One of the reasons I like The Green Goblin's plan so much in SPIDER-MAN is that it's not a plan, it's what he does. It's characterization. He's arrogant, and he wants to be top dog, and he'll hurt/kill anyone who gets in his way who doesn't heed his warnings. I loved that about SPIDER-MAN, it made it very personal. He didn't need to take over the city, he just needed to be better than everyone else, and on top, with nothing to stop him.
Some of you are missing the point about Superman soaking in the sun and then removing New Krypton from the Earth. The point is not that Kryptonite doesn't harm him there or that the solar energy prevented it from hurting him, the point is, he knew he was likely going to die, and he went up and soaked in all the POWER he could...before he SACRIFICED himself for the people of his adopted world. Brandon Routh is not a great actor, so a lot of the actual "sacrifice" didn't come through until he essentially died. Now, the Kryptonite was fused into the rock, and a lot of the rock was in the way of the Kryptonite, so I have no problems with that scene.
Lex's master plan was kinda weak. I mean, if the plot was aimed at younger kids... sure it would be fine. Or if Lex wanted to destroy the world just because he's evil, sure it would be fine. But here, his actions did not rationally match up with his ideas.
Exactly.
The crystal was eventually going to make a continent that would destroy most of North America... along with LARGE chunks of Africa and South America according to Lex's maps. Plus, the effects on ocean levels... climate... the atmosphere... it's no wonder he believed that billions would die.
Yet his GOAL was to create land that he owned alone and then sell it.
First off, no government on Earth would recognize Lex as having the right to own that land. If you kill billions of people, governments are gonna come after you. Not cater to you.
Secondly, if Lex destroys nations and crashes the world's economy... who is going to be able to buy his land even if we suppose that he'd actually be able to control all that land.
Third, the US military would wipe him out. A decent amount of time went by, and that island still hadn't grown enough to do more than give Metropolis an earthquake. The military would have plenty of time to bomb the crap out of that island or even just storm it and capture Luthor. Luthor had no Kryptonian weapons. We don't even know if he knew how to build them yet. Or how long building them would take. Plus, he only had three guys with him. Even if the weapons popped out quick, three guys vs. hundreds of thousand of US soldiers??? Numbers will win out even if the weapons are uber powerful.
Fourth, if all went to plan and the continent grew... people will be swarming all over that new continent in order to seek a place to live. How was Lex planning on monitoring his borders for an entire continent... with just THREE guys and himself? Advanced alien border protection? lol
Imagine if the United States was completely barren except for 4 guys with some insanely powerful guns. Now imagine millions of people trying to get onto the US coming from Mexico, Canada, and over the sea. The 4 guys would never stop them all. Nor would the 4 guys have any way to regulate or control all those people.
So Lex's plan fails on almost every level of planning. Which is sad since he's supposed to be a genius.
Agreed. And well said.
But if Lex's plan had gone through... even the way he wanted it... it would have failed. Hence, his master plan is craptacular.
Yup. Darn cool, but yeah, pretty craptacular.
You're right. In the end, they're comic book movies. Same with Batman Begins: The evil plot was a tad over-the-top but it's a comic book movie and it really didn't contridict the tone that Nolan wanted.
If it's "just a comic movie", then it's "just a comic book movie". It's either a comic book movie, or it's a movie with some depth and logic. But it can't be both at the same time. Not as an overall piece of work. So which is it? Lex Luthor's plan is a major weakness of the story and mechanics of the film.
As a scheme to build and sell property it is ridiculous and lame. What I'm saying is that if it was written such that NK was created to humiliate and destroy Superman it may be more plausible - Lex's thirst for revenge totally blinds him from any consequences later. His should just be obsessed with killing Superman, not beach front property.
I agree. He could have just built New Krypton as a fortress of sorts for himself. As a way to lure Superman to him with massive destruction and a means to kill him via Kryptonite poisoning. And then he could have implied that he was going to use Superman's technology to get what he felt he deserved. The beachfront property idea did not need to be a part of this film.
That's where they dropped the ball. No coherence, no thematic continuity. They bring this whole motif of a world that doens't need Superman - and then everybody just claps and cheers as if he was never gone and they completely forgot the whole kicker to the movie that it's called Superman Returns and it's just business as usual circa 1978. When you don't create any significant conflict in regard to the main premise of the movie, what good is it? He never proved one bit that the world needed him and the film never proved for one moment that the world had moved on at all.
Yep. That disappointed me. And since Singer essentially sold us on this being the main thematic of the film, I expected much more.
norm
