So is Larry Niven's essay "man of steel woman of Klneenex" invalid then, would those same rules apply to Supergirl?
Superman
- Thread starter urbandefault
- Start date
Most likely.
As I said, a Kryptonian's superpowers would necessarily include the ability to precisely control said powers. So (barring alien or magical influence) Superman and Lois could be intimate whenever they wanted, without fear of injury; same would apply to Supergirl and any human boyfriend she might have.
Even though a Kryptonian's physical strength would normally overpower any human, they would have absolute control over that strength, so that they wouldn't injure anyone unless they specifically wanted to.
Superman (or Supergirl) can walk across a physical surface without pulverizing it, can't they? They could shake a human's hand without crushing it? Same story here. Absolute control over their muscle movements would be par for the course, at all times. You can't have superpowers without control over them.
I mean, remember the "Can you read my mind?" sequence in the original film? If Superman didn't have absolute control over his muscles at all times, he wouldn't have been able to fly around with Lois without injuring her. And he wouldn't have been able to rescue that helicopter (and Lois herself) without crushing it to bits.
Even if humans might experience a momentary loss of muscle control during sex...there's no evidence that this would apply to Kryptonians.
Last edited:
Despite the sci-fi trappings of the character (which I enjoy), Superman is a complete fantasy construct. Trying to science your way to an explanation of his abilities is a fool's errand.
For that matter, "telekinesis" is just sci-fi approved code for "magic," and equally plausible.
As for whether Clark and Lois can bang, of course they can. They've been doing it for decades in the comics. And it makes for a better story, which is really the only criterion that matters here.
For that matter, "telekinesis" is just sci-fi approved code for "magic," and equally plausible.
As for whether Clark and Lois can bang, of course they can. They've been doing it for decades in the comics. And it makes for a better story, which is really the only criterion that matters here.
How he rebuilt the great wall in movie IV?
THOSE M##HERFUCKERS!!!!!
In the original Quest for Peace, it's telekinesis ? From his eyes?
In the remastered Quest for peace, its super speed and heat vision to melt the bricks into place.
Did they fix a lot of shit wrong with that movie?
THOSE M##HERFUCKERS!!!!!
In the original Quest for Peace, it's telekinesis ? From his eyes?
In the remastered Quest for peace, its super speed and heat vision to melt the bricks into place.
Did they fix a lot of shit wrong with that movie?
Last edited:
Why would it matter WHO the hell is directing it?
You think a movies’ director is irrelevant? First time I’v heard THAT. .
No, the person who decides how the script is interpreted on screen, how the actors interpret their characters, what parts of the script are emphasized or de-emphasized, etc, is extremely important .
And the reason we are shown the scenes that confirmed Richard as a formidable person, as worthy of Lois’ affections as Superman, is because that was the movies’ director’s vision of ”Richard,” as was the entire
In a book from the early 2000s, Superman claimed to have "Super Sensitivity" which means when he's shot with a machine gun, it hurts more than it does with a normal human being, but there's no damage.
This is why he needs to wear the extra pair of underware, because of his super sensitive penis, he's probably done while she's still undressing.
Maybe a lead lined blindfold?
Meanwhile "traditional" sex with Lois is not going to last very long, if he's super sensitive.
Although Smallville claims that a burst of heat vision accompanies sexual release.
Although 5 days in Darkness and he can shag like a normal human being.
Last edited:
To be fair, pseudo-scientific and techno-babble explanations for unrealistic technologies and superpowers are all over the scifi genre, including DC, Marvel, Star Trek, Star Wars, even Godzilla. Of course it's bonkers, but it gives at least the impression of plausibility and the creators having put some thought into it, and it also can work as a creative guide for writers.
Although, I loved when Russell T Davies, when asked by a fan how Doctor Who's sonic screwdriver worked, simply answered "It works just fine, thank you very much".
But why does it matter if the director is a man or a woman?
Actually, I agree. I think that’s the main reason I’ve always been drawn more to sci-fi than fantasy: that veneer of plausibility, of “this could really happen.” It’s also part of what I like about Superman over other superheroes, all the sci-fi aspects of the character’s origins and world. I’m just conscious at the same time that it’s all just a gloss for what are really fantasy concepts, and that it doesn’t really bear close examination beyond that.
Well, the premise of the video (take it or leave it) is that a female director would be more likely to emphasize the kinder, gentler core of Superman’s character (the “female gaze”) over displays of power and violence (the “male gaze”). You can dispute the gendered presentation if you like, but it’s true that Superman works best as a romantic figure, and that the male creative gaze has often mishandled him in recent years.
The romantic conceit of Superman: I want to make out with that woman in my office, but I don't want her to know it's me.
Isn't that rape?
Lets see a woman polish that turd.
So maybe It is a good movie now
Actually on further reflection, it's fake.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCdkakIMn2zG7XBt1NCHooqA
It doesn’t. I think you may have misunderstood or misread my initial post .
The podcaster felt that Supes needed to be directed by a woman, I disagreed that a woman director was required, but would not object to a woman director.
As well as the Heisenberg compensators?
I just read Story of Your Life and was thinking about how the Heisenberg Principle would not mean anything to beings with no concept of linear time.
Surely that would be taking a constant, the flow of time, and turning it into a variable.
That's three moving points to nail down instead of two.
I think it was this thread someone mentioned content warnings or something even Lost In Space has a warning for gore and violence on some episodes.
EDIT: Also because of this thread I watched Man Of Steel again today and really it's not that bad, in fact I think I like it more this time around then the previous time I saw it. It's the movie that follows this one I don't like. and I've seen BvS twice and haven't changed my mind.
EDIT: Also because of this thread I watched Man Of Steel again today and really it's not that bad, in fact I think I like it more this time around then the previous time I saw it. It's the movie that follows this one I don't like. and I've seen BvS twice and haven't changed my mind.
Last edited:
