Superman Returns did superman regret that he left for krypton?

[Angeloz]

Could it be that they're not actually the same movie?

Hehehe.

Great to have you here Angeloz.

Thanks.

I didn't know people here could be as welcoming as they've been (so far ).

Angeloz

 

[Angeloz]

I won't continue because it's all opinion. If you like the movie that's fine. The fact is, he made a Superman movie specifically to fit his re-occuring theme. He didn't care about the history or the character, he wanted to make a Singerman film. It wasn't just leaving, but his angst about his life and his duty. The reasons for leaving were to find survivors, yes, but to find his place in the universe as well. If you like soap operas and superheroes, then damn, this is the movie for you. That's proabably why women liked it a lot. Again, I mock no one for liking the movie, I mock the movie itself.

By the way, I mentioned that Superman the character bears no resemblance to any incarnation, not the movie itself. Obviously, Singer copied much of the Donner movie. I mentioned that in an earlier post. Again, you probably didn't read that anyway.

Isn't a contradiction to say it resembles nothing of the past then say it copied Donner?

Angeloz

 

[El Payaso]

I won't continue because it's all opinion. If you like the movie that's fine. The fact is, he made a Superman movie specifically to fit his re-occuring theme.

Once again, Singer didn't invent the personal vision in a movie. Many talented directors do.

He didn't care about the history or the character, he wanted to make a Singerman film.

He cared so much about the story he went right into STM and SII themes and leit motifs and took them one step further.

Other people have had a personal vision on his films, Nolanman, Donnerman, Burtonman, Del Toro-Boy, etc.

It wasn't just leaving, but his angst about his life and his duty. The reasons for leaving were to find survivors, yes, but to find his place in the universe as well. If you like soap operas and superheroes, then damn, this is the movie for you.

A superhero leaving Earth to find his place into universe. Classic soap opera premise.

That's proabably why women liked it a lot.

*feels less of a man because of matt's obvious reaffirmation of his own masculinity affirming women liked SR as in that's why I didn't like it*

Again, I mock no one for liking the movie,

You just did.

By the way, I mentioned that Superman the character bears no resemblance to any incarnation, not the movie itself. Obviously, Singer copied much of the Donner movie.

It resembles Donner's incarnation. Second time.

Obviously, Singer copied much of the Donner movie.

And then took his own direction (the son) based on Donner movies themes. And this time at the end of SR things stayed the way they happened. No deux ex machina, no turning back time, no amnesia kisses so everything that just happened, didn't happen.

I mentioned that in an earlier post. Again, you probably didn't read that anyway.

And that doesn't help your point that Singer's Superman didn't resemble any previous incarnation, in fact it contradicts it, so who cares.

 

[superbaby]

Once again, Singer didn't invent the personal vision in a movie. Many talented directors do.



He cared so much about the story he went right into STM and SII themes and leit motifs and took them one step further.

Other people have had a personal vision on his films, Nolanman, Donnerman, Burtonman, Del Toro-Boy, etc.



A superhero leaving Earth to find his place into universe. Classic soap opera premise.



*feels less of a man because of matt's obvious reaffirmation of his own masculinity affirming women liked SR as in that's why I didn't like it*



You just did.



It resembles Donner's incarnation. Second time.



And then took his own direction (the son) based on Donner movies themes. And this time at the end of SR things stayed the way they happened. No deux ex machina, no turning back time, no amnesia kisses so everything that just happened, didn't happen.



And that doesn't help your point that Singer's Superman didn't resemble any previous incarnation, in fact it contradicts it, so who cares.

unfortunately, singer failed to make us feel for superman. and that matters the most.

 

[Angeloz]

unfortunately, singer failed to make us feel for superman. and that matters the most.

I felt for Superman in the film speaking for myself. I've read others did too as well as those that didn't. So that assertion about the lack of caring is wrong.

Angeloz

 

[El Payaso]

unfortunately, singer failed to make us feel for superman. and that matters the most.

us = you, what do I care?

 

[mego joe]

I felt for Superman in the film speaking for myself. I've read others did too as well as those that didn't. So that assertion about the lack of caring is wrong.

Angeloz

I felt "Why is Superman such a jerk in his personal life?" I felt no empathy whatsoever for him b/c he caused all his own problems by acting irresponsibly. No empathy for that behavior whatsoever.

 

[El Payaso]

I felt "Why is Superman such a jerk in his personal life?" I felt no empathy whatsoever for him b/c he caused all his own problems by acting irresponsibly. No empathy for that behavior whatsoever.

You probably hate The Godfather and Scarface.

 

[Angeloz]

I felt "Why is Superman such a jerk in his personal life?" I felt no empathy whatsoever for him b/c he caused all his own problems by acting irresponsibly. No empathy for that behavior whatsoever.

I'll grant you he made a mistake not telling Lois he was going away. She forgave him (eventually) for it. I sympathised with him throughout the film. I guess we just differ on the issue. I can agree to disagree though we may end up discussing our differences later. We'll see.

Angeloz

 

[mego joe]

You probably hate The Godfather and Scarface.

Certainly your not comparing the character of Superman to Michael Coleone.

ACtually, I love the Godfather films, but they are not about the same types of characters that a Superman film should be about. SUperman is not a morally bankrupt character, Truth, Justice, the AMerican Way, remember?

Vito and Michael are criminals. They believe in killing as a way of doing business.

The one thing you do in the Godfather films is feels for Michael as he descends into his father's world of killing and revenge. Superman stands for none of that. Superman's journey shouldn't be a descent. He's Superman, he is a morally righteous character. He's not perfect, but he knows right from wrong and he stands up for what's right. Unfortunately, when you see a morally righteous character make mistakes that destroy his personal life you don't feel for that character because you know that the character already knows better. Additionally, Singer did not give plausible or believable backstory or motivations to explain why Superman did what he did. In the Godfather you understand on multiple levels why Michael does what he does, you feel for him b/c you see how it affects his marriage to Kay and their kids, and you know that Michael is a criminal, but he doesn't really know right from wrong b/c he's been raised in a mafia family. You feel for him, but you don't like him.

Never seen Scarface so I can't comment.

 

[mego joe]

I'll grant you he made a mistake not telling Lois he was going away. She forgave him (eventually) for it.

I don't understand why she didn't demand a reason for him not telling her. That to me is the real issue, not why he left, but Why he didn't tell tell. That is much more important.

I sympathised with him throughout the film. I guess we just differ on the issue. I can agree to disagree though we may end up discussing our differences later. We'll see.

Angeloz

Because he acted like a jerk and he knew it was the wrong thing to do and he did it anyway, I flet no sympathy for him. He deserved whatever he got. He deserves to not have Lois, he abandonned her emotionally by not being honest with her about leaving. He deserves to not raise his son, he didn't take his responsibility of being in a sexual relationship seriously enough to be honest with Lois.


I just felt nothing but sadness for the greater aspect of the character, not in the film but the character in general that he would be portrayed so poorly and out of charcter in his return to the big screen.

 

[El Payaso]

Certainly your not comparing the character of Superman to Michael Coleone.

Not at all, just trying to reach the symptoms of your apparent inability to relate to characters that are not morally high: "I felt no empathy whatsoever for him b/c he caused all his own problems by acting irresponsibly. No empathy for that behavior whatsoever." That was pretty absolute about a kind of behaviour.

ACtually, I love the Godfather films, but they are not about the same types of characters that a Superman film should be about. SUperman is not a morally bankrupt character, Truth, Justice, the AMerican Way, remember?

Truth Justice and All That Stuff.

Superman defends those ideals for his neverending fight against crime and maybe natural disasters. But his personal life is another thing. I mean, he can't defend Truth in his personal life when he lies about his identity practically 24/7.

Vito and Michael are criminals. They believe in killing as a way of doing business.

The one thing you do in the Godfather films is feels for Michael as he descends into his father's world of killing and revenge. Superman stands for none of that. Superman's journey shouldn't be a descent. He's Superman, he is a morally righteous character. He's not perfect, but he knows right from wrong and he stands up for what's right. Unfortunately, when you see a morally righteous character make mistakes that destroy his personal life you don't feel for that character because you know that the character already knows better. Additionally, Singer did not give plausible or believable backstory or motivations to explain why Superman did what he did. In the Godfather you understand on multiple levels why Michael does what he does, you feel for him b/c you see how it affects his marriage to Kay and their kids, and you know that Michael is a criminal, but he doesn't really know right from wrong b/c he's been raised in a mafia family. You feel for him, but you don't like him.

Still you see you can relate to "that kind of behaviour." Your gripe is not having a morally perfect Superman. Not the behaviour itself.

 

[El Payaso]

I don't understand why she didn't demand a reason for him not telling her.

Because she is in love/has the hots on Superman so once she saw he was back she was very indulgent with him due to that. Supes happens to revolve her hormones like crazy so she was more like wanting to slap his face and then kiss him.

That to me is the real issue, not why he left, but Why he didn't tell tell. That is much more important.

He got scared and acted cowardly. Superman scared? Superman a coward? A man who is able to stop tides and destroy meteors scared to tell a woman he's leaving? That's like a huge paradox for our hero. Which I think... it was intended.

Because he acted like a jerk and he knew it was the wrong thing to do and he did it anyway, I flet no sympathy for him. He deserved whatever he got.

I already addressed your gripes with not being able to relate to "that kind of behaviour."

But yeah, of course he deserved what he got. I think he deserved even worse. He made a huge mistake.

He deserves to not raise his son, he didn't take his responsibility of being in a sexual relationship seriously enough to be honest with Lois.

Then Lois doesn't deserve it either because she had this kid for five years and didn't even know who was the real father. Still, people who makes mistakes are entitled to correct them and having a second chance, that is, if God and you allow him.

I just felt nothing but sadness for the greater aspect of the character, not in the film but the character in general that he would be portrayed so poorly and out of charcter in his return to the big screen.

Opposite to you I was glad he was portrayed like a human being who makes mistakes and who has to face his errors, addind the third dimension to the mere icon.

 

[Angeloz]

I don't understand why she didn't demand a reason for him not telling her. That to me is the real issue, not why he left, but Why he didn't tell tell. That is much more important.

Maybe because she got the answer from Clark earlier on (the taxi scene).

Because he acted like a jerk and he knew it was the wrong thing to do and he did it anyway, I flet no sympathy for him. He deserved whatever he got. He deserves to not have Lois, he abandonned her emotionally by not being honest with her about leaving. He deserves to not raise his son, he didn't take his responsibility of being in a sexual relationship seriously enough to be honest with Lois.


I just felt nothing but sadness for the greater aspect of the character, not in the film but the character in general that he would be portrayed so poorly and out of charcter in his return to the big screen.

As he explained he was afraid he couldn't leave her when he needed to (to go to Krypton). I'm not saying it wasn't a mistake but he did pay for it a lot. By his trip to Krypton (with what he found) and what happened with Lois (the article and confrontation). Also as has been said he didn't know she was pregnant nor do we know if she did either. He probably never thought it could happen since he's an alien. And in the end he may not raise Jason. Though he may end up being in Jason's life. A possible sequel will tell.

I will say this that Jason did end up with two parents and has a father. I'm fine with that. Also he seems loved. As Clark was loved. Again we'll see 'cos films love disasters. Not to mention the broken family portrait as a possible metaphor.

Angeloz

 

[mego joe]

Not at all, just trying to reach the symptoms of your apparent inability to relate to characters that are not morally high: "I felt no empathy whatsoever for him b/c he caused all his own problems by acting irresponsibly. No empathy for that behavior whatsoever." That was pretty absolute about a kind of behaviour.

But see, that is the kind of character that Superman is. He is a 'morally high' character. SInger changed him and that is my gripe witht he film. THe type of character you are talking about can be interesting, but that is not who SUuperman is.

Truth Justice and All That Stuff.

My comics and S:TM still say American Way.

Superman defends those ideals for his neverending fight against crime and maybe natural disasters. But his personal life is another thing. I mean, he can't defend Truth in his personal life when he lies about his identity practically 24/7.

That's just it though. Comparing having a secret identity to standing for truth and justice is taking the purpose of having a secret id out of context.

ANd that's the thing, SUperman in his personal life does still stand for those ideals. Have you ever read a Superman comic? Of all the characters out there SUperman is the most straightforward of all to get, he really is that good a person through and through. Singer didn't relate to that and CHANGED it for SR, that is my and many other's gripe with the film.

Still you see you can relate to "that kind of behaviour." Your gripe is not having a morally perfect Superman. Not the behaviour itself.

Not morally perfect, morally consistent with the character's portrayal in previous media. His actions in SR are not consistent with previous portrayals in any medium.

 

[mego joe]

Maybe because she got the answer from Clark earlier on (the taxi scene).

Why would she accept Clark's explanation when she barely seems to notice Clark's existence? Why would this critical question to her life be answered by someone she hardly acknowledges? THat doens't make any sense to me.

As he explained he was afraid he couldn't leave her when he needed to (to go to Krypton).

When did he say this, I don't recall that in the movie itself? Even so, is that really a proper characterization of Superman? I think he has a stronger moral fiber and courage to face the tough choice and make it, he's not that emotionally weak is he?

I'm not saying it wasn't a mistake but he did pay for it a lot. By his trip to Krypton (with what he found) and what happened with Lois (the article and confrontation). Also as has been said he didn't know she was pregnant nor do we know if she did either. He probably never thought it could happen since he's an alien. And in the end he may not raise Jason. Though he may end up being in Jason's life. A possible sequel will tell.

I will say this that Jason did end up with two parents and has a father. I'm fine with that. Also he seems loved. As Clark was loved. Again we'll see 'cos films love disasters. Not to mention the broken family portrait as a possible metaphor.

Angeloz

Yeah, what the sequel will probably hold just doesn't interest me based on the set up from the first film.

 

[El Payaso]

But see, that is the kind of character that Superman is. He is a 'morally high' character. SInger changed him and that is my gripe witht he film. THe type of character you are talking about can be interesting, but that is not who SUuperman is.

That was my point. You can relate to "that kind of behaviour" but not with Superman. You see, you sounded like you can't stand a behaviour that's not on the top of moral highness. And as for interesting, yes it is.

That's just it though. Comparing having a secret identity to standing for truth and justice is taking the purpose of having a secret id out of context.

Comparing Truth and Justice as in fighting crime and personal life issues is as out of context as we'll see:

ANd that's the thing, SUperman in his personal life does still stand for those ideals.

So lying about his identity is... a healthy exception to Truth?

Have you ever read a Superman comic? Of all the characters out there SUperman is the most straightforward of all to get, he really is that good a person through and through. Singer didn't relate to that and CHANGED it for SR, that is my and many other's gripe with the film.

He is still a good person in SR. That hasn't changed. It's just that he can make mistakes specially when is about his feelings which, as you see, is a different field than bringing Justice to the needed one.

Not morally perfect, morally consistent with the character's portrayal in previous media. His actions in SR are not consistent with previous portrayals in any medium.

Yes it is. Superman chose to quit his mission for his personal life and feelings. Not to mention that when the menace was too big - Zod Non and Ursa - he let them die after they were de-powered and were no threat anymore.

 

[Angeloz]

Why would she accept Clark's explanation when she barely seems to notice Clark's existence? Why would this critical question to her life be answered by someone she hardly acknowledges? THat doens't make any sense to me.

There's so many possible ways to answer this. I acknowledge I don't know them all. First she asked and it might have made some kind of sense to her (his answer) although she said it didn't. Mainly though she brought it up with Superman about that possibly being the reason he left and he said maybe "Clark's" right. Also in discussions people have speculated that since she discusses Clark with Superman and Superman with Clark, she might subconsciously think they're the same person. But is in denial for whatever reason.

When did he say this, I don't recall that in the movie itself? Even so, is that really a proper characterization of Superman? I think he has a stronger moral fiber and courage to face the tough choice and make it, he's not that emotionally weak is he?

Unless you're a psychopath everyone can be emotionally weak. Or brought down. By the way he explained it as Clark in the taxi scene i.e. that he needed to go but thought she would stop him. At the time it was a tough choice to go and see Krypton. He just felt it was too tough to see Lois. He paid for it. And as Superman he acknowledged it (was too unbearable) on their flight together near the start long before he apologised for leaving.

Yeah, what the sequel will probably hold just doesn't interest me based on the set up from the first film.

I'm going to wait and see when it comes to the sequel. I hope it's as good as "Superman Returns" for me. Maybe for you it'll be a good film you might like.

Angeloz

 

[mego joe]

There's so many possible ways to answer this. I acknowledge I don't know them all. First she asked and it might have made some kind of sense to her (his answer) although she said it didn't. Mainly though she brought it up with Superman about that possibly being the reason he left and he said maybe "Clark's" right. Also in discussions people have speculated that since she discusses Clark with Superman and Superman with Clark, she might subconsciously think they're the same person. But is in denial for whatever reason.



Unless you're a psychopath everyone can be emotionally weak. Or brought down. By the way he explained it as Clark in the taxi scene i.e. that he needed to go but thought she would stop him. At the time it was a tough choice to go and see Krypton. He just felt it was too tough to see Lois. He paid for it. And as Superman he acknowledged it (was too unbearable) on their flight together near the start long before he apologised for leaving.



I'm going to wait and see when it comes to the sequel. I hope it's as good as "Superman Returns" for me. Maybe for you it'll be a good film you might like.

Angeloz

Honestly, if it continues any storylines form SR I won't even see it. SR killed any interest in another Superman movie from Bryan Singer and Co.

 

[afan]

He is still a good person in SR.

I'm being a bit simplistic here, but ..............He is not Goodman, he is Superman. "Super" doesn't just qualify his physical abilities, it also applies to his ethical behaviour.

 

[El Payaso]

I'm being a bit simplistic here, but ..............He is not Goodman, he is Superman. "Super" doesn't just qualify his physical abilities, it also applies to his ethical behaviour.

No it doesn't. Super is for his super-powers, other than that he's a man susceptible to make mistakes as everyone else. Lois called him Superman after experiencing his super-powers (being rescued from falling, lifting a helicopter and flying with him over the clouds.) At most she called him Super because she was totally seduced by him so he's a Super-seductive man. But he's not called Superman because he's Super-moral even when we know he fights for good and is incorruptible before evil.

 

[afan]

^ Respectfully El Pyaso, you are confused regarding the character of Superman. He is an individual of super-ethical ideals and behaviour.

 

[Angeloz]

Superman may be super but he's also a man. A good man but he has emotions. And he's not perfect. He chooses to use his gifts to help people. I love him for it.

Angeloz

 

[mego joe]

^ Respectfully El Pyaso, you are confused regarding the character of Superman.

That's what I was thinking. The characterization of Superman has always included his morality as part of his goodness, just as his determination and indominatable will have. The character's positive traits go way beyond his physical powers and abilities. That is where in my opinion Singer went his own way with the character and really lost those other essential elements.

 

[mego joe]

^ Respectfully El Pyaso, you are confused regarding the character of Superman.

That's what I was thinking. The characterization of Superman has always included his morality as part of his goodness, just as his determination and indominatable will have. The character's positive traits go way beyond his physical powers and abilities. That is where in my opinion Singer went his own way with the character and really lost those other essential elements.