instead. More badness....
D) I want the focus to be on the main hero of the story,without the villains, girlfriend, and certainly not the illegitimate child diluting the mix.

Jason must die.............................

Excellent points on A, B, C and D. I couldn't agree more. Killing Jason is not the right answer though it may certainly feel good.

The best way to get rid of him is either the BRainac or Myxzptlk ideas that have been tossed around. Those are ideas that would really make for an interesting moive.

[X Knight]

come to think of it.........Supes leaving suddenly might have worked better, had it been for another reason.

For example, let's say Supes and Lois meet, fall in love, have sex, etc. If all goes according to plan, Supes has every intention to stay around and be with Lois, because he loves her.

But, say he receives a distress call from a distant planet ( Apokolips, perhaps ), or there's some kind of intergalactic threat to Earth, and Supes has to leave suddenly to PROTECT people ( either ppl on another planet, or ppl here on Earth ).

So, Supes didn't leave just for a selfish purpose, but left to do good and help. Then, he returns many years later, to find a World that has moved on, Lois with Richard, and a son he never knew he had.

They could even have Superman explain to the World he is leaving, why he must leave, etc. At first, the World sends Superman off with a hero's farewell ( we could see old newspaper shots ). But, as time goes on, and Superman takes much longer to return, the ppl, wait, and wait, and wait until they finally give up hope.

It could be like Ulysses in Homer's the Odyssey. Where Superman is delayed by circumstances beyond his control.

Indeed, this could be used to set up a villain, as Braniac or Darkseid was behind the attack or distress call.

This would have been alot more interesting than Supes just leaving to find Krypton, to satisfy his own curiousity.

Granted, we DIDN'T EVEN GET TO SEE HIS TRIP TO KRYPTON!!! So, they could've easily substituted that for a more meaningful absence.........

It would be like a soldier going off to fight in a war, then returning many years later to find that he has a son.........

[GREEN =w= DAY]

kill the kid!!!!!

[C. Lee]

Everyone keeps complaining about them having unprotected sex.....he's a Kryptonian, she's an Earthwoman....the DNA should never have produced a kid in the first place...so there was no need for it.

[wellsy]

Killing off Jason is far too simplistic, and far too depressing, an option.

In my opinion (this idea has been raised earlier), Jason should go into hiding with Richard for several years. Not sure about Jason taking over from Supes a few movies down the track, but giving him some minor cameos, such as Supes giving him some guidance on his powers, etc.

In regards to how it reflects on Superman himself - the sooner we realise that Superman is, at heart, human, and thus flawed, then the easier we will find it to deal with an illegitimate child. Plus, with society the way it is today, Jason is probably lucky. He has a good father and a good step-father, and a good mother, and given how shotgun weddings have gone the way of the dinosaurs, methinks its not too problematic.

Like I said, Jason should go into hiding, with periodic visits by Superman so as to learn about his powers. Richard should be his guardian, and make sure the boy grows up all well and good (etc).

And I believe someone said that a way of getting rid of Richard is to have him run the international department for DP. Methinks that him going international would be a good idea; it gives much broader scope for hiding, etc.

[X Knight]

but doesn't this unneccesarily complicate the whole situation?

The problem with introducing a kid....is that it automatically takes the focus away from the hero, the main character....iow, Superman!!!

[Jasomius]

I don't think SUperman fathering an illegitimate child is a movie you should take your kids to either, but that's what we got in SR.

And you're right, it doesn't belong in a SUperman movie, and neither does an illegitimate child for Superman, but that's what we got in SR.Are you comparing illegitimate children to murder?

Are you saying that a child whose parents werent married at his conception is akin to the result of a murder?

Illegitimate kids happen all the time, it's not out of the social norm now, this isn't the 1900's. You can't judge what is suitable for a Superman film, because you obviously can't judge what is suitable in real life.

[mego joe]

Are you comparing illegitimate children to murder?

Are you saying that a child whose parents werent married at his conception is akin to the result of a murder?

No. But both issues are equally serious, albeit from different ends of the spectrum. However, they both touch upon how much you value children and how children are treated.

Illegitimate kids happen all the time, it's not out of the social norm now, this isn't the 1900's. You can't judge what is suitable for a Superman film, because you obviously can't judge what is suitable in real life.

I'm saying that Superman fathering an illegitimate child is not something I would want my kids to see. In the context of the film it is irresponsible and no consequences for any of the parties are shown. It is portrayed as benignly as say eating a cheeseburger. You're not going to go into the dietary concerns of cholesterol when a character eats a cheeseburger. But, brinigng a child into this world is a lot bigger deal than eating a cheeseburger.

Just because things become the social norm does not mean they are right, the results of responsible behavior or something you would want a role model character to portray.

As far as judging what's appropriate, everone has their own personal view of morality and what is right. I'm sorry if you can't see the huge problem that the irresponsible fathering of children has brought into the world.

There are children that are conceived and born out of wedlock that whose parents end up fulfilling their responsiblities. However, the vast majority of these parents, are too young and too imature to handle such a responsibilty. COnsequently, the state and taxpayers end up picking up the slack as best they can, but there is really no substitute for being raised by two loving parents who value that child the way the child should be valued.

[X Knight]

well said, mega joe, well said.

If I had kids of my own, I certainly wouldn't take them to see SR, as I, too, feel that it sends the wrong message. The problem, for most people, they wouldn't know that beforehand, and they would probably take their kids anyways.....cuz it's SUPERMAN for crying out loud.

And, I think it's not the fact that Supes and Lois has sex out of wedlock ( and hence, had a child out of wedlock ). While that can be considered more offensive to some, what is even more offensive is that Superman didn't even STICK AROUND in the relationship to support the woman he loves and his future child.

It's like......he had his fun, slept with Lois, and then.....poof.....he disappeared.

And, as for Lois, it also sends the wrong message because she is lying to Richard ( making him think the kid is his ), and she is holding on to 2 men at the same time. She can't be honest with Richard and commit to him ( extended engagement ) because she is still in love with you know who....

But, the movie celebrates all that.......it treats all of that as ok....as casual la-dee-do.....The characters are never meant to feel the CONSEQUENCES of their actions.....There was NO SHAME OR GUILT PORTRAYED.....it just casually passes that behaviour as normal.....which, i hate to say, is reflecting more and more on our society.

I mean, if you think about it, ALL OF THE PROBLEMS IN THE MOVIE WERE CAUSED BY SUPERMAN LEAVING. The complicated love triangle with Lois and Richard.....the issue with Jason.....Lex getting out of prison....Lex invading and burglarizing the FOS......Lex creating New Krypton and endagering all the people.......ALL OF THOSE ARE SUPERMAN'S FAULT!!!! IF SUPERMAN HADN'T LEFT IN THE FIRST PLACE, NONE OF THAT STUFF WOULD'VE HAPPENED!!

The problem is.....we didn't see any hint of remorse, or guilt, or shame from Superman. There was no scene in the empty, lifeless FOS, where Superman is reflecting and realizing the gravity and irresponsiblity of his action ( leaving for Krypton ). There was no scene where Superman questions his own competence as a SUPERHERO.....having created all of this mess. There was no scene where Superman realizes that, in his quest to find his home planet ( Krypton ), he forsake and abandoned his REAL HOME......EARTH!!!IOW, there was no hint that Superman felt bad or responsible for creating all this chaos.........

Such scenes would've been very powerful and emotional ( and would've been great opportunities for the audience to connect with Routh as the new Superman ).....yet, we got none.....

This movie was supposed to be GRAND AND EPIC......it had all the potential to be..........but, for me, it was merely SHALLOW AND HOLLOW......ultimately signifying nothing.

[wellsy]

Given just how secretive Lois would have been about the incident, I doubt that Superman knew that he had impregnated Lois before leaving for Krypton. So I don't think he was irresponsible. Ignorant and foolish perhaps, but not irresponsible.

That said, I do feel you have a point that Superman's absence allowed Earth to very nearly go to hell in a fast taxi. Realising this might not have occured to Superman while he was reestablishing himself on Earth. Dealing with Luthor probably did upset him (hey - didn't he go to a bar just before he saved Lois?).

But a more overt scene would have been a very good character-building one, I do agree. And we might get one, in SR2. I'd like to see it, quite a great deal more than I'd like to see a fistfight between Superman and someone else (NB - personal preference).

[mego joe]

well said, mega joe, well said.

If I had kids of my own, I certainly wouldn't take them to see SR, as I, too, feel that it sends the wrong message. The problem, for most people, they wouldn't know that beforehand, and they would probably take their kids anyways.....cuz it's SUPERMAN for crying out loud.

And, I think it's not the fact that Supes and Lois has sex out of wedlock ( and hence, had a child out of wedlock ). While that can be considered more offensive to some, what is even more offensive is that Superman didn't even STICK AROUND in the relationship to support the woman he loves and his future child.

It's like......he had his fun, slept with Lois, and then.....poof.....he disappeared.


Yes, exactly!!

And, as for Lois, it also sends the wrong message because she is lying to Richard ( making him think the kid is his ), and she is holding on to 2 men at the same time. She can't be honest with Richard and commit to him ( extended engagement ) because she is still in love with you know who....

Don't forget if Richard thinks it's his kid, that means Superman wasn't gone long (about 2 weeks, i'd guess) before she jumped in bed w/ Richard.

But, the movie celebrates all that.......it treats all of that as ok....as casual la-dee-do.....The characters are never meant to feel the CONSEQUENCES of their actions.....There was NO SHAME OR GUILT PORTRAYED.....it just casually passes that behaviour as normal.....which, i hate to say, is reflecting more and more on our society.


And that really is the fundamental problem with the film, and why I have no confidence in the sequel. The tone of the film is that no of this stuff is wrong either morally or just a mistake. It's all treated so casually, there is no underlying message except. "Stuff happens, even to SUperman, because ultimately you can't be responsible for anything. Stuff just happens."

It's gonna be more of the same in the sequel. Except it will be like Jason and my 2 dads. I shudder to think about the ramifications of that.

I mean, if you think about it, ALL OF THE PROBLEMS IN THE MOVIE WERE CAUSED BY SUPERMAN LEAVING. The complicated love triangle with Lois and Richard.....the issue with Jason.....Lex getting out of prison....Lex invading and burglarizing the FOS......Lex creating New Krypton and endagering all the people.......ALL OF THOSE ARE SUPERMAN'S FAULT!!!! IF SUPERMAN HADN'T LEFT IN THE FIRST PLACE, NONE OF THAT STUFF WOULD'VE HAPPENED!!


I agree. And he doesn't appear to learn anything from it, unlike the end of Superman 2.

The problem is.....we didn't see any hint of remorse, or guilt, or shame from Superman. There was no scene in the empty, lifeless FOS, where Superman is reflecting and realizing the gravity and irresponsiblity of his action ( leaving for Krypton ). There was no scene where Superman questions his own competence as a SUPERHERO.....having created all of this mess. There was no scene where Superman realizes that, in his quest to find his home planet ( Krypton ), he forsake and abandoned his REAL HOME......EARTH!!!IOW, there was no hint that Superman felt bad or responsible for creating all this chaos.........

Such scenes would've been very powerful and emotional ( and would've been great opportunities for the audience to connect with Routh as the new Superman ).....yet, we got none.....

This movie was supposed to be GRAND AND EPIC......it had all the potential to be..........but, for me, it was merely SHALLOW AND HOLLOW......ultimately signifying nothing.

I felt very empty when I left. I also felt that the characters were flat and wooden. Such a shame...

[mego joe]

Given just how secretive Lois would have been about the incident, I doubt that Superman knew that he had impregnated Lois before leaving for Krypton. So I don't think he was irresponsible. Ignorant and foolish perhaps, but not irresponsible.

The real problem is that the movie does nothing to establish the context of the realtionship. We have to guess what kind of relationship Superman and Lois were in to understand it fully, and the fact that SUperman couldn't tell Lois he was leaving indicates it was not a serious and committed one. HEnce, the sex becomes irresponsible, especially if he's gonna leave that soon after having had sex with her. Plus, does she remember having sex w/ SUperman? WHat's in continuity from SUperman 2 and what is not. This is just poor film making IMO. You having to understand the context of the relationship to understand the motivations of the characters.

That said, I do feel you have a point that Superman's absence allowed Earth to very nearly go to hell in a fast taxi. Realising this might not have occured to Superman while he was reestablishing himself on Earth. Dealing with Luthor probably did upset him (hey - didn't he go to a bar just before he saved Lois?).

But a more overt scene would have been a very good character-building one, I do agree. And we might get one, in SR2. I'd like to see it, quite a great deal more than I'd like to see a fistfight between Superman and someone else (NB - personal preference).

I actually felt for this story there needed to be more character confrontation/ resolution scenes instead of more action. THere was enough action, it was just action that really didn't move the story forward.

[bunk]

Everyone keeps complaining about them having unprotected sex.....he's a Kryptonian, she's an Earthwoman....the DNA should never have produced a kid in the first place...so there was no need for it.


Supes was a human being at the time, so their kid should be a normal human too.

[C. Lee]

Supes was a human being at the time, so their kid should be a normal human too.
Just because he no longer had super powers...doesn't mean he was human. He was just powerless.

[WhatsHisFace]

Yeah, it didn't change his genetic make-up or his physiology, it just took away his abilities.

Jason should be taken away or something.

[bunk]

Just because he no longer had super powers...doesn't mean he was human. He was just powerless.


Really? I'll have to watch that sequence again, I thought she specifically told Superman he would be a human.

[bunk]

Yeah, it didn't change his genetic make-up or his physiology, it just took away his abilities.

Jason should be taken away or something.

I'm sure when they made Superman II they didn't really think about it too hard, how would they know anything would come of it.

I just don't see how you could take his powers away without his physiology changing. Earths yellow sun gives him his abilities strictly because of his alien physiology. So it only makes sense that if the sun has no affect on him, his physiology must have been changed.

[C. Lee]

Really? I'll have to watch that sequence again, I thought she specifically told Superman he would be a human.
She tells him he will be "mortal"....that the crystal chamber has harnessed the rays of the red sun of Krypton, and that once exposed to them "All your great powers on Earth will disappear."

Being exposed to the red sun's rays shouldn't be able to transmute his DNA from Kryptonian to Earthman...but it should be able to do something to his basic structure to make him powerless.

[hulkamania]

Whoa, C. Lee. Forgive me for saying this, but I have exactly the same idea before. Make Superman being kidnapped by someone who could manipulate his mind by envisioning these events in Superman Returns, just to make Superman's morale going down and lose his hopes and ideals. And on tops of all villains that is capable of doing this, it's Braniac that comes first to my mind. So yeah, I'm with you on this one. Make it while Braniac keeps Superman company, he could be unleashing his army or whatever on earth. And after a while (probably on his own or with the help of any useful character) Superman snaps out of his illusion and faces off with Braniac mano-a-mano. Besides of the obvious action-packed battle that could ensue, it is, in my opinion, probably the best way to introduce Braniac to the movie universe. :woot:

I would love it if they did this, but Singer's too proud to throw away his ideas. And everyone would know it was a cop out.

[GREEN =w= DAY]

KILL THE BRAT DAMMIT!!!!! :cmad:

[Jasomius]

I would love it if they did this, but Singer's too proud to throw away his ideas. And everyone would know it was a cop out.Uh yeah, Singer is such a prick for telling the story he wants to tell :whatever:

[bunk]

Its not like Singer wrote himself into a corner. You really think he doesn't have plans for where this is all going?

[Maze]

I'm saying that Superman fathering an illegitimate child is not something I would want my kids to see. In the context of the film it is irresponsible and no consequences for any of the parties are shown. It is portrayed as benignly as say eating a cheeseburger. You're not going to go into the dietary concerns of cholesterol when a character eats a cheeseburger. But, brinigng a child into this world is a lot bigger deal than eating a cheeseburger.


You said yourself in another topic that, by the end of the movie, you felt that the movie was saying "don't do that kid, look at how they are miserable"

Well that's responsible in my book. Based on your logic a kid ( if he is not disturbed )would not repeat the errors of Superman ..

[mego joe]

You said yourself in another topic that, by the end of the movie, you felt that the movie was saying "don't do that kid, look at how they are miserable"

Well that's responsible in my book. Based on your logic a kid ( if he is not disturbed )would not repeat the errors of Superman ..

that's how I felt, but I don't feel that the message is clear from the movie. The movie treats the subjects very casually and SUperman and Lois show no real remorse or understanding that they've done anything wrong. My feeling comes from my definition of responsibility and morality. I don't think the movie defines responsibility and morality the same way. Superman never acknowledges a mistake or irresponsible behavior. The movie just seems to treat these things as things that happen with no value judgement on them. Of course my pesonal feeling on that is that SInger did not want to place a value judgement on them. I don't think SInger's definition of responsible behavior would be the same as mine, or would his opinions on these topics to deem the action wrong or right.

Kids who are by nature impressionable and have not w/o developed a moral/ ethical/ responsbibity code are going to be influenced by what they see a 'role model' character do. SOme will question it. Others will miss it entirely, but some will see it and think, 'Oh, that's OK, Superman did it."

Additionally, ther has been plenty of chat on this board that doesn't believe Superman did anything wron in the movie. That his actions are perfectly justifiable, and responsible. If people who like the movie get that out of the movie, I don't see how the 'consequenses,' 'sense of remorse' and 'admission of being guilty of mistakes' are supposed to be part of the SUperman character at the end of the film. He just never acknowledges that what he did was wrong, so how could he have learned from it. And if his actions are not supposed to be 'wrong' in the context of the movie, there are no lessons to be learned or examples to avoid.

[mego joe]

Its not like Singer wrote himself into a corner. You really think he doesn't have plans for where this is all going?

That's what I'm afraid of...

[bunk]

That's what I'm afraid of...

Well, yeah there's no guarantee it'll be a good plan. I just don't subscribe to the idea Singer lacks forsight. You know he laid out plans for more than one movie to WB, obviously they have confidence in the overall story. Though they did allow Batman and Robin so who knows.

[Maze]

that's how I felt, but I don't feel that the message is clear from the movie. The movie treats the subjects very casually and SUperman and Lois show no real remorse or understanding that they've done anything wrong. .
Well again personnaly i saw a Lois rather sad .all along the movie, unconfortable with richard .and suffering from guilt and admiration for Superman at the end.

i saw a Superman who let Lois go by the end of the movie , and who almost died for us among other ( and it seem almost of sadness ) and

if that's not showing any sign that you are somewhere a hero i dont know what is.

And ,all that moved me a lot.

mego , that doesn't speak to you i understand that , and again, i respect it ..the fact is for you, that's not a way to teach some "lessons" about heroism and responsabilities.

Well you're wrong ,that's your sensibility speaking there, nothing else .that doesn't speak to you , but that speak to me.. I saw a true hero at the end of the movie , and i cheered for him and i was really moved that at last he found some sort of "reward" for his victory over outer and inner conflicts.

you need just something else that the movie has to offer ..

[X Knight]

ok....here's another line of debate.......

Are we 100 % sure that Jason is, in fact, Superman's son? Or, did the movie merely imply it, leaving different possibilities open?

this is mainly for you guys and gals who have seen the movie multiple times.

I know we have the yacht scene where Jason pushes the piano into the thug to save his mom.

But, did Jason really push it? Or, did the piano move as a result of the ship's movement?

IOW, do you all think that Singer has something else up his sleeve, in regards to Jason's true lineage? Or, are we all fairly certain Jason is Superman's son?

[04nbod]

it wasn't clear- we never saw him move the piano and when he went to open the door richard was on the other side

[resentment]

A 400+ pound piano does not fly through the air at what seemed over 40 mph by a ship just hitting choppy waters. If that were the case, we would have seen Lois and the guy about to kill her have been affected by water turbulence as badly as the piano, seeing as they were on the same floor of the ship.

[SolidSnakeMGS]

Plus Lois asked her son to help her "open the door".

[bosef982]

I don't understand what the confusion is here. I thought it was assumed and already reported that Singer approached WB with a general idea for a trilogy and from there pitched Superman Returns. Not very complicated at all.

To me, I see nothing "cornerish" about where we are. It's simply that people who:

1) Do not like Singer
2) Do not like Jason
3) Do not like Superman Returns

These people are trying to make it an issue of Singer being stuck in a corner. There is so much dramatic potential here it's not even funny. So much.

First of all, Superman knows he has a son with Lois, who has no idea that Superman is also Clark Kent and he too is the father of his child. Lois is in love with Richard White, the runner-up naturally to Superman who believes that Jason is his own child. Meanwhile, Lex Luthor, more embittered and isolated than ever, now knows that Superman has a child and that Lois Lane is the mother of that child. Superman has lost all connections to his former homeland, leaving Jason as his own connection to Krypton.

Meanwhile, from outer space, a sentient lifeform grows on New Krypton, wanting to protect and harvest Kryptonian life above all...of which Jason seems to be the most viable option...?

This could easily play out in the sequel. Brianiac or the Eradicator coming to Earth and feeling that Superman is not raising Jason in the proper fashion, isn't fit to pass on the Kryptonian heritage to Jason and that they will take it upon themselves to do it. While many of the naysayers will run around and say that now we have a "kryptonian custody battle," this is pure drama and the thematic potentials are limitless.

Luthor manipulating Brainiac or Eradicator into getting back at Superman, Richard possibly sacrificing himself to save Jason, Lois, and Superman. Methinks if this is the case, we'll see Luthor take Richard and Richard become a villian in the 3rd film, where he'll have to fight to regain his humanity, via Metallo. I think having Metallo have a Kryptonian component to him would make a great deal of sense, be visually more interesting, and ultimately creepier.

So, my idea:

Man of Steel

Superman is back in society, watching Jason from a distance. Lois is in conflict about what to do, since Jason's powers are growing and becoming more noticeable and she fears that Richard will know. Richard begins to suspect soemthing is wrong, and he and Superman fuction as rivals in this film. Richard is losing it, he's trying to marry Lois, trying to solidify their relationship.

Meanwhile, from New Krypton, a sentient lifeform emerges from the wreckage of the crystals -- Brainaic, the accumulation of Jor-El's knowledge matrix. He sees New Krypton for what it is and sees Earth, sensing Kryptonian life. I say merge The Eradicator. He is a cold entity who wishes to cataloge and sustain Krypton's heritage, yet is aware of a greater danger to Kal-El, a sentinet being who cursed Kal-El's father, Brianiac. The Eradicator knows he is coming to Earth, can sense Brainiac approaching. So the Eradicator comes to Earth to build an army, and find Jason andSuperman; he sees Sueprman as unfit to raise him, as derelict in participating in his own son's life. Luthor is somehow aware of The Eradicator, or perhaps Luthor is trying to awaken Brianiac. Also, Luthor somehow manages to manipulate Richard into betraying Lois, Superman, and Jason -- something Richard feel guilty over instantly and later will redeem himself for.

Have a lot of action -- perhaps a Doomsday creature or what not. Lois has to go into hiding with Jason, The Eradicator scouring for them, Earth's in danger or what not. In the end, Jason is taken by Brainiac, Lois is nearly incapcitated in the process, and Luthor is left all but dead. Superman defeats Brainiac, but not before Richard sacrifices his life to allow it to be.

Lois, Superman, and Jason are reunited. Luthor is jailed. Richard is dead. Superman, feeling that he must open Jason to his true heritage, flies off with Jason to "train" him, leaving Lois alone. Then, somewhere in the artic or what not, Richard's body is becoming infected with some Kryptonian techno-virus...and Braiiac is still coming...

"The Last Son of Krypton"

I say kill Superman. I'm okay with it. In this film, Brainiac arrives, perhaps have Zod come back here. I don't know. Anyways, I say have Richard team up with Brianic/Zod, and Superman go toe-to-toe with them all, eventually dying at Richard's hands. The film could end with Lois and Jason trekking through the artic, bundled, Jason now 16 and coming upon the Fotress of Solitude. From there, Lois watches from outside as Jason enters the Fortress just as Clark had many years before....

[bosef982]

Even better, I think if Singer really wants to push the envelope.

It's obvious that Superman can be harmed. SR sets up the idea of Superman dying, I think in the sequel Superman should follow through. At the end of "The Man of Steel" Supeman dies saving Lois, Richard, and Jason, the people he's choosen to take care of his family.

In The Last Son of Krypton, Jason is older, perhaps 18 or 19, and Lois and Richard are failing in their responsibility to reaise him to his father's legacy as the world crumbles around them. As per the messiah message, Superman should come back and return in this one, passing on the legacy formally to his son, acknowleding how Lois and Richard have truly done their mission.

I mean, that could really work.

[Eros]

Bosef please never post that again.....

[bosef982]

Bosef please never post that again.....

What is so wrong with that...?

That is a story. It's a fullfilling trilogy that shows a overall thematic progression and character development that ends resolutely.

Fans need to realize that these films cannot go on forever. Three amazing films that tell the story and soul of Superman, a self-sacrificing individual from a planet where a scientist felt it neccessary to bequeth his only son upon Earth, doing whatever it takes to save those he loves, and aspiring to open the eyes of humanity to their real potentail.

Why...oh why...does it have to be the same retredead tired comic book crap.

Have Superman die, plain and simple. In the third one, hae Lois and Richard hiding Jason from the impending doom. I mean, if you really want to go crazy...have Zod return in the third and have Lois and Richard fleeing to hide the idenity of Jason from Zod, and Luthor attempting to find Jason. Jason could be the key to some larger puzzle or mystery...

I mean, the possibilities are endless and the scope limitless. One could have a great deal of fun if they are allowed to let their creativity run wild and not be hampered by the narrow confines of comic dogmatism.

[mego joe]

Well again personnaly i saw a Lois rather sad .all along the movie, unconfortable with richard .and suffering from guilt and admiration for Superman at the end.

i saw a Superman who let Lois go by the end of the movie , and who almost died for us among other ( and it seem almost of sadness ) and

if that's not showing any sign that you are somewhere a hero i dont know what is.

And ,all that moved me a lot.

mego , that doesn't speak to you i understand that , and again, i respect it ..the fact is for you, that's not a way to teach some "lessons" about heroism and responsabilities.


One of my points all along is that this approach is not in keeping with Superman. Maybe some heroes develop and learn this way. But that is not how Superman has been developed over his long history and it tarnishes his image as a role model. Superman is not a role model who teaches what not to do, he displays the correct and responsible behavior, even in the face of his own potential suffering. He never takes the easy way out.

To compare: End of SUperman II, he realizes he's let EVERYONE down and appologizes to the PResident and recommits himself to never doing it again. I just don't seen that acknowledgement of guilt on his part in SR that indicates he's learned anything.



Well you're wrong ,that's your sensibility speaking there, nothing else .that doesn't speak to you , but that speak to me.. I saw a true hero at the end of the movie , and i cheered for him and i was really moved that at last he found some sort of "reward" for his victory over outer and inner conflicts.

you need just something else that the movie has to offer ..

Maybe you're wrong? I can't even respect the man part of Superman in SR. SUperman is more than a bunch of powers. It's about doing the right thing, especially in the aspects of life that make up the 'man.' The 'super' part is easy, and he did fine in that respect. But on a personal level, he treats Lois' feelings for garbage, never admits ANY wrong doing, and never is shown learning from his mistakes, unlike the end sequence of SUperman II.

If you feel he learned a lesson and grew as a character, help me out.

What lesson did he learn and how is that shown in the movie. I am refering to aspects of the 'man,' the 'super' part always stepped up to the plate, the personal issues in his life are the ones that don't ring true to the essence of the SUperman character. IF Lois were your daughter and your sister, would respect or even want to tolerate this Superman after finding out how he treated her?

When does he admit culpability for any of his questionable actions? WHat is the outcome?

The reward he found was what, Jason? SO his reward is the fact that he unknowingly brought a child into the world that he will not raise as his own and whose life will be complicated because SUperman failed to do the right thing. Wow, if only everyone' life could be so rewarded.

Children are not rewards for parents. Children are the greatest resonsibility in a parents life. They are miracles of life who depend on EVERYTHING from the parents to survive and grow and develop. SUperman will never be this to Jason, he will never be the true father to Jason. HE will not be there day in, day out, reading stories, putting him to bed etc....He will always be second banana to the father that raises him. He will be relegated to weekend/ special event father. That doesn't sound like much of a reward for either Jason or Superman. It's sad and depressing for both Superman and Jason. Every child deserves better. SUperman deserves better, but SUperman need look no further than the mirror to find the person at fault for this tragic existence.

PS- Maze, thanks for the good debate

[wellsy]

mego joe - perhaps the remorse comes in the second film. I think a brilliant scene could be where Jason and Supes have an argument, and Jason goes nuts when he finds out how Supes scorned his mother.

Now THAT would be some drama!

[mego joe]

mego joe - perhaps the remorse comes in the second film. I think a brilliant scene could be where Jason and Supes have an argument, and Jason goes nuts when he finds out how Supes scorned his mother.

Now THAT would be some drama!

Perhaps.

[Jasomius]

mego joe - perhaps the remorse comes in the second film. I think a brilliant scene could be where Jason and Supes have an argument, and Jason goes nuts when he finds out how Supes scorned his mother.

Now THAT would be some drama!It would be the perfect representation of the fanboy reaction, a child throwing a tantrum!

[X Knight]

well....Singer really has to step up and bring his game for the sequel. He has to address all of these issues......otherwise he will not interest fans like me who were turned off by SR. So, imo, if Singer thought he had it tough with SR, he'll have to work 10 time harder on the sequel.

oh, and bosef, that is actually an interesting scenario. The only problem is that places more focus on Jason than on Superman. The sequels become more about Jason's journey getting prepared to assume the mantle from his father, than it is about Superman's own journey.

And, that is the problem with introducing a child in the hero's life, especially so early on. You automatically become more interested in the child's development than you are in the hero.

[what?]

How about this "sequel" be a "vague" "sequel" to the "sequel" to the 70's movie. I mean judging from his treatment of the first movie he can just pick and choose what he wants to recycle anyway so why not just choose not to have the kid in the "sequel"? It would fit quite nicely with his established shotgun approach to Superman.

[Dark Knight]

Kill the kid.....unfortunately. It will create a better story with strong emotion.....

[Octoberist]

I still stand by with my easy solution: Let Superman eat Jason. It's that simple. Very civil.

[X-Maniac]

Even better, I think if Singer really wants to push the envelope.

It's obvious that Superman can be harmed. SR sets up the idea of Superman dying, I think in the sequel Superman should follow through. At the end of "The Man of Steel" Supeman dies saving Lois, Richard, and Jason, the people he's choosen to take care of his family.

In The Last Son of Krypton, Jason is older, perhaps 18 or 19, and Lois and Richard are failing in their responsibility to reaise him to his father's legacy as the world crumbles around them. As per the messiah message, Superman should come back and return in this one, passing on the legacy formally to his son, acknowleding how Lois and Richard have truly done their mission.

I mean, that could really work.

I want to ask something here, and i am not trying to be argumentative or belligerent.

X3 came in for criticism (from the online fan community especially) for its decisions to kill, or cure, several key characters. Cyclops, Jean and Xavier died; Rogue, Magneto and Mystique were cured. There was also wider criticism of the way Cyclops was quickly despatched. Although there are means by which some of those characters might return, through various hints in the movie, they did die or take the cure.

Do you not think that the Superman sequel is opening itself to the same criticism if the central character dies? With Singer's version there would be no get-out clause, he wouldn't do that.

Is it right to want to kill Superman, given that he is the central character and given the reaction to other superhero deaths in the X-movie?

As X3 got blasted by many for 'dead-ending' character arcs (and I'm sure you were among those who complained), I do find it rather astonishing that you should want Superman to die!

[COMPO]

hey, what's wrong with Superman having a kid?

[batman44]

Even better, I think if Singer really wants to push the envelope.

It's obvious that Superman can be harmed. SR sets up the idea of Superman dying, I think in the sequel Superman should follow through. At the end of "The Man of Steel" Supeman dies saving Lois, Richard, and Jason, the people he's choosen to take care of his family.

In The Last Son of Krypton, Jason is older, perhaps 18 or 19, and Lois and Richard are failing in their responsibility to reaise him to his father's legacy as the world crumbles around them. As per the messiah message, Superman should come back and return in this one, passing on the legacy formally to his son, acknowleding how Lois and Richard have truly done their mission.

I mean, that could really work.

I would hate that so much.

[bunk]

hey, what's wrong with Superman having a kid?

run...RUN DAMNIT!!!! YOU'RE IN DANGER!!!!

[Spider-Fan]

Do it like Dallas, and make SR a dream. But, since they won't do that, I don't know.

[bunk]

Singer should just pull a Donner and have Supes spin the world back a few years. Thats pretty much the ultimate in birth control.

[Spider-Fan]

Singer should just pull a Donner and have Supes spin the world back a few years. Thats pretty much the ultimate in birth control.

GENIOUS!!! PURE GENIOUS!!!

[Killgore]

What should Singer do with Jason? Give him a hockey mask and a machette. chi-chi-chi-chi ha-ha-ha-ha

[chrisguyver]

You want another soap opera?

a serious movie doesn't make it a soap opera the movie was great. Superman is in love with loise its always been that way get over it you heartless geek.:cmad:

[bunk]

What should Singer do with Jason? Give him a hockey mask and a machette. chi-chi-chi-chi ha-ha-ha-ha

That shouldn't be funny, but it is.

[dude love]

What should Singer do with Jason? Killing him off would be a good way to add something to Superman's character. Superman then becomes consumed by his personal faliure and dies saving the world and comes back to life with some Marlon brando narrating Biblical style.

[Visionary]

Send him to Michael Jackson's house.

[The Kid]

What should Singer do with Jason? Killing him off would be a good way to add something to Superman's character. Superman then becomes consumed by his personal faliure and dies saving the world and comes back to life with some Marlon brando narrating Biblical style.

It adds nothing but a dead kid to me, might as well not have introduced the liddle widdle munchkin...

What I've always assumed after this whole stupid kid fiasco was that he was added to add something to the character. The same way Lenny was added to Luthor's character.

[C. Lee]

Lenny rules.....leave him alone you big bully.

[The Kid]

AHAR HAR HAR HAR HAR, Hey Mr. lee. That's totally rad. I can dig that, man.

Seriously, congrats on 20,000. If only it was money, eh...

[Heretic]

First of all, I didnt read any spoilers for Returns, but if someone had told me about the kid I would have thrown a fit...but I actually liked the way it was handled and felt the movie did a good job with it. It does present some eventual problems with a goofy sidekick.

So, for the sequel, you pretty much have to reveal to Richard that the kid isnt his. Rich was one of the better characters in the film I thought, just a really good guy who loves his family but is REALLY outclassed by Superman. The revelation that he isnt the father of his own kid could send him slowly on a journey to become (insert super villian here).

But what do you do with the kid?

1) subplot that kryptonian DNA doesnt mix well with human DNA and he dies in part 2, and the end of that is when Richard finds out.

2) Richard finds out some other way, and kills the kid in part 3, which could lead to some very good emotional drama with Supes. Maybe have Richard possesed by Zod (hey, Smallville did it)

Either way, I dont want a freakin Superboy.

[WhatsHisFace]

Have Braniac steal the kid for being Kryptonian.

[COMPO]

run...RUN DAMNIT!!!! YOU'RE IN DANGER!!!!

why am i in danger?

[bunk]

I think you asked whats wrong with Supes having a kid. That question alone could offend some peoples sensibilities, looks like I was wrong this time or your post just went unnoticed.

[Sub-Zero]

i think it was more superman having a kid out of wedlock that really got to fans. plus they might go the route they did with the lena luthor in the comics. she was possessed by brainiac in the imperiex storyline and was eventually killed. i wouldn't mind if the kid was brainiac or zod reborn, and destroy the kid's body and emerge to beat the crap out of superman.

[chosen1]

I bet singer does'nt even know what to do with Jason. LOL

He needs to be replaced.

The should've restarted everything like batman.\






"You cannot lose if you do not play." -- Marla Daniels

[X Knight]

we must also remember Superman's son is already a murderer!!! and at such a tender age too.........guess they start young nowadays........

I wonder if Jason will have any qualms about that......or if they'll just gloss over it like they did in SR.....

[Heretic]

they glossed over it because they really had no time to think about it.

Besides, when Lois later asked the little brat to help her get out of that room he couldnt do it, and I took that as A) he had a brief spurt of power brought on by the intensity of the moment. or B) he was ashamed of using his powers like that.

[Arkady Rossovich]

I think the boy should perhaps die in the sequel,it would be a huge unexpected manuver.

[Killgore]

I think the boy should perhaps die in the sequel,it would be a huge unexpected manuver.
Then fanboys would complain that Singer didn't know what to do with him so he killed him off.

[The Kid]

You could not be more wrong.

[AirKnight82]

They should put Jason in an akward position like him trying to find out the real identity of Superman and him convinced that its Clark but no one believes him then he fianlly catches clark changing and takes photos of it and shows up at Clarks home and tells him he knows everything and then later finds out that the kids isn't his.

Then kill him off by accident as Superman trys to save lois lane again! But A huge build board crushes him!

[KaptainKrypton]

Have Braniac steal the kid for being Kryptonian.
Pretty good idea. That'll give Supes some incentive to kick some ass. Especially if Brainiac wants to do some experiments on the kid and stuff like that.

[Eros]

or a more sensible and more obvious idea, is Jason will have more of a relationship with superman it will be explored upon. Maybe one day, when superman grows some balls, he will tell his son and Lois who he really is.

[bunk]

We find out Lois actually slept with Martian Manhunter when Jason gets older and turns green. *whew* Supes dodged a bullet there.

[Matt]

What to do with Jason? That is indeed the million dollar question, eh?

[JBElliott]

Ignore his existence altogether and treat him like the mistake he is!

[Maze]

Pretty good idea. That'll give Supes some incentive to kick some ass. Especially if Brainiac wants to do some experiments on the kid and stuff like that.
Yup .

let's say experiments like cloning for example ..

Contrarely to what a lot of people think here, imo ,the kid was a good idea.. the potential for a lot of interesting stories is there.

[bunk]

It was only a matter of time before they did it in the comics, the difference being Clark and Lois have been married so it would have been a more natural progression.

[JBElliott]

Kill the little eff-er!

[JBElliott]

Or make him Cyclops' son after all. Chalk it up to mistaken identity and explain away the "superkid" crap on the boat by a sudden wave that rocked to boat fortuitously. Then let Jason and Dad go on a road trip to get to know one and other better and ditch Lois who's not the mother anyway since Cyclops worked with Luthor to imlant her with Superman and Cyclops DNA in order to create a Bizzaro. The kid grows up fast, kills Cyclops and then comes back for Lios and Superman fights him and has to destroy him to save Lois and Metropolis and then Superman cries like a baby and Luthor laughs in prison having his revenge on Lois, White and Superman.

[thechubbysaint]

Have Superman turn the world backwards, erase the last horrible movie, and use a kryptonite condom.

[JBElliott]

Have Superman turn the world backwards, erase the last horrible movie, and use a kryptonite condom.

That almost works. Spin the world backwards, then keep it in his pants!

[mego joe]

Yup .

let's say experiments like cloning for example ..

Contrarely to what a lot of people think here, imo ,the kid was a good idea.. the potential for a lot of interesting stories is there.

How would Braniac know that Jason is Superman's son, and do you really think that it would be a good idea to have a child, SUperman's child no less, being experimented on medically, kidknapped, possibly tortured? Using the damsel in distress works in movies like this, but the 'child in distress' motif just makes me angry. There are enough problems in the world with children being mistreated that we don't need to see Jason portrayed as a pawn or victim. He's an innocent child and doesn't deserve any of the conflict and trauma in his life.

Any 'interesting' development with the Jason charcter is going to have to focus on bonding or lack of bonding between him and supes. If he just becomes a victim it becomes kind of sick and disgusting, and doesn't add anything to the charactes. Just using it as a plot device to make SUperman upset so he goes berserk is really cliched and obvious and not a bit interesting.

[Maze]

How would Braniac know that Jason is Superman's son
Hi joe,

Brainiac possesses telepathic and psycho-kinetic powers of as-yet-untested limits

There are enough problems in the world with children being mistreated that we don't need to see Jason portrayed as a pawn or victim. He's an innocent child and doesn't deserve any of the conflict and trauma in his life.

Most of fairy tales have child mistreated .. fairy tales are considered important in child education.. but maybe you wan't to censor them too?

all is about treatement.

it's not because you a story showing child abuse in a way that can
Any 'interesting' development with the Jason charcter is going to have to focus on bonding or lack of bonding between him and supes. If he just becomes a victim it becomes kind of sick and disgusting, and doesn't add anything to the charactes.
That's what you say ..again read about fairy tales.

Just using it as a plot device to make SUperman upset so he goes berserk is really cliched and obvious and not a bit interesting.
you brought that .


Using the damsel in distress works in movies like this,
Don't you think that there are enough women mistreated in this world ?....so it's ok to have women mistreated but not children? (i don't have a problem with women kidnapped it it's useful to the story ..like any story idea )

again tell that to the Brothers Grimm , countless other child author.(and pediatrist , and psychiatrist too )

all that makes you angry?Well i'm sorry for you mego.

but ,to continue to have a reasoned debate (like i saw you doing usually) , i will recommend you to relax a little , think a little more and do some research before posting next time.

[mego joe]

Hi joe,

Brainiac possesses telepathic and psycho-kinetic powers of as-yet-untested limits



Most of fairy tales have child mistreated .. fairy tales are considered important in child education.. but maybe you wan't to censor them too?

all is about treatement.

.
That's what you say ..again read about fairy tales.


you brought that .



Don't you think that there are enough women mistreated in this world ?....so it's ok to have women mistreated but not children? (i don't have a problem with women kidnapped it it's useful to the story ..like any story idea )

again tell that to the Brothers Grimm , countless other child author.(and pediatrist , and psychiatrist too )

all that makes you angry?Well i'm sorry for you mego.

but ,to continue to have a reasoned debate (like i saw you doing usually) , i will recommend you to relax a little , think a little more and do some research before posting next time.

As a father of two I am very sensetive to the portrayal of children in any media. I also am aware of how sensetive kids can be, especially mine. I would also say that many classic fairy tales are scary to little kids and that at the time they were written, they were used as object lessons, like "This is why you don't go into the woods." There are other ways of teaching children without scaring them. The only lesson you get out of a situation like this would be, "Don't be SUperman's son."

As far as Braniac's powers go, which Braniac are you refering to? There are quite a few different incarnations out there. It seems if he were that powerful he would have been able to kill SUpmeran's parents and all his friends already in some medium.

You are right about things being in the presentation, and there are many presentations of the treatment of women I do not care for, for the exact reason you mention. THere is a difference though in placing an adult in a harrowing situation and placing a child in a similar one.

As a parent there is no enjoyment or excitement in seeing childen mistreated in any way. I'm way to emotionally connected to my children and the desire to see kids grow up happy with as few problems as possible to find entertainment in that, despite presentation. In SR when Lois takes Jason aboard the yacht, the first thing I thought was, "any decent parent would know better than to take their child with them in this situation."

[Maze]

The only lesson you get out of a situation like this would be, "Don't be SUperman's son."

No.

that's what YOU get about the situation... and you tell me that , without knowning how the story would be told..... like i said all is in the treatement...but i suppose that if there was a plot along the line i have told , you would percieved it as immoral anyways.

herer lies a problem in discussing with you :Sometimes you interpret things too much because (it seem )of you own sensibility...(and there it is not a question of taste ) for example,you say the lesson in some of the greatest fairy tales (like the Brother Grimm ones) "This is why you don't go into the woods" ..and it is not ..ask any competent psychiatrist or pediastrist..

The message in the greatest fairy tales is rather that a struggle against severe difficulties in life is unavoidable. It is an intrinsic part of human existence - but that if one does not shy away, but steadfastly meets unexpected and often unjust hardships, one masters all obstacles and at the end emerges victorious.

That's true , responsible.


As far as Braniac's powers go, which Braniac are you refering to? There are quite a few different incarnations out there. It
Vril Dox

First Appearance: (current version): ADVENTURES OF SUPERMAN #438 (March, 1988)

THere is a difference though in placing an adult in a harrowing situation and placing a child in a similar one.
Yes, for you.

All is in the treatement.

As a parent there is no enjoyment or excitement in seeing childen mistreated in any way. I'm way to emotionally connected to my children and the desire to see kids grow up happy with as few problems as possible to find entertainment in that, despite presentation.
And i understand that ..and i don't have any excitement , or enjoyment in seeing children being mistreated either..but if it is needed to tell a story ,and it is well told ,it interest me yes.. YOU don't seem to need that ..YOUR children (maybe ) doesn't need that ..another guy (and maybe his children) would need something else , and however he will have the same desire as you have for his children..No? maybe you wan't to teach a lesson to pediatrist and psychiatric about other children?

That's the other problem in discussing with you to be completely honest.. not only sometimes you interpret things , but you seem to think too often that somebody who need other manner to tell (Superman ) stories about morality ,than you, have surely an ambiguous morality ( irresponsible? ) No mego..you know what is the first responsible lesson imo "we are all different."

Have a nice day.

[HUMAN]

Actually, if the series lasts long enough, I look forward to when Jason takes over the tights. The tagline for the movie:

"The Son Becomes the Father"

Or maybe Jason could become a villain... who knows?

[Lead Cenobite]

I said this earlier, I'll say it again, but this time in a shorter post.

Don't ignore Superman Returns, but don't base the sequels around Jason. Keep him out of the picture, he's not important right now. Superman has moved on, Jason has a family in Lois and Richard. Much like Jor-El, Superman should only guide Jason when the time is right, when he develops abilities later on, maybe in his late teens.

Ok, so that kindof ruins the opportunity for Lois to be Superman/Clark's girlfriend. So what? Have him start going out with Lana or someone else. We've seen plenty of Lois and Superman's relationship, I think it's time to move on.

How's that?

[Cyrusbales]

I said this earlier, I'll say it again, but this time in a shorter post.

Don't ignore Superman Returns, but don't base the sequels around Jason. Keep him out of the picture, he's not important right now. Superman has moved on, Jason has a family in Lois and Richard. Much like Jor-El, Superman should only guide Jason when the time is right, when he develops abilities later on, maybe in his late teens.

Ok, so that kindof ruins the opportunity for Lois to be Superman/Clark's girlfriend. So what? Have him start going out with Lana or someone else. We've seen plenty of Lois and Superman's relationship, I think it's time to move on.

How's that?

But if we're getting a super hardcore villain like doomsday, darkseid or Gog, then supes should be too busy to have a relationship, he's the truth and justice, so he's gonna do the right thing and leave lois to it with her new family. maybe play a little with clark's involvement in the family, but no romantisism and keep supes out of that, I loved the way they showed supermans' lonelyness in SR, above the clouds etc, and all the solo shots of him and so forth, anyways, a decent villain is vital for 'the man of steel'.

[Spider-Fan]

Have Jason become BIZARRO!!!

[Lead Cenobite]

But if we're getting a super hardcore villain like doomsday, darkseid or Gog, then supes should be too busy to have a relationship, he's the truth and justice, so he's gonna do the right thing and leave lois to it with her new family. maybe play a little with clark's involvement in the family, but no romantisism and keep supes out of that, I loved the way they showed supermans' lonelyness in SR, above the clouds etc, and all the solo shots of him and so forth, anyways, a decent villain is vital for 'the man of steel'.

Well he's managed to juggle relationships and saving the world for a long time already hasn't he? I'm only saying that IF there's a relationship, it should be someone like Lana. I know a lot of people out there would probably want a love interest in the movie for one reason or another.

[Cyrusbales]

Well he's managed to juggle relationships and saving the world for a long time already hasn't he? I'm only saying that IF there's a relationship, it should be someone like Lana. I know a lot of people out there would probably want a love interest in the movie for one reason or another.

Horrible people who want a bad movie, lol. We've seen superman with a love interest FAR too much before, let's have a break!

Also, when he ejaculates, is it like a proper shotgun blast? lois would be killed!!!

[bestever23]

Honestly I never read the whole thread so I won't talk about the above

yet I honest like jason in the movies. It really makes superman more human and caring. I mean he's a dad now. he's not just out there flying around saving people. he has family now on earth

[The Kid]

sigh... I really didn't expect to ever read something like that at this point in my hype life. I really didn't. :dew:

Zorro, the mask, and now superman. Who's next...

I remember wonder woman had a sidekick on that old tv show starring linda carter... but I'm not sure if it was her sister or cousin. All I know is I accepted wonder woman with a sidekick because she was quite hot. Jason's not good eyecandy and already as dumb as a rock like his father so I don't like him. Anyway, my point is if you're going to try and add sidekicks, make them older and more shapely.

[bunk]

Why is Jason as dumb as a rock? ^^^

[MandomanForever]

What they need to do is set up that Lex makes a public appearance and has become all corporate i.e. LexCorp. Clark is adjusting being back on earth, but has a conflict with Lois/Jason/Richard thing. No one knows how Luthor got off the island (including audience), but he's rich and has become Metropolis business poster boy. He has a new crew, no Kitty, he has a body guard named Joh Corben-Metallo. We see Clark and Lois trying to uncover how Lex who has new technology (remisniscent of Krypton at his disposal) later we find there is an approaching Krypton invading force which has been picked up by satellites and Superman is outed as a scout and people soon begin to distrust him as they believe he left to bring back his "forces" (this is taking a page from Birthright) so this gives a superman who has a giant conflict--people hate him and see Lex as their savior--He promises to have the military stop them. There is also a hidden puppet master who has set up Lex with all the technology...Brainiac (who latched himself on Supes spaceship when he went back to Krypton) and is charge in creating Metallo. Metallo dresses in faux Kryptonian military garb lay siege to Metropolis. Superman has to save day, we have Jason helping people, nothing to obvious like flying or anything, but maybe we have him hold up a falling ceiling. So we get action. Supes fights Metallo, beats him then Brainiac who reveals himself and they fight supes wins. But knowing Brainiac he comes back for the third picture. We end the film on a semi cliffhanger--half of world distrusts Superman, Lex gets arrested for creating the fraud, but beats the system and Supes is left pondering if Brainiac was indeed the puppt master--we then go to space and find another Brainiac dupilicate talking to his "master" who is Zod.

As part three the film should be about resolutions. Richard and Lois find Clark is Superman and Zod and his Brainiac drones attack earth, but this has to be more personal and in a way smaller than the previous blockbuster. Zod now knows of Jason and wants him to join him. Superman takes Jason to the fortress while Zod runs beserk on earth. Jason learns from the crystals and his heritage and Supes just wants him to stay put because Zod can not enter the Fortress, I think Supes would go take the fight to Zod. Their fight should take place in Smallville as Zod tries to kill Martha. Fires in corfields arial battles. Jason sees what going on in the world through the fortress and sees his dad and his family (Lois, Ma, Richard) and the world needing help and aginst Supes wishes goes to confront Zod. We don't really have Jason fight him, and I don't want to see him fight exactly, because it would look cheesy, but maybe some Gohan/Dragonball z type of fight betwen them. For example Zod is about to kill Superman and Jason intervens dying in the process and this would add to Clar being the "Last Son of Krypton" motif. the world sees in shock as JAson dies, we Supes go psycho because frankly people want to see Superman pissed. Lex should be in the film as well as he Superman reluctantly fight Zod. Superman tells Lex to build a phanton zone projector (mind you all this in rough thinking) in return Lex will be exonerated. But all that hits fan as I said before when Zod kills JAson. We see the fight go all over the world people watching the skys burn, they fight in the Artic all the way to space to New Krypton where Superman knows their powers will be depleted. Slow-mo fight in Space with great orchestral music. They brings chunks of New krypton down to earth via meteor shower and Supes almost kills a bloodied Zod when Lois pleads with him not to because it would tarnish Jason memory and what Superman stands for. Superman gives off a one-liner. Lex comes in and puts Zod in the phantom zone never to be released it looks like Lex will do the same to Superman, but doesn't and holds up his deal and does Superman. At the end we see a funeral scene, I thought it be bittersweet with Richard finding out about Jason and braks up his engagement with Lois because he knows she belongs with Supes. And we end it similar to the Apokolips Now episode where Turpin dies. WHat you guys think?

[SentinelMind]

As a parent there is no enjoyment or excitement in seeing childen mistreated in any way. I'm way to emotionally connected to my children and the desire to see kids grow up happy with as few problems as possible to find entertainment in that, despite presentation. In SR when Lois takes Jason aboard the yacht, the first thing I thought was, "any decent parent would know better than to take their child with them in this situation."

I thought the exact same thing when I first witnesses that scene. Bring a child unto some stranger's property/possible crime headquarters that is source of a citywide black out? Smart thinking Lois:whatever:. It's as if she doesn't have a mother's instinct.

I also agree that I don't like how children are used as tools to further someone else's agenda and would prefer not to see any abuse or harm in the next film.

[mego joe]

No.

that's what YOU get about the situation... and you tell me that , without knowning how the story would be told..... like i said all is in the treatement...but i suppose that if there was a plot along the line i have told , you would percieved it as immoral anyways.

herer lies a problem in discussing with you :Sometimes you interpret things too much because (it seem )of you own sensibility...(and there it is not a question of taste ) for example,you say the lesson in some of the greatest fairy tales (like the Brother Grimm ones) "This is why you don't go into the woods" ..and it is not ..ask any competent psychiatrist or pediastrist

The message in the greatest fairy tales is rather that a struggle against severe difficulties in life is unavoidable. It is an intrinsic part of human existence - but that if one does not shy away, but steadfastly meets unexpected and often unjust hardships, one masters all obstacles and at the end emerges victorious...

Originally, fairy tales were not intended solely for children, they were handed down in an oral tradition like folktales. It was only later that after changing endings and other aspects were they deemed more suitable for children.

I was specifically thinking of the original versions of some of the classics where Little Red Riding HOod gets eaten by the wolf and Hansel and Gretel don't escape. They get baked in the oven. These seem to be the types of tales that are a warning to kids especially about certain dangers in the world.

If you look at other types of tales then definitely you get the bit about struggle that you mention and that evil, etc... can be overcome. Those tales are a bit different from the Hansel and Gretel/ Red Riding Hood type though.

That's true , responsible.



Vril Dox

First Appearance: (current version): ADVENTURES OF SUPERMAN #438 (March, 1988)


Yes, for you.

All is in the treatement.


And i understand that ..and i don't have any excitement , or enjoyment in seeing children being mistreated either..but if it is needed to tell a story ,and it is well told ,it interest me yes.. YOU don't seem to need that ..YOUR children (maybe ) doesn't need that ..another guy (and maybe his children) would need something else , and however he will have the same desire as you have for his children..No? maybe you wan't to teach a lesson to pediatrist and psychiatric about other children?

That's the other problem in discussing with you to be completely honest.. not only sometimes you interpret things , but you seem to think too often that somebody who need other manner to tell (Superman ) stories about morality ,than you, have surely an ambiguous morality ( irresponsible? ) No mego..you know what is the first responsible lesson imo "we are all different."

Have a nice day.

We are all different, but there is a status quo for SUperman. He is a character that is known for doing the right thing and being responsible and there is no moral abmbiguity to his character. Of course, I am basing my view of SUperman more on the comics than the movies. But even in the first 4 Superman films, I think for the most part, they get the morality right, at least when there is a question, the character is shown learning from the mistake. In SR, if he is supposed to learn from or even acknowlege his mistakes it is very poorly done. His actions don't seem to indicate any change from the beginning to the end of he movie.

You can't have SUperman act out of character, not explain the reasons why, not resolve the situation and have people go, "Oh yeah, you nailed the character." Singer didn't. The whole purpose seems to be to give us a different SUperman. He obviously isn't the one from the comics and he is 'vaguely' similar to the one from the previous films, while not necessarily being the exact same character.

I want SUperman to act and be like SUperman, not some half baked poor imitation. You said in a post that you felt sorry for me, well I feel sorry for anyone who can accept the SR interpretation as Superman. My history with the character is far too extensive and deep to be swayed by impressive visual and a pseudo-emotional non-story from a director that has no idea who SUperman is. There are 6 year old kids who have a better idea of who Superman is than Bryan SInger does.

As far as intepreting things through my world view, I think that's what you were getting at, everyone does that. I will say that my criticism of SR is based more on my knowledge of the character and how he acts in the comics than how I would act or how I think he should act based solely on my own beliefs. There are going to be a lot of similarities, but they are not exactly the same. But back to me and my beliefs. I have a certain view of the world, that some things are right and some things are wrong. YOu do to. I believe in certain moral absolutes and certain absolute truths about our existence and how we should treat each other. I am going to hold to those beliefs and my world view will be filtered through those beliefs, like anyone else. One thing I don't believe is that everyone can be right. There is no moral ambiguity. Some things are right and some things are wrong. Certain actions are responsible and certain actions are not.

The situation as portrayed in SR with SUperman fathering a child is irresponsible. There is no way you can be responsible and father a child you have no knowlege of. That is irresponsible. True responsibility in this situation is doing the right thing before knowledge of the child. It is sad to think that anyone would value a child so little as to not be able to see the irresponsibility in this situation. While SUperman suffers and Lois suffers, Jason in the one who will suffer the most. Jason is a complete innocent in this situation, as all children are when they first come into the world. They don't ask to be conceived, they are conceived by two people who are choosing to engage in actions which oftentimes re**** in the conception of a baby. That is the biggest responsibilty that exists in the world, having another life be competely dependent upon you. It is far more serious than it is portrayed in SR. It is far more serious than a lame reused dialogue taken out of context. It is far more serious than the un convincing "I'm always around." (Just like the last 5 years?)

Singer shows no understanding of the seriousness and responsiblity of being a parent and I don't imagine that he would use Jason as more than a pawn or victim of a villain, should that plot element be used. If we are to see SR as a morality play or story, then SUperman has to acknowledge and grow from his mistakes, but he does neither. He shows no understanding of the seriosness of his actions or even a deep realization of how much he hurt Lois. NOthing about SUperman the person gains favor with Lois, it is simply his powers. He doesn't go through a hardship to only realize at the end that it's the right thing to use his powers to help people, he does that throughout the film. THere is no personal growth. He does nothing different at the end of the film than he does at the beginning. He doesn't change at all.

[X Knight]

very good post, mego joe.

yes, we are all entitled to our opinions, and we are all going to interpret Superman differently. For some of us, like mego joe and myself, we have a similar interpretation of who Superman is ( a beacon of Virtue, Morality, and Values ). Hence, we would prefer to see Superman portrayed in that manner.
And, when we feel that Singer failed to do so, we have a right to express our dissatisfaction.

Now, that doesn't make our opinions better than anyone else's. Nor, does it make us a "problem." We simply felt that Singer's SR presented situations which were totally wrong and out of character for a Superman movie.

And, yes, I felt there was no personal growth for Supes in the movie........unlike say Batman Begins or the Spiderman movies.

[ariellem]

Superman may have left Earth to explore Krypton....but he hasn't really returned yet. He was captured by Brainiac, who is using some kind of mind control device to break him. He makes Supes believe that he has gone back to Earth and everything has gone wrong (demoted in his job, Lois no longer likes him, she's moved on with another man and has a kid, Lex was set free because of his leaving, etc...).....the old sci-fi staple of the "it's all a dream/mind control" trick.

What a great solution to all of it! It would bring in Brainiac as our SR2 villain, explain away Lois and the kid, and would give Singer an excellent opportunity to completely ditch the SR suit and go with a "normal" one for SR2. I would keep the SR1 stuff going for part of SR2, though, so the audience falls for it hook, line, and sinker...

Once Superman wakes up and fights his way back to the "real" Earth, let's fix all the other problems too... a good Lois (preferably not Kate!) who has been frantically worried about him/Clark and gives Clark a huge kiss when he walks into the office (yes, in front of everyone; she then can get really embarassed and try to explain it away), a tougher Perry (no matter who plays him)... and a gentleman named Richard. Introduce Richard again, same guy but without the kid, and see where it goes.

[Maze]

Originally, fairy tales were not intended solely for children, they were handed down in an oral tradition like folktales. It was only later that after changing endings and other aspects were they deemed more suitable for children.

I was specifically thinking of the original versions of some of the classics where Little Red Riding HOod gets eaten by the wolf and Hansel and Gretel don't escape. They get baked in the oven. These seem to be the types of tales that are a warning to kids especially about certain dangers in the world.

If you look at other types of tales then definitely you get the bit about struggle that you mention and that evil, etc... can be overcome. Those tales are a bit different from the Hansel and Gretel/ Red Riding Hood type though.


We are all different, but there is a status quo for SUperman. He is a character that is known for doing the right thing and being responsible and there is no moral abmbiguity to his character. Of course, I am basing my view of SUperman more on the comics than the movies. But even in the first 4 Superman films, I think for the most part, they get the morality right, at least when there is a question, the character is shown learning from the mistake. In SR, if he is supposed to learn from or even acknowlege his mistakes it is very poorly done. His actions don't seem to indicate any change from the beginning to the end of he movie.

You can't have SUperman act out of character, not explain the reasons why, not resolve the situation and have people go, "Oh yeah, you nailed the character." Singer didn't. The whole purpose seems to be to give us a different SUperman. He obviously isn't the one from the comics and he is 'vaguely' similar to the one from the previous films, while not necessarily being the exact same character.

I want SUperman to act and be like SUperman, not some half baked poor imitation. You said in a post that you felt sorry for me, well I feel sorry for anyone who can accept the SR interpretation as Superman. My history with the character is far too extensive and deep to be swayed by impressive visual and a pseudo-emotional non-story from a director that has no idea who SUperman is. There are 6 year old kids who have a better idea of who Superman is than Bryan SInger does.

As far as intepreting things through my world view, I think that's what you were getting at, everyone does that. I will say that my criticism of SR is based more on my knowledge of the character and how he acts in the comics than how I would act or how I think he should act based solely on my own beliefs. There are going to be a lot of similarities, but they are not exactly the same. But back to me and my beliefs. I have a certain view of the world, that some things are right and some things are wrong. YOu do to. I believe in certain moral absolutes and certain absolute truths about our existence and how we should treat each other. I am going to hold to those beliefs and my world view will be filtered through those beliefs, like anyone else. One thing I don't believe is that everyone can be right. There is no moral ambiguity. Some things are right and some things are wrong. Certain actions are responsible and certain actions are not.

The situation as portrayed in SR with SUperman fathering a child is irresponsible. There is no way you can be responsible and father a child you have no knowlege of. That is irresponsible. True responsibility in this situation is doing the right thing before knowledge of the child. It is sad to think that anyone would value a child so little as to not be able to see the irresponsibility in this situation. While SUperman suffers and Lois suffers, Jason in the one who will suffer the most. Jason is a complete innocent in this situation, as all children are when they first come into the world. They don't ask to be conceived, they are conceived by two people who are choosing to engage in actions which oftentimes re**** in the conception of a baby. That is the biggest responsibilty that exists in the world, having another life be competely dependent upon you. It is far more serious than it is portrayed in SR. It is far more serious than a lame reused dialogue taken out of context. It is far more serious than the un convincing "I'm always around." (Just like the last 5 years?)

Singer shows no understanding of the seriousness and responsiblity of being a parent and I don't imagine that he would use Jason as more than a pawn or victim of a villain, should that plot element be used. If we are to see SR as a morality play or story, then SUperman has to acknowledge and grow from his mistakes, but he does neither. He shows no understanding of the seriosness of his actions or even a deep realization of how much he hurt Lois. NOthing about SUperman the person gains favor with Lois, it is simply his powers. He doesn't go through a hardship to only realize at the end that it's the right thing to use his powers to help people, he does that throughout the film. THere is no personal growth. He does nothing different at the end of the film than he does at the beginning. He doesn't change at all.

Of course he does.

We talked many time about it.(and many others told you the same exact things )

But you don't wan't to listen .You don't wan't to have a debate , and maybe understand some of the point made , you wan't to be right.Because the movie fail to be what is Superman is for you.

i don't wan't to be right mego ..But and maybe i will sound a little arrogant in saying that i studied enough cinema , not to determine what is good ( even if there are objective standart imo ) but what is in a script or not.

it's there , but you don't see it..and especially because you don't like the movie .

the day you will really wan't to listen on the suject of the script we will talk again about it (but i will talk with pleasure about other topics ) ..But there now it's useless..i don't think that repeating myself will be constructive , and that's why i think it's a waste of time for me and (maybe ) for you too..( to each their own ultimately )

Wishing you ( without malice at all :) ) a good debate :yay:

ps: yup some of the old tales of Little red hood mean that ..now don't forget that there were from a time where a lot of people tried to control others with fear .. (that said like a lot of people try anew since some years )that does reflect one truth , but not THE truth about the world imo.. ans i favor the most modern responsible tales ( imo ) about struggle through life .

[Maze]

edit

[X Knight]

well then....maze.......how does Superman change and grow throughout the film???

i didn't really see or feel it myself.........

[The Punisher]

Found this at BT:

Posted by Justin on 11/21/06


Tristan Lake Leabu, who played Jason in Superman Returns, told IESB at the Superman Returns DVD and video game release party that he expects to return as Jason in the sequels.
IESB also had this bit of information regarding the plot for the sequel:
"According to a studio/production source at the party, Zod will not be back. He will not be a part of the story at all. They have decided to go a different way and Bryan will make The Man of Steel his own story completely. Our insider promises more action than any D.C. Comics based movie thus far."
Read the full article and watch video interviews with Stephan Bender, Eva Marie Saint, and Tristan Lake Leabu here (http://www.iesb.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=687&Itemid=99), and watch Sam Huntington's video interview here (http://www.iesb.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=670&Itemid=99).

This just made me anticipate the sequel. Zod not the villain? Awesome. More action that what we've seen? Double awesome. And the title is Man of Steel?

Discuss.

[I Am The Knight]

Found this at BT:



This just made me anticipate the sequel. Zod not the villain? Awesome. More action that what we've seen? Double awesome. And the title is Man of Steel?

Discuss.
[/size][/font]

Great news. The best part? Bryan making it his own story. I'M PUMPED!

[The Punisher]

Same here, and i'm glad to hear about the action. It's Superman dammit I want lots of action!

[I Am The Knight]

Yup! and no Zod is great.....Should please most people.

[The Punisher]

For sure it does me, I hope we get either Brainiac or Darkseid.

[I Am The Knight]

Chances are, it will be everyone's darling, Brainiac. Some setup for Darkseid would be awesome though.

[The Punisher]

I've always thought that Brainiac could be the villain and then have Darkseid as the villain for the third film. But, whoever we get i'm sure it'll be great. Cause now I don't have to worry if Zod will be in or not.

[The Kid]

The boy of steel should do us a favor and go do home alone 5 instead of throwing instruments.

[GreenKToo]

you got that right..:up:I've always thought that Brainiac could be the villain and then have Darkseid as the villain for the third film. But, whoever we get i'm sure it'll be great. Cause now I don't have to worry if Zod will be in or not.

[Brainiac 2009]

http://www.gametrailers.com/gamepage.php?id=2460

Tristan also speaks in the first clip here, talking about the video game.

I don't mind keeping him for the sequel given hes still a really young kid, but they should recast the role around the 3rd or 4th film when Jason is a teeanger.... so he resembles teenage Kon-El to a certain degree. A kid with a more Stephen Bender-like look.

Thats the direction I'm hoping this character will go since my fingers are crossed that the possible success of the Superman/Doomsday animated DVD will inspire Warner Bros to eventually do the Death of Superman saga around 3 or 4.

[superbaby]

The boy of steel should do us a favor and go do home alone 5 instead of throwing instruments.
lol. ya he would have a better career than brandon.

[Mentok]

My bet is on Brainiac, with Darkseid getting set up for the third film.

[Retroman]

I hope Jason doesn't become uberpowerfull. But this is cool news nonetheless.:yay:

[ervann]

The only question I have (and a rhetorical one at this point) is if it really needed Superman Returns to set up this awesome-sounding sequel? Now it's another 3 years in the waiting, dammit.

[ervann]

My bet is on Brainiac, with Darkseid getting set up for the third film.

Ditto.

And that would be AWESOME.

What would be interesting is that after Braniaic and Darkseid, it turns out (in the final installment) that somehow Luthor still holds the greatest threat, and he and Supes have a final showdown of sorts.

[GarudA]

My bet is on Brainiac, with Darkseid getting set up for the third film.

Darkseid? Bryan Singer do Darkseid :woot: Will never happen, Darkseid is far to cool for Singer.

[Superfreak]

I'll keep saying it til I'm proven wrong, the villain will be metallo because of the title

[Mentok]

I hope Jason doesn't become uberpowerfull. But this is cool news nonetheless.:yay:

I kinda want to see some flat out weird crap develop with him... After all he is a Human/Alien hybrid... Thats gotta mean weird stuff is going to go down.

[charl_huntress]

Doomsday...I want to see him live action...horns on his head and everything.

[DavidTyler]

What if Jason turns out to be Mr. Mxyzptlk?

[I Am The Knight]

What if Jason turns out to be Mr. Mxyzptlk?

HAHAHA!

[MaskedManJRK]

Found this at BT:



This just made me anticipate the sequel. Zod not the villain? Awesome. More action that what we've seen? Double awesome. And the title is Man of Steel?

Discuss.
[/size][/font]

Hey--maybe this is meant to further connect the Batman and Superman franchises to meet in a World's Finest film?

The Dark Knight
Man of Steel

[Mentok]

Thats nevergoing to happen.

[superkong 500]

The insider said this one is gonna have more action than any dc movie made. Singer being the director I wanna see that.

[thechubbysaint]

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/news/comments/?entryid=380217

Inside the party, Bryan Singer (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/p/bryan_singer/) could be overheard suggesting the sequel will be two hours and seven minutes with lots of action. He also promised to give Tristan Lake Leabu, who plays the young superkid, a lot to do.


http://data1.blog.de/blog/a/atuvulemaniac/img/funny-dog-throwing-up-picture_small.jpg

[Vile]

Because that is what was wrong with Superman Returns.

...The kid didnt have enough to do.

...Le sigh.

[Jochimus]

I honestly believe Lois should be sending the kid into hiding. Otherwise his life WOULD be in imminent danger since at least one megalomaniac who has it out for Superman knows the kid's true nature.

[Lighthouse]

Instead of more of Superman's kid....how about we get more of Superman.

[matthooper]

When people don't admit their mistakes, they just make it worse by continuing it out of spite.


“All men make mistakes, but only wise men learn from their mistakes.”
---Winston Churchill

[Showtime]

I am sure that he was saying that at the party and he already knows how long the movie is going to be. Are you guys seriously believing that?

[The Caped Knight]

I can't wait to see more of Jason/superboy in the sequel .

[ROBOCOP CPU001]

we're all doomed.

[The Caped Knight]

I'm really looking forward to seeing how their going to handle the Jason , SUPERMAN & Lois relationship in the sequel .

Is Jason going to find out his father is really SUPERMAN

Is Sups going to show Jason how to control his powers ?

Lois & Superman relationship, now that they both know Jason is Sups son .

[batman7289]

poo

[Mr. Credible]

more action than we've seen in any dc movie so far?



that's really not saying much, is it? most (if not all) dc movie are notoriously action-less.

[dark_b]

The insider said this one is gonna have more action than any dc movie made. Singer being the director I wanna see that.yeah right :woot:
first he makes a superman movie wihtout action and now he will make a movie with lots of action? how about a movie that has the right balance between the story and action. did he forgot about the x-men movie that he made? :o

[The Incredible Hulk]

the only thing I want to see the kid do is have his DNA unravel and turn into a puddle of primordial ooze.

[matthooper]

The problem is, it doesn't matter what they do. Superman has a kid now. It can't be changed. Once you have a kid, they become your life's focus. Superman is no longer the same character.

Whether they give the kid 1 minute or 1 hour of screen time it's irrelevant. Superman's new main motivation is now a kid.

[y2jversion1]

the only thing I want to see the kid do is have his DNA unravel and turn into a puddle of primordial ooze.

Now that sounds like a plan :woot:

[The Caped Knight]

the only thing I want to see the kid do is have his DNA unravel and turn into a puddle of primordial ooze.

It's clear you don't like the movie Superman returns or the fact the sequel is Official , so why are you posting here ? Shouldn't you stick in your comfort zone in SV ?

[matthooper]

It's clear you don't like the movie Superman returns or the fact the sequel is Official , so why are you posting here ? Shouldn't you stick in your comfort zone in SV ?

Do you not realize that almost every post in this thread is a negative jab at Super-lad? So who's out of their comfort zone?