AVEITWITHJAMON said:
Well this is the fault of Superman II not SR, they slept together in SII not SR so how can you say Superman was out of character in SR for that?
I have alway loathed that part of SII. But, that message in that film is that it was not the right thing to do, hence the amnesia kiss and his promise to the PResident that he would neve leave again. HE has learned from his mistake. Singer came up with the kid idea implying that there was no sort of contraceptive used. In my mind SInger took the absolute hardest part of SII to digest and based his whole movie around it, as well as ignoring the promise he made to the President which he promptly breaks for SR to take place. I know that SI and SII are supposed to be a vague history for SR and maybe not canon, but Singer does nothing to explain what actually happened and what did not happen to make sense of everything within the context of the characters. In my opinion it is unclear if the SR story includes the depowering before sex or not. Again, in my mind, bad film making. You've got to be clear about the context of Superman and Lois's realationship before he leaves to understand the characters motivations.
Exactly, he knows how she feels so he knows what her reaction will be when he tells her he has to leave for several years, just as in SR, she wouldnt understand, and that would just cause more problems.
Why don't you think Lois would understand? If she really loves him and he really loves her, then honesty is always best, b/c by not telling her what was going on she ends up hating him. How can not telling be better than being truthful and honest about his leaving. He's not psychic, he can't read her mind to know what she will say, he may have an idea, but that's not what he said. He said he didn't tell her because HE did't want to get hurt, not that he did not want to hurt Lois. You don't protect other people by lying or hididng the truth from them, b/c when they find out the truth and that you lied the damage is tenfold.
Superman has just nearly died, TWICE, AND found out he has a son AND is not alone on earth anymore. Do you really think the first thing on his and Lois' mind is a talk?
If I found out I had a kid I didn't know about, then nothing, not even death's door would keep me from finding out about him and talk to the mother.
I cant put myself in his position, because i dont have superpowers. Yes it was ethically wrong, but being a peeping tom would be looking through Lois's clothes to see her naked he didnt do that. He listened to a conversation for 30 seconds to see if he still had a place in Lois's life, once he knew he didnt, he flew away.
Super powers are beside the point. It was ethically wrong. With power comes responsibility.
As Superman he doesnt have any friends, and Ma Kent lives miles away and doesnt know Lois, so he cant really talk to her, especially when he knows Lex is on the loose in Metropolis.
Thank you for pointing out one of the major flaws of the films, Superman is supposed to have friends. HE's not a social leper, he's Superman, everyone wants to be his friend. WHy can't can't he fly home to Smallville for an evening to talk to Ma? He's got time to pound beers with Jimmy? He's got time to investigate the power outage thing? Using super speed to get to home and talk to Ma would have been a great scene, very remeniscent of the comics. He often goes home to get his parents views on problems he faces. IT doesn't matte if Ma knows Lois or not, she can still advise him on how a woman would like to be treated, honestly with respect, etc...
I'm sure he wasnt the only person who had evidence on Lex, and Clark even mentioned that Superman was pissed off that they let Lex go juse because he wasnt there, he obviously thought they had enough evidence on Lex.
While you man be correct about others having evidence on LEx, it seems that SUperman would have the most reliable and credible evidence that could put Lex away for a long, long time.
Well yeah i agree here, but as i mentioned before he's never been in love before, and so doesnt know how to react to Lois's anger and frustration towards him. Also, he went there to explain a few things to her, like why he left, and how its not easy being him and that she was wrong to write the article.
He didn't just fall off the turnip truck, he over 30 years old according to the movies. He's been around and experienced life for a while. He's got to have some common sense when dealing with people and anger. He didn't grow up in a bubble. He recalls his youth and the anger he felt at not being able to use his super powers as Clark. He understands people better than that, he knows anger and frustration.
Which is part of his development as a character, becoming a mature adult. and i dont think he was immature in the movie at all. Immature would have been going to save Lois instead of the people in Metropolis, or constantly giving Richard a hard time just because he is going out with Lois. Or when Lois goes to kiss him and stops, immature would have been kissing her anyway instead of stopping himself.
He may have exhibited maturity in rescuing Richard, but his othe actions as I've stated , especially in his dealing with Lois come off like an immature teenager. His irreseponsible behavior are also sings of immaturity.
Superman wasnt told it was his son until the end of the movie, and after all he had gone through, i doubt any of that **** was on his or Lois's mind, as i said before.
Becoming a parent for the first time has a lot of impact, I think SInger missed the opportunity here to really give such an important event the importance it deserves.
Well then how come the Donner movies get a free pass from loads of people in here and SR doesnt when they both have the same problems?
If you look carefully in these threads there are many points that point out flaws in the DOnner movies. We are not discussing the Donner films in this thread so their inclusion is somewhat out of place. I'm sure if you started a DOnner film thread in the other forum you would get tons of response on what people liked, didn't like and what they felt needed to be changed and done better.
Singer had the opportunity to make ANY Superman movie he wanted. He chose to attach himself to the Donner films. He chose what aspects he wanted to use as inspiration. SR is his baby.
The Donner films, while suffereing from some of the same problems use the controversial issues as smaller aspects of the story, not the main parts of the movie. Additionally, Superman learns something crucial through his mistakes. The SR Superman doesn't seem to learn any lessons, at least not that is shown.
If you eliminate the whole Jason is SUperman's son aspect you've got a movie that fits much better into the SUperman mythos. If you just have him tell Lois why he is leaving, the whole movie becomes better, b/c the story then fits in bette with the SUperman character. You don't need to change who SUperman is to tell this basic story. That is however what Singer felt he needed to do.
I answered this in my post above, but i think its clear we will never agree on these subjects we are debating.
I wold agree, but I enjoy discussing the film and the character. I am also seeking to understand your viewpoint and where it comes from. I think a lot of perceptions about films and charactes come from one's personal definition of responsibilty, maturity and their own personal morality.
BTW, I hope you decide to pick up some comics, the current SUperman and Action arc by Kurt Busiek are both really great.
t:
