Superman Returns Has anyone else here read 'Up, Up And Away?'

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I think this particular mistake is completely not in keeping with who Superman is. THere is no reason to think what you are supposing, especially when in the film he says it's too difficult for him, he is not talking about her her, he is talking about himself. Additionally, why would Lois not understand?

Lois has always been a stubborn and somewhat selfish character, especially in the Donner movies (she had the chance in Superman II to stop Superman from giving up his powers). I dont think she would accept that Superman wants to leave on the CHANCE he could find survivors. And she shows this in the later interview on the rooftop, he tells her why he left and she doesnt understand or accept it.

Yet if he believes in 'truth and justice' it would make sense that the truth would work best. Lying or hiding the truth seems like it would be wrong if he wants to save his relationship.

He didnt lie or hide the truth IMO, he just told her at the wrong time. When he returned.

What you are suggesting is not in the movie. You are making up a context that is not in the film.

I dont think i am making anything up at all, and i dont see how you can make that claim when you have seen the movie once, over a year ago, and i have seen it over 50 times, the most recent time being last week.

I am just reading deeper into what we are presented with in the movie. Other people have also said this, and you have discussed it with plenty of them, so i cant be making it up.

Extras on the DVD show that it was 5 years into his career. The Donner films are vague and thematic history, not exact historical chronicles of the events of his life.

Dont remember this being mentioned on the DVD at all, and i thought you hadnt watched it on DVD?

It may be the irony of the story, but it doesn't mean that this type of irony is appropriate for Superman.

I dont see why it isnt.

Considering the circumstances of Jason's conception and first 4 years of life, Superman isn't going to get the chance.

I dont see how that claim can be mae when we are only seeing the beginning of their relationship.

Nope. Superman and Lois have never had sex in the comics w/o Lois knowing his dual identity, nor did it happen in the previous Superman movies.

They have dated in the past with Lois knowing about the dual identity, this is just an update of that situation.

 

[mego joe]

Lois has always been a stubborn and somewhat selfish character, especially in the Donner movies (she had the chance in Superman II to stop Superman from giving up his powers). I dont think she would accept that Superman wants to leave on the CHANCE he could find survivors.

I think that if she really loves him she would understand, that's just a difference of opinion. IMO, her characterization is wrong as well if that was his reasoning, that she was so selfish that she wouldn't understand. Again, an example of the immature and high school approach to their relationship.

And she shows this in the later interview on the rooftop, he tells her why he left and she doesnt understand or accept it.

Perhaps b/c his reason for not telling her was so lame, and not b/c he left.

He didnt lie or hide the truth IMO, he just told her at the wrong time. When he returned.

He didn't respect her as a person enough to tell her the truth. He wasn't concerned with her feelings, she has a right to know where he's going to be if they are in a sexual relationship, it's more about Justice than Truth.

I dont think i am making anything up at all, and i dont see how you can make that claim when you have seen the movie once, over a year ago, and i have seen it over 50 times, the most recent time being last week.

THere just isn't enough back story in the film to say that it is intended from the film. You are creating something that doesn't have any support from the movie. If there is evidence to support this please share. REmember, stuff from the movie.

I am just reading deeper into what we are presented with in the movie. Other people have also said this, and you have discussed it with plenty of them, so i cant be making it up.

Not necessarily. Because you've argued with plenty of people who say that Superman was out of character in the film, so I can't be wrong about that either then. Whether or not it is there it is still out of character for SUperman to shaft Lois the way he did, no matter what.

Still, what is your evidence for what you are saying about it being his first love and all so he's stupid about love.

Dont remember this being mentioned on the DVD at all, and i thought you hadnt watched it on DVD?

I haven't. THe details of the extras have been posted more than once on this site. It's in the NEwpaper headlines portion I believe, whatever that is.

I dont see why it isnt.

Because that's just not what a SUperman story is about. He isn't that hung up on his heritage that he HAS to have another KRyptonian around to feel like he's not an outcast. It focusses too much on his alien heritage and not enough on his human upbrining. It's just the wrong approach for a character who was raised his whole life as a human.

I dont see how that claim can be mae when we are only seeing the beginning of their relationship.

I'm basing my opinion on real world events of similar situations. Also, it fits the bitter sweet ending presented in the film. THe end leaves us with the same status quo as always. SUperman can't be with Lois, and he can't have a normal life.

They have dated in the past with Lois knowing about the dual identity, this is just an update of that situation.

By adding in the sexual aspect it is no longer the casual dating of the past. THe sex necessarily makes it serious. IF he's the 'same' SUperman from the Donner films, he wouldn't be having sex with Lois unless she knew his dual identity. That's pretty clear.

It is definitely updating, but it is updating to a point that takes SUperman out of character. It would be like updating Batman to being a cold-blooded killer. It is lowering SUperman's moral standard and it goes against his belief in the values of Truth and Justice and it is a purely selfish act.

To believe that is part of a casual relationship is only fooling one's self. The responsibilities and consequences of being in a sexual realationship necessarily make it serious. If one enters into a sexual relationship casually, it is irresponsible, selfish and immature.

 

[Angeloz]

Sorry double post.

Angeloz

 

[Angeloz]

Well Superman should be with Batman.

Also mego joe is right about the DVD extras. There is more than one headline that had him appearing in 1996. Also he disappeared around 2000 ("Where Has He Gone?") and reappeared in 2006. The latter two facts were in the film where the first wasn't.

Angeloz

 

[mego joe]

Dont remember this being mentioned on the DVD at all, and i thought you hadnt watched it on DVD?

Courtesy of Angeloz:

Some of the headlines and the dates are:

- "It Flies! Flying Man Soars Over Metropolis"
Wednesday, June 12th 1996

- "Caped Wonder Stuns City"
Monday, June 17th 1996

- "I Spent The Night With Superman"
Wednesday, June 19th 1996

- "Superman Foils Luthor"
Wednesday, May 14th 1997

- "Astronomers Discover Distant Planet"

- "Is It Krypton?"
Monday, August 16th 2000

-"Where Has He Gone?"
Friday, March 3rd 2000 (this is in the film and I know the above doesn't make sense unless they took awhile to work it out)

- "Is He Coming Back?"
Wednesday, November 15th 2000

- "Will He Ever Return?"
Friday, June 15th 2001

- "The Man Of Steel Is Back!"
Thursday, September 28th 2006 (in the film)

That's just some of them. I wanted to be accurate.

Angeloz

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I think that if she really loves him she would understand, that's just a difference of opinion. IMO, her characterization is wrong as well if that was his reasoning, that she was so selfish that she wouldn't understand. Again, an example of the immature and high school approach to their relationship.

I dont think that is the sole reason he didnt tell her, i just think it was a factor.

Perhaps b/c his reason for not telling her was so lame, and not b/c he left.

I dont see how it was a lame excuse, wanting to see if your home planet is still there when you thought for your whole it wasnt isnt lame in any shape or form to me.

He didn't respect her as a person enough to tell her the truth. He wasn't concerned with her feelings, she has a right to know where he's going to be if they are in a sexual relationship, it's more about Justice than Truth.

Again, i dont think respect comes into it, naivity, immaturity (relationships wise) and inexperience are the sole reasons for him not saying goodbye IMO.

THere just isn't enough back story in the film to say that it is intended from the film. You are creating something that doesn't have any support from the movie. If there is evidence to support this please share. REmember, stuff from the movie.

And i am talking about the movie, again you need to watch it more than once to get my point, it all comes down to facial expressions. Prime example being when Lois and Clark are speaking outside the planet on his first day back, and she asks him about Superman not saying goodbye, his face in that scene (watch specifically as she turns her back and walks away from him) tells me that this is point were he know he royaly ****ed up.

Not necessarily. Because you've argued with plenty of people who say that Superman was out of character in the film, so I can't be wrong about that either then. Whether or not it is there it is still out of character for SUperman to shaft Lois the way he did, no matter what.

True, but what i am saying still stands, if other people have noticed it, how can i be making it up?

Still, what is your evidence for what you are saying about it being his first love and all so he's stupid about love.

Various T.V interviews with both Brandon and Kate around the time of release.

I haven't. THe details of the extras have been posted more than once on this site. It's in the NEwpaper headlines portion I believe, whatever that is.

Saw them below, and yes you were right, but honestly, we dont know how much he has had to deal with in those 5 years, not a lot it seems in both his personal and public life.

Because that's just not what a SUperman story is about. He isn't that hung up on his heritage that he HAS to have another KRyptonian around to feel like he's not an outcast. It focusses too much on his alien heritage and not enough on his human upbrining. It's just the wrong approach for a character who was raised his whole life as a human.

So Superman has never felt lonely or the urge to be with others like him in the comics? Come on MJ, we both know this isnt true.

I'm basing my opinion on real world events of similar situations. Also, it fits the bitter sweet ending presented in the film. THe end leaves us with the same status quo as always. SUperman can't be with Lois, and he can't have a normal life.

I dont see the ending as bitter sweet, Superman seems completely happy at the end and i felt it with him.

By adding in the sexual aspect it is no longer the casual dating of the past. THe sex necessarily makes it serious. IF he's the 'same' SUperman from the Donner films, he wouldn't be having sex with Lois unless she knew his dual identity. That's pretty clear.

Possibly, but in the Donner films, pryor to him being found out by Lois, he did seek a relationship with her as Superman, in fact, at one point, he goes to kiss her before Jimmy shows up.

It is definitely updating, but it is updating to a point that takes SUperman out of character. It would be like updating Batman to being a cold-blooded killer. It is lowering SUperman's moral standard and it goes against his belief in the values of Truth and Justice and it is a purely selfish act.

Batman was portrayed as a cold-blooded killer in the Burton movies, yet both are loved, changing (or in my eyes what they did with SR updating) aspects of a character doesnt mean you lose the whole character.

To believe that is part of a casual relationship is only fooling one's self. The responsibilities and consequences of being in a sexual realationship necessarily make it serious. If one enters into a sexual relationship casually, it is irresponsible, selfish and immature.

Then 85% of people in the world are irresponsible, selfish and immature.

 

[mego joe]

I dont think that is the sole reason he didnt tell her, i just think it was a factor.

Still, they all add up to selfish and immature relationship.

I dont see how it was a lame excuse, wanting to see if your home planet is still there when you thought for your whole it wasnt isnt lame in any shape or form to me.

The excuse is the whole 'it was too difficult etc...'

Again, i dont think respect comes into it, naivity, immaturity (relationships wise) and inexperience are the sole reasons for him not saying goodbye IMO.

Well, naivete, and inexperience aren't really addressed. Respect is common sense.

And i am talking about the movie, again you need to watch it more than once to get my point, it all comes down to facial expressions. Prime example being when Lois and Clark are speaking outside the planet on his first day back, and she asks him about Superman not saying goodbye, his face in that scene (watch specifically as she turns her back and walks away from him) tells me that this is point were he know he royaly ****ed up.

I've lost track of what we're discussing on the above!

True, but what i am saying still stands, if other people have noticed it, how can i be making it up?

Because both groups are interpretting things differently, and looking for evidence that is not there.

Various T.V interviews with both Brandon and Kate around the time of release.

Well, I can't say I've seen any of those. It would seem that if that was significant to the story it would have been included instead of omitted.

Saw them below, and yes you were right, but honestly, we dont know how much he has had to deal with in those 5 years, not a lot it seems in both his personal and public life.

Then you can't really trust anything based on 'vague history' and nothing can really be known w/o specific details and that just goes against the purpose of the 'vague history' approach.

So Superman has never felt lonely or the urge to be with others like him in the comics? Come on MJ, we both know this isnt true.

But in the context of his career it is something he works through as a young man and is no longer a problem during his prime years as SUperman. It is an element of growing up and maturing. A person 27/28 would be beyond that point in his life, and the same would go for SUperman.

I dont see the ending as bitter sweet, Superman seems completely happy at the end and i felt it with him.

Why would he be happy that he is unable to raise his own son as his own and that he's pointlessly complicated his son's life.

Possibly, but in the Donner films, pryor to him being found out by Lois, he did seek a relationship with her as Superman, in fact, at one point, he goes to kiss her before Jimmy shows up.

But it is never followed through on until Lois knows his dual identity.

Batman was portrayed as a cold-blooded killer in the Burton movies, yet both are loved, changing (or in my eyes what they did with SR updating) aspects of a character doesnt mean you lose the whole character.

It depends on what was changed and how much it affects the story. I wouldn't say Batman was portrayed as a cold blooded killer. Not as careful as his comic counterpart and not really moved by the deaths of the bad guys, but he was a cold-blooded killer or murderer. Additionally, it has no real effect on the story, whereas the changes to SUperman's character are integral to the story told in SR.

Then 85% of people in the world are irresponsible, selfish and immature.

Exactly. And perhaps the greatest contributor to the social problems we face in the world today. And I think the number is a lot lower than 85%.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Still, they all add up to selfish and immature relationship.

From what i have gathered the relationship WAS immature, from both sides.

The excuse is the whole 'it was too difficult etc...'

And there are good and understandable reasons why it was so difficult.

Well, naivete, and inexperience aren't really addressed. Respect is common sense.

I think they are addressed subtly, Superman coming back and just expecting Lois to fall into his arms was down to both naivity and inexperience IMO.

I've lost track of what we're discussing on the above!

Ha ha, i'm not surprised!

Because both groups are interpretting things differently, and looking for evidence that is not there.

Like all people will interpret things differently, which is why there are people who both love and hate SR.

Well, I can't say I've seen any of those. It would seem that if that was significant to the story it would have been included instead of omitted.

It was mentioned in most interviews around the time of release.

Then you can't really trust anything based on 'vague history' and nothing can really be known w/o specific details and that just goes against the purpose of the 'vague history' approach.

I dont see how it does, there is a reason the word vague is used, IMO it was Singers idea that people fill in the blanks themselves.

But in the context of his career it is something he works through as a young man and is no longer a problem during his prime years as SUperman. It is an element of growing up and maturing. A person 27/28 would be beyond that point in his life, and the same would go for SUperman.

Not necessarily, Superman has to do a lot more maturing and growing up than the rest of us considering the power he has at his fingertips, its no great stretch it would take him a little longer to grow-up and mature than usual.

Why would he be happy that he is unable to raise his own son as his own and that he's pointlessly complicated his son's life.

He will be happy he is not alone anymore, that he has a connection to humanity and that the son has become the father. And IMO, he will get to raise Jason for the rest of his life.

But it is never followed through on until Lois knows his dual identity.

But if Jimmy hadnt shown up he WOULD have kissed her, this cant be denied.

It depends on what was changed and how much it affects the story. I wouldn't say Batman was portrayed as a cold blooded killer. Not as careful as his comic counterpart and not really moved by the deaths of the bad guys, but he was a cold-blooded killer or murderer. Additionally, it has no real effect on the story, whereas the changes to SUperman's character are integral to the story told in SR.

Batman wasnt portrayed as a cold-blooded killer? So strapping a bomb to a guy isnt killing in cold blood? Throwing Catwoman off a roof isnt killing in cold blood? These things are FAR more integral than what Superman does IMO.

Exactly. And perhaps the greatest contributor to the social problems we face in the world today. And I think the number is a lot lower than 85%.

Not were i come from, i know women who sleep with 3 different guys a month, its just the world we live in today my friend.