Superman Returns The lifting of NK = Utterley Heroic?

Cyrusbales said:
Even if it's not dilluted, the notion of it being near him is what damages him, 10 kilo's or 100 wouldn't make much difference in terms of the radiation from the surface area.

Also, this is no different from any action film where a guy gets shot a billion times then carries on, like the punisher or any hollywood film from the 80's. Only difference is that this is SUPERMAN, who CAN push the boundaries.

I disagree, there is a crucial difference.

Kryptonite is Superman's weakness, it is unique to the character, and was created to put a limit on his invulnerable nature and make him defeatable. It is his achilles heel.

It's intent on creation was to make it impossible for him to "carry on" or push the boundaries, while presenting the opportunity for writers to invent creative solutions to the dilemma it's presence creates for our hero.

Allowing him to negate it's effect, by shear will of body and soul to protect humanity, as has been oft stated on these boards, illustrates again a misunderstanding by the creative team of SR for the whys and wherefores of the Superman mythos, and or is indicative of uninspired storytelling.

In SR we have an island laced with Green K growing of the coast of the Eastern US, threatening the lives of billions what is our hero to do!!!!!?????? How will he possibly save the day!!!!!????

He shrugs off the Green K effect and lifts it into orbit, now that's creative writing!:cwink:
 
I disagree, there is a crucial difference.

Kryptonite is Superman's weakness, it is unique to the character, and was created to put a limit on his invulnerable nature and make him defeatable. It is his achilles heel.

It's intent on creation was to make it impossible for him to "carry on" or push the boundaries, while presenting the opportunity for writers to invent creative solutions to the dilemma it's presence creates for our hero.

Allowing him to negate it's effect, by shear will of body and soul to protect humanity, as has been oft stated on these boards, illustrates again a misunderstanding by the creative team of SR for the whys and wherefores of the Superman mythos, and or is indicative of uninspired storytelling.

In SR we have an island laced with Green K growing of the coast of the Eastern US, threatening the lives of billions what is our hero to do!!!!!?????? How will he possibly save the day!!!!!????

He shrugs off the Green K effect and lifts it into orbit, now that's creative writing!:cwink:

The kryptonite is diluted which is why this is possible. The will power here had little to do with it I agree. K will take Superman down as long as it is potent and close enough to do just that. But the K in the new krypton rock was diluted and even at close range was not ebough to effect him to a point where he could not lift the rock.
 
I disagree, there is a crucial difference.

Kryptonite is Superman's weakness, it is unique to the character, and was created to put a limit on his invulnerable nature and make him defeatable. It is his achilles heel.

It's intent on creation was to make it impossible for him to "carry on" or push the boundaries, while presenting the opportunity for writers to invent creative solutions to the dilemma it's presence creates for our hero.

Allowing him to negate it's effect, by shear will of body and soul to protect humanity, as has been oft stated on these boards, illustrates again a misunderstanding by the creative team of SR for the whys and wherefores of the Superman mythos, and or is indicative of uninspired storytelling.

In SR we have an island laced with Green K growing of the coast of the Eastern US, threatening the lives of billions what is our hero to do!!!!!?????? How will he possibly save the day!!!!!????

He shrugs off the Green K effect and lifts it into orbit, now that's creative writing!:cwink:


Crucial difference? dunno about you, but bullets and blood loss are definately some of my weaknessess.

And for the record, supes nearly died if not for the hospital sequence.
 
Next will there be complaints that Spider-Man stopped a train? 'Cos I don't think so. :oldrazz:

Angeloz
 
What if he used a De Lorean? :D

Angeloz

Well i dont know if even Superman is cool enough for a De Lorean :cwink: .

But that's the thing he's not solving his problems, he's solving LOIS'S problems.

And it's not easy, it puts more of a burden on him than letting Lois be dead or suffer.

But its taking the easy way out of a problem and shirking responsibility for one's own actions :cwink: .

Isnt that right MJ :cwink: :woot: .
 
I disagree, there is a crucial difference.

Kryptonite is Superman's weakness, it is unique to the character, and was created to put a limit on his invulnerable nature and make him defeatable. It is his achilles heel.

It's intent on creation was to make it impossible for him to "carry on" or push the boundaries, while presenting the opportunity for writers to invent creative solutions to the dilemma it's presence creates for our hero.

Allowing him to negate it's effect, by shear will of body and soul to protect humanity, as has been oft stated on these boards, illustrates again a misunderstanding by the creative team of SR for the whys and wherefores of the Superman mythos, and or is indicative of uninspired storytelling.

In SR we have an island laced with Green K growing of the coast of the Eastern US, threatening the lives of billions what is our hero to do!!!!!?????? How will he possibly save the day!!!!!????

He shrugs off the Green K effect and lifts it into orbit, now that's creative writing!:cwink:

So bullets ARENT a human weakness? Thats not what my folks told me!:cwink: .

Plus, he did practically die in the act, do you forget this?

EDIT: Sorry, didnt see Cyrus's post saying exactly the same thing!
 
AVEITWITHJAMON said:
So bullets ARENT a human weakness? Thats not what my folks told me!:cwink: .


Sigh...........

Indiana Jones, is fearless, save for ...snakes.... it is his weakness.
Superman is invulnerable save for Kryptonite.....it his his weakness.
This is different than the action film/action hero and bulletts cliche comparison Cyrusbales proposes.

The weakness is created solely to limit and or incapacitate the hero.
 
Sigh...........

Indiana Jones, is fearless, save for ...snakes.... it is his weakness.
Superman is invulnerable save for Kryptonite.....it his his weakness.
This is different than the action film/action hero and bulletts cliche comparison Cyrusbales proposes.

The weakness is created solely to limit the hero.

How often does a film revolve around the central character overcoming their weakness?
 
Sigh...........

Indiana Jones, is fearless, save for ...snakes.... it is his weakness.
Superman is invulnerable save for Kryptonite.....it his his weakness.
This is different than the action film/action hero and bulletts cliche comparison Cyrusbales proposes.

The weakness is created solely to limit and or incapacitate the hero.

Yes indeed the weakness is created solely to limit and or incapacitate the hero. Which it did in SR. So I don't see an issue as I am sure you do not either. ;)
 
Didn't Indiana Jones face snakes more than once? Anyone with a picture of a pit of snakes please?

Angeloz
 
Didn't Indiana Jones face snakes more than once? Anyone with a picture of a pit of snakes please?

Angeloz

indiana_jones_01.jpg
 
I take it the dude is general as I'm a woman. ;)

Angeloz
 
That's becasue he loves her.

So it's his problems as I originally stated.

Well, duh, it was his responsibility. He loves Lois.

Superman's responsibilities don't include to love Lois or defend her especially over the rest of humankind.

It's really simple, you do special things for other people b/c you care more about them than anyone esle.

Except if you're Superman and you have a bigger duty to do your best for everyone, not just the ones he personally loves.

But that does not mean you turn right around and hurt them the next day.

Yes it means that, if your bigger duties interfere with your girl.

Like when Clark had to regain his powers and explain Lois they couldn't be together and now it was definitive. He hurt her (even if later he deleted that memory from her mind, the fact remains) literally the day after.

Like when Supeman had to go to Krypton and didn't want to risk his mission by surrender to his own temptations, namenly Lois. He hurt her.

I know you don't get S:TM and SII.

Bare statement.

It is supposed to be that way just because you say so

I know you think that Superman is just some guy whose selfishness gets in the way of his altruistic mission,

I think it because it's the way it has been in the movies.

but that is not what the character or S:TM and SII are about.

To allow a missile to potentially kill people in STM but to reverse time just because his precious Lois was dead - even when he knew it was wrong - is selfish. And if you don't think it was wrong, just trust filmmakers' sugary intentions showing us how Jor-El was his mentor and father and told him specifically to not to do it.

To quit his mission and let any villiain or any danger to kill people because he had to get the girl is selfish. To go back to a restaurant and use your super-powers over a human being because of personal anger is utterly selfish.

I know the world is a different place today than in 1978 and people are much more jaded and untrusting of others who appear to be genuinely good. But SUperman is not like that, he REALLY is that good.

He wasn't that unlselfish back in this franchise. He has been selfish, he has made mistakes.

1978 or people who pretend to be good and they're not have nothing to do with that fact.

And if you don't get that, you don't get Superman. And if you don't get that genuinely good and honest people don't ditch the woman they love for 5 years w/o a goodbye, you just don't get what a genuinely good and honest person is.

Donner and Lester didn't get it then.

They allowed Superman to put Lois' lives over others', they allowed him to quit his mission for personal satisfactions and they allowed him to manipulate minds just because he decided to. They allowed him to have a personal revenge abusing of his super powers over a simple human.

That doesn't match a genuinely good person.

For the last time: It's not better to be dead

That rule is for everyone on Earth, not just Lois. he does it just for Lois.

and it's more of a burden on Superman to erase Lois's memory than let her go around in emotional distress for the rest of her life.

No one has been in emotional distress over a broken relationship. Every human being has lived that and it's part of life. Once again, for his own satisfaction, Superman was changing human history.

The only burden he'd carry is that he was not man enough to ask Lois first if she agreed about having her memories deleted. It's the least he could have done IF he really loved her. You don't decide the other person's fate by yourself if you truly love. You don't take people's things and right away without a warning just because you thought it was ok if you truly love.

He realizes he made a mistake and that b/c of that it is not fair to Lois to be dead

What was the mistake in saving other people?

By using his time to save only Lois he was risking more people to die. He was where people needed him more. It was not a mistake, it was just that Superman didn't like how things turned out and decided to re-write history for his personal satisfaction.

or in emotional distress,

THAT was a mistake and as a mistake - as any man having his trousers properly on - he should have assumed it and not tried to delete it AS if it never happens.

Lois has the right to know who she has been intimately in bed with. Superman took it away.

In SR, after he made a big mistake, Superman didn't go and erased history in any way, for his own satisfaction. If this was Donner's, Superman would have reversed history so he never had a child with Lois so the poor girl wouldn't die of distress. And in the way, he would stand as a true hero only because people and/or Lois weren't allowed to actually know what Superman did wrong.

therefore, he uses his powers to the ultimate degree to right those wrongs

Exactly. He doesn't use his powers to the ultimate degree to stop the missile and save all the poeple. He uses his powers to the ultimate degree only to correct his mistakes, not for the good of all people.

and give LOis a chance at a happy norman life while still being alive and not a corpse.

Breaking up a relationship hasn't killed anyone in a normal mental state. And if he wants to bring people to life as part of his mission he's more than welcome. But if he does it for everybody.

It's really not that hard to get. Superman has no ulterior motives,

As you have said yourself, he has them. Lois' life and his relationship with her being it. That's behind him reversing time, quitting his mission and manipulating minds. Not the good of humankind.

And his personal anger carried him to fight back a human being just because he humilliated him first.

he's not a skeletons in the closet guy.

Time reversing, mind manipulation, killing Zod, personal revenge out of anger. Being Zod the most literal skeleton of them all.

He's straigtforward good, caring and honest. I know it's tough to find some of these people these days, but that's who Superman is and that's his motivation. That's what S:TM and SII capture and what SR fails to capture, it is that essence of Superman.

As I've said mentioning the facts in the movies, not merely making statements; it is not that way. Superman in STM, SII and SR are the same. And I might add some things Superman did far less selfishly in SR than in the previous 2 mentioned movies.
 
Not even if it's not in use or for a private drive? Do they have open to the public stuff?

Angeloz

.....and people are accusing ME of not having a sense of humor:huh: :csad:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
200,560
Messages
21,760,239
Members
45,597
Latest member
Netizen95
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"