Superman Returns Singer mentioned that this would vaguely tie in with Smallville, how so???

[Kane]

But I dont think he was neglegent like Peter was when he let that dude go.It's like I said, Superheroes borrow from each other in updating andcreating origins, much like any other genre its almost part of the basic rules of orgins (Tragedy, Accident, outcast= seeds of origin), as long as the use of the event is put in a way that shows a legitimate and more believeable way to the character's origin it works and it clearly relates to them. So Pa Kent's death as a result of a deal works. Im the end there's a lot of groundwork to go on like Jor-El explaining why the path and consequences are like this but at this point laying the ground over 6 seasons plus is working well.

Well SV had do whatever it wants and really change anything (as its proven). Its just not my preference to see Clark and Jorel directly responsible for Jonathan's demise and then to see John return in ghost form...

I thought Clark was pretty neglegent though when he put the red K ring on (considering he knew what it does to him). Peter didnt realize the consequences when he let the dude go.

 

[Super_Ludacris]

That's ok though, it freshens Superman mythos cause let's keep it real: dude is like the Hulk Hogan of comics and superheroes. Legendary and original and well known but pretty boring and vauge compared to his peers. So when he's reinvented (and dont kid yourself all heroes need or have had that for the better) it brings intrest in his legend.

 

[Kane]

Depends on how its reinvented though and how the changes are executed. It has been sloppy on SV, especially in this case...but I have nothing against reinvention if done correctly.

I think this movie will reinvent Superman's character too, make him more interesting given the fact everything in his life falls apart here and he becomes isolated.

I really want him to end up alone at the end of the film akin to a John Ford classic western where it ends with him flying up into the skies leaving the world and Lois behind him.

 

[Super_Ludacris]

Only thing the writers have been sloppy in is placement and balancing of the characters, but when it comes to CLark himself they've mastered his reinvention fine.

A John Ford Western? Man **** that corny **** those Westerns in the 50's were corny. Thank God Sergio Leonne reinvented that genre

 

[Kane]

Only thing the writers have been sloppy in is placement and balancing of the characters, but when it comes to CLark himself they've mastered his reinvention fine.

I still say they write him off as a major tool, like in this sex slave episode for example.

A John Ford Western? Man **** that corny **** those Westerns in the 50's were corny. Thank God Sergio Leonne reinvented that genre

Are you nuts? "The Searchers" was one of the best of them ever made. It was a timeless masterpiece

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0049730/

 

[Super_Ludacris]

I stuidied the western genre for Media Stuides and all those films in the 50's served there purpose but they were boderline corny **** looking back now. I love how right wingers whine about Hollywood now like they werent running things in the 50's ( High Noon, Destiny Rides Again, any John Wayne movie).

That's why I love Leonne's films much more. More realsitc, More Grimy, shot down the glamourisation, more coloured people and hell he gave us Clint Eastwood. The Leonne trilogy trumps anything made by John Ford. By the 60's and 70's those movies were irrelevant. Kinda like how Burtons films (Classics I'm sure) and Reeve's Superman pale in comparison to some of the gems we get now in the Comic Book genre (X-Men, Sin City, BB, Spidey, V)

 

[Kane]

Nevertheless its a matter of prespective. I didnt think it was corny at all, it was a reflection of its time and the fact of the matter is, those films influenced so many other films in the industry as well. They were pretty influential and important.

 

[The Sage]

It's nice to see some people actually *get* it around here.

Superman cares about all people, but one of his greatest lessons in life is that he can't save everybody, as much as he might try. But he's also bullheaded. So that lesson doesn't always sink in. He will forever TRY to save EVERYBODY. It's what makes him Superman, among other things.

The issue here is that Superman may try to save everybody, but he wouldn't put someone's life like that at risk. He's not gonna intentionally cause the trama then try to stop it. That's playing with people's lives. I don't think Superman would do that.

 

[NateGray]

While it's true that every post you make is your opinion, no opinions are created equal. If you don't have any evidence or facts to back up your opinion, then it's just you blowing hot air. We don't know what the facts are surrounding Singer's story. You have your own conclusions but no factual evidence to back it up since none of us have seen the movie yet.

However, the people who talk about Smallville do have factual evidence behind them. They can state specific instances where characters have been changed from their comics counterparts. What can you offer? Conjecture and speculation, neither of which hold any water. You're free to have an opinion, as is everyone else. But if you're going to an argument armed with just your opinion and no evidence to support it? It's like walking into battle with a gun without any bullets.

See and I did mention one thing that is fact in SR that is a major liberty that Singer took that bothers me.
The fact Lois has a child (not debating whose child it is) is as big a liberty IMO and is as bad as anything SV has done.
Thats just one, The leaving earth for 6+ years exactly when did superman do that in the comic's? I believe that is another liberty he took that I am not to fond of.
The love triangle while done in the comic's in a couple issues is not exactly a reason I want to see SR either, I also mentioned that.

And on the superman board walking into a battle without any bullets is par to the course since I have the minority opinion.

 

[Kane]

My theory is the 6 year Journey replaces the 12 year Fortress training with Jorel (from the original origins). The crystal ship looks like it was developed within the FOS and looks too big to be the ship that Clark landed in as a baby.

Clark did return to krypton on several occasions in the comics but I suppose the 6 year part makes the distance more realistic given it took him about 2-3 years to arrive on Earth from Krypton after the explosion as a baby.

 

[NateGray]

The issue here is that Superman may try to save everybody, but he wouldn't put someone's life like that at risk. He's not gonna intentionally cause the trama then try to stop it. That's playing with people's lives. I don't think Superman would do that.

Ahh see but if you are talking about SV that is one of the reasons I like the show.
The fact Clark makes mistakes and learns from them shows to me anyways the building of the superman character he is destined to become.
That and the moral lessons he learns.
I agree there are good SV's and some so so ones but even the soso ones tend to have 10 minutes of excellent character building in them as a saving grace for the 90210 type some of the plots are or the overused krytponite posioning superpowered people ones.

 

[The Sage]

See and I did mention one thing that is fact in SR that is a major liberty that Singer took that bothers me.
The fact Lois has a child (not debating whose child it is) is as big a liberty IMO and is as bad as anything SV has done.
Thats just one, The leaving earth for 6+ years exactly when did superman do that in the comic's? I believe that is another liberty he took that I am not to fond of.
The love triangle while done in the comic's in a couple issues is not exactly a reason I want to see SR either, I also mentioned that.

Superman went into a ten year exile in the Kingdom Come graphic novel, and he also has left Earth to explore the remains of Krypton. I also recall a story where he went into exile from Earth out of guilt.

 

[The Sage]

Ahh see but if you are talking about SV that is one of the reasons I like the show.
The fact Clark makes mistakes and learns from them shows to me anyways the building of the superman character he is destined to become.
That and the moral lessons he learns.
I agree there are good SV's and some so so ones but even the soso ones tend to have 10 minutes of excellent character building in them as a saving grace for the 90210 type some of the plots are or the overused krytponite posioning superpowered people ones.

Making mistakes is one thing. Making mistakes that occur from playing with people's lives is another. I don't think the Clark on Smallville would have done that. If the guy wouldn't ask for someone's life to be exchange for his own, then why would he exchange one innocent life for another like he did? I think the main mistake that he made and should have been it is him not keeping his word to Jor-El to return to him in the season premiere.

 

[Kane]

He even left Earth in the DCAU to the remains of Krypton. "Little Girl Lost" shows him piloting a spaceship on a journey to Krypton only to find nothing but death where the planet once was.

 

[NateGray]

Superman went into a ten year exile in the Kingdom Come graphic novel, and he is also has left Earth to explore the remains of Krypton. I also recall a story where he went into exile from Earth out of guilt.

Well I stand corrected

In the words of the immortal Johnny Carson
I did not know that.....

I never read the graphic novel kingdon come, I do recall the exile one from awhile back but did not think it was for very long.

 

[NateGray]

Making mistakes is one thing. Making mistakes that occur from playing with people's lives is another. I don't think the Clark on Smallville would have done that. If the guy wouldn't ask for someone's life to be exchange for his own, then why would he exchange one innocent life for another like he did? I think the main mistake that he made and should have been it is him not keeping his word to Jor-El to return to him in the season premiere.

Just to make sure we are on the same page you are talking about the 100th episode?

 

[The Sage]

Just to make sure we are on the same page you are talking about the 100th episode?

Yeah, but I'm referencing the first and third episodes of this season as well.

 

[NateGray]

Yeah, but I'm referencing the first and third episodes of this season as well.

Cool then yeh I agree with most of what you are saying some of the SV epsiodes bother me as well with the liberties they take.
I tend to write them off because I feel as a whole the show is pretty well done.
I also have a much higher tolerance for something done on a TV show vs a movie but thats just me I want the movie's to be just that much better than a TV show.

 

[Kane]

And hopefully it will be.

 

[The Sage]

Cool then yeh I agree with most of what you are saying some of the SV epsiodes bother me as well with the liberties they take.
I tend to write them off because I feel as a whole the show is pretty well done.
I also have a much higher tolerance for something done on a TV show vs a movie but thats just me I want the movie's to be just that much better than a TV show.

I agree with that. up:

 

[Eros]

all i know is when in smallville when Jor-el told clark he can't reverse time and, "we are not gods". Then Jor-el gave him that "time travelling" crystal seconds later i turned off the tv to laugh. After the time travel bit i lost some respect for the sense of this show. If Kryptonians have time travel crystals why could they not see their planet demise? why did they even die at all, with all that magic-like technology they seem to have and all.

 

[SuperDaniel]

Anyway, i think this 100 episode ruined everything for me. So badly written. And now, Lana and Luthor are going to have a romantic relationship. Can it get any worser?

 

[LostSon88]

all i know is when in smallville when Jor-el told clark he can't reverse time and, "we are not gods". Then Jor-el gave him that "time travelling" crystal seconds later i turned off the tv to laugh. After the time travel bit i lost some respect for the sense of this show. If Kryptonians have time travel crystals why could they not see their planet demise? why did they even die at all, with all that magic-like technology they seem to have and all.

As exemplified from the show, just because you change one fate does not mean that the enivitable will not happen. Just as Jor-El mentioned, FATE WILL FIND A BALANCE.

Maybe the reason why they never used it on Krypton is out of fear that by tampering with time and destiny, something far worse may come of it...which is what Jor-El was trying to emphasize to Clark.

Was he wrong? :sarcasm:

 

[SuperDaniel]

Clark definetely wasn`t very Supermanish when he killed Jonathan...Anyway, the real Superman is comming back in June...

 

[LostSon88]

He didn't. But lets not play that game again.