Basically, people nowdays go out of their way to look for things to be offended about, instead of, you know, actually ENJOYING a movie or TV show. I don't get it either, but that's how it is now. I hope it changes. I really do. People need to relax.
Supergoof never cared about people's privacy. In the Dean Cain & Teri Hatcher show, he flew into Lois' apartment through the open window without asking in almost every episode.
Not exactly the worst idea in the world, if what you're doing is intended to loosely be in some kind of continuity with the Donner films. Because Reeve is Superman in those films, it creates the impression that, in that continuity, Superman is like Reeve. Just imagine, for example, if Star Trek Into Darkness had had a Khan who was played like Ricardo Montalban. Wrong wrong wrong! Because bald time-traveling Romulans cause people in cryosleep to stop acting like Ricardo Montalban. This has been proven by science.
Gathered some links on online articles in regards to SR. They are old and some of the source sites have been taken down. Don't throw too many stones at me. Fascinating read though. SR the homage to Donner's films, Romantic story, for the Devil Wears Prada audience http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/VoicesFromKrypton/news/?a=33821 Also Singer is a big Trekkie and was in ST NEM. Do you think he should fill the void left by Abrams? I think this is something Singer can do and WELL. Singer on X-Men and missed opportunities with Superman http://www.cinemaspy.com/movie-news/bryan-singer-embraces-more-x-men-regrets-superman-returns-707/ Full article http://herocomplex.latimes.com/movies/bryan-singer-and-the-xmen-together-again/ If given another chance Singer said he would be a true reboot. Casting Nicholas Hoult (Beast Xmen first class/ Jack the Giant Slayer) as Superman/Clark Kent. Full article http://www.digitalspy.com/movies/news/a314721/singer-id-cast-nicholas-hoult-as-superman.html http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/TheFortressofSolitude/news/?a=35362 Here is a summary of the SR sequel that was never made. The source link from IESB has been taken down however. http://screenrant.com/bryan-singer-superman-man-steel-brainiac-storyline-rob-91933/
Poor Brandon Routh. He probably thought it was his big break and he never had a legitimate chance to impress.
Pretend I said "justifiable homicide" instead. Anyway, it turns out I spoke in error anyway. Murder is "the act of killing another human with malice aforethought", so it's actually impossible for Superman to murder Zod.
Well we did see him wearing the glasses a bit crooked, so it's still possible this will be some kind of disguise.
The other thing I didn't like about this movie was the way Superman solves the situation by picking it up and throwing it into space. That was an anti climax. That's how he solves everything. Obviously Superman can pick up anything and throw it into space, even a whole continent, infused with kryptonite no less. so it is the most practical solution to a lot of problems. There's very few threats that can't be eliminated by launching them into deep space.
I just finished the first rewatch since it was in theaters in 2006. Not as bad as I remembered. I think it captured most of the feel of I and II. Brandon Routh did a pretty good job. Loooking at it now I think what turned me off to him in the first place were the CGI flying shots. Not his fault, and I didn't realize that's what it was at the time, but I thought his eyes looked dead. Now I know it's the CGI. They haven't really been able to capture human eyes yet. Kevin Spacey did a pretty good job of channeling Gene Hackman. I like Kate Bosworth. She's much easier to look at than Margot Kidder, even back then. I do agree with some here that Parker Posey might have been a better choice, but I don't really have any complaints. Marsden's character was wasted. He didn't need to be there, except to provide the seaplane. Lois could have maintained that her son was by "an old boyfriend" and it wouldn't have been any more obvious who was the father. The kid could have performed a couple more super-feats. Maybe blasting through the porthole with heat vision or something. I think maybe he did use telescopic vision to locate Superman in the ocean, but they never actually implied it. I still hate that suit. The neck was too tight and the cape looked heavy. The reds were too dark, and the pasted on rubber emblem just didn't work for me. Still, it wasn't as bad as I remembered. If given a choice between this one or MOS, I think I'd choose Superman Returns. I grew up with George Reeves, then was amazed by Christopher Reeve in 1978. Superman Returns did a pretty decent job of carrying the torch. That is all.
Yeahhhhhh. There's a vast difference between murder and killing someone who's threatening the lives of others who also was hell-bent on exterminating the entire human race.
In that scene Superman practically begged Zod to relent, but Zod insisted. You could see the anguish in Superman's face as he knew what had to be done, but at the same time didn't want to do it. It went against everything he had been taught, everything he believed. In the end he saw no choice but to save that family that was about to be annihilated. That's not murder.
I thought Superman was taught that life wasn't important, though? Isn't that what the scene with his father dying in the tornado is about? That a secret is much more valuable than human life, since life is only temporary anyways? But secrets and protecting yourself above all else, that's forever? He basically murdered his father through inaction anyways.
The line was "I don't know. Maybe." "Murder" implies intent. Clark wanted to run and save Jonathan, but his father said no. That's not murder. In my opinion, Clark struggled with that and it clinched it for him. I think that if he were able to go back and change that one thing in his life, he would have saved Jonathan and dealt with the consequences later. Call it a formative moment.
Say huh? Jonathan was simply trying to protect his son from being discovered and hounded the rest of his live by the government and military. He still made it clear that he expected Clark to do great things in the future, but just didn't think he was quite ready yet to reveal himself to the world.
Generally, when parents tell their children one thing through their words but demonstrate a completely contradictory thing through their actions, it's going to be their actions that the children grow up emulating.
Jonathan demonstrated self sacrifice to Clark in a way that would stay with him for the rest of his life. I don't like the way they did it, but I get the message. But back to Superman Returns ...
The thing that people don't seem to appreciate about this situation is that they were setting up Superman to be the Jor-El figure in Jason's life, and Richard to be the Jonathan Kent figure.