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

[Anubis]

Because he could still be with her in seconds anytime she needed him cuz he's effin' Superman.

 

[Wushuboy]

I don't see your point here? People didn't dislike Batman and Robin because it was a different version; they hated it because it was a bad movie. I mean Batman and Robin is an accurate representation of the Batman comics of the 50s and 60s.

And mega joe I have a question; if in the Donner films Superman never put his own feeling above the people he loved; why did he leave his recent widowed mother to deal with her grief on her own?

You don't get the point? It was Schumacher's vision of batman that made it bad. And it was in no way an accurate representation of Batman in the comics of those times. He didnt have an all black costume, no nipples.. none of the design elements. Robin never looked like that. Batgirl was never alfred's niece. Batman never had a neon glowing batmobile either. There was no bane either. So let's not even go there. The only thing that is reminiscent of the 50s 60s is the shoddy lighting effects and the slanted camera angles that remind ppl of the adam west show. Why cant you all respect Schumacher's vision of the batman and robin universe? See... that line of thinking doesnt work. Just because SR is Singer's vision of superman doesn't mean i have to accept it and many people don't just as people don't accept Schumacher's vision of Batman.

And really.. are you trying to compare that scene of him leaving his mother to him leaving lois. Do you not remember when his mom finds him in the wheat fields and he says his goodbye? His mom understood that he had to go and they hugged each other. She knows the day would come one day. At least he said goodbye! He doesnt just up and leave like in SR. And this scene totally shows how he's different in SR from S1. In S1.. he says goodbye to his only loved one.. his mother.. before he goes on his search to find himself which is basically the same situation he is faced with in SR. He goes on another search to find his roots, to look for krypton, but this time.. doesnt say goodbye to lois who is his main loved one when he's in the city. Don't you think Lois would have understood just like his mother did?

And he doesnt leave right after his father dies. There is some time after that happens before he leaves the farm.

 

[Wushuboy]

Because he could still be with her in seconds anytime she needed him cuz he's effin' Superman.

LOL

 

[Anubis]

I'm just sayin, Supes mom being sad because he moved to another state is stupid because he could still be home for lunch and dinner everyday as if he never even left.

 

[Wushuboy]

I know.. i just thought it was funny cuz you said he's effin superman.. haha

 

[Jack O Lantern]

You don't get the point? It was Schumacher's vision of batman that made it bad. And it was in no way an accurate representation of Batman in the comics of those times. He didnt have an all black costume, no nipples.. none of the design elements. Robin never looked like that. Batgirl was never alfred's niece. Batman never had a neon glowing batmobile either. There was no bane either. So let's not even go there. The only thing that is reminiscent of the 50s 60s is the shoddy lighting effects and the slanted camera angles that remind ppl of the adam west show. Why cant you all respect Schumacher's vision of the batman and robin universe? See... that line of thinking doesnt work. Just because SR is Singer's vision of superman doesn't mean i have to accept it and many people don't just as people don't accept Schumacher's vision of Batman.

There's more to representation than suit designs and who Batgirl was related to. I'm talking about the over all tone of the books that would feature a Wacky Race around Gothaml Batman with gills and wearing different colour coustumes every night

And really.. are you trying to compare that scene of him leaving his mother to him leaving lois. Do you not remember when his mom finds him in the wheat fields and he says his goodbye? His mom understood that he had to go and they hugged each other. She knows the day would come one day. At least he said goodbye! He doesnt just up and leave like in SR. And this scene totally shows how he's different in SR from S1. In S1.. he says goodbye to his only loved one.. his mother.. before he goes on his search to find himself which is basically the same situation he is faced with in SR. He goes on another search to find his roots, to look for krypton, but this time.. doesnt say goodbye to lois who is his main loved one when he's in the city. Don't you think Lois would have understood just like his mother did?

Probably not. After Lois is Superman 1 complained that he wasn't there when she ran out of gas and in Superman 2 she said she is selfish when it comes to him.

We're talking about him putting his feeling above that of his loved ones. In Superman 1; it doesn't matter that his mother understands, it's the fact that he does it.

And he doesnt leave right after his father dies. There is some time after that happens before he leaves the farm.

Really because there is no mention of any passing of time. We go from the funeral straight to Clark in bed.

Also he leaves his mother and stays in the Fortress for 12 years with no contact with the putside world

 

[Wushuboy]

There's more to representation than suit designs and who Batgirl was related to. I'm talking about the over all tone of the books that would feature a Wacky Race around Gothaml Batman with gills and wearing different colour coustumes every night


Probably not. After Lois is Superman 1 complained that he wasn't there when she ran out of gas and in Superman 2 she said she is selfish when it comes to him.

We're talking about him putting his feeling above that of his loved ones. In Superman 1; it doesn't matter that his mother understands, it's the fact that he does it.



Really because there is no mention of any passing of time. We go from the funeral straight to Clark in bed.

Also he leaves his mother and stays in the Fortress for 12 years with no contact with the putside world

And in the end who's vision is it that is represented in batman and robin? Schumacher.. that's right. It's his vision. His decision to cast who he did.. his decision on costumes.. his decision on look of the film... his decision on everything. He may have been trying to bring out the tone of the books but it is his VISION of the characters and his own take on that period just as SR is Singers VISION of the characters. Why was batman and robin a bad movie.. because Schumacher's VISION of the characters suck. Plain and simple. If you ask anyone.. who they thought ruined the batman franchise...they'll tell you it's Schumacher. Hell.. Schumacher himself apologized for it.

From wikipedia
"Many fans have complained about the "artistic license" Schumacher took with the Batman franchise. The tone of the films became far campier (akin to the 1960s live-action TV series starring Adam West) under Schumacher's direction and overt sexual elements began to rear their head. One of the more persistent complaints was Schumacher's stylistic approach in putting nipples on the Batsuit. Schumacher would later claim that he was inspired by statues of the Greek gods in relation to the nipples being placed on the Batsuit. Others included shots focusing on Batman and Robin's rear ends while suiting up and a Gotham City filled with giant stone statues of nude men (one memorable fight with Mr. Freeze takes place across one). He dismissed these issues in the 2005 special edition DVD of Batman Forever, saying that these people should "get out more."

If these are overall tones in the 50s and 60s please show me where nipples and shots of bottoms come into play. These are part of his vision.



Now, you dont think Lois can understand a situation where Superman has a chance to find survivors of his race? You don't think there's a difference between that and running out of gas? I don't know what to say to this. You really.. really think Lois would forbid him to leave earth to search for survivors? Right....


It doesnt matter that his mother understands? At least he tells his mom he's leaving! Every child does this. They leave the nest. This was the point of the scene. It's time for him to leave to become a man. Every mother deals with their child leaving the home to become their own person and she understands this. Something he couldnt do with Lois and this is the flaw in SR. His mother is just as important to him as Lois. If he could tell his mother goodbye than why not Lois. He should be man enough. If he didnt care for his mother he would have just left without saying a word... which he doesnt do because HE CARES.

Yes it can be assumed time passes. In fact if you read the script it is implied.

The day his dad dies he's around 15... When he leaves he's 18.


" CLARK
Well, gee... I'd...why, yes, Susie, I'd like that
very...

FOOTBALL PLAYER (0.5.)
Kent won't be able to make it.

A large FOOTBALL PLAYER comes into frame, looks at SUSIE with what passes for "macho" at 15.

FOOTBALL PLAYER
Kent's still got a lot of work to do."

From this you can assume that since the football player is 15 and he's picking up their equipment that he's probably 15 too.

"MARTHA'S VOICE
(from inside)
Jonathan...?

JONATHAN collapses, falling backwards as MARTHA opens the front door.

MARTHA
Jonathan!

69 EXT. KAN5AS CEMETERY - DAY

CAMERA CLOSE on a tombstone reading: JONATHAN KENT, 1887-1943 R.I.P., PULLS BACK: CLARK stands by a freshly filled grave, holds the hand of the weeping MARTHA. Both are dressed in mourning.

CLARK
(quiet anguish)
All those things I can do, all those powers...
and I still couldn't save him.

70 EXT. KENT FARM - NIGHT'

The barn stands silhouetted against the night sky. .SLOWLY TRACKS TOWARD IT, passes through the door.

71 INT. BARN - NIGHT

Pitch dark inside. A green light emanates somewhere from beneath a mound of hay the light seems to throb as it glows, as if calling out for something - or someone.

72 INT. CLARK'S BEDROOM - NIGHT

CLARK KENT, now 18 years old, is asleep, suddenly his eyes open. Her sits up, looks around.

73 EXT. FARM - NIGHT

The back door opens. CLARK, fully dressed, emerges from the house, crosses
to the barn."

And from here.. he's 18. So 3 years have passed since his dad died. So it's not like he leaves immediately after his father passes away and his mother is not grieving. He leaves because he does what all young men do at 18... go o a journey to become a man. This is in no way selfish.. this is his journey to becoming Superman and growing up.

 

[SuperDaniel]

Some people just dont understand, Wush...

 

[mego joe]

I don't see your point here? People didn't dislike Batman and Robin because it was a different version; they hated it because it was a bad movie. I mean Batman and Robin is an accurate representation of the Batman comics of the 50s and 60s.

Not directed at me, but... If I watch BandR and think about it as a modern version of the fifties and sixties approach to Batman, I can watch it and enjoy it. It's not my favorite approach, but I can appreaciate it.

Now there are lots of things in there that don't fit, but there are a lot of things that do. I don't find it horrible, I just find it to be so completely different from the two Burton films that you have to approach it differently than the Burton films.

And mega joe I have a question; if in the Donner films Superman never put his own feeling above the people he loved; why did he leave his recent widowed mother to deal with her grief on her own?

If you're asking that then you truly don't understand my issue. It would only be comparable only if he left his mother without telling her goodbye. It's pretty obvious that's the difference, if he was so cowardly that he couldn't leave to find meaning to his life that he couldn't say goodbye. He even made arrangement with Ben Hubbard. That's how the situations are different, but I understand what you are trying to get at. All along with SR my problem has not been in the leaving, but how he left- not saying goodbye. The scene you mention shows why it would be in character for Superman to say goodbye to Lois. Thanks for finding a scene which helps support my side of the argument.

I'm not sure, but I think there's more passage of time there as well that you're not taking into account between Pa's death and when he leaves home. But my answer still stands.

 

[mego joe]

Probably not. After Lois is Superman 1 complained that he wasn't there when she ran out of gas and in Superman 2 she said she is selfish when it comes to him.

We have to assume for them to be in a sexual relationship, if it's healthy at all that they've moved on in some sort of fashion and they have a better understanding of each others needs. If we are to assume that they haven't moved on and grown, then Singer truly only understands the one aspect of the relationship as presented in Superman II.

As far as the selfishness aspect of Lois goes, the problem was that she didn't want to share him with the world and still have him as her husband/ boyfriend etc..., she didn't want to have to share him with the world and NOT be able to be honest and natural arround him and pretend like she wasn't his wife/ girlfriend/ relationship etc....

Remember, in SII, the situations are mutually exclusive. If he's SUperman he can't be in a relationship with her, and if he's in a relationship with her, he can't be Superman. It's that mutual exclusivity that causes her to feel selfish.

In her description of her feelings she talks about not being able to see him and act naturally around him, tell him how she feels about him b/c she's got to keep it secret and that's the issue, not that she is selfish in that she wants him for herself only and the world can never have him for anything. She doesn't want that, but she feels selfish b/c she knows that's the ONLY way she'll get him- if he's NOT Superman.

But she doesn't ask for that- she understands that he can't be both SUperman and Mr. Lois Lane. After the events of the film she understands he has to be SUperman. Despite the pain and unhappiness, she understands. The pain is so unbearable to her though that he uses his super-hypnotism to give her the amnesia kiss so she won't rememeber the aspects that cause her pain. Not for any selfish reasons on his part, but so Lois can be relieved of that pain and have a chance to move on, without the knowledge of what might have been constantly hurting her and destroying her emotional well being.

But running out of gas is a lot different than leaving for 5 years, or forever.

We're talking about him putting his feeling above that of his loved ones. In Superman 1; it doesn't matter that his mother understands, it's the fact that he does it.

And it's the fact that he does it the right way, saying goodbye, making arrangements to make sure his mom has help on the farm. That's what's important, that's what shows you the content of his character- that's what differs between the Donner version and the Singer version. Singer's version is not that same person, he doesn't say goodbye to the people he loves, he finds it 'too difficult' so he chickens out.

Really because there is no mention of any passing of time. We go from the funeral straight to Clark in bed.

Also he leaves his mother and stays in the Fortress for 12 years with no contact with the putside world

I found it to be implied in the film. But since there's an above post of the script, it seems it was the intention of the filmmakers as well.

 

[afan]

I think he (Singer) understands the Donner film really, really well, and he also gets Superman, IMO. It's just that his vision of Superman is different to yours, I think.

Perhaps.

I think Singer's problem is that he chose to make the third film(SR) in what should probably have been a trilogy.

He should have filmed his SII first; a film that details the emergence, depth and intention of the romantic relationship between Lois and Superman. It is the focal point of SR' plot and yet it's details are left entirely to speculative conjecture on the viewers part. Then finish off the trilogy with SR.

 

[Jack O Lantern]

And in the end who's vision is it that is represented in batman and robin? Schumacher.. that's right. It's his vision. His decision to cast who he did.. his decision on costumes.. his decision on look of the film... his decision on everything. He may have been trying to bring out the tone of the books but it is his VISION of the characters and his own take on that period just as SR is Singers VISION of the characters. Why was batman and robin a bad movie.. because Schumacher's VISION of the characters suck. Plain and simple. If you ask anyone.. who they thought ruined the batman franchise...they'll tell you it's Schumacher. Hell.. Schumacher himself apologized for it.

From wikipedia
"Many fans have complained about the "artistic license" Schumacher took with the Batman franchise. The tone of the films became far campier (akin to the 1960s live-action TV series starring Adam West) under Schumacher's direction and overt sexual elements began to rear their head. One of the more persistent complaints was Schumacher's stylistic approach in putting nipples on the Batsuit. Schumacher would later claim that he was inspired by statues of the Greek gods in relation to the nipples being placed on the Batsuit. Others included shots focusing on Batman and Robin's rear ends while suiting up and a Gotham City filled with giant stone statues of nude men (one memorable fight with Mr. Freeze takes place across one). He dismissed these issues in the 2005 special edition DVD of Batman Forever, saying that these people should "get out more."

If these are overall tones in the 50s and 60s please show me where nipples and shots of bottoms come into play. These are part of his vision.

Like I said already that is not what tone is. The tone of the 1950s and early 60s comics was campiness; as was the tone of Batman and Robin.

Now, you dont think Lois can understand a situation where Superman has a chance to find survivors of his race? You don't think there's a difference between that and running out of gas? I don't know what to say to this. You really.. really think Lois would forbid him to leave earth to search for survivors? Right....

No i don't. She expects him to be on hand when even small events occur in her life that a guy with a pick up can handle; yet she would understand him leaving earth, potentially forever?

It doesnt matter that his mother understands? At least he tells his mom he's leaving! Every child does this. They leave the nest. This was the point of the scene. It's time for him to leave to become a man. Every mother deals with their child leaving the home to become their own person and she understands this. Something he couldnt do with Lois and this is the flaw in SR. His mother is just as important to him as Lois. If he could tell his mother goodbye than why not Lois. He should be man enough. If he didnt care for his mother he would have just left without saying a word... which he doesnt do because HE CARES.

Yes but surely he could pick a better time.

Yes it can be assumed time passes. In fact if you read the script it is implied.

The day his dad dies he's around 15... When he leaves he's 18.


" CLARK
Well, gee... I'd...why, yes, Susie, I'd like that
very...

FOOTBALL PLAYER (0.5.)
Kent won't be able to make it.

A large FOOTBALL PLAYER comes into frame, looks at SUSIE with what passes for "macho" at 15.

FOOTBALL PLAYER
Kent's still got a lot of work to do."

From this you can assume that since the football player is 15 and he's picking up their equipment that he's probably 15 too.

"MARTHA'S VOICE
(from inside)
Jonathan...?

JONATHAN collapses, falling backwards as MARTHA opens the front door.

MARTHA
Jonathan!

69 EXT. KAN5AS CEMETERY - DAY

CAMERA CLOSE on a tombstone reading: JONATHAN KENT, 1887-1943 R.I.P., PULLS BACK: CLARK stands by a freshly filled grave, holds the hand of the weeping MARTHA. Both are dressed in mourning.

CLARK
(quiet anguish)
All those things I can do, all those powers...
and I still couldn't save him.

70 EXT. KENT FARM - NIGHT'

The barn stands silhouetted against the night sky. .SLOWLY TRACKS TOWARD IT, passes through the door.

71 INT. BARN - NIGHT

Pitch dark inside. A green light emanates somewhere from beneath a mound of hay the light seems to throb as it glows, as if calling out for something - or someone.

72 INT. CLARK'S BEDROOM - NIGHT

CLARK KENT, now 18 years old, is asleep, suddenly his eyes open. Her sits up, looks around.

73 EXT. FARM - NIGHT

The back door opens. CLARK, fully dressed, emerges from the house, crosses
to the barn."

And from here.. he's 18. So 3 years have passed since his dad died. So it's not like he leaves immediately after his father passes away and his mother is not grieving. He leaves because he does what all young men do at 18... go o a journey to become a man. This is in no way selfish.. this is his journey to becoming Superman and growing up.

That's the screenplay not the film; Lana is called Suzie; Clark isn't present when his father dies; it proves nothing. Clark doesn't appear to grow or even age slightly between his fathers death and when he leaves. There is nothing given to suggest any passage of time.

 

[Jack O Lantern]

If you're asking that then you truly don't understand my issue. It would only be comparable only if he left his mother without telling her goodbye. It's pretty obvious that's the difference, if he was so cowardly that he couldn't leave to find meaning to his life that he couldn't say goodbye. He even made arrangement with Ben Hubbard. That's how the situations are different, but I understand what you are trying to get at. All along with SR my problem has not been in the leaving, but how he left- not saying goodbye. The scene you mention shows why it would be in character for Superman to say goodbye to Lois. Thanks for finding a scene which helps support my side of the argument.

Yes but your issue is that he is putting himself above others bu noting saying goodbye. He never asks his mother if she needs him; he neevr considers what her life would be like on the farm on her own [I'm not talking about the work but the fact that she lives on her own with no company] he just wakes up one day and tells her he's leaving.

We have to assume for them to be in a sexual relationship, if it's healthy at all that they've moved on in some sort of fashion and they have a better understanding of each others needs. If we are to assume that they haven't moved on and grown, then Singer truly only understands the one aspect of the relationship as presented in Superman II.

Why should we assume they have grown? In Superman II he gives up his powers to enter a committed relationship with her; he doesn't even ask her is that is what she wants, he just assumes.

As far as the selfishness aspect of Lois goes, the problem was that she didn't want to share him with the world and still have him as her husband/ boyfriend etc..., she didn't want to have to share him with the world and NOT be able to be honest and natural arround him and pretend like she wasn't his wife/ girlfriend/ relationship etc....

Remember, in SII, the situations are mutually exclusive. If he's SUperman he can't be in a relationship with her, and if he's in a relationship with her, he can't be Superman. It's that mutual exclusivity that causes her to feel selfish.

In her description of her feelings she talks about not being able to see him and act naturally around him, tell him how she feels about him b/c she's got to keep it secret and that's the issue, not that she is selfish in that she wants him for herself only and the world can never have him for anything. She doesn't want that, but she feels selfish b/c she knows that's the ONLY way she'll get him- if he's NOT Superman.

But she doesn't ask for that- she understands that he can't be both SUperman and Mr. Lois Lane. After the events of the film she understands he has to be SUperman. Despite the pain and unhappiness, she understands. The pain is so unbearable to her though that he uses his super-hypnotism to give her the amnesia kiss so she won't rememeber the aspects that cause her pain. Not for any selfish reasons on his part, but so Lois can be relieved of that pain and have a chance to move on, without the knowledge of what might have been constantly hurting her and destroying her emotional well being.


But running out of gas is a lot different than leaving for 5 years, or forever.

I still can't believe that use the amnesia kiss to back up your point; that's another example of him taking her life into his hands without consulting her.

Lois is selfish towards Superman even before she discovers his identity. That's my point about the gas. She doesn't even consider the possiblity that in the earthquake that caused a telegraph pole to fall on her car that somebody else could have been in greater danger. Superman must be at her side when ever the tinyness annoyance occurs.

Regardless I can't remember how this aspect of the argument happened; Lois reaction to him saying goodbye is pure specatulation

And it's the fact that he does it the right way, saying goodbye, making arrangements to make sure his mom has help on the farm. That's what's important, that's what shows you the content of his character- that's what differs between the Donner version and the Singer version. Singer's version is not that same person, he doesn't say goodbye to the people he loves, he finds it 'too difficult' so he chickens out.

Actually in Singer's version he does say goodbye to his mother; she knows where he's gone. We don't know whether or not Superman would have been able to say goodbye to Lois in Superman I or II because when a stituation arrived that might invole him leaving; like say when Lois says it is too hard to see him around. He choses not to simply leave and let her get on with her life; he simply kisses away the problem.

 

[mego joe]

Yes but your issue is that he is putting himself above others bu noting saying goodbye. He never asks his mother if she needs him; he neevr considers what her life would be like on the farm on her own [I'm not talking about the work but the fact that she lives on her own with no company] he just wakes up one day and tells her he's leaving.

Right. He considers the difficulty of saying goodbye and SAYS goodbye to Ma. He does the right thing even though it not easy, which can clearly be seen in that scene. He also makes arrangements for her. Young men leaving home is something that is natural and normal in the world. And he does it the right way, makes arrangements for her and he farm. To dip out w/o a goodbye would be wrong, just like it would be wrong to dip out on Lois after being in a sexual relationship with her. S:TM- RIght way, SR- Wrong way.

Why should we assume they have grown? In Superman II he gives up his powers to enter a committed relationship with her; he doesn't even ask her is that is what she wants, he just assumes.


I still can't believe that use the amnesia kiss to back up your point; that's another example of him taking her life into his hands without consulting her.

If you don't understand this aspect of SUperman, then you don't understand the character. That pre-Crisis version of Superman KNOWS better and how to use his powers wisely to help others. The amnesia kiss wasn't the best resolution, but his intentions are clearly on Lois's behalf and in her best interests. Ditching Lois w/o a goodbye is not in her best interests, and it is clearly out of character for Superman to not do something b/c it is 'too difficult.'

Lois is selfish towards Superman even before she discovers his identity. That's my point about the gas. She doesn't even consider the possiblity that in the earthquake that caused a telegraph pole to fall on her car that somebody else could have been in greater danger. Superman must be at her side when ever the tinyness annoyance occurs.

Don't you realize when she says that, SUperman has prevented the Earthquake from happening and all that happens to Lois is that she runs out of gas? There is no earthquake. If anything it's a funny quip and not a serious comment by Lois.

Regardless I can't remember how this aspect of the argument happened; Lois reaction to him saying goodbye is pure specatulation

If they got Lois and Superman's characterization correct and the nature of their relationship correct, then there shouldn't be any speculation. But yes, they botched the story and characterization so much we don't really know how she would act. But at the end of SII to me it's clear that she understands she and the world can't both have SUperman, and despite how much it grieves her she's not going to deny the world SUperman. If you don't get that, you don't get the whole point of the movie.

Actually in Singer's version he does say goodbye to his mother; she knows where he's gone.

So it makes no sense that he wouldn't tell Lois in SR, since he clearly after being in a sexual relationship with her has just as great an obligation to her as he would to his mom.
Saying goodbye and making arrangements for Ma shows that he understands the right way to handle obligations and responsibilies. There is no reason he shouldn't also say goodby to Lois, copping out with 'it's too difficult' is just and incorrect characterization. Being 'too difficult' is not a reason Superman does do the right thing. Both situations are real life situations. With Ma it's a young man leaving home, with Lois it's a relationship that takes the backburner to other responsibilties. The difference is in S:TM he handles them with maturity and responsibility despite the degree of difficulty and in SR he chickens out and screws over the woman he loves knowing it is the wrong thing to do. S:TM- Does things the right way. SR- Does things the wrong way.

BTW, in S:TM he doesn't know where he's going so he can't tell her where exactly, he just says- "North."

We don't know whether or not Superman would have been able to say goodbye to Lois in Superman I or II because when a stituation arrived that might invole him leaving; like say when Lois says it is too hard to see him around. He choses not to simply leave and let her get on with her life; he simply kisses away the problem.

He chooses to use his powers to alievate her pain and make it possible for her TO go on with her life since he considers it his responsibility- just like the end of S:TM when he turns back time to save her lilfe. Simply leaving will not fix the problem and it will not allow Lois to 'get on with her life,' it's clear if you try and listen to her dialogue in that scene. If you don't understand this you don't understand the endings to S:TM and SII. It seems clear that Singer doesn't either.

The amnesia kiss is not SUperman running away from responsibility or manipulating minds. It is SUperman using his powers to an extreme degree to help Lois b/c he loves her and he DOES put her first. It is diametrically opposed to not saying goodbye to Lois in the backstory of SR which IS about running away from responsibility b/c it is too difficult.

I can understand why people don't understand the differences, but if you look at intentions and motivations you can see the difference.

 

[Wushuboy]

Like I said already that is not what tone is. The tone of the 1950s and early 60s comics was campiness; as was the tone of Batman and Robin.




No i don't. She expects him to be on hand when even small events occur in her life that a guy with a pick up can handle; yet she would understand him leaving earth, potentially forever?



Yes but surely he could pick a better time.


That's the screenplay not the film; Lana is called Suzie; Clark isn't present when his father dies; it proves nothing. Clark doesn't appear to grow or even age slightly between his fathers death and when he leaves. There is nothing given to suggest any passage of time.

So you're saying that Schumacher had no input into any of Batman and Robin. Tell me why people blame him for ruining the batman franchise if it wasnt his vision of batman and robin? If all it was was because it was a bad movie, the blame should fall on the writer since he came up with the screenplay. But it's Schumacher's responsibility to bring that vision to screen and he envisioned batman and robin the way he did and ppl hated it.


Running out of gas vs searching for survivors. If you see these as the same and would think Lois couldnt differentiate between the two then there's nothing to say to you.

I quoted the actual SHOOTING SCRIPT. This is waht both donner and mankiwiez intended and you somehow question it. This coming from somone who believes Superman's powers and the Fortress are linked. I show you clear documentation that theres at least 3 years time from the minds of the director and writer and you dont believe it. It doesnt prove anything? Sheesh. Why don't you show me clear documentation of your claim and then we'll talk. They may have changed Suzie's name to Lana but that doesnt mean the shooting script is not proof enough. I can't believe you're using a name change to discredit the actual shooting script. And Clark isn't present during his father's death? Jeez, do I have to paste the whole script?

"It ain't to score touchdowns.

CLARK turns, nods, understanding. JONATHAN puts his arm around him.

JONATHAN
Now why don't you see if you can finish up your
chores before I finish up all that apple pie I smell
comin' from your mother's kitchen window....

CLARK smiles, heads off toward the barn, CAMERA TRACKS with him. Suddenly: a choked scream is heard 0.S. CAMERA WHIP PANS: JONATHAN, his hand clutching his heart, staggers on the front step of the farmhouse.

CLARK (O.S.)
Dad! . ."

It's implied that there's time between his dad's passing when he leaves. You just don't want to see it or maybe cannot understand it. I don't think that Donner or Mankiewiez had any need to change that part of the script. How else did you want them to show that time had passed? Get another actor? They probably didnt feel the need to. I don't see why they would choose to change their shooting script to make him leave right after his father dies. But somehow you do.

From http://www.chrisreevehomepage.com/m-movie1.html

"The death of Jonathan Kent marks a turning point in Clark's life.

When Clark turns eighteen, as recorded in earth years, the green crystal that Jor-El sent along to teach him calls him to make another journey, a pilgrimage, to learn who he is and why he is here."

If he's the same age when his father dies I wonder why this writer feels the need to mention "when clark turns 18." Guess it must be because time has passed.


Here's another thing... watch the scene right before Ma Kent goes out into the wheat fields to meet with Clark. It's morning, she's talking to her bird, waking clark up and making him breakfast. Look at her demeanor. She doesnt look like someone who's still grieving. She looks like it's just another normal day. Like she's moved on. Like it's been a while since her husband's death.

 

[Wushuboy]

double post

 

[Jack O Lantern]

Right. He considers the difficulty of saying goodbye and SAYS goodbye to Ma. He does the right thing even though it not easy, which can clearly be seen in that scene. He also makes arrangements for her. Young men leaving home is something that is natural and normal in the world. And he does it the right way, makes arrangements for her and he farm. To dip out w/o a goodbye would be wrong, just like it would be wrong to dip out on Lois after being in a sexual relationship with her. S:TM- RIght way, SR- Wrong way.




If you don't understand this aspect of SUperman, then you don't understand the character. That pre-Crisis version of Superman KNOWS better and how to use his powers wisely to help others. The amnesia kiss wasn't the best resolution, but his intentions are clearly on Lois's behalf and in her best interests. Ditching Lois w/o a goodbye is not in her best interests, and it is clearly out of character for Superman to not do something b/c it is 'too difficult.'

Actually Lois' problem was having to see him all the time. He could have just left Metropolis and then she wouldn't have to see him all the time. instead he messed with her mind so that he could still be with her.

Don't you realize when she says that, SUperman has prevented the Earthquake from happening and all that happens to Lois is that she runs out of gas? There is no earthquake. If anything it's a funny quip and not a serious comment by Lois.

Really? Then why does Jimmy come running up the road complaining that Superman left himin the middle of no where? If there is no earthquake then why was there a need to save Jimmy?

If they got Lois and Superman's characterization correct and the nature of their relationship correct, then there shouldn't be any speculation. But yes, they botched the story and characterization so much we don't really know how she would act. But at the end of SII to me it's clear that she understands she and the world can't both have SUperman, and despite how much it grieves her she's not going to deny the world SUperman. If you don't get that, you don't get the whole point of the movie.

Actually at the end of Superman II her memory is wiped so she doesn't understand anything; in fact the lesson that she has learned has been wiped as well. So that understanding doesn't matter because she no longer has it.

So it makes no sense that he wouldn't tell Lois in SR, since he clearly after being in a sexual relationship with her has just as great an obligation to her as he would to his mom.

When you consider that Lois is as shocked as anybody that Jason could be Superman's son that is proof enough that they didn't have any long term sexual relationship.

Saying goodbye and making arrangements for Ma shows that he understands the right way to handle obligations and responsibilies. There is no reason he shouldn't also say goodby to Lois, copping out with 'it's too difficult' is just and incorrect characterization. Being 'too difficult' is not a reason Superman does do the right thing. Both situations are real life situations. With Ma it's a young man leaving home, with Lois it's a relationship that takes the backburner to other responsibilties. The difference is in S:TM he handles them with maturity and responsibility despite the degree of difficulty and in SR he chickens out and screws over the woman he loves knowing it is the wrong thing to do. S:TM- Does things the right way. SR- Does things the wrong way.

BTW, in S:TM he doesn't know where he's going so he can't tell her where exactly, he just says- "North."



He chooses to use his powers to alievate her pain and make it possible for her TO go on with her life since he considers it his responsibility- just like the end of S:TM when he turns back time to save her lilfe. Simply leaving will not fix the problem and it will not allow Lois to 'get on with her life,' it's clear if you try and listen to her dialogue in that scene. If you don't understand this you don't understand the endings to S:TM and SII. It seems clear that Singer doesn't either.

The amnesia kiss is not SUperman running away from responsibility or manipulating minds. It is SUperman using his powers to an extreme degree to help Lois b/c he loves her and he DOES put her first. It is diametrically opposed to not saying goodbye to Lois in the backstory of SR which IS about running away from responsibility b/c it is too difficult.

I can understand why people don't understand the differences, but if you look at intentions and motivations you can see the difference.

Actually if you look at the intentions they are exactly the same. Lois doesn't need to forget everything to move; SR shows us that there is indeed life after Superman. The hardest thing and the most honorable thing is for him just to leave and let her get on with her life. But he can't do that because he doesn't want to lose her; so he makes it possible for him to remain in her life. He's not doing it for her; her pain could be gone if he is gone. Regardless; it's not his choice to make.

 

[Jack O Lantern]

So you're saying that Schumacher had no input into any of Batman and Robin. Tell me why people blame him for ruining the batman franchise if it wasnt his vision of batman and robin? If all it was was because it was a bad movie, the blame should fall on the writer since he came up with the screenplay. But it's Schumacher's responsibility to bring that vision to screen and he envisioned batman and robin the way he did and ppl hated it.

Are you tense? What i'm saying is that Batman and Robin is an accurate representation of the 50s and 60s Batman comics and they are; that is a fact. It wasn't the fact that his version was different from those comics that was the problem but that they were the same. Nobody liked that era; the title was nearly cancelled. Anyway this all goes back to win someone said that SR is Superman just not your version. His point wasn't that you or anybody else has to like it because it is an accurate representation of Superman; his point was that you can like it or hate but it is Superman.

Running out of gas vs searching for survivors. If you see these as the same and would think Lois couldnt differentiate between the two then there's nothing to say to you.

Yeah; ah her complaints about running out of gas happened after an earthquake. She put herself running out of gas above any number of people who were in serious danger.

I quoted the actual SHOOTING SCRIPT. This is waht both donner and mankiwiez intended and you somehow question it. This coming from somone who believes Superman's powers and the Fortress are linked. I show you clear documentation that theres at least 3 years time from the minds of the director and writer and you dont believe it. It doesnt prove anything? Sheesh. Why don't you show me clear documentation of your claim and then we'll talk. They may have changed Suzie's name to Lana but that doesnt mean the shooting script is not proof enough. I can't believe you're using a name change to discredit the actual shooting script. And Clark isn't present during his father's death? Jeez, do I have to paste the whole script?

"It ain't to score touchdowns.

CLARK turns, nods, understanding. JONATHAN puts his arm around him.

JONATHAN
Now why don't you see if you can finish up your
chores before I finish up all that apple pie I smell
comin' from your mother's kitchen window....

CLARK smiles, heads off toward the barn, CAMERA TRACKS with him. Suddenly: a choked scream is heard 0.S. CAMERA WHIP PANS: JONATHAN, his hand clutching his heart, staggers on the front step of the farmhouse.

CLARK (O.S.)
Dad! . ."

It's implied that there's time between his dad's passing when he leaves. You just don't want to see it or maybe cannot understand it. I don't think that Donner or Mankiewiez had any need to change that part of the script. How else did you want them to show that time had passed? Get another actor? They probably didnt feel the need to. I don't see why they would choose to change their shooting script to make him leave right after his father dies. But somehow you do.

Shooting scripts change all the time; especially on bg budget films. Why do you think writers are always present on set? Tim Burton even says in the SE Batman DVD they wuld be re-writng every day. Did you know that in the original shooting sript of Batman, the Hoker isn't the Wanye's killer and that Alfred didn't let Vicki vale into the Bat cave? They're are two massive differences.

From http://www.chrisreevehomepage.com/m-movie1.html

"The death of Jonathan Kent marks a turning point in Clark's life.

When Clark turns eighteen, as recorded in earth years, the green crystal that Jor-El sent along to teach him calls him to make another journey, a pilgrimage, to learn who he is and why he is here."

If he's the same age when his father dies I wonder why this writer feels the need to mention "when clark turns 18." Guess it must be because time has passed.

Here's another thing... watch the scene right before Ma Kent goes out into the wheat fields to meet with Clark. It's morning, she's talking to her bird, waking clark up and making him breakfast. Look at her demeanor. She doesnt look like someone who's still grieving. She looks like it's just another normal day. Like she's moved on. Like it's been a while since her husband's death.

You know it doesn't matter what is wriiten on paper just what is shown on screen. On screen we see that there is no change in Clarks physical appearnce; is he fully grown at 15? The even dubbed in Reeve's voice; des a 15 year boy sound like a fully grown man. There is nothing to suggest a passage of time; not even a title saying "Three years later"

As for his mother; she has a farm to run and a boy to feed. Just because she shows strenght doesn't mean that she is over it.

 

[SuperDaniel]

Jor-el says that he`s eighteen...

 

[stargazer]

Probably not. After Lois is Superman 1 complained that he wasn't there when she ran out of gas and in Superman 2 she said she is selfish when it comes to him.

We're talking about him putting his feeling above that of his loved ones. In Superman 1; it doesn't matter that his mother understands, it's the fact that he does it.



Really because there is no mention of any passing of time. We go from the funeral straight to Clark in bed.

Also he leaves his mother and stays in the Fortress for 12 years with no contact with the putside world

Agreed on everything. In this version of Lois, she is still somewhat immature, selfish and very self-centered. But after the talk she had with Superman in SR (during their flight together, especially after he shares his burden with her: "you wrote that the world doesn't need a saviour, but every day I hear people crying out for one"), she begins to understand his position and there is a change in her attitude towards him. She is maturing.

Some people just dont understand, Wush...

exactly..

 

[Wushuboy]

Another person who thinks superman left his mom right after his dad passes. I wonder if there's a correlation between those who liked SR and see superman as doing this in S1. I just find it funny that some can support the vague history BS of SR but then when it comes to understanding that time passes between the funeral and his leaving for the fortress that they have to have something explicit on the screen that tells them so.

Show them a script ? Ohhh.. scripts can change.

Show them other sources? ooo... anythign written is invalid. guess the only way to settle it is ask Donner himself right? Or is his word not good either?

But then you watch SR where nothing is on screen?... ooo it's implied... Suddenly vagueness is accepted.

 

[Jack O Lantern]

Another person who thinks superman left his mom right after his dad passes. I wonder if there's a correlation between those who liked SR and see superman as doing this in S1. I just find it funny that some can support the vague history BS of SR but then when it comes to understanding that time passes between the funeral and his leaving for the fortress that they have to have something explicit on the screen that tells them so.

Show them a script ? Ohhh.. scripts can change.

Show them other sources? ooo... anythign written is invalid. guess the only way to settle it is ask Donner himself right? Or is his word not good either?

Scripts can and do change. That is a fact.

But then you watch SR where nothing is on screen?... ooo it's implied... Suddenly vagueness is accepted.

Well why is that when it happens in SR vagues is wrong but in Superman The Movie it is OK?

 

[Wushuboy]

I dont disagree that scripts change while on set. That is a fact. You suggesting that superman leaves after his surrogate father's death? That is NOT fact. You're using an occurance that happens on movie sets as something to justify your assumption. You adhere to your belief that he leaves right after the funeral knowing that in the script he leaves after some time has elapsed and I see no reason at all for them to change it. There is virtually no difference from that scene in the shooting script to what was in the movie. The only difference is that it has a narrative tag saying that he's 18. Now if you want to believe that Donner and Mankiwiez intentionally changed the script to make superman such an insensitive arse as to do something like that then we have a difference of opinion and the only way to settle it is to ask Donner and Mankiwiez themselves. Even then I bet you would not believe it. But I'll bet money on it that they'd say time has passed and he doesnt leave immediately after. But hey.. no use in arguing with you because you definately do not want to see it.

I don't feel the scene in Superman is vague at all. It's apparent time has passed to me and others. I think you'll find that most people understand that time has passed and you're definately in the minority regarding this. The vagueness in SR is a whole other monster and you know this. It is the source of contention within the superman fan community. This vague history is up to people's interpretation and your interpretation will most likely be different than another's. I don't see many fans arguing whether or not superman left immediately right after pa kent's death in superman 1.


Oh I guess ma kent must age super quick in the movie then because if clark does leave right after pa kent's death then, hell, her hair mustve changed from light brown to silver white overnight not to mention all those added wrinkles. Wonder why she looks so different in the two scenes.

From Pa kent's death scene and the funeral. Notice her hair is a light brown and so are her eyebrows and she has less wrinkles.

From the scene where clark leaves. She now has silver white hair as well as eyebrows. She has more wrinkles especially around the eye and mouth. If you dont think she's aged a couple years here then there's nothing else I can show you. These screenshots show she has aged a couple years. People don't age like this in a short time.

 

[Wushuboy]

Agreed on everything. In this version of Lois, she is still somewhat immature, selfish and very self-centered. But after the talk she had with Superman in SR (during their flight together, especially after he shares his burden with her: "you wrote that the world doesn't need a saviour, but every day I hear people crying out for one"), she begins to understand his position and there is a change in her attitude towards him. She is maturing.





exactly..

I dont know where you get this idea that lois doesnt understand that superman has a higher responsibility than her. Sure she complains about him not being there and being threatened with falling poles but if you continue to watch the scene Superman says "Im sorry lois.. ive been a kinda busy for a while." letting her know that he was saving others in greater danger and afterwards Lois realizes she was being unreasonable. You can see her change in expression and then she says "I'm sorry, it's alright." She apologizes! She's already mature enough to know she said something wrong and she already knows Superman takes care of others. She even says "Superman cares about everybody Jimmy."

 

[Jack O Lantern]

I dont disagree that scripts change while on set. That is a fact. You suggesting that superman leaves after his surrogate father's death? That is NOT fact. You're using an occurance that happens on movie sets as something to justify your assumption. You adhere to your belief that he leaves right after the funeral knowing that in the script he leaves after some time has elapsed and I see no reason at all for them to change it. There is virtually no difference from that scene in the shooting script to what was in the movie. The only difference is that it has a narrative tag saying that he's 18. Now if you want to believe that Donner and Mankiwiez intentionally changed the script to make superman such an insensitive arse as to do something like that then we have a difference of opinion and the only way to settle it is to ask Donner and Mankiwiez themselves. Even then I bet you would not believe it. But I'll bet money on it that they'd say time has passed and he doesnt leave immediately after. But hey.. no use in arguing with you because you definately do not want to see it.

I don't feel the scene in Superman is vague at all. It's apparent time has passed to me and others. I think you'll find that most people understand that time has passed and you're definately in the minority regarding this. The vagueness in SR is a whole other monster and you know this. It is the source of contention within the superman fan community. This vague history is up to people's interpretation and your interpretation will most likely be different than another's. I don't see many fans arguing whether or not superman left immediately right after pa kent's death in superman 1.


Oh I guess ma kent must age super quick in the movie then because if clark does leave right after pa kent's death then, hell, her hair mustve changed from light brown to silver white overnight not to mention all those added wrinkles. Wonder why she looks so different in the two scenes.

From Pa kent's death scene and the funeral. Notice her hair is a light brown and so are her eyebrows and she has less wrinkles.

From the scene where clark leaves. She now has silver white hair as well as eyebrows. She has more wrinkles especially around the eye and mouth. If you dont think she's aged a couple years here then there's nothing else I can show you. These screenshots show she has aged a couple years. People don't age like this in a short time.

Well that put me in my place