It really didn't. The exploring never went beyond Superman feeling alone and Superman feeling less lonely when he finds out he has a son.
Yes, exactly. What is the wrong part about it. That’s further than what SII (or any other Superman movie) went.
Fine as an idea, but it drags down the entire movie, because even that lacks pacing. It shows up here and there, visually for the most part and then it resolves itself.
Being cinematography a visual art in a big way, I can’t see the wrong in developing themes visually. Sure, florid speeches can be cool but they’re not the only way.
I don't get that. In a TV show, I'd probably agree, but movies stand on their own. It's a move that certainly wouldn't pass these days, because it is a bad resolution to drama, but it's a snap decision in the last moment and in no way does it magically erase what came before and what the movie did for the character before.
In fact the whole point of the amnesia kiss is precisely to magically erase what came before and what the movie did for the character. In the end, we never see Superman a bit troubled for what happened. It looked like the amnesia kiss had anesthetic effect on himself. 5 minutes after the kiss he was smiling at the camera again as if nothing happened (which is almost true since the ending goes back the whole way; wjhat happened during the movie left no effects on any of the characters).
Again, Returns didn't do anything different. Everything was exactly the same by the end of it, with the exception of Superman knowing he has a son.
Unless the son magically dissapeared or Superman never left Earth for 6 years, SR’s Superman actions pretty much had consequences and an effect on the main caharacters until the end of the movie. Nothing that happened was left “as if” never happened.
Lois forgave Superman for what he did to her. She didn’t just magically forgot the whole thing, getting her back exactly to what she was in the beginning.
Superman felt alone by the beginning fo the movie and he felt radically different by the end. With Jason on the picture it is obvious that his life will never be the same again. Jason set a difference not only because his mere presence, he got an efect on Superman’s feelings and perception of life forever.
Was that before or after he was putting the moves on her on the rooftop of the Planet? Or we assume that's the case, because in the end they didn't hook up? Because it was pretty obvious that, had this story been continued, Richard would've been dumped pretty fast in the next one.
Unless you can provide a serious link about what the Singer’s sequel would be about, we have to base our thoughts on what we actually see in the movie so to avoid speculation.
Superman and Lois didn’t kiss in the end. No ‘I love you’s were said. It is obvious that they still love each other but – as you observe yourself – it is not the rooftop situation anymore. In fact Singer repeated the smoking Lois/Superman blowing the lighter again so it was clear that they are again in the same position as before, but they’re not romantically approaching to each other. He’s coming from Jason’s bedroom; it is obvious that the Jason factor has changed things between them.
Yes, fortunately he has a half-Kryptonian son that can be the most important thing in his life. Steady and substantial.
Exactly. It is a son now and not Lois, as I said. It is not romance but fatherhood; quite different.
Ok, seriously, example or it didn't happen. Or are we talking about Lois again? Because good luck convincing me that the only reason they didn't drop by the Fortress for a quickie wasn't that the movie was running out of time.
I’m not aware of what you’re talking about for it makes no connection at all with the portion of post you quoted from me. Again, what you say wasn’t even suggested in the movie and we cannot develop a good discussion based on speculation alone.
I was talking about how Superman learnt that decision are not easy; going to Krypton or staying on Earth. Saying good-bye to Lois (risking that he wouldn’t be able to leave) or not.
In the end, he made his decisions and had to liove with consequences since, luckily for the story, he decided not to turn back time or delete memories.
Superman didn't do any harm in SII.
You mean, apart from abandoning his mission while Zod and Co. Killed people at their pleasure?
He used the kiss to help Lois forget, not himself.
If that was the case he would have asked Lois first. It’s her mind we’re talking here and thus her decision. The quick smilie Superman we got at the end of the movie tells me he wasn’t too troubled about it once Lois stopped being troubled about it.
It was out of character to mind-rape someone, and that's the second reason that movie gets my glorious middle finger (the first one being KILLING Zod and his gang), but SR had him act just as much out of character (more, in fact), just without the good stuff, the revelance and the impact.
If you call killing more “in-character” for Superman than not saying good-bye, then I’ll have to disagree about your concept of “in/out of character” for obvious reasons.
Understandable, but a 2-minute-scene, dissappointing or not, doesn't define or characterize an entire movie.
In fact it does. Just like when we realize the Wizard of Oz is a cheat by the end of the movie tells us he was a cheat throughout the whole movie.
It defines the character. In his own words he tells Lois that what he does during the movie is not for her but “I did it for us.”
It's the logical equivelant of anyone who doesn't like SR putting it down just for the stalking scene. It's certainly an issue and people rightfully bring it, but it doesn't summarize the whole movie.
It’s an aspect that defines the character and his behaviour and choices. It’s not like a light plothole you choose to ignore under the ‘suspension of disbelief’ principle.
I never said it did. I said that it potrays a better Superman than SR does. And while liberties are acceptable to a degree in an adaptation, writers and/or directors wishing the put their spin on an old, iconic and defined character should stay the hell away from them.
SR ignored SIII and SIV. It’s a sequel to STM and SII, and from what I’ve seen of SII, it maches the character. It wasn’t more “out of character” than he was in the movie to which SR is sequel.
I thought Returns was big disapointment, and a missed oppertunity to start fresh for this generation. Superman Returns is still vastly superior to superman 3 and superman 4 combined. Thats like saying Batman and Robin was better then Batman begins dude.
