Superman Returns Why the flashback scene?

SuperDaniel

Superhero
Joined
Jun 27, 2001
Messages
9,782
Reaction score
0
Points
56
The first time i saw the movie, i thought the flashback scene wasn`t needed. But then, i was in a brazilian board about the movie and some guy told me an interesting reason that makes a lot of sense.

Young Clark did need glasses when he was a kid till he discovered his powers. He had sight problems. When he first discovers his powers, starts to run, leap and fly, you can see he now doesn`t have sight problems. His glasses fell and he doesn`t need them anymore.

So, why show this?

When Jason finds out he has super strengh in the movie, after he throws the piano, he is about to use his ashma medicine but he doesn`t use it! He is cured! Discovering the superpowers solves his childhood problems, like sight, in the case of clark, or ashma in the case of jason. So, thats why the flashback was needed. To trace a parellel between Clark and Jason.
 
I was thinking the same thing. Yeah that would clear up a lot of things. :up:
 
^Probably not a theory. A fact. haahaha. Notice how Jason doesn`t use his medicine anymore and has perfect health after the piano scene. He even survived the watery moments of the movie....
 
Now to quote myself.

Mr. Socko said:
NO NO NO. Jason is what 5 when he first gets his powers. Young Clark is like 12 until he gets his powers? That's so stupid considering Superman is 100% kyrptonian and Jason is only 50% kyrptonian.



Singer was so lazy, basically, he wanted to show an origin but also didn't want to show an origin. So he has Superman land on the Kent farm and talk to Ma then show a quick unnecessary flashback. Kent on the farm altogether was useless. He should have just landed in Metropolis.
 
^^ Wrooooooooooooooooong.
Clark had superstrengh way before. Superman the movie, remeber? He holds the truck over his head after saving Jonathan from certain death? He was what? Oh....five....Jason does what in the movie? Saves his mother from certain death? What does he do? Throws the piano. He is what? Five....oh.... :rolleyes:
 
Not in Singer's version.

Or why else would he be wearing the glasses............................
 
He knew he had powers, the thing was he was trying to CONTROL them. That's what Singer was showing.
 
Jason is not entirely Kryptonian. He probably only can use his problems when his passing through some emotional trauma...or something....we`ll see what happens in the sequel. I think a nice to way to show Jason growing up is if Singer traces a parallel between Clark`s childhood and Jason`s. Should be nice to see it.
 
SpiderDaniel said:
The first time i saw the movie, i thought the flashback scene wasn`t needed. But then, i was in a brazilian board about the movie and some guy told me an interesting reason that makes a lot of sense.

Young Clark did need glasses when he was a kid till he discovered his powers. He had sight problems. When he first discovers his powers, starts to run, leap and fly, you can see he now doesn`t have sight problems. His glasses fell and he doesn`t need them anymore.

So, why show this?

When Jason finds out he has super strengh in the movie, after he throws the piano, he is about to use his ashma medicine but he doesn`t use it! He is cured! Discovering the superpowers solves his childhood problems, like sight, in the case of clark, or ashma in the case of jason. So, thats why the flashback was needed. To trace a parellel between Clark and Jason.

yo dan

I think that when we see a director's/extended version of the film, we will find out for sure that the flying scene will also lead right into the discovery, or introduction of, the ship, the crystals and their potential power.
 
And bringing up Superman: The Movie isn't a valid explination. In Donner's movies, Lois knows that Clark is Superman. Yet for some unknown reason, she doesn't in Superman Returns? Returns serves as a poor sequel
 
Wow, your post causes more problems than it solves. Yet another continuity issue for Mr. Singer, as young Clark on the farm never wore glasses in the Donner films. The glasses were part of the Metropolis Clark Kent disguise.
 
They missed a great opportunity. The flashbacks should've been ALL Pa Kent, and him telling him what's important in the world. Stuff that's part nostalgia and part inspiration for him to go back out in the world and be the savior that everyone needs.

Other than that, Smallville was boring and pointless...not to mention REALLY expensive, from what I've heard!
 
Whatever happened to the Flashback with Hugh Jackman as Pa kent?
 
Yeah we missed the pa kent factor. it was all Jor el, brando's glory moments taking their place. When in stm, it was pa kent's voice and jor el's voice conflicting in supe's mind but not this time... meh.

This fashback was unnecessary. I just can't find a real reason for its existence other than to show some cool power scenes.

The idea of showing he needed gasses then didn't need glasses isn't explored at all so i don't know where that's coming from. they're Probably just digging for gold it seems.
 
SpeedballLives said:
Whatever happened to the Flashback with Hugh Jackman as Pa kent?

Was it ever confirmed that they filmed anything about Pa Kent? Don't remember...

:confused:
 
Tony Stark said:
Wow, your post causes more problems than it solves. Yet another continuity issue for Mr. Singer, as young Clark on the farm never wore glasses in the Donner films. The glasses were part of the Metropolis Clark Kent disguise.

Wrong. Clark was never depicted at 12 on the Kent farm in Donner's films. He was depicted at 17 or 18, not wearing glasses. So Singer's take could very easily fit in, in that Clark stopped wearing his glasses at 12 and didn't wear them again until he went to Metropolis. In fact, it could be that his wearing glasses as a preteen gave him the idea of wearing them later on, as a disguise.
 
Mr. Socko said:
And bringing up Superman: The Movie isn't a valid explination. In Donner's movies, Lois knows that Clark is Superman. Yet for some unknown reason, she doesn't in Superman Returns? Returns serves as a poor sequel

What are you talking about? Movies? Wrong! First, Lois does NOT know Clark is Superman in Superman The Movie. Second, Donner only has director credit for ONE Superman movie (which will hopefully change later this year however). Third, if you're referencing Superman II, it is still unknown whether or not Singer even used it as part of his vague "pick and choose" history. Some parts of SR hint at it, such as the fact that Superman has a kid as well as when Kitty suggests that Lex has been to the FoS before. Yet, Singer has stated he doesn't like the second film. Fourth, Superman ERASED Lois's memory of the events from Superman II at the end of the film!
 
Mr. Socko said:
Not in Singer's version.

Or why else would he be wearing the glasses............................


Because Singer knows not what he does... :o
 
Singer and his two buddies were completely lacadazical in their treatment of this movie. That p.o.s. probably never even opened a comic from the looks of what was thrown up on screen so discussing why this ****tard put anything in this movie is really pointless. I'm pretty sure it was there just because it sounded like a good idea on paper so why the hell not?
 
WTFwuzThT said:
Singer and his two buddies were completely lacadazical in their treatment of this movie. That p.o.s. probably never even opened a comic from the looks of what was thrown up on screen so discussing why this ****tard put anything in this movie is really pointless. I'm pretty sure it was there just because it sounded like a good idea on paper so why the hell not?


AMEN brother!! :):up:
 
Wow people still complaining over not getting the Superman movie they wanted..you would think at this point they would get tired of complaining and give up..The negativity is getting real old people...move on already please.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"