Superman Returns Was Superman Really Out of Character in SR?

[El Payaso]

Although your point is valid you're ignoring the crux of what he's saying for the sake of belittling him. He's saying that in light of Superman's own experience, wouldn't it be best for Jason to benefit from that experience and have the guidance of someone who has had to work it all out for himself?

Why? Did Superman had trust issues of any kind? And how is Jason NOT going to have the best guidance of Superman?

Are we taking for granted things that haven't happened yet (they'd be part of a sequel) in order to belittle SR?

About Jason and the Superman-didn't-say-good-bye issue, I'm sure many sons have forgiven bigger mistakes than that from their parents.

But aside from that, Superman would feel the obligation and responsibility of parenthood and would want to be there to raise his son, because he is a caring and decent person.

Again, are we taking for granted he won't do it so we can complain about something else?

 

[dr collossus]

Again, are we taking for granted he won't do it so we can complain about something else?

No - yet again, we are talking about the situation as it stands at the end of this movie. If it is somehow rectified in the sequel, and is part of a larger story, then fine.

Are we taking for granted that he will do it just so we can carry on in our belief that there is not even a single flaw in this film?

 

[El Payaso]

No - yet again, we are talking about the situation as it stands at the end of this movie. If it is somehow rectified in the sequel, and is part of a larger story, then fine.

I'm sure situations evolve after the end of a movie. Heroes that are hanging from a cliff by the end of a movie won't remain hanging forever, so that shouldn't be the starting point for a complaint. Like saying 'I hate they have him falling from that cliff. Bad movie.'

Are we taking for granted that he will do it just so we can carry on in our belief that there is not even a single flaw in this film?

We shouldn't be bashing or defending a movie for things that aren't happening yet.

I, for one, am not saying this movie is flawless because Superman will do the right thing in a sequel. It is you who's saying a movie's wrong because of a character's future mistakes that might never happen. I'm just defending the possibility that things won't go the wrong way. Jason hasn't still being abandoned by Superman, once he knows he's his son.

Now, if for flaws.

- Please, what horrible Donner movies quotes all over. Were they going to tickle my nostalgia feeling? Terrible.
- Can Kevin Spacey take acting lessons before putting in Lex Luthor's shoes? He made John Doe in Seven and he can't do a creepy villiain in a Superman movie?
- People: Lois fainting is not funny anymore. If once it was.
- People: characters randomly tying up end looses together which leads to think Clark is Superman and dismissing the odds with a laugh and going 'Haha, sure' is just stupid and a uneeded scene.
- Hey, how many people actually remembers the green crystal made the Fortress? Shouldn't you be quoting THAT from Donner mnovie instead of random unfunny quotes?
- So Superman left Earth to go to Krypton; tough one. Couldn't you include his powerful reasons in those white letters on black, so we can buy the premise from minute one.
- Was the not saying good-bye the best scenario? Isn't more believeable Superman broke up with Lois in order to go to Krypton and Lois was just angry with him because he once again chose otheer things over her?

Give me something I can use.

 

[Angeloz]

Didn't you know kryptonians have to register to vote before they're thirty. Or they get into big trouble. So he went just in case. Also to obey the law.

Angeloz

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

YOu school your child on behavior, on what is right and wrong. And while it is not romantic love Clark certainly knows the love of his parents and knows his love for his parents. By what you're saying, no one knows how to act until they are in love. That is simply not true. People learn how to act as they grow up and develop, not only by trial and error.

I think Superman does know how to act in love, IN MOST NORMAL situations. But when it comes to his home planet and possible survivors i think he did the right thing in leaving, but made mistakes when leaving.

ACtually she's in mortal danger as being Superman's girlfriend, and much safer as Clark Kent's girlfriend. That's why it never got serious in the comics between them pre-Crisis.

Any enemy who finds out Clark is Superman, will target Lois.

More significantly, Lois, RIchard and Jason pay for it too. And that is the problem. It's not a mistake that only affects him, it's a mistake that hurts the people he cares about.

Lois pays for it yes, but Richard and Jason dont really IMO, they may in the sequel however.

That's a lot to suggest. I still see that scene as scene of bittersweetness. Hence using JOr-El’s bittersweet speech from S:TM.

I also think it's incredibly shallow to have SUperman think that having a child is all about himself as opposed to being about the child. It just suggests again that Superman is thinking of himself first and NOT his loved ones, those that should come first.

But he does think about Jason first, he goes to him, and basically tells him he will always be there for him, there is nothing wrong with him being happy about it.

Plus watching his facial expressions in the scene, i dont think its a lot to suggest, but thats just me!

But she didn’t leave for 5 years w/o saying goodbye. What I’m saying is that the definition of responsibility is not using contraception, but rather only entering into a sexual relationship if you are able to put the other person and the potential fruits of that relationship first. Just b/c you used contraception doesn’t mean you acted responsibly. Maybe you lowered the risk of pregnancy but you did not eliminate it nor did you eliminate your responsibility.

And just because you dont use contraception doesnt mean the woman will get pregnant, in fact more often than not, women dont.

I think it is shortsighted to say that he rectified his previous mistakes. His mistakes in SR are unrectifiable. The most he can do is try to atone for them and demonstrate he’s learned that he was wrong and not do the same thing again. He can never recover those 5 years he was gone from Lois and Jason, he can never go back and make sure Jason knows from the beginning who his real father is.

Sorry, i dont think he rectified his mistakes, i meant to say that he did atone for them, as best he could IMO, and i think he will continue to do this in a sequel if it happens.

Donner/ Lester provided a way to erase the consequences of his mistakes, b/c it was in character for Superman to be able to fix anything. He didn’t ignore his mistakes in either S:TM or SII. Turning back time might be a bad plot device, but it shows that Superman was willing to do anything to save Lois and reverse the effects of the Earthquake. It is far more noble to completely erase the pain and death that was casued in S:TM and SII than to have to see your mistakes hurt the woman you love and your son.

Sorry, but i find it far more noble and adult to admit you made a mistake and apologise for it, than to completely erase it from existence, which is the easy way out IMO.

I felt little to no drama. I never expected Superman to end up w/ Lois and Jason and I was never excited by anything.

I am excited to see what happens in the sequel.

I do think had he done everything right and STILL he came back to a world and Lois that had moved on then THAT would have been interesting and dramatic.

But then wouldnt that have shown Lois to be completely shallow and obviously NOT in love with Superman?

When it’s portrayed as a series of mistakes he should have known better than to make, it just isn’t interesting.

I disagree, i liked seeing Superman take something on he couldnt easily fix.

Cool!

Only luck has borne this out. There is no way Superman would know this ahead of time. Therefore he should have acted responsibly and acted in a way which showed he cared BEFORE leaving.

Again, he made a mistake, a bad one, and i dont see how he could have known about Jason. Its not suggested in the movie (well i suppose it could be by Lois's surprise at Jason's powers), but its possible Lois didnt know she was pregnant when Superman left.

And he will always wonder why that person didn’t care enough about him to be there for him and his mother the whole time. And he may not even want Superman in his life at that point, why would he? Superman didn’t care enough to be around for his first 4 years of life, why should Jason want him around now?

The situation is too dysfunctional. Superman is not about dysfunctional families.

If my dad explained to me that he couldnt be there for the first 5 years of my life because he had to go away to possibly save people in need, i would accept it, i might not neccessarily be happy, but i would understand.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

No - yet again, we are talking about the situation as it stands at the end of this movie. If it is somehow rectified in the sequel, and is part of a larger story, then fine.

Are we taking for granted that he will do it just so we can carry on in our belief that there is not even a single flaw in this film?

Please Dr Collosus, show me a post were anyone has claimed SR was flawless.

 

[dr collossus]

Please Dr Collosus, show me a post were anyone has claimed SR was flawless.

It's not about saying its flawless, its about people not acknowledging its flaws. And arguing with EVERY point some people don't like about it, without even being willing to see their point of view. If you look at my posts, you will see that I will quite happily agree that there were some really great points about the movie, while still saying that as a whole I felt that the flaws of the movie outweighed the good. There are some people who say that they love the movie, and then refuse to even accept that some people don't like certain things about it, and rather than saying 'ok, I see your point, but that really didn't bother me', prefer instead to dismiss anyone else's point of view.

Also, if you look at the post I made that comment in response to, you will see that I was parodying his original remark.

 

[dr collossus]

It is you who's saying a movie's wrong because of a character's future mistakes that might never happen.

Quite the opposite in fact. Read what I said. I'm saying exactly the opposite to this. I'm objecting to the way things are as they stand in this film.

I'm just defending the possibility that things won't go the wrong way. Jason hasn't still being abandoned by Superman, once he knows he's his son.

Quite the opposite in fact. Read what you're saying. Your argument is based on what may or may not happen in future sequels.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

It's not about saying its flawless, its about people not acknowledging its flaws. And arguing with EVERY point some people don't like about it, without even being willing to see their point of view. If you look at my posts, you will see that I will quite happily agree that there were some really great points about the movie, while still saying that as a whole I felt that the flaws of the movie outweighed the good. There are some people who say that they love the movie, and then refuse to even accept that some people don't like certain things about it, and rather than saying 'ok, I see your point, but that really didn't bother me', prefer instead to dismiss anyone else's point of view.

Also, if you look at the post I made that comment in response to, you will see that I was parodying his original remark.

Yes but the thing is Dr C, we HAVE discussed the movies flaws, and at length, over a year ago, so why dwell on them?

 

[mego joe]

I think Superman does know how to act in love, IN MOST NORMAL situations. But when it comes to his home planet and possible survivors i think he did the right thing in leaving, but made mistakes when leaving.

I get that, but the mistake is still out of character. There's no characterization of Superman being a wimp or wuss in his history. Of all things he is supposed to have the intestinal fortitude to stand up and do what is right,ie.. Go to Krypton to help potential survivors, tell Lois goodbye before he leaves b/c he loves her and understands his moral and ethical obligations of being in a sexual relationship with her. It is just out of character for him not do this. Period.

Any enemy who finds out Clark is Superman, will target Lois.

But any enemy of SUperman will target Lois if he dates her as Superman. The enemy won't even have to find out his secret identity. Which do you think is harder to do?

Lois pays for it yes, but Richard and Jason dont really IMO, they may in the sequel however.

ANd that's what I'm suggesting will happen if the scenario is played out realistically. HEck, the end of SR indicates that Richard already suspects that Jason is Superman's son.

But he does think about Jason first, he goes to him, and basically tells him he will always be there for him, there is nothing wrong with him being happy about it.

The irony is that without being an everyday father raising your child, you CAN'T always be there for him. Being a Father is not once a month, once a week or two weeks a year or special events thing, but an EVERYDAY commitment. Trust me on this, I AM an EVERYDAY Father. RIchard is who Jason will ALWAYS consider his real father, no matter what. HE's the person Jason's bonded with and has that father/ son relationship with. Superman can NEVER be the person Jason thinks of as his REAL father. It's too late. That ship has already sailed. THe emotionaly bond with Richard is too strong to be broken. That's why it's so important to be there.

Plus watching his facial expressions in the scene, i dont think its a lot to suggest, but thats just me!

I disagree, but we'll have to chalk that one up to taste as well.

And just because you dont use contraception doesnt mean the woman will get pregnant, in fact more often than not, women dont.

And just b/c you use contaception doesn't mean you have eliminated the responsibilities of being in a sexual relationship with someone. Many people are conceived while parents use a form of contraception, but they are still responsible for that child and responsible to their partner. The man for being around and emotionally available and the woman is responsible for telling the man that she's pregnant.

Sorry, i dont think he rectified his mistakes, i meant to say that he did atone for them, as best he could IMO, and i think he will continue to do this in a sequel if it happens.

OK.

Sorry, but i find it far more noble and adult to admit you made a mistake and apologise for it, than to completely erase it from existence, which is the easy way out IMO.

SO if you have the power to completely eliminate the mistake it's better for the people around you to suffer than eliminate the mistake? "Hey, sorry I smashed into your car and shattered the windshield. I admit that I did that, I'm sorry. Oh, you want me to replace the windshield? No way."

I am excited to see what happens in the sequel.

I am frightened to read the spoilers of what happens in a sequel, if there is a sequel.

But then wouldnt that have shown Lois to be completely shallow and obviously NOT in love with Superman?

Not necessarily. If there was a good story that actually EXPLAINED that she REALLY moved on, then no. Perhaps he said he'd be gone a year, but after 3 she moved on in life and met Richard who is actually a great guy. Then when Supeman comes back, so do all the old feeling that she thought were gone.

I think SR makes Lois out to be completely shallow and obviously NOT in love with Superman. THe issue of paternity certainly indicates she was having sex with Richard before she could have even realized that Superman would be gone for an extended period of time. Remember, she didn't know that Superman was leaving- it took he how long to move on?

I disagree, i liked seeing Superman take something on he couldnt easily fix.

If it was not purely the results of his mistakes and him doing things he knew he should not do in the firt place then yes, I would agree. But when the entire story is DRIVEN by Superman's mistakes it is out of character. IT's how he got there that bothers me, not the fact that it's not an easy fix. And how easy is turning back the world, really? How easy is amnesia kissing the woman you love?

Again, he made a mistake, a bad one, and i dont see how he could have known about Jason. Its not suggested in the movie (well i suppose it could be by Lois's surprise at Jason's powers), but its possible Lois didnt know she was pregnant when Superman left.

You're stuck on this I know, but it doesn't matter. He has an obligation to Lois for the basic fact that he's in a sexual relationship with her. THe movie indicates he knows this otherwise, it wouldn't have been 'too difficult' to tell her the truth. When he doesn't say goodbye he is essentially saying to Lois, "I don't care about you."

If my dad explained to me that he couldnt be there for the first 5 years of my life because he had to go away to possibly save people in need, i would accept it, i might not neccessarily be happy, but i would understand.

But could you undertand that he couldn't tell your mom either? And she was left thinking that he didn't care about her? Or the the fruits (YOU) of their sexual relationship?

 

[Mr. Socko]

The only thing that was out of character was Superman not being there for the kid, or even realizing he and Lois had conceived one. Just about everything else was in character of Supes. People with the stalking stuff are just going out on a limb to find something to piss about, and this is coming from someone who didn't even like Returns much.

The portrayal of Superman through vision and scripting was fine, I just didn't like Routh much. Yeah, I said it. Don't like that then choke on it.

 

[dr collossus]

Yes but the thing is Dr C, we HAVE discussed the movies flaws, and at length, over a year ago, so why dwell on them?

Dude, if you only want to discuss the movie's good points, get off the internet. They have all been discussed at length too. You can't expect to have a discussion about a film and not be open to all kinds of different points of view.

 

[CGHulk]

See all films have good and bad things about them, even in the films I like, it's give and take. Usually the good out weighs the bad, but with Superman Returns it's exactly the opposite!

 

[X Knight]

i really think they needed to delve into the whole "return to krypton" aspect of the story. Especially Superman's belief that there might be survivors......including HIS PARENTS!!!

if they didn't want to show the Return to Krypton scene at the outset ( which would have made for an awesome opening sequence!!! )....they could have done it as a flashback when Supes is explaining himself to Lois on the Daily Planet rooftop.

That way, as Superman is describing his journey to Lois, the flashback and voiceover will also allow the audience to experience the journey with Supes. To see the barren, wasteland remains of Krypton.....to feel Superman's hopes dashed when he realizes that he really is the last of his kind.......to learn of Superman's perils as he tried to journey back home.......and to feel Superman's despair as he realizes that he let everyone down on Earth.........

The Return to Krypton aspect seemed to be the entire crux....the catalyst of the entire movie......yet it received so little attention....almost as if it was an afterthought or excuse to get Supes away......

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Dude, if you only want to discuss the movie's good points, get off the internet. They have all been discussed at length too. You can't expect to have a discussion about a film and not be open to all kinds of different points of view.

I'll stay on the internet as much as i want thankyou very much!

As i said the flaws have been discussed AT length, meaning there is simply nothing more to discuss, IMO the movie had FAR more good things about it, hence why it takes longer to talk about the good things .

 

[matthooper]

The Return to Krypton aspect seemed to be the entire crux....the catalyst of the entire movie......yet it received so little attention....almost as if it was an afterthought or excuse to get Supes away......

Not almost, that is exactly what it was. A slim premise for a movie. It recieved no attention. It is not the film that Singer promised a year before it's release. I posted a Q&A with Singer from Comic Con 2005 in another thread. He changed the entire focus of the film before it's release. It's not the movie he promised the studio or us.

Nothing about the reasons behind his journey to Krypton, the trip itself, or any ramifications were dealt with in any reasonable fashion in the finished film. It was only lightly touched upon. It’s clear by his comments about the theme from Comic Con 2005, that it was radically changed from the summer of 2005 to it’s 2006 release. His leaving was pulled off as simply a flimsy reason to re-start a franchise. It didn’t have to be flimsy. It could have been amazing if Singer had kept to his original plans. It’s actually dealt with better in the SR game. Not only were his reasons for leaving not fully shown, but this theme of Superman coming back to a world that moved on was not dealt with. Singer mentions that theme about 3 times during the 2005 interview. Simply showing earth in the beginning without Superman does not show us how the earth and earthlings moved on. When he came back, we needed to see how his leaving affected the earth and people. He missed a parole hearing and Luthor got out. Is that the major consequences to the earth for his leaving?

We had to see this from the people’s perspectives, not just Lois. What about all the lives lost while you were gone? No consequences, no issues... no sense. They welcome him back as if nothing had happened. He saves a plane and the world forgets his sin of leaving the people he swore to protect for 5 years. How about the people who lost their loved ones on a plane Singer mentioned Superman having to find his place in a world that moved on. When did that happen? He got back saved a plane, it was as he never left. I don’t blame Singer for showing Superman left, I blame him for simply using it as a gimmick, and showing nothing of what was promised.

There are consequences to every action. There were none shown. Earth might have moved on, but we were not really shown it. By showing us the consequences we would have seen they had moved on. By showing us Superman having to win back the people, we could see that people are forgiving. It seems odd that a theme mentioned so proximately a year before the release, was virtually ignored. By not showing the full reasons for his leaving was even worse, because it altered the characters core ideals.

The movie Singer spoke about was Superman returning to a world that had moved on and Superman having to find his place again, meaning to me that he had to win their trust. The film we got was a shell of that vision. If you liked the film, hey that’s great, but it wasn’t the film Singer said he was making just a year earlier than the release. It wasn’t the film we got.

 

[Angeloz]

When he came back he saved a shuttle, plane and the city they might have crashed in. I think that'd win back most peoples trust. It would me. They'd be wankers not to accept him. I'm glad they weren't. And it's not his fault if the justice system is crap. I'll point out he volunteered to be Superman (though humans named him) he did it so he could use his abilities to help. But he can't save everyone nor is it his fault if someone dies when he's not there. He isn't God or whatever your belief sytem you believe in. I probably could write more but don't feel like it.

Angeloz

 

[matthooper]

bump

The Return to Krypton aspect seemed to be the entire crux....the catalyst of the entire movie......yet it received so little attention....almost as if it was an afterthought or excuse to get Supes away......

Not almost, that is exactly what it was. A slim premise for a movie. It recieved no attention. It is not the film that Singer promised a year before it's release. I posted a Q&A with Singer from Comic Con 2005 in another thread. He changed the entire focus of the film before it's release. It's not the movie he promised the studio or us.

Nothing about the reasons behind his journey to Krypton, the trip itself, or any ramifications were dealt with in any reasonable fashion in the finished film. It was only lightly touched upon. It’s clear by his comments about the theme from Comic Con 2005, that it was radically changed from the summer of 2005 to it’s 2006 release. His leaving was pulled off as simply a flimsy reason to re-start a franchise. It didn’t have to be flimsy. It could have been amazing if Singer had kept to his original plans. It’s actually dealt with better in the SR game. Not only were his reasons for leaving not fully shown, but this theme of Superman coming back to a world that moved on was not dealt with. Singer mentions that theme about 3 times during the 2005 interview. Simply showing earth in the beginning without Superman does not show us how the earth and earthlings moved on. When he came back, we needed to see how his leaving affected the earth and people. He missed a parole hearing and Luthor got out. Is that the major consequences to the earth for his leaving?

We had to see this from the people’s perspectives, not just Lois. What about all the lives lost while you were gone? No consequences, no issues... no sense. They welcome him back as if nothing had happened. He saves a plane and the world forgets his sin of leaving the people he swore to protect for 5 years. How about the people who lost their loved ones on a plane Singer mentioned Superman having to find his place in a world that moved on. When did that happen? He got back saved a plane, it was as he never left. I don’t blame Singer for showing Superman left, I blame him for simply using it as a gimmick, and showing nothing of what was promised.

There are consequences to every action. There were none shown. Earth might have moved on, but we were not really shown it. By showing us the consequences we would have seen they had moved on. By showing us Superman having to win back the people, we could see that people are forgiving. It seems odd that a theme mentioned so proximately a year before the release, was virtually ignored. By not showing the full reasons for his leaving was even worse, because it altered the characters core ideals.

The movie Singer spoke about was Superman returning to a world that had moved on and Superman having to find his place again, meaning to me that he had to win their trust. The film we got was a shell of that vision. If you liked the film, hey that’s great, but it wasn’t the film Singer said he was making just a year earlier than the release. It wasn’t the film we got.

 

[hammy]

i really think they needed to delve into the whole "return to krypton" aspect of the story. Especially Superman's belief that there might be survivors......including HIS PARENTS!!!

if they didn't want to show the Return to Krypton scene at the outset ( which would have made for an awesome opening sequence!!! )....they could have done it as a flashback when Supes is explaining himself to Lois on the Daily Planet rooftop.

That way, as Superman is describing his journey to Lois, the flashback and voiceover will also allow the audience to experience the journey with Supes. To see the barren, wasteland remains of Krypton.....to feel Superman's hopes dashed when he realizes that he really is the last of his kind.......to learn of Superman's perils as he tried to journey back home.......and to feel Superman's despair as he realizes that he let everyone down on Earth.........

The Return to Krypton aspect seemed to be the entire crux....the catalyst of the entire movie......yet it received so little attention....almost as if it was an afterthought or excuse to get Supes away......

You're right. That would have been awesome. That's exactly what they should have done, because that is what was behind Superman's motivation to do what he did, and why things went the way the went with Lois. It's so sad that Singer made stupid decision after stupid decision. Grrr .. it still aggravates me. That, coupled with a boring script, lackluster acting by Bosworth, Spacey and Langella, and a lack of exciting situations for Superman made this movie the dud that it was. Singer sucks.

 

[El Payaso]

i really think they needed to delve into the whole "return to krypton" aspect of the story. Especially Superman's belief that there might be survivors......including HIS PARENTS!!!

if they didn't want to show the Return to Krypton scene at the outset ( which would have made for an awesome opening sequence!!! )....they could have done it as a flashback when Supes is explaining himself to Lois on the Daily Planet rooftop.

That way, as Superman is describing his journey to Lois, the flashback and voiceover will also allow the audience to experience the journey with Supes. To see the barren, wasteland remains of Krypton.....to feel Superman's hopes dashed when he realizes that he really is the last of his kind.......to learn of Superman's perils as he tried to journey back home.......and to feel Superman's despair as he realizes that he let everyone down on Earth.........

The Return to Krypton aspect seemed to be the entire crux....the catalyst of the entire movie......yet it received so little attention....almost as if it was an afterthought or excuse to get Supes away......

Absolutely agreed.

 

[Angeloz]

I just hope they let us get to see the deleted scene of him seeing Krypton's ruins. I don't mind if it's a DVD extra.

Angeloz

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I get that, but the mistake is still out of character. There's no characterization of Superman being a wimp or wuss in his history. Of all things he is supposed to have the intestinal fortitude to stand up and do what is right,ie.. Go to Krypton to help potential survivors, tell Lois goodbye before he leaves b/c he loves her and understands his moral and ethical obligations of being in a sexual relationship with her. It is just out of character for him not do this. Period.


But any enemy of SUperman will target Lois if he dates her as Superman. The enemy won't even have to find out his secret identity. Which do you think is harder to do?


ANd that's what I'm suggesting will happen if the scenario is played out realistically. HEck, the end of SR indicates that Richard already suspects that Jason is Superman's son.


The irony is that without being an everyday father raising your child, you CAN'T always be there for him. Being a Father is not once a month, once a week or two weeks a year or special events thing, but an EVERYDAY commitment. Trust me on this, I AM an EVERYDAY Father. RIchard is who Jason will ALWAYS consider his real father, no matter what. HE's the person Jason's bonded with and has that father/ son relationship with. Superman can NEVER be the person Jason thinks of as his REAL father. It's too late. That ship has already sailed. THe emotionaly bond with Richard is too strong to be broken. That's why it's so important to be there.


I disagree, but we'll have to chalk that one up to taste as well.




And just b/c you use contaception doesn't mean you have eliminated the responsibilities of being in a sexual relationship with someone. Many people are conceived while parents use a form of contraception, but they are still responsible for that child and responsible to their partner. The man for being around and emotionally available and the woman is responsible for telling the man that she's pregnant.




OK.



SO if you have the power to completely eliminate the mistake it's better for the people around you to suffer than eliminate the mistake? "Hey, sorry I smashed into your car and shattered the windshield. I admit that I did that, I'm sorry. Oh, you want me to replace the windshield? No way."


I am frightened to read the spoilers of what happens in a sequel, if there is a sequel.


Not necessarily. If there was a good story that actually EXPLAINED that she REALLY moved on, then no. Perhaps he said he'd be gone a year, but after 3 she moved on in life and met Richard who is actually a great guy. Then when Supeman comes back, so do all the old feeling that she thought were gone.

I think SR makes Lois out to be completely shallow and obviously NOT in love with Superman. THe issue of paternity certainly indicates she was having sex with Richard before she could have even realized that Superman would be gone for an extended period of time. Remember, she didn't know that Superman was leaving- it took he how long to move on?


If it was not purely the results of his mistakes and him doing things he knew he should not do in the firt place then yes, I would agree. But when the entire story is DRIVEN by Superman's mistakes it is out of character. IT's how he got there that bothers me, not the fact that it's not an easy fix. And how easy is turning back the world, really? How easy is amnesia kissing the woman you love?





You're stuck on this I know, but it doesn't matter. He has an obligation to Lois for the basic fact that he's in a sexual relationship with her. THe movie indicates he knows this otherwise, it wouldn't have been 'too difficult' to tell her the truth. When he doesn't say goodbye he is essentially saying to Lois, "I don't care about you."



But could you undertand that he couldn't tell your mom either? And she was left thinking that he didn't care about her? Or the the fruits (YOU) of their sexual relationship?

You know, i was going to post a big long, usual reply to this MJ, but i honestly dont see the point . Have either of us changed our minds about ANYTHING we have argued? No, not at all it seems.

All i will say is that i think you need to watch the movie again at least twice, this way i think you will see more of were me and other fans who liked it come from.

i really think they needed to delve into the whole "return to krypton" aspect of the story. Especially Superman's belief that there might be survivors......including HIS PARENTS!!!

if they didn't want to show the Return to Krypton scene at the outset ( which would have made for an awesome opening sequence!!! )....they could have done it as a flashback when Supes is explaining himself to Lois on the Daily Planet rooftop.

That way, as Superman is describing his journey to Lois, the flashback and voiceover will also allow the audience to experience the journey with Supes. To see the barren, wasteland remains of Krypton.....to feel Superman's hopes dashed when he realizes that he really is the last of his kind.......to learn of Superman's perils as he tried to journey back home.......and to feel Superman's despair as he realizes that he let everyone down on Earth.........

The Return to Krypton aspect seemed to be the entire crux....the catalyst of the entire movie......yet it received so little attention....almost as if it was an afterthought or excuse to get Supes away......

This is a completely valid complaint, and i completely agree with you on this, if we would have seen more of his RTK, i think A LOT of people who didnt like the movie might have a different opinion of it.

Hopefully we will get to see the scene one day.

 

[dr collossus]

As i said the flaws have been discussed AT length, meaning there is simply nothing more to discuss, IMO the movie had FAR more good things about it, hence why it takes longer to talk about the good things .

Did you even read the title of this thread? It's clearly a thread for discussing people's criticism of the movie. If you don't like that, stick to the SR Was Great!!!!! threads.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Did you even read the title of this thread? It's clearly a thread for discussing people's criticism of the movie. If you don't like that, stick to the SR Was Great!!!!! threads.

And if you look at my post above, i do add some criticism t: .

 

[dr collossus]

And if you look at my post above, i do add some criticism t: .

Right...so it's ok to discuss the movie's flaws then?