Superman Returns SR in TIME mag's Summer Preview

[Whack Arnolds]

That's probably one of the things from the past that'll be ignored.

See how that can get confusing, and entirely corny? Selective amnesia of the backstory? I mean its called "Superman Returns"...so there has to be a back story... Where do future sequels to this take place? Before the Richard Prior Superman movies? It's stupid. "Let's only use selective parts from prior movies as explanations for things." I'm personally excited for the movie, but I think its too complicated.

 

[ultimatefan]

No, it isn't... Because this is the same guy that flew around the worl so fast that he reversed the earth's rotation...thus going back in time????? If he could do that, why didn't he just keep going back in time to save his father and speed him to a hospital to counter act his father's heart attack? That is just one of the reasons, why that single act makes the og Superman movies so incredibly sh1tty. And why many don't like the character.

It was implied that Supes still didn´t fly when he was young, and he still wasn´t sure what he was capable of. Even after becoming Superman, he wasn´t entirely sure how fast he could fly. I don´t like the turning back in time scene either, but the fact that he could´t save his father was a good character insight.

 

[explode7]

yep it is

 

[Fatboy Roberts]

You're thinking way too hard, is why. Selective amnesia is EASY for an audience when they're not as hardcore fanboy as we are. Not everyone has these movies memorized like we do, and the few that do care enough to read around in mags and on the internet to have it explained so we go in there knowing what to pick apart and what not to.

It's pretty cake, actually.

 

[ultimatefan]

That's probably one of the things from the past that'll be ignored. Besides, that's no goofier than Ra's Al Ghul wanting to destroy Gotham for a catastrophe that he himself perpetuated.

Actually, he implied that Gotham was already in the course of self-destruction when he and the league acted, even the first time. The league acts "when a civilization reaches the peak of its decadence". Ra´s believes in saving a decaying society by destroying it for good and building something else in its place. It´s a distorted view, but that´s why he´s the bad guy.

 

[Showtime]

You're thinking way too hard, is why. Selective amnesia is EASY for an audience when they're not as hardcore fanboy as we are. Not everyone has these movies memorized like we do, and the few that do care enough to read around in mags and on the internet to have it explained so we go in there knowing what to pick apart and what not to.

It's pretty cake, actually.

I agree. I don't think any of the "Average Joe" movie goers are going to be pissed off because they didn't explain why Gus Gorman wasn't still working as a computer analyst at the coal factory.

 

[Oldguy]

the guy's obviously not a fan of Superman... I stopped when I read "he's not dark and troubled like Batman and Wolverine".

not every superhero has to be "dark and troubled", jackass...

They do, if they want to pack the seats with the MTV crowd.

 

[The Sage]

See how that can get confusing, and entirely corny? Selective amnesia of the backstory? I mean its called "Superman Returns"...so there has to be a back story... Where do future sequels to this take place? Before the Richard Prior Superman movies? It's stupid. "Let's only use selective parts from prior movies as explanations for things." I'm personally excited for the movie, but I think its too complicated.

Hardly. The James Bond movies aren't exactly in direct continuity with each other, or else they all would be set in the 60s, wouldn't they?

They're probably gonna give a backstory with what they're taking from the past and including it in the movie.

 

[The Sage]

They do, if they want to pack the seats with the MTV crowd.

Spider-Man, you speak of?

 

[The Sage]

Actually, he implied that Gotham was already in the course of self-destruction when he and the league acted, even the first time. The league acts "when a civilization reaches the peak of its decadence". Ra´s believes in saving a decaying society by destroying it for good and building something else in its place. It´s a distorted view, but that´s why he´s the bad guy.

Yeah, but even some people in the audience that was crazy. I easily accepted it though.

 

[Whack Arnolds]

I didn't say they would be 'pissed off'....I said they may be confused. Because some WILL remember the previous movies, and not know whether ot not all said events are being counted or just a few... etc. It's messy.

 

[ultimatefan]

The audience didn´t have a problem with accepting Batman Begins as the "first" Batman movie even after four movies had been made, they certainly won´t have a problem with the vague history concept.

 

[Whack Arnolds]

It was implied that Supes still didn´t fly when he was young, and he still wasn´t sure what he was capable of. Even after becoming Superman, he wasn´t entirely sure how fast he could fly. I don´t like the turning back in time scene either, but the fact that he could´t save his father was a good character insight.

I'm not disagreeing, I am actually saying it is GREAT character insight....but it is then all thrown out the window when he reverses time.

 

[ultimatefan]

I didn't say they would be 'pissed off'....I said they may be confused. Because some WILL remember the previous movies, and not know whether ot not all said events are being counted or just a few... etc. It's messy.

As long as the movie makes sense in its own internal logic, that won´t be a problem. Most people won´t remember the past movies in such rich detail. They´re from over twenty-five years ago.

 

[Oldguy]

Another clueless person who thinks that a character has to be an Agnsty teen or a badass anti hero to have any appeal.

To the MTV crowd they do. What's a teenager going to relate to easier? Superman or Spiderman?

I totally agree that a character does not have to be angsty, or an anti-hero to have any appeal. But that brand of hero is the easiest for teenagers to relate to, so hollywood is afraid of depicting heroes in any other light because they fear their #1 demographic won't "get it."

The author of this article is aware of this, and merely pointing out how Singer has tweaked the character towards this end.

 

[Fatboy Roberts]

Because some WILL remember the previous movies, and not know whether ot not all said events are being counted or just a few

The number of people worrying about that is going to be a really REALLY small number, man. You gotta see that. The hand-wringing over the "vague history" is somewhat overkill at this point.

I agree with you about the 2nd half of Superman the Movie, however.

To the MTV crowd they do.

This stopped being a valid demographic descriptor back in 93, you old fart

 

[Whack Arnolds]

The audience didn´t have a problem with accepting Batman Begins as the "first" Batman movie even after four movies had been made, they certainly won´t have a problem with the vague history concept.

Yeah, but BEGINS is a clearly distinguished film compared to the previous 4. It felt different, had different characters, with different backstory... etc. This Superman film is supposed to show flashbacks to scenes of the original movies, AND it USES Marlon Brando's Jor-El, and I'm assuming Poppa Kent is still dead? It's messy. Doesn't mean it can't be a good flick, but the convulted nature of the history is really annoying.

 

[ultimatefan]

I'm not disagreeing, I am actually saying it is GREAT character insight....but it is then all thrown out the window when he reverses time.

Like I said, I don´t like the scene either... What I´m saying is you CAN generate interesting character conflict for Superman.

Oh, and I love your avatar with the BB line...

 

[Oldguy]

...This stopped being a valid demographic descriptor back in 93, you old fart

Hey, MTV crowd was the first demographic descriptor that I could get past the forumn censor.

 

[Fatboy Roberts]

Then I rescind my stab at thee

 

[Oldguy]

The audience didn´t have a problem with accepting Batman Begins as the "first" Batman movie even after four movies had been made, they certainly won´t have a problem with the vague history concept.

OK, I agree up to a point, like when it's revealed that Superman's the father. If they don't show some kind of flashback conception scene, and instead rely on CR and Lois' deed from SII, then I think some people might be lost.

Now if Maury is opening a manilla envelope, I think the home boyz will relate.

 

[Fatboy Roberts]

That's true. I don't think there's a lot of people that remember either a) Superman banged Lois in Superman II or b) that he kissed her and made her forget everything.

Of course, all of this becomes a lot easier if that kid ends up not being Clark's.

 

[Showtime]

What's this vague history everyone is talking about? How does it work?

 

[Whack Arnolds]

Like I said, I don´t like the scene either... What I´m saying is you CAN generate interesting character conflict for Superman.

No doubt, I think the character is great...but I do see the concerns of others as legitimate.

Oh, and I love your avatar with the BB line...

Why, thank you.

 

[Showtime]

That's true. I don't think there's a lot of people that remember either a) Superman banged Lois in Superman II or b) that he kissed her and made her forget everything.

Of course, all of this becomes a lot easier if that kid ends up not being Clark's.

Did Lois get on his steel before he got rid of the powers or after? I forget now?