...by depowering them.
Superman Returns Deleted Scene Now Online
- Thread starter Captaindemotion
- Start date
...by depowering them.
He looked nude in that scene to me.
But in Superman 1, the state of New Jersey was about to be annihilated. And you'd think he'd be motivated to get out of the pool. But he couldn't even lift his arms and take the frickin' necklace off.
He couldn't even lift his arms.
But now we're expected to believe that he can lift a frickin' continent while Kryptonite is inside him?
Noooo.
Look again.
Again Superman I believe charged himself up a good sun dose before he moved that rock and we all know Clark is a solar battery so it was well within his means of accomplishing.
As for referencing previous movies this very discussion is probably why Singer stated this has a "vague" continuity with the other films
As for referencing previous movies this very discussion is probably why Singer stated this has a "vague" continuity with the other films
Hey, a victory is a victory. It is even better when you outsmart your opponents to win it.
Still, he was holding his own in the battle.
I liked the bit near the end where his ship gets banged up. I thought they were going to suggest that that made the return trip much longer. Wouldn't it make it more excusable if Superman only expected to be gone for a couple of weeks, rather than five years?
I completely agree. While I am open to the new movie I am bummed that Routh didn't get another chance to play Superman.
A microcosm of the film itself: boring, bland, plodding, soulless, poorly scripted and acted ... unremarkable.
Barely - and he certainly wasn't alert and in Super mode like he is in the opening there.
Utter nonsense.
WB suits didn't get the extra $100 million they had banked on. End of story.
I thought this guy had a better suggestion of how to open the film and explain Superman's absence than the return to Krypton that Singer gave us:
....start the movie Bond style with a pre-title mini-story. We pick up the plot shortly after the end of Superman II. Lex is in jail, the Krypton criminals vanquished.
Superman gets called for help in some emergency and rushes to the scene. Only it turns out to be a trap put in place by Lex Luthor before he was sent to jail.
Superman is laid low by kryptonite. A prerecorded message from Lex plays. He explains that if Superman is there then he must be in jail and his contingency plan has gone into effect. If he's going down, so is Supes.
As Superman lays weak and powerless, Lex explains that he isn't going to kill Superman. Too easy. He wants Superman to suffer in prison like HE is. The trap essentially traps Superman in a high tech coffin which runs on kryptonite and keeps Superman constantly dosed in just enough kryptonite radiation to keep him crippled. The coffin will end up burrowing itself under Metropolis where it won't be found. Or it'll be in a statue honoring Superman. Something like that. Close enough so that if Superman's super senses are working he can hear/see what is going on but he will be forever trapped alive until the kryptonite power supply gives out in, oh, 100 years.
The only other way out would be if an EMP pulse would short out the system. But if that happened that would mean Metropolis had been nuked. So still sad day for Superman. So Superman is trapped in the prototypical villain trap. Only in this case, it works.
The opening ends with Superman defeated and locked away as Lex laughs at him. Credits roll.
Then we see "Five Years Later". Then the film can start picking up largely as written. Superman is gone for five years. Lex is out of jail. If you've seen the movie you know that early on Lex conducts an experiment that creates a huge EMP pulse. You play that scene and end with Lex going, "Was that an EMP pulse? Ohhhh no…"
I see what you did there ... sarcastically debunking the notion of being soulless with the intrinsic greed of filmmaking. Well played!
Nowhere Man
Commodore
To be fair, I'd hesitate to save New Jersey, so maybe he was thinking about it first.
Wow, this was even more boring than the movie itself.
A few thoughts:
The FX in that clip were gorgeous.
He was clearly not nude. If so, then Kryptonian males have no dangly bits, just a Ken doll-type lump.
Krypton was blown to little bits in the first film...how did it re-form, complete with cultural artifacts, like the big "S"?
That scene would have slowed down an already-too-slow film. Paging Robert Wise!
Superman being a deadbeat dad was a lame idea, and Singer should have been slapped.
I still say that Routh was a good Clark and a poor Superman.....it was the voice. He has a wimpy, reedy voice. Superman should be a baratone, baby!
The FX in that clip were gorgeous.
He was clearly not nude. If so, then Kryptonian males have no dangly bits, just a Ken doll-type lump.
Krypton was blown to little bits in the first film...how did it re-form, complete with cultural artifacts, like the big "S"?
That scene would have slowed down an already-too-slow film. Paging Robert Wise!
Superman being a deadbeat dad was a lame idea, and Singer should have been slapped.
I still say that Routh was a good Clark and a poor Superman.....it was the voice. He has a wimpy, reedy voice. Superman should be a baratone, baby!
When he's flying away at the end (around 5:08), You can see he was just exploring the largest piece of krypton. Granted, a giant, orange-peel-shaped slice of planet is more than you would've expected from the violence of the explosion, but it's certainly not intact.
I can't believe they spent 10 mil on that and didn't find some way to reincorporate it back into the finished film. It looked great, but I think it was pointless and a bit too long. I think it would've thrown people right out of the film from jump, especially if he found nothing there that tied into the rest of the film, if there was no hook on Krypton and he just wound up back at the Kent farm. The theatrical take worked better.
The idea that the journey itself changed Kal-El's personality is a reasonable argument, but I'm not so sure how much of that is born out by what we saw in the film. Outside of perhaps feeling like a fool at Lex's expense and pining over Lois, which was what he was doing before the trip, how exactly did his personality change. I don't think the trip can be used to explain the stalker behavior.
The idea that the journey itself changed Kal-El's personality is a reasonable argument, but I'm not so sure how much of that is born out by what we saw in the film. Outside of perhaps feeling like a fool at Lex's expense and pining over Lois, which was what he was doing before the trip, how exactly did his personality change. I don't think the trip can be used to explain the stalker behavior.
