What Impact does SV have on a new Superman movie?

[Motown Marvel]

Forgot about this thread.

The only major deviation Superman Returns made was the addition of Jason.

Jason isnt even a deviation, rather a progression. argue all you want about whether its good or bad progression, but....

 

[Motown Marvel]

Forgot about this thread.

The only major deviation Superman Returns made was the addition of Jason.

jason isnt even deviation, rather progression. now, you can argue all you want about whether it was good or bad progression, but....

 

[Nave 'Torment']

Jason, or Superman with a son, is a deviation from mainstream comics continuity. But the entire premise of SR is a progression anyway so you're right in one sense.

 

[Man of Tomorrow]

jason isnt even deviation, rather progression. now, you can argue all you want about whether it was good or bad progression, but....

Indeed, there's a difference between that and going back and altering the origins.

 

[LL2K2]

Hmmm...how quickly we forgot about the "Last Son" arc in the comics...

 

[stargazer]

Hmmm...how quickly we forgot about the "Last Son" arc in the comics...

In the Alan Moore Superman stories, we also learn that Superman's deepest wish is to be a family man. It makes sense since he was raised by a very loving couple with old-fashioned values.

 

[KyleDW2]

Hmmm...how quickly we forgot about the "Last Son" arc in the comics...

The difference between Superman Returns and Last Son is that, in Returns, Jason was the product of Superman's complete irresponsibility in regards to his and Lois' relationship. Richard grew up thinking another man, a better man in my opinion, was his father. Superman lost the first five years of his son's life because he was off doing something stupid. In Last Son, he took complete responsibility for a boy that wasn't even his, took him in, adopted him, and taught him. Even after Chris was forced back into the Phantom Zone, he still thought of Clark and Lois as his parents. In Returns, Jason thinks Richard is his father.

So, in other words, its not really a question of progression but a question of how to present the progression. Hidden love child that Superman accidentally abandoned for the first five years of his life? Not really the right sort of progression for Superman. And, to bring this back to Smallville, I don't think many people would be adverse to rewriting some of Superman's backstory a bit. But having every single one of his enemies know him before he has even become Superman? Having Clark easily defeat Doomsday once? Lois knowing Clark's secret before he becomes Superman? Again, those are bad changes.

 

[Man of Tomorrow]

There are much worse changes SV has made than the above ones you've mentioned.

Some of the ones I loathed the most occurred in Season 8.

 

[Alonsovich]

Jason isnt even a deviation, rather a progression. argue all you want about whether its good or bad progression, but....

It's no progression or deviation. It's an outright abortion that somehow came to life when it shouldn't have and needed to be put down to end it's own suffering.

 

[stargazer]

The difference between Superman Returns and Last Son is that, in Returns, Jason was the product of Superman's complete irresponsibility in regards to his and Lois' relationship. Richard grew up thinking another man, a better man in my opinion, was his father. Superman lost the first five years of his son's life because he was off doing something stupid. In Last Son, he took complete responsibility for a boy that wasn't even his, took him in, adopted him, and taught him. Even after Chris was forced back into the Phantom Zone, he still thought of Clark and Lois as his parents. In Returns, Jason thinks Richard is his father.

So, in other words, its not really a question of progression but a question of how to present the progression. Hidden love child that Superman accidentally abandoned for the first five years of his life? Not really the right sort of progression for Superman. And, to bring this back to Smallville, I don't think many people would be adverse to rewriting some of Superman's backstory a bit. But having every single one of his enemies know him before he has even become Superman? Having Clark easily defeat Doomsday once? Lois knowing Clark's secret before he becomes Superman? Again, those are bad changes.

I don't see how Superman going back to Krypton searching for survivors is something stupid.

And how was he being irresponsible to Lois about the child if he didn't know she was pregnant? Yes, he left without saying goodbye to her, but in his mind that was the only way he could go; if he had told her and she asked him to stay, he wouldn't have gone, but he felt he had to go. In other words, he was really torn, he acted like a real human being. He isn't perfect either.

Hidden love child that Superman accidentally abandoned for the first five years of his life? Not really the right sort of progression for Superman.

If may not be your ideal Superman behavior the way it happened, but he didn't really abandon his son since he didn't know he had one in the first place. Besides, this type of story has happened before in other mythologies like the Greek one with Zeus and Hercules for instance. They did it first and most people are ok with it. I'm no 'Superman purist' either so I find the way they did it in SR an acceptable one. I really wonder if the next film will present Superman like such a perfect being in every way... can't wait to hear the fanboy reactions.....

 

[KyleDW2]

I don't see how Superman going back to Krypton searching for survivors is something stupid.

Because Superman wouldn't do that. Find one time in the comics he did that. The closest I can think of is when he left in exile, and that was because he felt he could no longer serve as Superman. He also left Supergirl in charge of protecting Earth as he didn't want to leave it unprotected.

Superman, when written as he is supposed to be, isn't the type to go off on a five year journey at the expense of all his personal relationships because of some half baked, poorly explained rumor he heard from unreliable Earth science. He's smarter and more responsible than that.

And how was he being irresponsible to Lois about the child if he didn't know she was pregnant? Yes, he left without saying goodbye to her, but in his mind that was the only way he could go; if he had told her and she asked him to stay, he wouldn't have gone, but he felt he had to go. In other words, he was really torn, he acted like a real human being. He isn't perfect either.

Let me ask you something. If a man is in a sexual relationship with a woman, doesn't he owe her some modicum of respect? Just the slightest courtesy like, say, telling her he will be leaving for five years? That he might not be back? You know, to keep from breaking her heart and having her worry and think all sorts of terrible things during said five years? That is how Superman was irresponsible to his son. Even if he didn't know he existed, he wronged him before he was ever born by not giving a damn about Lois' feelings. Oh, so she might ask him to stay? He might not go then? Well then maybe that would have been a sign that going would have been a stupid thing to do. But maybe Lois would have still been mad at him? Then Superman must have very little confidence in Lois' ability to act as an adult. If he absolutely had to go, and she loved him, she would have understood and been able to raise Jason as Superman's son instead of having another man think he's the father, thus hurting him when he eventually finds out.

And before you start in on the line of logic that I know is coming, no, I don't expect Superman to be perfect. But Superman shouldn't make such simple mistakes. Hell, I wouldn't do that kind of thing. So how can I be more moral than Superman?

You know, I can sum up all of this in one sentence. Its not just his powers that makes Superman super. The people behind the next movie would do well to remember that.

If may not be your ideal Superman behavior the way it happened, but he didn't really abandon his son since he didn't know he had one in the first place. Besides, this type of story has happened before in other mythologies like the Greek one with Zeus and Hercules for instance. They did it first and most people are ok with it. I'm no 'Superman purist' either so I find the way they did it in SR an acceptable one. I really wonder if the next film will present Superman like such a perfect being in every way... can't wait to hear the fanboy reactions.....

Just so you know, Zeus and Hercules in traditional mythology are kind of jerks. Zeus turned a woman into a cow and had sex with her. So...not really the best comparisons.

 

[B]

Because Superman wouldn't do that. Find one time in the comics he did that. The closest I can think of is when he left in exile, and that was because he felt he could no longer serve as Superman. He also left Supergirl in charge of protecting Earth as he didn't want to leave it unprotected.

Superman, when written as he is supposed to be, isn't the type to go off on a five year journey at the expense of all his personal relationships because of some half baked, poorly explained rumor he heard from unreliable Earth science. He's smarter and more responsible than that.

Let me ask you something. If a man is in a sexual relationship with a woman, doesn't he owe her some modicum of respect? Just the slightest courtesy like, say, telling her he will be leaving for five years? That he might not be back? You know, to keep from breaking her heart and having her worry and think all sorts of terrible things during said five years? That is how Superman was irresponsible to his son. Even if he didn't know he existed, he wronged him before he was ever born by not giving a damn about Lois' feelings. Oh, so she might ask him to stay? He might not go then? Well then maybe that would have been a sign that going would have been a stupid thing to do. But maybe Lois would have still been mad at him? Then Superman must have very little confidence in Lois' ability to act as an adult. If he absolutely had to go, and she loved him, she would have understood and been able to raise Jason as Superman's son instead of having another man think he's the father, thus hurting him when he eventually finds out.

And before you start in on the line of logic that I know is coming, no, I don't expect Superman to be perfect. But Superman shouldn't make such simple mistakes. Hell, I wouldn't do that kind of thing. So how can I be more moral than Superman?

You know, I can sum up all of this in one sentence. Its not just his powers that makes Superman super. The people behind the next movie would do well to remember that.

This. All of this x 1,000,000,000,000,000.

 

[idrnkurmlkshks]

I never understood how the SR Supes couldn't use a little x-ray vision to notice a knocked up Lois before he left.

 

[rob-el2]

Because Superman wouldn't do that. Find one time in the comics he did that. The closest I can think of is when he left in exile, and that was because he felt he could no longer serve as Superman. He also left Supergirl in charge of protecting Earth as he didn't want to leave it unprotected.

Superman, when written as he is supposed to be, isn't the type to go off on a five year journey at the expense of all his personal relationships because of some half baked, poorly explained rumor he heard from unreliable Earth science. He's smarter and more responsible than that.



Let me ask you something. If a man is in a sexual relationship with a woman, doesn't he owe her some modicum of respect? Just the slightest courtesy like, say, telling her he will be leaving for five years? That he might not be back? You know, to keep from breaking her heart and having her worry and think all sorts of terrible things during said five years? That is how Superman was irresponsible to his son. Even if he didn't know he existed, he wronged him before he was ever born by not giving a damn about Lois' feelings. Oh, so she might ask him to stay? He might not go then? Well then maybe that would have been a sign that going would have been a stupid thing to do. But maybe Lois would have still been mad at him? Then Superman must have very little confidence in Lois' ability to act as an adult. If he absolutely had to go, and she loved him, she would have understood and been able to raise Jason as Superman's son instead of having another man think he's the father, thus hurting him when he eventually finds out.

And before you start in on the line of logic that I know is coming, no, I don't expect Superman to be perfect. But Superman shouldn't make such simple mistakes. Hell, I wouldn't do that kind of thing. So how can I be more moral than Superman?

You know, I can sum up all of this in one sentence. Its not just his powers that makes Superman super. The people behind the next movie would do well to remember that.



Just so you know, Zeus and Hercules in traditional mythology are kind of jerks. Zeus turned a woman into a cow and had sex with her. So...not really the best comparisons.

They bascially covered him leaving Earth at the end of season 3 on Lois and Clark and while that show was poorly written most of the time they did get the character right in that he made the descion to go to New Krypton after talking to Lois (and others first). He never would just up an leave like he did in SR

 

[Nave 'Torment']

People, keep to the topic! How would the next film be affected by SMALLVILLE? SMALLVILLE! I'm going to equate Superman Returns with the CR films and leave it there. They're rebooting that universe. The question is how much will they take from the series? I'm guessing none. But at least keep to the topic.

 

[KrypJonian]

Agreed.

What if Lois is pregnant in the SV universe right now...? What if the season ends with Clark wanting to take off for 5 years...? HA!

 

[Nave 'Torment']

^ People will still complain how SR is better than SV or vice versa, despite both telling two different stories of the same character.

Btw, here's a thought: What if they decide to tell the Brainiac story in the new film? Would it be better to use the STAS/Smallville version where he's an A.I. from Krypton (and is connected to its doom) or should they use the Silver Age 'collector of species' depiction?

 

[KrypJonian]

^You should read Johns' Brainiac trade... They finally tied all that together.

 

[El Payaso]

Because Superman wouldn't do that. Find one time in the comics he did that. The closest I can think of is when he left in exile, and that was because he felt he could no longer serve as Superman. He also left Supergirl in charge of protecting Earth as he didn't want to leave it unprotected.

Wait, going to Krypton to find survivors is a stupid thing to do because it hasn't been done in comics?

So Batmanm blaming himself for Two-Face's crimes is as stupid because of the same reason? Because I can't remember him doing that previous to TDK.

Superman, when written as he is supposed to be, isn't the type to go off on a five year journey at the expense of all his personal relationships because of some half baked, poorly explained rumor he heard from unreliable Earth science. He's smarter and more responsible than that.

Well it wasn't a rumour. It was some astronomers, you knopw, science people who said that so it wasn't just something someone said.

Let me ask you something. If a man is in a sexual relationship with a woman, doesn't he owe her some modicum of respect? Just the slightest courtesy like, say, telling her he will be leaving for five years? That he might not be back? You know, to keep from breaking her heart and having her worry and think all sorts of terrible things during said five years?

I think Superman thought it would be easier for Lois to forget him if she just hated him.

Anyways I would have done it with Superman actually telling her good-bye (the not saying good-bye is something I never bought) and Lois not accepting that he was going to leave her.

That is how Superman was irresponsible to his son. Even if he didn't know he existed, he wronged him before he was ever born by not giving a damn about Lois' feelings.

It's easy to wrong someone when you don't know he exists. It's like you're not even aware of it, right?

Oh, so she might ask him to stay? He might not go then? Well then maybe that would have been a sign that going would have been a stupid thing to do.

It's now stupid because he might have doubts about it? Or because it was troublesome?

But maybe Lois would have still been mad at him? Then Superman must have very little confidence in Lois' ability to act as an adult.

Given Lois's behaviour in the Donner movies, Superman had every reason to know Lois rarely acts like an adult woman.

If he absolutely had to go, and she loved him, she would have understood and been able to raise Jason as Superman's son instead of having another man think he's the father, thus hurting him when he eventually finds out.

That was both's mistake. Lois never had the chance to know Jason was Superman's because she got involved with Richard very quickly. And that would have never happened if not because of Superman not saying good-bye.

And before you start in on the line of logic that I know is coming, no, I don't expect Superman to be perfect. But Superman shouldn't make such simple mistakes. Hell, I wouldn't do that kind of thing. So how can I be more moral than Superman?

You know, I can sum up all of this in one sentence. Its not just his powers that makes Superman super. The people behind the next movie would do well to remember that.

And you have to remember that super-powers and strong morals don't prevent you from making mistakes. Simple mistakes, as you call them.

Just so you know, Zeus and Hercules in traditional mythology are kind of jerks. Zeus turned a woman into a cow and had sex with her. So...not really the best comparisons.

So compared to them, Superman comes off reasonably right.

 

[KrypJonian]

Wait, going to Krypton to find survivors is a stupid thing to do because it hasn't been done in comics?

So Batmanm blaming himself for Two-Face's crimes is as stupid because of the same reason? Because I can't remember him doing that previous to TDK.



Well it wasn't a rumour. It was some astronomers, you knopw, science people who said that so it wasn't just something someone said.



I think Superman thought it would be easier for Lois to forget him if she just hated him.

Anyways I would have done it with Superman actually telling her good-bye (the not saying good-bye is something I never bought) and Lois not accepting that he was going to leave her.



It's easy to wrong someone when you don't know he exists. It's like you're not even aware of it, right?



It's now stupid because he might have doubts about it? Or because it was troublesome?



Given Lois's behaviour in the Donner movies, Superman had every reason to know Lois rarely acts like an adult woman.



That was both's mistake. Lois never had the chance to know Jason was Superman's because she got involved with Richard very quickly. And that would have never happened if not because of Superman not saying good-bye.



And you have to remember that super-powers and strong morals don't prevent you from making mistakes. Simple mistakes, as you call them.



So compared to them, Superman comes off reasonably right.

Sorry Payaso, but I gotta agree with Kyle... His points make sense...

And even though it wasn't overtly said in the movie, it was said somewhere that Lex tricked him into thinking there was some Krypton left.... to get himself out of his own trial...

I know I have no sources, so feel free to ignore me. But I know it's out there somewhere

 

[El Payaso]

Sorry Payaso, but I gotta agree with Kyle... His points make sense...

Which ones. And please don't be sorry.

And even though it wasn't overtly said in the movie, it was said somewhere that Lex tricked him into thinking there was some Krypton left.... to get himself out of his own trial...

I know I have no sources, so feel free to ignore me. But I know it's out there somewhere

Yeah, that's like a documented fact. And I would have included it in the movie.

 

[Nave 'Torment']

^You should read Johns' Brainiac trade... They finally tied all that together.

Ah okay, cool then. I haven't read up on that yet. Is it a retcon or does it actually fit easily into the rest of the myth?

Wait, going to Krypton to find survivors is a stupid thing to do because it hasn't been done in comics?

So Batman blaming himself for Two-Face's crimes is as stupid because of the same reason? Because I can't remember him doing that previous to TDK.

Dude, seriously, just move on from that. A few posts back we were arguing about which was more 'true to the comics'. Thing is, every adaptation will interpret the character in its own way, adding certain elements while removing others. The point here was simply that Superman never left to find Krypton like the way he did in the film, a lot of fans would find that as something that isn't 'true to the comics'. The entire debate is in the wrong thread.

And, just for the record, Batman has always blamed himself for murders committed by some of his greatest enemies. Hell, in the comics he blamed himself for Harvey becoming Two-Face.

I think Superman thought it would be easier for Lois to forget him if she just hated him.

That's something Joey Tribianni would advocate

 

[Ultimate_Superman]

Jason, or Superman with a son, is a deviation from mainstream comics continuity. But the entire premise of SR is a progression anyway so you're right in one sense.

Actually no it's not the idea of Superman with a kid first came about from Lois and Clark since then DC has always been trying to give him and Lois a child Rucka was the closest to doing so and was building up to it in a very nice and respectable way. However when AOS got canned that storyline got canned and Superman and Lois were then the parents of Zod's son for two years. So he is right that Superman Returns was just in many ways progression. Plain and simple And if you look at the comics a lot of elements from that movie has found its way into the comics as well.

Personally while I love SV I think nether should play a role in the new movie because while SV has been on for 10 years it doesn't mean it is widely loved. For example if you look at the reviews for SR from Rotten Tomato down to Yahoo or Amazon the General Public did like the movie but it's not getting a sequel (anymore anyways). Reason being that WB wants a movie the public will love and crave more of not just like or think its okay. Which category Smallville falls under as well. That's why I always say Smallville and Superman Returns have more in common than most give it credit but have a huge split fan base among the Superman/comic fans and bot in the general public eyes viewed as I can care either way what happens to it. The difference is one cost less to make.

 

[Ultimate_Superman]

The difference between Superman Returns and Last Son is that, in Returns, Jason was the product of Superman's complete irresponsibility in regards to his and Lois' relationship. Richard grew up thinking another man, a better man in my opinion, was his father. Superman lost the first five years of his son's life because he was off doing something stupid. In Last Son, he took complete responsibility for a boy that wasn't even his, took him in, adopted him, and taught him. Even after Chris was forced back into the Phantom Zone, he still thought of Clark and Lois as his parents. In Returns, Jason thinks Richard is his father.

So, in other words, its not really a question of progression but a question of how to present the progression. Hidden love child that Superman accidentally abandoned for the first five years of his life? Not really the right sort of progression for Superman. And, to bring this back to Smallville, I don't think many people would be adverse to rewriting some of Superman's backstory a bit. But having every single one of his enemies know him before he has even become Superman? Having Clark easily defeat Doomsday once? Lois knowing Clark's secret before he becomes Superman? Again, those are bad changes.

Once again it is hinted that both Lois and Richard knew the truth about Jason in the novel and the shooting script it is that he just didn't care though. Again not justifying because I would have been okay with the idea had Lois known Clark was Superman or even if Clark and Lois relationship had progressed to where Lois was dating Clark.

 

[Ultimate_Superman]

Because Superman wouldn't do that. Find one time in the comics he did that. The closest I can think of is when he left in exile, and that was because he felt he could no longer serve as Superman. He also left Supergirl in charge of protecting Earth as he didn't want to leave it unprotected.

Superman, when written as he is supposed to be, isn't the type to go off on a five year journey at the expense of all his personal relationships because of some half baked, poorly explained rumor he heard from unreliable Earth science. He's smarter and more responsible than that.



Let me ask you something. If a man is in a sexual relationship with a woman, doesn't he owe her some modicum of respect? Just the slightest courtesy like, say, telling her he will be leaving for five years? That he might not be back? You know, to keep from breaking her heart and having her worry and think all sorts of terrible things during said five years? That is how Superman was irresponsible to his son. Even if he didn't know he existed, he wronged him before he was ever born by not giving a damn about Lois' feelings. Oh, so she might ask him to stay? He might not go then? Well then maybe that would have been a sign that going would have been a stupid thing to do. But maybe Lois would have still been mad at him? Then Superman must have very little confidence in Lois' ability to act as an adult. If he absolutely had to go, and she loved him, she would have understood and been able to raise Jason as Superman's son instead of having another man think he's the father, thus hurting him when he eventually finds out.

And before you start in on the line of logic that I know is coming, no, I don't expect Superman to be perfect. But Superman shouldn't make such simple mistakes. Hell, I wouldn't do that kind of thing. So how can I be more moral than Superman?

You know, I can sum up all of this in one sentence. Its not just his powers that makes Superman super. The people behind the next movie would do well to remember that.



Just so you know, Zeus and Hercules in traditional mythology are kind of jerks. Zeus turned a woman into a cow and had sex with her. So...not really the best comparisons.

I agree with you in this statement in the comics Superman wouldn't have done this but Singer based his Superman movie off of the Donner series. Now going by that Donner's "beloved" Superman would have done something like that because they mad him more or less a human with God like powers. He was more relateable which is one of the many reasons why people liked the movie and series so much and during the scripting stage at that time asking for SR to be a sequel to his movies then anything else. Also why comic movies usually don't follow to close a comic book story persay because each person has their own version of that hero. Look at Captain America for example most people hate Ultimate Cap because to them he is not Captain America but that moive and storyline looks like it is shaping up to be Ultimate Cap then 616. Look at Burton's Batman he pretty much killed off all of his villains from dropping them from rooftops to strapping bombs on their chest. Yet comic Batman didn't kill. Hell even take Superman what Superman did in SR was not to bad considering he told Martha Kent where he was going and kept Clark Kent alive he just took Superman away which if you want to take from the comics is right out of Kingdom Come only that Superman was gone longer then SR was. It's all a matter of where or what you use for the source. For example some people don't like Earth One's Superman because many feel Superman should right off the back want to help people and save the world because of his powers but in Earth One he wanted to do different until his hand was forced. Now does that make him any less Superman than the others? And what would happen if Earth One was used for the movie since Goyer had a copy long before we did hell 9 out 10 he read that and Secret Origins around the same time. So if he used that as somewhat the source is that Superman not Superman?


I am just saying there are many versions of Superman that you can pick and chose what you want to follow Singer went with Donner & Kingdom Come, SV is going all over the place, L&C went with MOS, the comics are now going the Donner/Singer way. So which one is right?

At the same time though