Superman Returns What's So Bad About Superman Returns?

[Dr.]

Are you serious?Most laymen would tell you Supe can't even STAND next to kryptonite.Now Singer has him lifting an ISLAND laced with the stuff.Obviously,Singer didn't know how kryptonite affects Superman.

You may have a point that the effects of kryptonite were handled inconsistently. But your original complaint was to do with Superman getting vanquished by common thugs. It's surely relevant, though, that this occurred in the presence of kryptonite - hence, the Senator mentioning it. And if you dislike that Supes can be rendered helpless as a kitten by a mere rock, then that's the flaw of the mythos in general (not SR in particular).

 

[BH/HHH]

Yeah,that's why Tommy Mank said it was so important for Clark to go back to the bully at the end of SMII.There is something unsatisfying about seeing Superman get beaten,without getting vindication at the end.

Yeah definitely, there's other instances in the movie too like when he goes to stop the guy firing that huge gun, he's shot in the eye and then we get that hint of a smile. We should have gotten more, in the original artwork he ties him and all the crooks up with the chopper blades.

 

[Senator Pleasury]

Those thugs who beat Superman died.

 

[BH/HHH]

Those thugs who beat Superman died.

They did yeah but it didn't feel like a payoff. I get the feeling he doesn't even know he killed them.

 

[Senator Pleasury]

They did yeah but it didn't feel like a payoff. I get the feeling he doesn't even know he killed them.

Dying is not enough?

 

[BH/HHH]

Dying is not enough?

Not what I mean, Superman should have gotten to do something to them rather than them unintentionally dying from a falling pilar on an island he was lifting. I thought it was pretty lame, not a real payoff at least for me.

 

[Senator Pleasury]

Not what I mean, Superman should have gotten to do something to them rather than them unintentionally dying from a falling pilar on an island he was lifting. I thought it was pretty lame, not a real payoff at least for me.

I guess Superman is more about personal vendettas than villains dying because they're just too greedy?

 

[BH/HHH]

I guess Superman is more about personal vendettas than villains dying because they're just too greedy?

Lol no that's not what I mean. i guess I just found the "payoff' to not be very satisfying is all.

 

[sf2]

The difference is that SR did show how Superman recharged his cells by flying towards the sun. TDKR simply forgot about the thing.

You didn't like it? Was it not enough? Maybe so, but they addressed the subject.



Exactly what in the movie makes you suspect that Lois knew?


**********************************




Wrong. He went with Lois because he knew that she wasn't in love with Richard as she had refused to marry him even when he had proposed, so it was possible that she was with Richard just out of spite. They flew together and AFTER that Lois said 'I'm sorry, it's too late, cannot do this to Richard' and Superman stepped back and never again flirt with her.



What does the crystals' theft have to do with the beating scene? His crystals cannot defeat him. Kryptonite does.

So the kryptonite weakened Superman. How is that cheap?

He was so weak n almost got killed when the K was not even near him. After recharge, he can hold the weight of an island when a piece of K inside him and tons of K above his head directly???

There r many reasons people dont get marry even they r in love. Maybe Lois doesn't believe in marriage. Come on. She has a kid with the other guy! It's okay for him to flirt her to test her further??? What if Lois kissed him back, wanna get laid???

If Clark was slightly brighter, he would connect the dots... lex escaped jail term, missing crystals, stolen rare minerals from museum.

I don't know... u r so generous to SR, yet u r so harsh with MOS. At least when I watch MOS, I don't have to press the forward key. I can enjoy it through wholly.

 

[Senator Pleasury]

He was so weak n almost got killed when the K was not even near him. After recharge, he can hold the weight of an island when a piece of K inside him and tons of K above his head directly???

In one word, yes.

But the kryptonite inside the island started to emerge when he was in space.

There r many reasons people dont get marry even they r in love. Maybe Lois doesn't believe in marriage. Come on. She has a kid with the other guy!

Or maybe it's like it happened in the movie: according to Jimmy Olsen she "hates that question," when referring to when Lois and Richard are "tying the knot." She is okay with him - we can see that in the movie - but she doesn't love him. In fact, she lies to him when she tells Richard she wasn't in love with Superman during the events of STM.

No, I'm afraid this is far worse than just not believing in marriage.

It's okay for him to flirt her to test her further??? What if Lois kissed him back, wanna get laid???

Given that Superman has reasons to believe Lois is not in love, they both has the right to know.

Now, if Lois had kissed him back and gone for a further relationship, it's her right as an adult to choose who she wants to be with. But she didn't, so I assume you're not going to rant against things that didn't happen.

If Clark was slightly brighter, he would connect the dots... lex escaped jail term, missing crystals, stolen rare minerals from museum.

So, why would Clark assume there was kryptonite involved? All he knows about it is what Lois said "There was a museum robbery last night, even Superman missed that." No minerals were mentioned.

I don't know... u r so generous to SR, yet u r so harsh with MOS. At least when I watch MOS, I don't have to press the forward key. I can enjoy it through wholly.

Because characters that were all about life let their dad die and threw giant spaceships against buildings, and because those dads that traditionally instilled strong morals in the hero are now saying that the right thing to do is let people die. But your posts against SR sometimes have wrong events or things that didn't happen (or not in the right order).

 

[sf2]

In one word, yes.

But the kryptonite inside the island started torge when he was in space.



Or maybe it's like it happened in the movie: according to Jimmy Olsen she "hates that question," when referring to when Lois and Richard are "tying the knot." She is okay with him - we can see that in the movie - but she doesn't love him. In fact, she lies to him when she tells Richard she wasn't in love with Superman during the events of STM.

No, I'm afraid this is far worse than just not believing in marriage.



Given that Superman has reasons to believe Lois is not in love, they both has the right to know.

Now, if Lois had kissed him back and gone for a further relationship, it's her right as an adult to choose who she wants to be with. But she didn't, so I assume you're not going to rant against things that didn't happen.



So, why would Clark assume there was kryptonite involved? All he knows about it is what Lois said "There was a museum robbery last night, even Superman missed that." No minerals were mentioned.



Because characters that were all about life let their dad die and threw giant spaceships against buildings, and because those dads that traditionally instilled strong morals in the hero are now saying that the right thing to do is let people die. But your posts against SR sometimes have wrong events or things that didn't happen (or not in the right order).

The Kryptonite didn't even start to emerge, he was already as weak as a kid not got beaten around. well u r convinced, good for u.

It's her choice??? Wow... so if she ok, he'll ok??? where the high morale standard has gone to which u have hold it against superman in MOS???

Maybe the execution wasn't so good, but we knew that they tried to make pa kent a normal protective father in MOS. However, Lois was made a total ***** in SR! Pa Kent just a glimpse, while Lois is everywhere!

 

[Senator Pleasury]

The Kryptonite didn't even start to emerge, he was already as weak as a kid not got beaten around. well u r convinced, good for u.

It's what's in the movie. Superman gets to see the kryptonite beneath the island surface when he feels weak. But when he's lifting the island, the kryptonite only emerges later (I assume the lower part of the island was thicker so kryptonite took longer to emerge).

And then we have the sun re-charge in between.

It's her choice??? Wow... so if she ok, he'll ok??? where the high morale standard has gone to which u have hold it against superman in MOS???

It's not like they would jump on a bed immediately. But if she doesn't love Richard (refuses to marry him, lies to him), why would she keep being with him?

Anyways, if you ask for high moral, SR had Lois saying no and Superman respecting that. But it's more fun to argue about what did not happen in the movie, I assume.

Maybe the execution wasn't so good, but we knew that they tried to make pa kent a normal protective father in MOS. However, Lois was made a total ***** in SR! Pa Kent just a glimpse, while Lois is everywhere!

Lois has always been portrayed as impulsive, reckless and superficial when it's about men. It's the case of the Donnerverse. That's why she is crazy about Supes, but despises Clark Kent. So Lois in SR is not different.

Pa Kent has always been the one who instilled morals in Clark, the one who taught him to value life above everything else. Going precisely against all that is far more than a glimpse (and Clark not saving him was even worse).

 

[charl_huntress]

Lois has always been portrayed as impulsive, reckless and superficial when it's about men. It's the case of the Donnerverse.

Hold on now...

Please stop with the broad generalizations. While she may be reckless and impulsive, she is not superficial. I could name four Loises from four different eras and incarnations where she is portrayed as far from superficial. Also you really need to watch STM and SII again if you think she despises Clark. You clearly missed all the signs of friendship and affection in STM and SII, and it seems at this point you will say anything to support SR.

Just stop now.

 

[Senator Pleasury]

Hold on now...

Please stop with the broad generalizations. While she may be reckless and impulsive, she is not superficial. I could name four Loises from four different eras and incarnations where she is not portrayed as far from superficial. Also you really need to watch STM and SII again if you think she despises Clark. You clearly missed all the signs of friendship and affection in STM and SII, and it seems at this point you will say anything to support SR.

Just stop now.

No, I don't have any reason to stop.

I specified it was the case of the Donnerverse (in comics, I am aware, there have been different approaches). That friendship she displays with Clark in the Donnerverse, while honest, has a lot of pity and sympathy. She knows him, but she would never ever take him seriously. But not knowing much about Superman, she fell for him instantly.

 

[charl_huntress]

No, I don't have any reason to stop.

I specified it was the case of the Donnerverse (in comics, I am aware, there have been different approaches). That friendship she displays with Clark in the Donnerverse, while honest, has a lot of pity and sympathy. She knows him, but she would never ever take him seriously. But not knowing much about Superman, she fell for him instantly.

Thank you for clarifying that you think this only applies to Donnerverse/SR Lois. It sounded like a broad character generalization you were applying to Lois Lane, and not just a specific incarnation. As it is...she still does not despise Clark. I don't agree with your interpretation of their relationship, but as you say she feels pity and sympathy for him which are not emotions one shows toward someone they despise. I think you should rethink using that word.

But by all means...carry on defending SR. This is you right on the Hype...lol. I, of course, will go on hating it because that's my right too.

 

[Senator Pleasury]

Thank you for clarifying that you think this only applies to Donnerverse/SR Lois. It sounded like a broad character generalization you were applying to Lois Lane, and not just a specific incarnation. As it is...she still does not despise Clark. I don't agree with your interpretation of their relationship, but as you say she feels pity and sympathy for him which are not emotions one shows toward someone they despise. I think you should rethink using that word.

Lois might look and sound nice to Clark. But that's only because she pities him, that's why she tries to be nice and friendly. And she knows he has a real crush on her but for no reason she looks at him like a complete man. But it's the blue prince she looks for, when it's about Superman, she doesn't even need to get to know him better.

And since SR is a sequel to the Donnerverse, then other interpretations are irrelevant.

But by all means...carry on defending SR. This is you right on the Hype...lol. I, of course, will go on hating it because that's my right too.

Unlike you, I haven't told you to stop, so you don't have to clarify this.

 

[charl_huntress]

Lois might look and sound nice to Clark. But that's only because she pities him, that's why she tries to be nice and friendly. And she knows he has a real crush on her but for no reason she looks at him like a complete man. But it's the blue prince she looks for, when it's about Superman, she doesn't even need to get to know him better.

Again though, pity is not an emotion someone has for someone they despise. That was my main beef with your wording. As it is...I still think you need to watch STM and SII again. I happened to watch both STM and SII yesterday, and while I agree Lois feels some pity for Clark, and has a crush on Superman. One of the reasons she feels pity for Clark is he goes out of his way to act like a complete buffoon around her. Or...he acts so incredibly wimpy and meek he seems a little deserving of pity. Lois is actually trying to be a friend to Clark because she thinks he's...a bit of boob, and she wants to help him not be that way because she considers him a friend. It might be and would be wrong of her to think that way if he wasn't actually acting like a boob. Conversely, when he's Superman, he's all macho and hot, and he's flirting with her! Why wouldn't Lois have a crush on Superman, when he's clearly crushing on her?

Again, it's like you'll say anything to defend SR... C'mon...

And since SR is a sequel to the Donnerverse, then other interpretations are irrelevant.

Fair enough, but that's now how you phrased it, and again it was that phrasing I took issue with.

Unlike you, I haven't told you to stop, so you don't have to clarify this.

Quite right...my bad.

 

[Senator Pleasury]

Again though, pity is not an emotion someone has for someone they despise. That was my main beef with your wording. As it is...I still think you need to watch STM and SII again. I happened to watch both STM and SII yesterday, and while I agree Lois feels some pity for Clark, and has a crush on Superman. One of the reasons she feels pity for Clark is he goes out of his way to act like a complete buffoon around her. Or...he acts so incredibly wimpy and meek he seems a little deserving of pity. Lois is actually trying to be a friend to Clark because she thinks he's...a bit of boob, and she wants to help him not be that way because she considers him a friend. It might be and would be wrong of her to think that way if he wasn't actually acting like a boob. Conversely, when he's Superman, he's all macho and hot, and he's flirting with her! Why wouldn't Lois have a crush on Superman, when he's clearly crushing on her?

Again, it's like you'll say anything to defend SR... C'mon...

Re-word, re-phrase it the way you want. The Lois-Clark relationship was based on STM and follows that. And the whole point of this was that sf2 was outraged that Lois was not a role model. And she has never been one in the Donnerverse.

I, of course, will go on hating it

Weren't you a haterphobic?

 

[charl_huntress]

Re-word, re-phrase it the way you want. The Lois-Clark relationship was based on STM and follows that. And the whole point of this was that sf2 was outraged that Lois was not a role model. And she has never been one in the Donnerverse.

Fair enough, but what I was responding to was what you said in response to that. I think we have clarified Lois did not despise Clark in STM and SII. She did consider him a friend. She wasn't some superficial harlot who ignored him in favor of Superman. Superman was clearly crushing on her and the feeling was mutual. I am glad that is clear.

In my opinion SR Lois was cold. I didn't get a lot of warmth or energy from her, and I blame that completely on Singer and Bosworth. She was upset with Superman (rightfully so) because he left without saying goodbye when they were clearly (?) in a relationship. Because of the vague history, it's unclear what was going on, or why she's really mad, so it comes off as cold. The vague explanation is what hampers truly exploring the relationship because Singer didn't actually follow the Donnerverse, he just picked certain elements that he wanted for his depressing Superman flick.

Were you no a haterphobic?

I believe the hate I have for this movie is what caused my phobia in the first place.

 

[BH/HHH]

Yeah Singer got the whole Lois & Clark dynamic wrong, she wasn't dismissive of him in the Reeve series. She was his friend, infact she was always trying to help him come out of his shell. In Superman Returns she pretty much ignored him, infact it pissed me off when she asked him about his trip them totally blanked him after that. Singer may have paid homage to the Donner films but he didn't understand that dynamic.

 

[Dr.]

If Clark was slightly brighter, he would connect the dots... lex escaped jail term, missing crystals, stolen rare minerals from museum.

One of the problems with kryptonite (among several) is that’s it’s a short-range weapon. Commonly, it’s used in its “raw” form (a single meteorite) - so necessarily, Superman has to be tricked into approaching it. Sample any number of stories from the Silver Age and note the creatively wacky booby-traps and ambushes used. Now Supes might be forgiven for falling for these schemes once, twice or even three times. But eventually, he starts to come across as excessively gullible. Given the apparent ubiquity of kryptonite (every villain seemed to have access to the stuff ) why doesn’t he take more precautions? Of course, if Supes could anticipate and forestall every attempted use of kryptonite, it would negate the very point of giving him an Achilles Heel. Ultimately, you might have to treat the use of kryptonite like the glasses disguise: it doesn’t quite make sense, but we “give it a wink” as a decades-old convention.

Or… don’t “give it a wink” and call it a sloppy and overused trope that makes Supes look dumb. But if so, that’s an issue for the mythos as whole and not particularly unique to SR.

Yeah Singer got the whole Lois & Clark dynamic wrong, she wasn't dismissive of him in the Reeve series. She was his friend, infact she was always trying to help him come out of his shell. In Superman Returns she pretty much ignored him, infact it pissed me off when she asked him about his trip them totally blanked him after that. Singer may have paid homage to the Donner films but he didn't understand that dynamic.

Classically, Superman-Clark-Lois constitutes a love “triangle.” And while Clark is clearly interested in Lois, she (depending on the iteration) either ignores Clark or is romantically torn between him and Superman. Often, this dynamic has been played for laughs (Hey, isn’t it funny that the guy Lois rejects is really the guy she pines for? ) And to the extent it’s more nuanced, it paints Supes/Clark as dysfunctional and Lois as shallow.

In SR, Clark was pretty much sidelined as any sort of legitimate love interest and Richard replaced him as the third point in the triangle. Essentially, Richard was a better version of what Clark (ostensibly) represented. And in dramatic/thematic terms, that was more interesting.

 

[BH/HHH]

Classically, Superman-Clark-Lois constitutes a love “triangle.” And while Clark is clearly interested in Lois, she (depending on the iteration) either ignores Clark or is romantically torn between him and Superman. Often, this dynamic has been played for laughs (Hey, isn’t it funny that the guy Lois rejects is really the guy she pines for? ) And to the extent it’s more nuanced, it paints Supes/Clark as dysfunctional and Lois as shallow.

In SR, Clark was pretty much sidelined as any sort of legitimate love interest and Richard replaced him as the third point in the triangle. Essentially, Richard was a better version of what Clark (ostensibly) represented. And in dramatic/thematic terms, that was more interesting.

When I said Singer got it wrong what I meant was he got it wrong as a continuation of the Donner films. The dynamic in those between Clark and Lois wasn't her ignoring him, they were clearly friends.

 

[charl_huntress]

Essentially, Richard was a better version of what Clark (ostensibly) represented. And in dramatic/thematic terms, that was more interesting.

I'm curious. What made this dynamic more interesting in a dramatic and thematic sense in a Superman movie? How does taking a love triangle (as you called it) for two, and turning it into a trapezium that now includes one extra body make that dynamic more interesting?

 

[Dr.]

I'm curious. What made this dynamic more interesting in a dramatic and thematic sense in a Superman movie? How does taking a love triangle (as you called it) for two, and turning it into a trapezium that now includes one extra body make that dynamic more interesting?

Well, in the classic triangle, Lois’s romantic dilemma is essentially a sham. Whether she chooses noble-but-ordinary (Clark) or the romantic ideal (Superman), she’ll ultimately be rewarded with “both.”

In SR, where the options aren’t conflated, Lois’s choice is real, has real significance and implications. And that makes it intrinsically more dramatic.

 

[Picard Sisko]

Superman Returns is just boring. It tries too hard to play homage to the Christopher Reeve films and struggles to be something new of its own.