Originally Posted by Dr.
That’s a separate - but entirely legitimate - question. Originally, the “two person triangle” was just a lighthearted bit of tension and comedy. And you could certainly make the case that it should stay that way - i.e., don’t substitute a more mature drama into a scenario that was never designed for that purpose. But having been teased with the classic triangle for years, I was happy that SR changed up the dynamic. Btw, I was happy that MOS did this too (though their approach was obviously different).
Again well said, and you are right. There is something to be said for changing that dynamic. I also appreciated what they did in MOS (and SV for that matter), and I was pleasantly surprised by it...tbh.
Lois knowing Clark's secret, and helping to protect it, allows the triangle dynamic to expand in a good way that enhances both characters. I noticed new dimensions to MOS Lois I had never seen before, which was a good thing because it enhanced her and the story. Superman, as a character, was made more vulnerable, but wasn't actually depowered. I like all this and saw what Snyder and Goyer did as a progression.
My issue with SR's direction is the dynamic Singer added did none of what MOS did. Singer's dynamic didn't add anything to enhance either character. It barely did anything for the actual story itself. It was just there with barely any context, and a 30-year old movie blueprint (twice removed) to explain it.
While you can say it was dramatic...and more mature, what actual purpose did it serve?