Superman movies/Superman Returns: Is Superman the last Krptonian?

[Crewman47]

In Superman Returns after Clark discovers the ruins of Krypton he comes to realise that he is now the last survivor. If Returns is supposed to slightly follow on from at least the first two Reeves movies then shouldnt he know about Kandor (?) and Kara, his cousin who showed up in the Supergirl movie which is supposed to tie in with the movies also, being set somewhere just after the second movie?

 

[Captaindemotion]

^ It's a loose sequel, as Singer termed it. Events somewhat like Superman The Movie and Superman II occurred somewhere in the past of this Superman (but they weren't set in the late 1970s and early 1980s). That certainly implies that Zod and co occurred in his past and, if things panned out like they did in that movie, they're still on Earth, albeit depowered and in prison.

Singer has stated that he disregarded Superman III and IV (for example, Martha was referred to as having died in the latter) but never really addressed Supergirl, as far as I know. I'd be surprised if he even considered it, to be honest.

 

[Set Harth]

That certainly implies that Zod and co occurred in his past and, if things panned out like they did in that movie, they're still on Earth, albeit depowered and in prison.

If Superman Returns was supposed to follow the Donner cut of II, they would be back in the Phantom Zone after he turned back time. But I don't think setting Returns in the same continuity as the Donner cut really works, given that turning back time would erase other things as well, including Lois' pregnancy ( not to mention the fact that the theatrical audience of Returns had not yet seen the Donner cut ). It seems that when it comes to II, Singer's film is a very "loose" sequel indeed, but it can be considered a solid sequel to the first film.

 

[Admiral_Young]

Except that Jason White is Lois and Clark's child from when they slept together in the Fortress in "Superman II". Plus it could be argued that Lois can't remember that due to the mind wipe. I think Singer just picked things he liked from the first two movies (mainly that particular storyline) the Gene Hackman portrayed Lex Luthor, and that is the "vague" continuity that he mentioned. He basically also ignored "Superman III". I think a lot of fans look at "Superman Returns" as a remade Superman III anyways. I do to a certain extent.

 

[Set Harth]

Except that Jason White is Lois and Clark's child from when they slept together in the Fortress in "Superman II".

Maybe from an "alternate" Superman II or something, going by certain Singer interviews. He referenced the "Mylar bed" thing and seemed to indicate they weren't sticking to the specifics.

Plus it could be argued that Lois can't remember that due to the mind wipe.

She seems to clearly remember that they had some kind of relationship, which creates some problems with the mind wipe idea ( however, my earlier post was about conflict with Donner, not Lester ). Maybe he was able to mind wipe her knowledge of his Clark identity while leaving her memory of a relationship with Superman intact?

I think Singer just picked things he liked from the first two movies (mainly that particular storyline) the Gene Hackman portrayed Lex Luthor, and that is the "vague" continuity that he mentioned.

The film does seem to indicate that Lex has been to the fortress before as in II.

 

[Checkmate]

It doesn't really matter which medium you look at, he's always referred to as the "Last Son of Krypton" even when it's blatantly and painfully obvious that he isn't.

It'd be really nice if he one day is, though. I really hate seeing all these other ones cropping up out of the blue, yet somehow the universe isn't under their rule despite the fact that it damn well should with their powers and propensity for being evil sum'bitches (there's far and away more evil Kryptonian survivors than good ones no matter the medium).

If they'd keep him in a period piece, that'd be awesome, too. Ditto for Batman.