Superman Returns Why Don't Some Superman Fans Like Superman Returns?

[dasam12]

I read in a previous post that he should have had a press conference, left a video tape for the media, or something along those lines.
Thats the part I disagreed with.

As to whether he was obligated to tell Lois or not it all depends where their relationship was before he left to try and find Krypton.

 

[dasam12]

Anubis, I admit that I do not know as much about Wonder Woman as other heroes.
I think she is a great character and one of the top 3 characters in DC.
When it comes to power, strength, invulnerability Superman wins in those catergories hands down.
Diana has top notch fighting ability, but Supes has weathered a few battles himself.

I think it would be pretty one-sided.

 

[afan]

I read in a previous post that he should have had a press conference, left a video tape for the media, or something along those lines.
Thats the part I disagreed with.

As to whether he was obligated to tell Lois or not it all depends where their relationship was before he left to try and find Krypton.

Where do you think it was............

 

[dasam12]

Honestly, I don't know. Here is why.
The movie supposedly started after Superman II.
In that movie, that slept together but he erased her memory at the end.

So IF it supposedly followed SII, it didnt make any sense.

Superman & Lois obviously had a "I like you but we can't act on it" relationship going.

If that is the case I would say he was not obligated to tell her anything.
It would have just been the polite thing to do.

What do you think?

 

[Anubis]

Anubis, I admit that I do not know as much about Wonder Woman as other heroes.
I think she is a great character and one of the top 3 characters in DC.
When it comes to power, strength, invulnerability Superman wins in those catergories hands down.
Diana has top notch fighting ability, but Supes has weathered a few battles himself.

I think it would be pretty one-sided.

Except for the fact that she's taken Supes on before, and not in one of those i'm not really trying to hurt you sorta deals, but a Superman that thought she was freakin' Doomsday who just killed Lois brutally right in front of him. And not only did she take what he dished out, but she actually hurt him. She's not only a better fighter, durable enough to take a few planet shattering punches, not to mention in possession of an arsenal of mystical armaments that could cleave the electrons off an atom.

Saying that, she's probably the third to fourth physically strongest person on the DCU Earth, depending on where exactly Captain Marvel and Black Adam end up. She is one of the few people capable of really walloping big blue.

 

[Nightwing1977]

I personally thing Wonder Woman being even close to Superman's strength is insulting)

Uhh....it's not insulting, since WW is quite as strong as he is. They're almost even. Even she was able to hold up her own few times when most of the time they fight. She can even beat the snot out of the big Boy Scout.

 

[dasam12]

You could be right. As I mentioned I do not know all that much about Wonder Woman I and am not familiar with the fights that they had.
I am very familiar with Superman and I know he is supposed to be the most powerful man on Earth.

My question is, how exactly did she hurt him?
If she could take his punches, was he not able to take hers?
I mean, isnt he invulnerable.
Why does she need bulletproof bracelets if she is tough enough to take Superman's punches?
I would think an edge she would have over him is her mythical powers.
He is very vulnerable to magic.

 

[afan]

Honestly, I don't know. Here is why.
The movie supposedly started after Superman II.
In that movie, that slept together but he erased her memory at the end.

So IF it supposedly followed SII, it didnt make any sense.

Superman & Lois obviously had a "I like you but we can't act on it" relationship going.

If that is the case I would say he was not obligated to tell her anything.
It would have just been the polite thing to do.

What do you think?

It's oft been stated that the events of S:TM, not SII, are the "vague" history foundation of SR, and that Lois and Superman had pursued a romantic relationship prior to the events of SR. Clearly the relationship was of a serious nature and involved intimacy, the result being Jason, and that level of emotional attachment demands that Superman tell Lois he is leaving for several years.

I would think an edge she would have over him is her mythical powers.
He is very vulnerable to magic.

Just to clarify Superman is only vulnerable to the specific intent of magic, i.e. a sword enchanted to kill dragons would be no more effective against Superman than a non-enchanted sword, and Wonder Woman would have no more impact on Superman than any super-being at her power levels.

 

[afan]

Honestly, I don't know. Here is why.
The movie supposedly started after Superman II.
In that movie, that slept together but he erased her memory at the end.

So IF it supposedly followed SII, it didnt make any sense.

Superman & Lois obviously had a "I like you but we can't act on it" relationship going.

If that is the case I would say he was not obligated to tell her anything.
It would have just been the polite thing to do.

What do you think?

It's oft been stated that the events of S:TM, not SII, are the "vague" history foundation of SR, and that Lois and Superman had pursued a romantic relationship prior to the events of SR. Clearly the relationship was of a serious nature and involved intimacy, the result being Jason, and that level of emotional attachment demands that Superman tell Lois he is leaving for several years.

I would think an edge she would have over him is her mythical powers.
He is very vulnerable to magic.

Just to clarify Superman is only vulnerable to the specific intent of magic, i.e. a sword enchanted to kill dragons would be no more effective against Superman than a non-enchanted sword, and Wonder Woman would have no more impact on Superman than any super-being at her power levels.

 

[Nightwing1977]

You could be right. As I mentioned I do not know all that much about Wonder Woman I and am not familiar with the fights that they had.
I am very familiar with Superman and I know he is supposed to be the most powerful man on Earth.

I understand. It just I know a lot about WW, so I just try to point it out to you.

My question is, how exactly did she hurt him?
If she could take his punches, was he not able to take hers?
I mean, isnt he invulnerable.
Why does she need bulletproof bracelets if she is tough enough to take Superman's punches?
I would think an edge she would have over him is her mythical powers.
He is very vulnerable to magic.

Easy: punch.

Like I said, she is as strong as he is & can really hurt him with how tough she is. And while she may be as strong as he is, but her body is not bulletproof like Supes is. Thus, why she need bulletproof bracelets. Or maybe the creators made her do that to look cool or something.

And Supes is not vulnerable to all magic. It depend what kind. I think he is vulnerable to Thor's magic, since many fans talk about what kind of battle they would be in.

 

[Anubis]

Actually, it depends on whose writing it. Some writers make it like all magic can harm him, some follow the enchanted items deal. Most go with this, his natural invulnerability can protect him from say blasts of mystical energy and the like, but not enough to where he wont get hurt. What would kill a human being with no powers Supes could probably survive, but he wont walk away unscathed. Hell fire would burn. God Blasts would kill. But that's not to say that any mystical bolt somebody throws at him is a possible death sentence. I guess the best way to put it is he's as vulnerable to magic as anybody else in his durability class save for guys like captain Marvel and Black Adam, who have a natural affinity for the stuff.

 

[superbaby]

it will only crack out your brain if you try to make sense with SR storyline into STM & SII continuity.

 

[superbaby]

it will only crack up your brain if you try to make sense with SR storyline into STM & SII continuity.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I find it quite easy to fill in the gaps for myself.

 

[El Payaso]

I find it quite easy to fill in the gaps for myself.

Same here. It was dead easy indeed. The only thing that worried me was if general audiences were able to remember that Kryptonian crystals were able to build things like the FoS.

 

[stargazer]

I find it quite easy to fill in the gaps for myself.

Same here. It was dead easy indeed. The only thing that worried me was if general audiences were able to remember that Kryptonian crystals were able to build things like the FoS.

Same here. I think some people say otherwise as an excuse to make SR look bad, as usual.

 

[Wushuboy]

Same here. I think some people say otherwise as an excuse to make SR look bad, as usual.

Wow.. so you think people intentionally say the story didnt make sense just out of spite? lol.. If it made so much sense then the approval rating for SR would have been much higher. Instead you get this huge split in the fan base that goes on to this day. I bet if you went to the iron man boards right now you wouldnt find this kind of "debate" going on. There had to be soemthing that set it off. I cant think of a superhero movie that's set off such a clear divide amongst fans.

 

[superbaby]

to AV, VP & MP,
so SR is a direct sequel? to STM or SII?? is the anesmia kiss applied? did the event of Zod happen? so the kid was concieved during their love making in the fortrest of solitude? how regular they make love? why lois didn't know clark kent's identity???

 

[dasam12]

I agree. If its so simple please explain.
I loved the movie but there was a disconnect.

Also AVEITWITHJAMON, do you really thing Hulk was the 5th best Superhero movie?

 

[El Payaso]

Wow.. so you think people intentionally say the story didnt make sense just out of spite?

I’ve seen people saying much more amazing things out of spite for a long time in here. I don’t see the unbelievable bit.

If it made so much sense then the approval rating for SR would have been much higher. Instead you get this huge split in the fan base that goes on to this day.

And what’s your base to say that SR’s rate amongst fans is based mainly or purely on how connected SR is/is not to the previous movies? You’re just giving it as a fact, but it’s just a theory without a given background.

I have a counter-theory: Put some more CGI shaky camera action on the movie and you get higher ratings no matter how much or how little connection SR has with STM and SII.

I bet if you went to the iron man boards right now you wouldnt find this kind of "debate" going on.

I wonder if it has to do with the fact that Iron Man is not a sequel.

There had to be soemthing that set it off. I cant think of a superhero movie that's set off such a clear divide amongst fans.

I haven’t actually thought about such an unimportant point. But it might be true. Maybe Spiderman 3, which was real crap but still had defenders. You never know what fans are going to like/dislike.




.------------------------------------.

so SR is a direct sequel? to STM or SII??

Yes. It can be taken that way.

is the anesmia kiss applied?

Yes. Nothing points otherwise.

did the event of Zod happen?

Yes. Nothing points otherwise.

Lex remembers being in the FoS before. SII happened.

so the kid was concieved during their love making in the fortrest of solitude?

Not necessarily. Superman and Lois could have perfectly had a sexual relationship after the events of Superman II. She remembers the relationship so two and two are being put by itself, you don’t need to do too much thinking here. If she remembers, it happened after the amnesia kiss.

how regular they make love?

huh? Is the irrelevancy of this question intentional?

Ok, let’s say twice a week?

why lois didn't know clark kent's identity???

Amnesia kiss. I thought you knew about it.

 

[Mikelus]

It's oft been stated that the events of S:TM, not SII, are the "vague" history foundation of SR, and that Lois and Superman had pursued a romantic relationship prior to the events of SR. Clearly the relationship was of a serious nature and involved intimacy, the result being Jason, and that level of emotional attachment demands that Superman tell Lois he is leaving for several years.

That's right, but because of this "vague sequel" nonsense, we have some inconsistencies and people have legitimate doubts about what happened previously, even fanboys are not sure 100% about some of the details and have debates still going about it. This stuff happens when things are not done right, if you do a sequel, be coherent with the continuity of previous films. SR is caught between the hommage to the Donner movies and Singer's "vision", the result ended up being a little schizophrenic.

 

[cronosred]

I also dislike the fact that after being gone for five years and missing his kids first five years of life Superman doesn't even have a real conversation with Lois about it, all thats said is "will we see you around?" to which he replies "I'm always around." and the he flies away, I mean don't you think they would have alot to talk about, he's been gone for five years and he can't take the time to dicuss things with Lois about his child and what their going to do?

 

[Mikelus]

^ Agreed, that happens when the script is superficial and frivolous, the movie was "serious" but the dialogues were shallow, which unfortunately happens with a lot of these blockbuster movies.

 

[El Payaso]

I also dislike the fact that after being gone for five years and missing his kids first five years of life Superman doesn't even have a real conversation with Lois about it, all thats said is "will we see you around?" to which he replies "I'm always around." and the he flies away, I mean don't you think they would have alot to talk about, he's been gone for five years and he can't take the time to dicuss things with Lois about his child and what their going to do?

I think they both know that conversation is better not to happen that very night. They both need to think about a lot of things before talking about it. Jason, Richard, is it for the better that the truth comes out so quickly? etc.

 

[cronosred]

I think they both know that conversation is better not to happen that very night. They both need to think about a lot of things before talking about it. Jason, Richard, is it for the better that the truth comes out so quickly? etc.

Whether that night or the next day it's a converation that should have been in this movie. For Superman to leave for five years without saying anything to Lois, comes back and finds out he has a five year old kid with her he never knew about and not even discuss it in the movie is wrong. The things Superman did in Returns requires him to have that conversation with Lois on screen and the only way it would work in a sequel is if it is set the next day, Superman missed his childs first five years of life to put off dealing with the situation comes off as selfish, cowardly and cruel.