I did not completely dislike the movie though I actually prefer Smallville over it. But thank god, the next one is written (but not directed) by Christopher freaking Nolan. I suppose it will be good.
@deelow83 What I read about Bryan Singer would suggest he has daddy issues as well as other issues. That could have contributed to his vision of Superman for this movie.
@deelow83 Yeah infact the line is what his own father Jor-el tells him in the first superman when he was a baby. he could not be there for him as his dad couldn't as well.
@deelow83 I think you might be right. I loved the film. I think Brandon Routh did a superb job. I think he captured the spirit of Chris Reeves, and at the end, what a tribute to Chris and George Reeves in the final flight scene.
@OceanicOsprey Welcome to the real world! In this world we don't ignore the poor representation of the longstanding characteristic values of an American iconic figure, we confront them, criticize them for what they are, and the people whose deranged ideals produced them.
And in the real world an edict from you has as much meaning to me as a parasite on a fleas back dictating what I should feed the dog.
@OceanicOsprey What? Is that some sort of brain washing psychobabble? LOL LOL LOL
Let's face facts people... the movie was a disaster! A creative monstrosity from with the idea for what ever reason that Superman needed some "tweaking." The result, a devastating failure, as it deserved. Bad ideas deserve to fail. But somehow there are a few of you that feel you have to be loyal to Bryan Singer and support this travesty. Fine! Just stop trying to flip the script and make me the issue.
@chiefrstrong Anybody that bases their judgement on commercial success has no place critiquing films. I think you'll find it's a homage to the Christopher Reeve series, and as such Brandon Routh does an excellent job, as does the film in attempt to re-visit a past quadrilogy. If you perceive my words to be 'psycho-babble' then I suggest you learn the English language.
@OceanicOsprey I never said "I" judged this rubbish by whether or not it was commercially successful. You should spend more time learning to comprehend the English language than advising others in knowledge you don't have yourself. That being said... if commercial success the presence of, lack of, or potential to be is not worthy of consideration in judgment maybe Hollywood will stop charging for their product.
@chiefrstrong It's a shame your video has received views, for reasons I cannot understand. With that statement, you're saying Michael Bay deserves credit for the commercial success of his garbage. How very wrong you are, you bear no substance. This conversation is over.
@OceanicOsprey Wellll... let me see. Who is the creative force behind the re imagined vision of the Transformers for the modern era? Micheal Bay. Is the Transformers a success? Yes Therefore who deserves the credit? tik tok tik tok ....... Oh I'll just give it away. Michael Bay! What else do you want to hear?
I'm sorry Superman Returns was shit. I was looking forward to a good movie like everyone else. You have Bryan Singer to thank for the overall disappointment.
@OceanicOsprey Point 1: Though I am a fan of Micheal Bays work on The Transformers I never said or gave inference in my response TO YOU that I applauded Micheal Bay. Instead I identified that contrary to what you eluded to, credit for the success of The Transformers belongs the chief engineer and creative force behind the well received commodity delivered to the consumer market. That is, albeit to your dislike, Micheal Bay.
Point 2: Did you not already say...? "This conversation is over."
I disagree he like great hero who has alot villains after him so if they found out about his son. he and Louis will in danger every day of their lives lex knows so he will be after them
@king789ist In this very movie, and the previous movies this one was based on Lex Luthor knows Lois Lane and Superman are close. The extent of their relationship may or may not be known by Lex Luthor (in this series of movies) but he knows enough to seek out Lois to or use as a threat like he did in Superman 2. If he doesn't know Superman is the kids father, the kids still and extension of Lois Lane. Therefore that is a poorly executed logic even if I could agree.
they clearly give you the impression that superman is not gonna be a part of his sons life at the end of the movie. The writer and director dicided that. All this person did was post that scene between superman and his son. And he spends half of his time as clark so he would be able to spend time with him if he wanted to. It kinda sounded like a goodbye scene to me when i watched it. His father said the same thing to him b 4 he sent him to earth. So wat r we suppose to think?
My interpretation" as superman gazes down at the young boy, remember he has xray vision, and he recognizes something very different yet very familiar about the boys anatomy and molecular structure, its the same as his" its then superman realizes this is his son, and afterwards declares how different life will be for the young lad, how he will be different but not alone. what a great ending to start a new sequel"
@mewjaws5754 Except over a year ago the producers that once supported Bryan Singer to make this movie abandoned their support and labeled the movie toxic to the Superman film franchise, ended their relationship with him and sought another group to restart the franchise. Only a few fans, you apparently being one, remain of the few fans Bryan Singer ever gained with this box office flop.
I disagree man! He never abandon your family, He can be side by side to you wife in few seconds if he wish!! Sorry!! Your vision about final scene is very wrong!
@youangeltube I think the general plot twist of Superman leaving for 5 years to take a look at the wreakage of Krypton was the biggest plot problem to be had. Everything else was secondary. Either way, I think the producers were tired of still building on the original storyline with Christopher Reeve, which is what this film did. Not to say that Singer didn't evidently get into some facts, such as Superman sleeping with Lois in Superman II impregnated her, but yeah, the storyline was overused
Bryan Singer... You transformed our hero - I grew up watching Christopher Reeve until my VCR to blow up - in a adulterous and a absent father of a bastard child. Your sick jackass!!! You screwed the Brandon Routh's career!!
Zack Synder, at least, is a normal man!! I hope...
superman never hits anyone...he damges a plane so bad the only way he can save the people is by landing it in a baseball statuim filled with people and tv camras ...not bad for his first public appirance since "he claims" he went back home to look for sirvivors.....and then he leaves his son ......without explaining why his mother lois has no idea how superman got her preggers.....or making back payments for surport....superbastard
What a cycle the house of El has created. Clark's biological parents gave him up because their planet was exploding. Clark cannot take on full parental duties to his child because of his duties to the world.
@warrior770 Maybe Warner Bros. doesn't know shit about Superman either. Since they shit canned this direction calling it "toxic" and began a complete re-boot of the Superman franchise.
Its okay homie. A lot of people experience what you go through on a daily basis. You're not alone! But don't misinterpret a great moment btw a Man and his Son and try to make other people feel as down as you. Its just not right....
@sheldons7 Great attempt at aversion but I wont be distracted. This movie butchered and shit on the Superman mythology.
I offer a thousand apologies to Brandon Routhe. One good decision Bryan Singer made, and he made several good decision. But the overwhelming bad decisions he made cost Brandon Routhe a role he was tailor made for.
@sheldons7 I would throw in some trouble with women as well as the daddy issues. A woman is a "whore" because she has sex with two men? In the film it's indicated pretty strongly that she knew exactly who the father was but tried to make a life with a new man when she was abandoned, possibly forever as far as she knew. Cheif' I think you need to work out some issues mate, you're getting angry over fictional characters - see a counsellor or something because, seriously, you crazy dude!
@isupposeitdoes I think you need to learn how to read and apply that skill, once you obtain it, to what I have said. I have posted enough in my comments here, if you had the capacity of reading comprehension, that you would have not made such a foolish comment. Unless you just choose to ignore what you have read. In that case you ill conceived evaluation is your burden to bare.
@gojetafu I agree with all of your points. Taken as a stand-alone movie, I think Superman Returns is a good movie, but for setting up a franchise, it's crap! Hence, the reboot. I cannot understand why some studio exec didn't raise the reasonable point that giving Superman a kid was an incredibly dumb idea. In terms of the internal logic and themes of the story, it works, but for a franchise? Very, very, bad! Which is why this video does have a point.
If you paid attention in the movie Lois told Superman that he had been gone a long time and that Richard was a good man. Meaning she had respect for Richard and out of that she had moved on with her life. Wow. A flop or not it had its good points too. For Superman to protect his son he is pretty much keeping it a secret so Lex Luther or his enemies do not know. Why not. Like you said that would be another weakness besides Kryptonite...
It's pretty sad when you take a movie that was suppose to or could have been a big hit instead had some misses in it and really didn't have a good plot to go from to make it more interesting and a hit. So Lois and Superman had a son together. Big Deal! People have kids all the time that are not married. Two Clark aka "Superman" loved Lois and Lois loved superman she got what she wanted the man of her dreams which was duh Superman to love her. So he left to go see if there was anymore like him.
Lois Lane didn't have sex with two men in close proximity. She had sex with Superman in SUPERMAN 2. And then he wiped her memory of the whole thing. Yeah, how do you explain that? That was a Reeve film.
Superman Returns just said to 2 'what the heck were you thinking? Now we have to clean up your mess!' And they did. I'm glad it happened.
And did you think maybe it's possible that Richard White, you know, started dating Lois KNOWING she's pregnant? Maybe? I know of some guys that do that.
@GalacticKnight So Lois couldn't remember kissing Superman but she knew she fucked him and had his baby. As dumb as I think Bryan Singer was for this absolute atrocity even I give him more credit than that.
Bryan Singer established early in the movie when Superman returned home to his mother that he had been gone five years. He also established the kid was five years old and that Richard White and Lois Lane had been together for five years.
@chiefrstrong #1: No, she didn't. Thus the shocked look on her face when Jason shoved a friggan piano onto a thug. She had no idea that kid was that strong.
@GalacticKnight With the established time lines Lois Lane fucked Richard White very shortly after fucking Clark Kent and it's not established in the movie that Richard White or Lois Lane knew the baby wasn't his.
So Bryan Singers Lois Lane is just a common whore which does nothing to establish the character that was Lois Lane. In Singers atrocity she could have just as well been Jenna Jameson. Clearly everything points to Singers Lois Lane being the same as any whore in Metropolis.
@chiefrstrong #1: Was that ever actually stated? I grant you the very ambiguous nature of the kid can have many people wondering, but jumping to conclusions like you're doing (it was never stated or established that Richard and Lois ever actually had sex, for one) can make some people very angry.
Look, this video was posted a very long time ago and I'm sorry for bringing up some very unpleasant topics up again, be please don't try to take things out of the film that weren't there.
@GalacticKnight C'mon Knight! It was intentionally not specifically stated so that the audience wouldn't know the kid was Superman's son until he pushed that piano. What Bryan Singer didn't consider was that his Lois Lane was so far out of the Lois Lane character that she would no longer be the Lois Lane character.
It's like adding an illegitimate baby brother to "Leave It To Beaver." What does that do to the character of June Cleaver. Why can't you accept Bryan Singer fucked up? Warner has!
@chiefrstrong Because it was left ambiguous. There is no proof that Lois slept with Richard in a way that would make him believe he was the biological father. It was left ambiguous, intentionally. Honestly, I read over the ideas for the next film, and he didn't make it any clearer. Yes, he screwed up because I don't think he knew HOW to handle a plot like the one he layed out. But it was left ambiguous all the same, and I think we shouldn't speculate wildly on that.
@chiefrstrong In regards to Warner: Singer screwed up by making a film the fans weren't expecting and didn't really want. Why? Because it essentially retreaded the first film with a few new plot threads. :/ Granted they were interesting, but they were SUB plot. If we had a unique MAIN plot that was what the fans wanted, the movie wouldn't have been a disappointment (it made a profit, just not a big one).
Is the kid not better of with two stable parents that love him with a guardian angel or does superman have to become a father and possibly endanger the world by having a weakness.
As for Superman "abandoning" his son (and Lois and his "nobility"), that's your own inner voice talking.
When Lois pulls back from kissing Superman atop the Daily Planet, she makes a principled stand against returning to things as they were before Superman left: namely, that "Richard's a good man...and you've been gone a long time."
It is here, that we see Superman's most iconic virtue: veneration of his bond with Lois in accepting his rejection from the only person who ever completed him.
@bigollameo As for Superman "abandoning his son and his nobility" in this movie that is Bryan Singers presentation, and my eyes observing.
As for the rest of your enlightening, the problem with it is there is no reason to put a costume on or give the characters names because that is the real life story of every selfish man and woman seeking to satiate there own desires while seeking some redemption in defining it as a modern era relationship.
"As for Superman "abandoning his son and his nobility" in this movie that is Bryan Singers presentation, and my eyes observing.."
Yeah, that was a real good argument there.
Well, you sound like some kind of far-right wacko with your values-centered rant about Superman. I guess there isn't much to say, other than you can't appreciate Superman Returns for the same reason a Neanderthal couldn't appreciate a Rubik's Cube: you're not equipped for the content.
@bigollameo There you go again. I described the character that has endured and has been embraced by generations of fans worldwide, you and Bryan Singer talk about philosophical ideologies that you think everyone else accepts because you want to promote.
Your real life is more fantasy than the fictional world of Superman. Your "enlightenment" isn't new status quo you think it is and this box office flop is testament to that.
"Your real life is more fantasy than the fictional world of Superman." - My everyday existence is more unreal than the fictionally-authored world of Superman? What does that mean???
Beyond that, when you say "I.E. That's not Superman and Lois Lane", IT ISN"T A DESCRIPTION. You haven't described anything about either of them. You've just kept saying that this movie makes them look like two irresponsible parents who can't either keep their legs closed / dick in their pants.
Unfortunately, you seem to be able to convince yourself of anything. In light of protesting posters who deny your main point that everyone hated this movie, in lieu of statistics that basically end up donkey punching your "box office flop" argument, and in spite of how far out of touch your puritanical worldview is with today- a view that, if accepted, would probably also condone casual domestic violence and lynching negros for being too uppity.
@bigollameo You have officially run out of material. You are arguing that I haven't made a point you have already previously argued against. You are baring witness to testament I never made. In fact since you have lost any debating points and all credibility with it your entire response is to attack me with erroneous insults.
Buy soda and popcorn, invite Bryan Singer over for movie night and watch this tragic work of crap. Then both people who thought this is a good movie will be together.
Where does virtue exist for Superman in the absence of physical danger? Sure, his actions are both morally praiseworthy (saving airplanes, etc.) are gallant and noble, but he's not at risk.
Note: Virtue untested by risk ISN'T virtue.
So where's the risk, then?
It lies in the possibility of encountering emotional and psychological trauma in negotiating the world, and Lois Lane in particular, and his acceptance of the perils of the social without enlisting force.
@bigollameo What is GOD's name are you talking about? The movie sucked, it was a box office flop, the backers of the movie hated it and shit canned any further endeavors with it, and Superman fans in particular have expressed vitriolic outrage towards Bryan Singer for producing it. No one cares about all that deep analyzing because regardless of how insightful you think it is. It failed.
How does the term "toxic" fit into your modern definition?
Total flop at the box office, huh? Seems your perception is as deprived and stunted as your mind, However, maybe a sorry drone like you has enough reading skill to follow the statistics from Box Office Mojo: Production Budget: $270 million Worldwide Gross: $391,081,192 million
Vitriolic outrage? Maybe you should look at how virtually everyone commenting is in total disagreement with you.
Btw, make sure not to cook the fries too long- drive-thru customers hate that shit.
@bigollameo One of the elements that made the characters of Superman what they were is how great "of character" they were. There was no one else for Lois Lane, only Superman was strong enough for her. Superman could only love Lois. Superman could not be even be tempted to use his abilities to violate the expectation of privacy others have. In this scene we see the abandonment of all those trademark characteristics that made Superman so iconic. And to add to that he become a common (con't)
@bigollameo deadbeat dad. He should just wear pants that hang down showing his underwear and a hoodie, have another couple of babies by different women.
There is no failure in understanding the movie or the scene. The movie is shit, and betrays Superman. Waner Bros. agrees, they have labeled "Superman Returns" toxic and have abandoned it. This is bad for Brandon Routhe because he was excellent. Bryan Singers vision of Supernan is repugnant and that costume is only good for wiping your ass.
If Superman Returns "is shit" and indeed "toxic" to the franchise, it doesn't seem to show over at Rotten Tomatoes critical and fan reviews. But, really, let's get back to the big ticket here: your conception of Superman.
First off, this isn't the golden age of comics anymore. Someplace where you appear to be trapped. It is no longer a time for the naive heroic narrative- virtue triumphant, yet casting no shadows of fear or pain or weakness.
i dont think he's abandoning his son or Lois, he loved them but he wants Lois to have a regular life and his son to have a father thats going to b there all the time and not out saving the world thats why he lets Richard take over
i wouldnt call this abandonment its more like watching over him knowing he can't be there in person. knowing his son might become his heir maybe he figured he needed to experience life as he did and help him when he can along the way
I have to say, even though this movie was not a good contiuation to the Superman franchise this was a pretty decent seen. I don't think Supes mas abandoning his son. He was "passing the torch". It was a very effective reflection of the original movie when Marlon Brando (Jor-El) said the same to him. This was one of the best scenes in the film. Can't wait for a different recreation though. That'll be better. Hopefully.
Lois had lost of memory after Superman kissed her in the Superman II, in the end. She didn't know at that time that she was pregnant with Superman's son. She found out she was pregnant after Superman gone and after met Richard.
You people have to give up trying to salvage this movie. Warner Bros. Executives have long labeled this movie "toxic" to the Superman franchise and have abandoned it. Just accept it, Bryan Singers "Singerman Repugnant" sucks.
Sorry to disagree. I think this scene's great. The theme of alienation, of being different and trying to fit in, weaves in and out of the story. It starts with Superman returning to Earth after searching for others like him, and ends with him discovering there is someone like him after all, his son. As such, whilst it's flawed, lacking the fast pacing and big, big explosions that we have come to expect of a summer blockbuster, as a film based upon its own merits, Superman Returns is very good.
@britmike84 Sorry warner bros disagrees with you. They have shitcanned any further attempt at this franchise and began work to renew the Superman Film franchise starting all over specifically because of what Bryan Singer did with this horrific piece of crap.
@chiefrstrong whatever our differing opinions on Superman Returns, Singer was given the job on the back of first, some good/great indie films and second, a previous successful superhero franchise. For Singer, read Christopher Nolan, the new "Godfather" of Superman. I have high hopes because his Batman films and Inception were stunning, but it ain't going to be a slamdunk successful reboot.
A question to all.. How many of you are *known* film critics or prominent Hollywood Producer/Director-types and how many are Burger King/student-types? I just want to know *who* graces us with all of these, "this movie sucks" and "the problem with this scene is"-type comments. How many of you have been paid millions by a major studio to Direct a movie? Maybe four or five of you, right?
Plus the fact at the beginning of quote he even says, you will never be alone, which proves that even tho he must take care of his responsibilities as superman, he will always be watching over his son.
he didnt really abandon his son because he didn know it was his son...rather it was more like he was payin him a visit...and takin joy in the fact that he has a son...even though he can't be the father that maybe he'd like to be because he is superman
How in the hell do you take one of the best superman scenes ever and try to distort it into the absolute opposite of what it means? Chiefstrong, you seem to have some kind of childhood issue that clouds your judgment. This scene represents Superman returning to Earth and, after realizing he has a son, completing the kryptonic prophesy. This a surprisingly deep statement expressed in a film genre you would least expect it. Only father's tend to understand what that statement means.
Can't really say Superman is a "deadbeat dad" or that he "abandons his son." He says that he's "always around," implying he'll be there to take care of Lois and the kid. Besides, do you really think Superman is going to announce to the world, "Hey! I have a son!!" NO! Lois is already a target, but openly claiming his son would endanger his son's life as well. Second, Lois and Richard's relationship is not fully explored, so we don't know that she slept around and can't say she is a whore.
erm.. superman is not human right.. not ''one of them''. so is this kid a cross breed?? maybe that explains his strength while at the same time his breathing difficulties which i assume to be the human side of him.. p.s kudos to lois lane for surviving taking a 'superdick'.. i mean she must have been walking funny for years after that.. lol
@dissyfit ... dont forget that this is a direct sequal to Superman 2.. and Superman decieded to give up his powers in that movie to be with lois and they slept with each other and boom theres the child in this movie lol.....I dont why i said boom and just felt like saying it haha
What a retardedly bias and mean spirited title to an awesome video. Nice try, dipshit. His son is in good hands and the father is watching over him, letting him be raised by a human family like he was to give him perspective. Nice try you goof.
The only problem with this movie was that Lex Luthor was the wrong villain to choose. Or they should have at least put in another villain, one that Superman could actually fight. That's why the movie was boring, because as nice as deep themes might be, in the end, we all want to see a big fight. And we never got that here.
@Vasquez88 There was no problem with the choice of villain. This movie was a horrible vision of Superman and the cast of characters in the Superman mythos. Singer did one excellent job and that was the choice of Brandon Routhe to play Superman.
Warner has finally abandon this calling it "toxic" and decided to re-initiate the Superman film franchise. That is an excellent decision on the part of Warner Communications.
I know it's a lost cause arguing with the dude who posted the vid, but I'll state my beliefs anyway......the movie is about Superman's self-discovery. He goes to search his lost home of Krypton (presumably) for a sense of belonging. Through the events of the film, he finds his sense of belonging in what he already had. It's an interesting take on the character. I felt Singer's direction and the production values were top notch.
Superman does tell Lois "he'll always be there"........but it's not like he can quit his job as Superman. You know, the guy who saves the world. In any event, this is a pointless, annoying debate.
Chiefrstrong, your stupid. He doesn't abandon his son and wife of son. Based on the ending, and Lois's reaction, I can assume he's going to allow Richard (Lois's finacee') to raise the boy, while Clark is watching over him. He probably knows he could never be a real father, hmm, why? Because he is SUPERMAN.
In the comic books when that happened people did complain about it and that was changed like 40 years ago. But to answer you question more specifically, that was not in this movie.
Because not everyone still reads childish comic books above the age of 12 (which is when you're supposed to grow up and stop reading them). The only thing that comics are good for is a jumping off point for a character. No director follows EVERY little piece of a comic book word-for-word, if they did it would be pointless to make the movies to begin with, even though it was pointless to make this Superman anyway; it SUCKED.
Believe it or not that was done in mass before the while the movie was in early production. And has continued since. It reminds me of that old axiom "Don't tug on Superman's cape."
Every superman/comic book fan with common sense should know that Kryptonian and humans don't mix when comes to bredding. But this scene was touching, however.
Actually, every human being over 12 years of age should have the common sense to read comics anymore. Most people don't even believe in Aliens (which is what Superman is), so why would they believe in the idea of Superman having a child whether they read the comics or not? Because people are stupid, and so are you for thinking this STUPID scene was even remotely interesting.
Are all you guys naturally morons or you guys trained hard to be professionally stupid?
This guy was making a joke. he understood the bases of why superman done what he did, but he wanted to poke fun at this movie. Now let's get serious here, that child is going to hell because he is a bastard(lol)
dude chiefstrong do you know anything about how superheroes can't get close to people because they put them in danger 9of ocurse they're pretty much all stupid and always get cloes to someone) he had to leave them to protect them, what did you expect that he would just settle down with his family...of course he is Superman so I guess that shouldn't be too hard
of ocurse this whole premise was stupid...Iagree with that....but the mvoie still wasn't that bad...but it wasn't great
I figured that Lois always knew the kid was Superman's, she just never said anything to anyone. And there isn't really an indication of when she got together with Richard, or that he believes the kid is his. He has raised Jason, so they refer to him as Jason's father.
If you watch the screen tests of past Lois Lanes from Superman: The Movie (look for the special DVD edition or search YouTube), despite each actress reading from the SAME script, you'd be amazed at how DIFFERENT each 'Lois' is portrayed.
Why not just say "Kate Bosworth was a terrible Lois Lane"? That would've been shorter and more to-the-point.
"Singerman Repugnant"? *sigh*..Repugnant? That word is reserved for such garbage as "Superman III" (Kate Bosworth may have been mediocre as Lois, but better her than Richard Pryor RIP).
I never saw it the way you explained it. From the chronology of this film and its events. Lois Lane is a whore. Logically, in order to confuse 2 males about their son, would mean that Lois slept with Richard in about a week right after Superman left without a word.
Though I love Superman and this touching scene, this film throws bullshit at our faces and betrays the Superman story.
This is the only part of the movie I like, great scene of Superman telling his son what his father told him. He isnt abandoning his son, Lois is in a relationship so cant come between them but he will always be around for his son. Maybe Lois knew he was Superman's son but wanted to believe he was her new boyfriend's. Thats what women are like!
(("This bickering is going no wheres. Long story short, your accusations of Superman is not supported by this movie")) What isn't supported is your abliity to read.
I have lost nothing to a guy posting under two account names.
This bickering is going no wheres. Long story short, your accusations of Superman is not supported by this movie, by previous Superman installments, nor reality.
In fact, the "evidence" you provided to prove your point in reality disproves your point completely.
From the number of posts here not of yours, you lost 50-0. Douche.
SEEK PROFESSIONAL HELP for your issues chiefstrong. My blood father was not around but I had a real dad that raised me. And THANK GOD HE WASN'T AROUND. He's a horrible father to his other kids. 1 son in jail, older daughter a nut-job. middle one high school drop-out. OR if you abandoned your kid, LOOK HIM UP and try to be there for them You can't change the past but you can live in the present. And leave the alcohol bottle & rx drugs alone
MrLofton, MrLofton, MrLofton, MrLofton... tsk tsk tsk. Take a deep breath, put on your reading glasses and take a good look at this exchange between you and I. Whether or not you were right about me (and you were wrong by the way) you "evaluation of me is without merit because I have not revealed anything about me in my criticism as I will reinforce that I have been critical of Bryan Singers direction in this movie not the characters actions. Bryan singer presented them .... (con't)
completely out of character for who they were and what made them so popular. HOWEVER... considering your last two post in these comments its clear that I hit the bulls eye when I question why you were so adamant in your defense of this movie and took my criticism so personally. If you can't see that sir, I would suggest you quickly take your own advice and seek that professional help.
This is obviously driving you and clouding your vision, god only knows how it's affecting you elsewhere.
Uh...I'm not the one with a Youtube thing on here about Superman abandoning his son chiefrstrong this is is your site. And FYI what ever daddy problems I had I came to terms with a long time ago! Maybe it's time you do the same. Forgive the people who wronged you, exercise your demons and get on with your life
How senile is chiefrstrong? In ABSOLUTELY no point in that clip is evidence that Superman abandons his son. In fact, if Superman did in deed abandon his son, then when he found out Jason is his son, why did he go to him and gave him the same words Jor-El gave him? Hm?
(("Uh...I'm not the one with a Youtube thing on here about Superman abandoning his son chiefrstrong this is is your site.")) I'm not the one who cried "my daddy wasn't there for me" You did in an earlier post.
Don't project your childhood issues on me because I wont except them. My issue with this movie has nothing to do with what's apparently troubling you. But what's troubling you is so bad that's all you see.
You have not come to any terms even if you think you have.
What's troubling me is how you can easily speak out against the greatest superhero of all time, and how you can easily make up stories to prove a point that you don't have.
I've made it crystal clear in this dialogue between you and I that it is the direction Bryan Singer chose for this movie that I have contempt for and his work I have criticized.
(But what's troubling you is so bad that's all you see) No my friend it's whats troubling you...Superman Returns came out how many years ago now.. and your still bitching and crying about it YOU NEED HELP YOU NEED HELP YOU NEED HELP.
Singerman Repugnant was released 28 June 2006. Becuase I work so much in Summer I neever saw it in the theaters. The DVD was released in December 2006 but I never saw it until March 2007. Finnally learning how to extract videos from DVD I did so and posted that clip in Novemeber 2007. If you look at the dates on the comments you'll notice that this video went unnnoticed even by me for over two years. WEll ... until you came along.
I spoke me piece once, in November of 2007. You just found it. But what ever is eating away at you wont allow you to let it go. You are projecting your issue on me again and I will not accept it for you.
Get up from the computer and do some serious self exploration. Then get help. You really do need it.
chiefstrong you do have either father abandonment issues, or maybe you had a kid and left the mother and your guilt is coming out on this Youtube clip my advice seek prodessional help, come to terms why did your daddy leave you, or find your lost kid and try to be in his or her life. Cause mentally this is really bothering you and it doesn't take a professional to see you need help!
Thats kinda harsh there chiefrstrong, i mean its not like the guy wants to abandon the kid, but realistically whats he gonna do "Hey everyone, im Superman and this is my kid, and we're gonna go to a ballgame together, just so all the bad guys know" realistically even, superman being a major figurehead for the world needs to leave his son out of the spotlight so that he has a chance to be a normal kid, this concept applies in real life fr politicians, diplomats, etc
(("Thats kinda harsh there chiefrstrong, i mean its not like the guy wants to abandon the kid..."))
What he wants is not what he did. The character was far and above those issues that would be relevant to average people, hence the name Superman. for what ever the reason Bryan Singer lost site of that. This Superman is the average street thug that "will always be there fo' my baby" Well that isn't Superman.
Its understandable that the guy isnt a normal person, but being raised on earth isnt he subject to the same sociocultural crap of everyday human life as well? I mean if he was a hardcore kryptonian attitude wise im sure you would have seen what you wanted to see, but Bryan Singer had to encorporate some aspect of him being emotionally vulnerable. And like i said he isnt abandoning the kid, not really, after all he does say that "he's always around" hehe
That's not what I meant. The character of Superman and Lois Lane was far and away above the character of what we would define as normal people. That is what made them who they were. Bryan Singer didn't respect that so Superman and Lois Lane are now just a super powered John Doe and a popular Jane Doe. His Kryptonian origin gave him his powers but had nothing whatsoever to do with his character. And there was no such origin that made Lois Lane the extraordinary character she was ....
And you failed completely to explain how this isn't Superman or Lois. Let's see now, a man from another world falling for an intrepid woman with all his heart, and she feels the same for him. And that nothing can come between them.
And also, douche. What makes you an expert as to what a wife beating social degenerate says? Unless you are one yourself, which wouldn't surprise me. Man, you need a lesson in love and devotion. Preferably from a woman who can tolerate you. Like Rosanne Barr.
Just because you watch the news, douche, doesn't make you an expert. You can watch the weather report as much as you want, and still have no fucking clue as to what the meteorologist are talking about or how they figure these things out. THAT I can understand. But you have demonstrated time and time again that you need an expert to explain the incredibly obvious.
The question was... "Do I have to be an expert to watch the news?" Which was a reply to your previous comment/question...(("And also, douche. What makes you an expert as to what a wife beating social degenerate says? " )) It requires not status of expertise to witness.
Oh I know things cause I watch the news. Does the news dictate how to recognize in this case a wife beater? Does it make you an expert as to social structure and order? You proved beyond all doubt the answer is no.
The extraordinary character she was before Bryan Singers meddling. The aspect of Superman being emotionally vulnerable has been around since 1938. Bryan Singer just screwed it up by making these character subject to the conventional social quagmire of our time. And that line about "I'll always be around" is what every wife beating social degenerate says to every one of the mothers of his children between welfare paydays.
And by the way, douche, if Superman did in deed abandon his son, then when he found out he was Jason's father, why did he go to Jason? Hm? Why? Why did he give those words to Jason the way Jor-El gave them to him?
Douche, you contradicted yourself. You said Superman has been emotionally vulnerable since 1938, and yet you say he shouldn't be subjected to the conventional social quagmire of our time. Both of those goes hand in hand, douche.
No they don't. Being emotionally vulnerable just means he's subject to the same ups an downs any person is. Being subjected to the conventional quagmire of our times would mean he might use his x-ray vision to look through women's clothing, break and enter some ones home, invade their privacy or have a child he doesn't take responsibility for. Being just like everyone else is not being what was created to be Superman.
I did not completely dislike the movie though I actually prefer Smallville over it. But thank god, the next one is written (but not directed) by Christopher freaking Nolan. I suppose it will be good.
aliebellule 1 month ago
i think someone has daddy issues.
deelow83 3 months ago
@deelow83 What I read about Bryan Singer would suggest he has daddy issues as well as other issues. That could have contributed to his vision of Superman for this movie.
chiefrstrong 3 months ago
@deelow83 Yeah infact the line is what his own father Jor-el tells him in the first superman when he was a baby. he could not be there for him as his dad couldn't as well.
TheSkellingtons3 1 month ago
@deelow83 I think you might be right. I loved the film. I think Brandon Routh did a superb job. I think he captured the spirit of Chris Reeves, and at the end, what a tribute to Chris and George Reeves in the final flight scene.
singchef1965 1 month ago
When I say over, you no longer speak to me boy. Keep your pathetic, weak ideals to your insect self. You're unworthy.
OceanicOsprey 3 months ago
@OceanicOsprey Welcome to the real world! In this world we don't ignore the poor representation of the longstanding characteristic values of an American iconic figure, we confront them, criticize them for what they are, and the people whose deranged ideals produced them.
And in the real world an edict from you has as much meaning to me as a parasite on a fleas back dictating what I should feed the dog.
chiefrstrong 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@chiefrstrong Child, you are weak.
OceanicOsprey 3 months ago
Anybody that bases part of their argument on comercial success has no place to criticise. That is but a fool's game.
OceanicOsprey 3 months ago
The way you speak appears bitter and child-like. I like this film but I do not broadcast this fact as you do your distain for it.
OceanicOsprey 3 months ago
@OceanicOsprey What? Is that some sort of brain washing psychobabble? LOL LOL LOL
Let's face facts people... the movie was a disaster! A creative monstrosity from with the idea for what ever reason that Superman needed some "tweaking." The result, a devastating failure, as it deserved. Bad ideas deserve to fail. But somehow there are a few of you that feel you have to be loyal to Bryan Singer and support this travesty. Fine! Just stop trying to flip the script and make me the issue.
chiefrstrong 3 months ago
@chiefrstrong Anybody that bases their judgement on commercial success has no place critiquing films. I think you'll find it's a homage to the Christopher Reeve series, and as such Brandon Routh does an excellent job, as does the film in attempt to re-visit a past quadrilogy. If you perceive my words to be 'psycho-babble' then I suggest you learn the English language.
OceanicOsprey 3 months ago
@OceanicOsprey I never said "I" judged this rubbish by whether or not it was commercially successful. You should spend more time learning to comprehend the English language than advising others in knowledge you don't have yourself. That being said... if commercial success the presence of, lack of, or potential to be is not worthy of consideration in judgment maybe Hollywood will stop charging for their product.
chiefrstrong 3 months ago
@chiefrstrong It's a shame your video has received views, for reasons I cannot understand. With that statement, you're saying Michael Bay deserves credit for the commercial success of his garbage. How very wrong you are, you bear no substance. This conversation is over.
OceanicOsprey 3 months ago
@OceanicOsprey Wellll... let me see. Who is the creative force behind the re imagined vision of the Transformers for the modern era? Micheal Bay. Is the Transformers a success? Yes Therefore who deserves the credit? tik tok tik tok ....... Oh I'll just give it away. Michael Bay! What else do you want to hear?
I'm sorry Superman Returns was shit. I was looking forward to a good movie like everyone else. You have Bryan Singer to thank for the overall disappointment.
chiefrstrong 3 months ago
@chiefrstrong To applaud Michael is to be a fool. Only the weak and feeble care for money over substance.
OceanicOsprey 3 months ago
@OceanicOsprey Point 1: Though I am a fan of Micheal Bays work on The Transformers I never said or gave inference in my response TO YOU that I applauded Micheal Bay. Instead I identified that contrary to what you eluded to, credit for the success of The Transformers belongs the chief engineer and creative force behind the well received commodity delivered to the consumer market. That is, albeit to your dislike, Micheal Bay.
Point 2: Did you not already say...? "This conversation is over."
chiefrstrong 3 months ago
@chiefrstrong I sincerely hope you are a successful troll
TheGoldcountry 1 month ago
This scene makes the film. It's beautiful.
God, I hate cynical people.
LedWhisky69 4 months ago
I disagree he like great hero who has alot villains after him so if they found out about his son. he and Louis will in danger every day of their lives lex knows so he will be after them
king789ist 5 months ago 2
@king789ist In this very movie, and the previous movies this one was based on Lex Luthor knows Lois Lane and Superman are close. The extent of their relationship may or may not be known by Lex Luthor (in this series of movies) but he knows enough to seek out Lois to or use as a threat like he did in Superman 2. If he doesn't know Superman is the kids father, the kids still and extension of Lois Lane. Therefore that is a poorly executed logic even if I could agree.
chiefrstrong 5 months ago
they clearly give you the impression that superman is not gonna be a part of his sons life at the end of the movie. The writer and director dicided that. All this person did was post that scene between superman and his son. And he spends half of his time as clark so he would be able to spend time with him if he wanted to. It kinda sounded like a goodbye scene to me when i watched it. His father said the same thing to him b 4 he sent him to earth. So wat r we suppose to think?
Connerluver4 5 months ago
My interpretation" as superman gazes down at the young boy, remember he has xray vision, and he recognizes something very different yet very familiar about the boys anatomy and molecular structure, its the same as his" its then superman realizes this is his son, and afterwards declares how different life will be for the young lad, how he will be different but not alone. what a great ending to start a new sequel"
mewjaws5754 5 months ago in playlist Movies
@mewjaws5754 Except over a year ago the producers that once supported Bryan Singer to make this movie abandoned their support and labeled the movie toxic to the Superman film franchise, ended their relationship with him and sought another group to restart the franchise. Only a few fans, you apparently being one, remain of the few fans Bryan Singer ever gained with this box office flop.
chiefrstrong 5 months ago
I disagree man! He never abandon your family, He can be side by side to you wife in few seconds if he wish!! Sorry!! Your vision about final scene is very wrong!
youangeltube 6 months ago
@youangeltube You sound like Superman should be the typical deadbeat dad, one that can just travel faster.
chiefrstrong 6 months ago
@youangeltube I think the general plot twist of Superman leaving for 5 years to take a look at the wreakage of Krypton was the biggest plot problem to be had. Everything else was secondary. Either way, I think the producers were tired of still building on the original storyline with Christopher Reeve, which is what this film did. Not to say that Singer didn't evidently get into some facts, such as Superman sleeping with Lois in Superman II impregnated her, but yeah, the storyline was overused
suemorphplus2009 6 months ago
Bryan Singer... You transformed our hero - I grew up watching Christopher Reeve until my VCR to blow up - in a adulterous and a absent father of a bastard child. Your sick jackass!!! You screwed the Brandon Routh's career!!
Zack Synder, at least, is a normal man!! I hope...
rdsbarros 7 months ago
superman never hits anyone...he damges a plane so bad the only way he can save the people is by landing it in a baseball statuim filled with people and tv camras ...not bad for his first public appirance since "he claims" he went back home to look for sirvivors.....and then he leaves his son ......without explaining why his mother lois has no idea how superman got her preggers.....or making back payments for surport....superbastard
MrPoliticaltoons 8 months ago
superman and lois can't have a child because they are genetically different
surajsinghsherawat 8 months ago
What a cycle the house of El has created. Clark's biological parents gave him up because their planet was exploding. Clark cannot take on full parental duties to his child because of his duties to the world.
AmoebaeProductions 8 months ago
good on you chief for calling it like it is. This movie was technically well done, but morally a piece of steaming shit.
tikletik 8 months ago
@warrior770 Maybe Warner Bros. doesn't know shit about Superman either. Since they shit canned this direction calling it "toxic" and began a complete re-boot of the Superman franchise.
chiefrstrong 9 months ago
chiefrstrong
Apparently, someone has "Daddy Issues"
Its okay homie. A lot of people experience what you go through on a daily basis. You're not alone! But don't misinterpret a great moment btw a Man and his Son and try to make other people feel as down as you. Its just not right....
sheldons7 10 months ago
@sheldons7 Great attempt at aversion but I wont be distracted. This movie butchered and shit on the Superman mythology.
I offer a thousand apologies to Brandon Routhe. One good decision Bryan Singer made, and he made several good decision. But the overwhelming bad decisions he made cost Brandon Routhe a role he was tailor made for.
chiefrstrong 10 months ago
@sheldons7 I would throw in some trouble with women as well as the daddy issues. A woman is a "whore" because she has sex with two men? In the film it's indicated pretty strongly that she knew exactly who the father was but tried to make a life with a new man when she was abandoned, possibly forever as far as she knew. Cheif' I think you need to work out some issues mate, you're getting angry over fictional characters - see a counsellor or something because, seriously, you crazy dude!
isupposeitdoes 7 months ago
@isupposeitdoes I think you need to learn how to read and apply that skill, once you obtain it, to what I have said. I have posted enough in my comments here, if you had the capacity of reading comprehension, that you would have not made such a foolish comment. Unless you just choose to ignore what you have read. In that case you ill conceived evaluation is your burden to bare.
chiefrstrong 5 months ago
@gojetafu I agree with all of your points. Taken as a stand-alone movie, I think Superman Returns is a good movie, but for setting up a franchise, it's crap! Hence, the reboot. I cannot understand why some studio exec didn't raise the reasonable point that giving Superman a kid was an incredibly dumb idea. In terms of the internal logic and themes of the story, it works, but for a franchise? Very, very, bad! Which is why this video does have a point.
britmike84 10 months ago
If you paid attention in the movie Lois told Superman that he had been gone a long time and that Richard was a good man. Meaning she had respect for Richard and out of that she had moved on with her life. Wow. A flop or not it had its good points too. For Superman to protect his son he is pretty much keeping it a secret so Lex Luther or his enemies do not know. Why not. Like you said that would be another weakness besides Kryptonite...
TheStormyblue 10 months ago
It's pretty sad when you take a movie that was suppose to or could have been a big hit instead had some misses in it and really didn't have a good plot to go from to make it more interesting and a hit. So Lois and Superman had a son together. Big Deal! People have kids all the time that are not married. Two Clark aka "Superman" loved Lois and Lois loved superman she got what she wanted the man of her dreams which was duh Superman to love her. So he left to go see if there was anymore like him.
TheStormyblue 10 months ago
Lois Lane didn't have sex with two men in close proximity. She had sex with Superman in SUPERMAN 2. And then he wiped her memory of the whole thing. Yeah, how do you explain that? That was a Reeve film.
Superman Returns just said to 2 'what the heck were you thinking? Now we have to clean up your mess!' And they did. I'm glad it happened.
And did you think maybe it's possible that Richard White, you know, started dating Lois KNOWING she's pregnant? Maybe? I know of some guys that do that.
GalacticKnight 11 months ago
@GalacticKnight So Lois couldn't remember kissing Superman but she knew she fucked him and had his baby. As dumb as I think Bryan Singer was for this absolute atrocity even I give him more credit than that.
Bryan Singer established early in the movie when Superman returned home to his mother that he had been gone five years. He also established the kid was five years old and that Richard White and Lois Lane had been together for five years.
chiefrstrong 11 months ago
@chiefrstrong #1: No, she didn't. Thus the shocked look on her face when Jason shoved a friggan piano onto a thug. She had no idea that kid was that strong.
#2: Okay.
GalacticKnight 11 months ago
@GalacticKnight With the established time lines Lois Lane fucked Richard White very shortly after fucking Clark Kent and it's not established in the movie that Richard White or Lois Lane knew the baby wasn't his.
So Bryan Singers Lois Lane is just a common whore which does nothing to establish the character that was Lois Lane. In Singers atrocity she could have just as well been Jenna Jameson. Clearly everything points to Singers Lois Lane being the same as any whore in Metropolis.
chiefrstrong 11 months ago
@chiefrstrong #1: Was that ever actually stated? I grant you the very ambiguous nature of the kid can have many people wondering, but jumping to conclusions like you're doing (it was never stated or established that Richard and Lois ever actually had sex, for one) can make some people very angry.
Look, this video was posted a very long time ago and I'm sorry for bringing up some very unpleasant topics up again, be please don't try to take things out of the film that weren't there.
GalacticKnight 11 months ago
@GalacticKnight C'mon Knight! It was intentionally not specifically stated so that the audience wouldn't know the kid was Superman's son until he pushed that piano. What Bryan Singer didn't consider was that his Lois Lane was so far out of the Lois Lane character that she would no longer be the Lois Lane character.
It's like adding an illegitimate baby brother to "Leave It To Beaver." What does that do to the character of June Cleaver. Why can't you accept Bryan Singer fucked up? Warner has!
chiefrstrong 11 months ago
@chiefrstrong Because it was left ambiguous. There is no proof that Lois slept with Richard in a way that would make him believe he was the biological father. It was left ambiguous, intentionally. Honestly, I read over the ideas for the next film, and he didn't make it any clearer. Yes, he screwed up because I don't think he knew HOW to handle a plot like the one he layed out. But it was left ambiguous all the same, and I think we shouldn't speculate wildly on that.
In regards to Warner (cont)
GalacticKnight 11 months ago
@chiefrstrong In regards to Warner: Singer screwed up by making a film the fans weren't expecting and didn't really want. Why? Because it essentially retreaded the first film with a few new plot threads. :/ Granted they were interesting, but they were SUB plot. If we had a unique MAIN plot that was what the fans wanted, the movie wouldn't have been a disappointment (it made a profit, just not a big one).
GalacticKnight 11 months ago
Is the kid not better of with two stable parents that love him with a guardian angel or does superman have to become a father and possibly endanger the world by having a weakness.
MATTNOUTCHCOS 11 months ago
Not only was he a dead beat dad he almost became a marriage wrecker
LikableDesi 11 months ago
As for Superman "abandoning" his son (and Lois and his "nobility"), that's your own inner voice talking.
When Lois pulls back from kissing Superman atop the Daily Planet, she makes a principled stand against returning to things as they were before Superman left: namely, that "Richard's a good man...and you've been gone a long time."
It is here, that we see Superman's most iconic virtue: veneration of his bond with Lois in accepting his rejection from the only person who ever completed him.
bigollameo 1 year ago
@bigollameo As for Superman "abandoning his son and his nobility" in this movie that is Bryan Singers presentation, and my eyes observing.
As for the rest of your enlightening, the problem with it is there is no reason to put a costume on or give the characters names because that is the real life story of every selfish man and woman seeking to satiate there own desires while seeking some redemption in defining it as a modern era relationship.
I.E. That's not Superman and Lois Lane.
chiefrstrong 1 year ago
@chiefrstrong
"As for Superman "abandoning his son and his nobility" in this movie that is Bryan Singers presentation, and my eyes observing.."
Yeah, that was a real good argument there.
Well, you sound like some kind of far-right wacko with your values-centered rant about Superman. I guess there isn't much to say, other than you can't appreciate Superman Returns for the same reason a Neanderthal couldn't appreciate a Rubik's Cube: you're not equipped for the content.
bigollameo 1 year ago
@bigollameo There you go again. I described the character that has endured and has been embraced by generations of fans worldwide, you and Bryan Singer talk about philosophical ideologies that you think everyone else accepts because you want to promote.
Your real life is more fantasy than the fictional world of Superman. Your "enlightenment" isn't new status quo you think it is and this box office flop is testament to that.
chiefrstrong 1 year ago
@chiefrstrong
"Your real life is more fantasy than the fictional world of Superman." - My everyday existence is more unreal than the fictionally-authored world of Superman? What does that mean???
Beyond that, when you say "I.E. That's not Superman and Lois Lane", IT ISN"T A DESCRIPTION. You haven't described anything about either of them. You've just kept saying that this movie makes them look like two irresponsible parents who can't either keep their legs closed / dick in their pants.
bigollameo 11 months ago
@chiefrstrong (cont.)
Unfortunately, you seem to be able to convince yourself of anything. In light of protesting posters who deny your main point that everyone hated this movie, in lieu of statistics that basically end up donkey punching your "box office flop" argument, and in spite of how far out of touch your puritanical worldview is with today- a view that, if accepted, would probably also condone casual domestic violence and lynching negros for being too uppity.
Bravo, cheifstrong!
bigollameo 11 months ago
@bigollameo You have officially run out of material. You are arguing that I haven't made a point you have already previously argued against. You are baring witness to testament I never made. In fact since you have lost any debating points and all credibility with it your entire response is to attack me with erroneous insults.
Buy soda and popcorn, invite Bryan Singer over for movie night and watch this tragic work of crap. Then both people who thought this is a good movie will be together.
chiefrstrong 11 months ago
*Yawn*
bigollameo 11 months ago
@chiefrstrong
FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL
bigollameo 11 months ago
@chiefrstrong (cont., pt. 2)
Where does virtue exist for Superman in the absence of physical danger? Sure, his actions are both morally praiseworthy (saving airplanes, etc.) are gallant and noble, but he's not at risk.
Note: Virtue untested by risk ISN'T virtue.
So where's the risk, then?
It lies in the possibility of encountering emotional and psychological trauma in negotiating the world, and Lois Lane in particular, and his acceptance of the perils of the social without enlisting force.
bigollameo 1 year ago
@bigollameo What is GOD's name are you talking about? The movie sucked, it was a box office flop, the backers of the movie hated it and shit canned any further endeavors with it, and Superman fans in particular have expressed vitriolic outrage towards Bryan Singer for producing it. No one cares about all that deep analyzing because regardless of how insightful you think it is. It failed.
How does the term "toxic" fit into your modern definition?
chiefrstrong 1 year ago
@chiefrstrong
Total flop at the box office, huh? Seems your perception is as deprived and stunted as your mind, However, maybe a sorry drone like you has enough reading skill to follow the statistics from Box Office Mojo: Production Budget: $270 million Worldwide Gross: $391,081,192 million
Vitriolic outrage? Maybe you should look at how virtually everyone commenting is in total disagreement with you.
Btw, make sure not to cook the fries too long- drive-thru customers hate that shit.
bigollameo 1 year ago
The title of this clip suggests 1 of 2 possibilities:
1. The OP, Cheifstrong, is having some fun with us and this turns out to be some of the best Superman satire writing I've seen
or...
2. The OP, Chiefstrong, has possibly the worst understanding of the movie Superman Returns that may exist in the world.
My money is on #1. The alternative is just too depressing...
bigollameo 1 year ago
@bigollameo One of the elements that made the characters of Superman what they were is how great "of character" they were. There was no one else for Lois Lane, only Superman was strong enough for her. Superman could only love Lois. Superman could not be even be tempted to use his abilities to violate the expectation of privacy others have. In this scene we see the abandonment of all those trademark characteristics that made Superman so iconic. And to add to that he become a common (con't)
chiefrstrong 1 year ago
@bigollameo deadbeat dad. He should just wear pants that hang down showing his underwear and a hoodie, have another couple of babies by different women.
There is no failure in understanding the movie or the scene. The movie is shit, and betrays Superman. Waner Bros. agrees, they have labeled "Superman Returns" toxic and have abandoned it. This is bad for Brandon Routhe because he was excellent. Bryan Singers vision of Supernan is repugnant and that costume is only good for wiping your ass.
chiefrstrong 1 year ago
@chiefrstrong
No. 2, then. Talk about depressing...
If Superman Returns "is shit" and indeed "toxic" to the franchise, it doesn't seem to show over at Rotten Tomatoes critical and fan reviews. But, really, let's get back to the big ticket here: your conception of Superman.
First off, this isn't the golden age of comics anymore. Someplace where you appear to be trapped. It is no longer a time for the naive heroic narrative- virtue triumphant, yet casting no shadows of fear or pain or weakness.
bigollameo 1 year ago
Wow, anyone noticing some parental issues with the posters?
TheWildfireOT 1 year ago
@TheWildfireOT The proper observation would be to take note of the parental issues, as well as other issues with the director.
chiefrstrong 1 year ago
i dont think he's abandoning his son or Lois, he loved them but he wants Lois to have a regular life and his son to have a father thats going to b there all the time and not out saving the world thats why he lets Richard take over
sarahcrawl3y 1 year ago
i wouldnt call this abandonment its more like watching over him knowing he can't be there in person. knowing his son might become his heir maybe he figured he needed to experience life as he did and help him when he can along the way
MrVamp09 1 year ago
your a dick
siriushewitt 1 year ago
fuck superman! what father does that! hell, he is a redneck hick, so.... explains alot
JUKIO01 1 year ago
Horrible movie but Routh is excellent.
Mikez4 1 year ago 4
A god awful terrible rendition of Superman. A babys daddy. Really? A depressing film.
thanks51 1 year ago
I have to say, even though this movie was not a good contiuation to the Superman franchise this was a pretty decent seen. I don't think Supes mas abandoning his son. He was "passing the torch". It was a very effective reflection of the original movie when Marlon Brando (Jor-El) said the same to him. This was one of the best scenes in the film. Can't wait for a different recreation though. That'll be better. Hopefully.
smallville2427 1 year ago
Lois had lost of memory after Superman kissed her in the Superman II, in the end. She didn't know at that time that she was pregnant with Superman's son. She found out she was pregnant after Superman gone and after met Richard.
naul888 1 year ago
You people have to give up trying to salvage this movie. Warner Bros. Executives have long labeled this movie "toxic" to the Superman franchise and have abandoned it. Just accept it, Bryan Singers "Singerman Repugnant" sucks.
chiefrstrong 1 year ago
Sorry to disagree. I think this scene's great. The theme of alienation, of being different and trying to fit in, weaves in and out of the story. It starts with Superman returning to Earth after searching for others like him, and ends with him discovering there is someone like him after all, his son. As such, whilst it's flawed, lacking the fast pacing and big, big explosions that we have come to expect of a summer blockbuster, as a film based upon its own merits, Superman Returns is very good.
britmike84 1 year ago 22
@britmike84 Sorry warner bros disagrees with you. They have shitcanned any further attempt at this franchise and began work to renew the Superman Film franchise starting all over specifically because of what Bryan Singer did with this horrific piece of crap.
chiefrstrong 1 year ago
@chiefrstrong whatever our differing opinions on Superman Returns, Singer was given the job on the back of first, some good/great indie films and second, a previous successful superhero franchise. For Singer, read Christopher Nolan, the new "Godfather" of Superman. I have high hopes because his Batman films and Inception were stunning, but it ain't going to be a slamdunk successful reboot.
britmike84 1 year ago
A question to all.. How many of you are *known* film critics or prominent Hollywood Producer/Director-types and how many are Burger King/student-types? I just want to know *who* graces us with all of these, "this movie sucks" and "the problem with this scene is"-type comments. How many of you have been paid millions by a major studio to Direct a movie? Maybe four or five of you, right?
SpiffyNips 1 year ago
...she knows very well that Superman was the father. She just didn't want Lex Luthor (you know, Superman's ARCHENEMY) to know who his son was.
HELLOPEOPLEPEOPLEHI 1 year ago
Plus the fact at the beginning of quote he even says, you will never be alone, which proves that even tho he must take care of his responsibilities as superman, he will always be watching over his son.
Ryanoman92 1 year ago
he didnt really abandon his son because he didn know it was his son...rather it was more like he was payin him a visit...and takin joy in the fact that he has a son...even though he can't be the father that maybe he'd like to be because he is superman
Ryanoman92 1 year ago
How in the hell do you take one of the best superman scenes ever and try to distort it into the absolute opposite of what it means? Chiefstrong, you seem to have some kind of childhood issue that clouds your judgment. This scene represents Superman returning to Earth and, after realizing he has a son, completing the kryptonic prophesy. This a surprisingly deep statement expressed in a film genre you would least expect it. Only father's tend to understand what that statement means.
seekortry 1 year ago
Can't really say Superman is a "deadbeat dad" or that he "abandons his son." He says that he's "always around," implying he'll be there to take care of Lois and the kid. Besides, do you really think Superman is going to announce to the world, "Hey! I have a son!!" NO! Lois is already a target, but openly claiming his son would endanger his son's life as well. Second, Lois and Richard's relationship is not fully explored, so we don't know that she slept around and can't say she is a whore.
DanteBrian 1 year ago
I was hoping for someone like DarkSide or Mongul
musicplay1978 1 year ago
erm.. superman is not human right.. not ''one of them''. so is this kid a cross breed?? maybe that explains his strength while at the same time his breathing difficulties which i assume to be the human side of him.. p.s kudos to lois lane for surviving taking a 'superdick'.. i mean she must have been walking funny for years after that.. lol
dissyfit 1 year ago
@dissyfit ... dont forget that this is a direct sequal to Superman 2.. and Superman decieded to give up his powers in that movie to be with lois and they slept with each other and boom theres the child in this movie lol.....I dont why i said boom and just felt like saying it haha
Rcp123190 1 year ago
@Rcp123190 so how come the son has powers then?????
dissyfit 1 year ago
@dissyfit ... maybe all his powers werent taken away...just enough to make him human
Rcp123190 1 year ago
What a retardedly bias and mean spirited title to an awesome video. Nice try, dipshit. His son is in good hands and the father is watching over him, letting him be raised by a human family like he was to give him perspective. Nice try you goof.
LARRYLONGSTRETH 1 year ago
@LARRYLONGSTRETH lois actually is his mother and she will always be.
naul888 1 year ago
ur a dick
gthilly1 1 year ago
The only problem with this movie was that Lex Luthor was the wrong villain to choose. Or they should have at least put in another villain, one that Superman could actually fight. That's why the movie was boring, because as nice as deep themes might be, in the end, we all want to see a big fight. And we never got that here.
Vasquez88 1 year ago
@Vasquez88 There was no problem with the choice of villain. This movie was a horrible vision of Superman and the cast of characters in the Superman mythos. Singer did one excellent job and that was the choice of Brandon Routhe to play Superman.
Warner has finally abandon this calling it "toxic" and decided to re-initiate the Superman film franchise. That is an excellent decision on the part of Warner Communications.
chiefrstrong 1 year ago
Ugh this is the worst superman movie ever. I'd like to pretend it was never made. Everything about it was just so out of character!
AmandaGbur 2 years ago
I know it's a lost cause arguing with the dude who posted the vid, but I'll state my beliefs anyway......the movie is about Superman's self-discovery. He goes to search his lost home of Krypton (presumably) for a sense of belonging. Through the events of the film, he finds his sense of belonging in what he already had. It's an interesting take on the character. I felt Singer's direction and the production values were top notch.
Firefox5498 2 years ago
Superman does tell Lois "he'll always be there"........but it's not like he can quit his job as Superman. You know, the guy who saves the world. In any event, this is a pointless, annoying debate.
Firefox5498 2 years ago
he'll return to his son and lois he just doesnt wan them to get hurt by his enemies
jesus4you1 2 years ago
Chiefrstrong, your stupid. He doesn't abandon his son and wife of son. Based on the ending, and Lois's reaction, I can assume he's going to allow Richard (Lois's finacee') to raise the boy, while Clark is watching over him. He probably knows he could never be a real father, hmm, why? Because he is SUPERMAN.
mysticman258 2 years ago 28
in the comic book superman also blew out another solar system's exploding sun. why aren't you bitching about that?
skinny3715 2 years ago
In the comic books when that happened people did complain about it and that was changed like 40 years ago. But to answer you question more specifically, that was not in this movie.
chiefrstrong 2 years ago
Because not everyone still reads childish comic books above the age of 12 (which is when you're supposed to grow up and stop reading them). The only thing that comics are good for is a jumping off point for a character. No director follows EVERY little piece of a comic book word-for-word, if they did it would be pointless to make the movies to begin with, even though it was pointless to make this Superman anyway; it SUCKED.
soul416 2 years ago
why are dis people arguing about dis??why dont dey file deir complaints to the 1 hu wrote the story...??
chapot03 2 years ago
Believe it or not that was done in mass before the while the movie was in early production. And has continued since. It reminds me of that old axiom "Don't tug on Superman's cape."
chiefrstrong 2 years ago
Superman's not supposed to have a son.
Every superman/comic book fan with common sense should know that Kryptonian and humans don't mix when comes to bredding. But this scene was touching, however.
piloneman 2 years ago
Actually, every human being over 12 years of age should have the common sense to read comics anymore. Most people don't even believe in Aliens (which is what Superman is), so why would they believe in the idea of Superman having a child whether they read the comics or not? Because people are stupid, and so are you for thinking this STUPID scene was even remotely interesting.
soul416 2 years ago
@soul416
Hey, hold on, just a minute, here.
True, this film was a flop, but I am not stupid, alright? I didn't really say I liked it. I only said it was touching but thats it.
piloneman 2 years ago
Are all you guys naturally morons or you guys trained hard to be professionally stupid?
This guy was making a joke. he understood the bases of why superman done what he did, but he wanted to poke fun at this movie. Now let's get serious here, that child is going to hell because he is a bastard(lol)
ZuluNgr 2 years ago
what u on bout he dosent abandon him he just looking at him cauz he just found out that he's is his son! wen he was in the hospital. x-) 8-D
Supergirl3995 2 years ago
dude chiefstrong do you know anything about how superheroes can't get close to people because they put them in danger 9of ocurse they're pretty much all stupid and always get cloes to someone) he had to leave them to protect them, what did you expect that he would just settle down with his family...of course he is Superman so I guess that shouldn't be too hard
of ocurse this whole premise was stupid...Iagree with that....but the mvoie still wasn't that bad...but it wasn't great
PowerHungryLizardman 2 years ago
hey remmber when we all thought he was real? hah
a part of him is real in all of us
tell me what you think
derek3bond 2 years ago 4
I figured that Lois always knew the kid was Superman's, she just never said anything to anyone. And there isn't really an indication of when she got together with Richard, or that he believes the kid is his. He has raised Jason, so they refer to him as Jason's father.
collectthemoments 2 years ago
You're an idiot chiefrstrong
What would be the best way to get at Kal-El?
If he publicly acknowledges his son, just how much of a risk would that present not only to himself, but to Lois and Jason?
And do you really think that he would truly abandon his own son?
Grow a brain
KiwiKugai 2 years ago
I'd like to point out on the side:
If you watch the screen tests of past Lois Lanes from Superman: The Movie (look for the special DVD edition or search YouTube), despite each actress reading from the SAME script, you'd be amazed at how DIFFERENT each 'Lois' is portrayed.
Truly a testament to how good Margot Kidder was!
pcmarriotthk 2 years ago
Why not just say "Kate Bosworth was a terrible Lois Lane"? That would've been shorter and more to-the-point.
"Singerman Repugnant"? *sigh*..Repugnant? That word is reserved for such garbage as "Superman III" (Kate Bosworth may have been mediocre as Lois, but better her than Richard Pryor RIP).
pcmarriotthk 2 years ago
I never saw it the way you explained it. From the chronology of this film and its events. Lois Lane is a whore. Logically, in order to confuse 2 males about their son, would mean that Lois slept with Richard in about a week right after Superman left without a word.
Though I love Superman and this touching scene, this film throws bullshit at our faces and betrays the Superman story.
AznDemonLord 2 years ago
ur just mad because you could not get laid under water with a tank of oxygen
skinny3715 2 years ago
its a movie, and you are a douche bag
skinny3715 2 years ago
Superman a Deadbeat Dad. wow first singer screws up x-men (which should have been titled Wolverine & and his bitches) and then this....wow.
vexshado 2 years ago
lmfao @ wolverine and his bitches but yeah it is true it was more about wolverine trying to find out what happened to him .
videogamerwrestler 2 years ago
This is the only part of the movie I like, great scene of Superman telling his son what his father told him. He isnt abandoning his son, Lois is in a relationship so cant come between them but he will always be around for his son. Maybe Lois knew he was Superman's son but wanted to believe he was her new boyfriend's. Thats what women are like!
Mikez4 2 years ago
But that is not what Lois Lane was like. This movie completely disgraced the characters as they were that made them so popular. Tha's why it sucked.
chiefrstrong 2 years ago
how can she not know its supermans son i mean the kid crushed a guy with a piano
videogamerwrestler 2 years ago
I Didn't mean to
hjwionarang 2 years ago
(("This bickering is going no wheres. Long story short, your accusations of Superman is not supported by this movie")) What isn't supported is your abliity to read.
I have lost nothing to a guy posting under two account names.
chiefrstrong 2 years ago
This bickering is going no wheres. Long story short, your accusations of Superman is not supported by this movie, by previous Superman installments, nor reality.
In fact, the "evidence" you provided to prove your point in reality disproves your point completely.
From the number of posts here not of yours, you lost 50-0. Douche.
Potrimpo 2 years ago
SEEK PROFESSIONAL HELP for your issues chiefstrong. My blood father was not around but I had a real dad that raised me. And THANK GOD HE WASN'T AROUND. He's a horrible father to his other kids. 1 son in jail, older daughter a nut-job. middle one high school drop-out. OR if you abandoned your kid, LOOK HIM UP and try to be there for them You can't change the past but you can live in the present. And leave the alcohol bottle & rx drugs alone
MrLofton 2 years ago
MrLofton, MrLofton, MrLofton, MrLofton... tsk tsk tsk. Take a deep breath, put on your reading glasses and take a good look at this exchange between you and I. Whether or not you were right about me (and you were wrong by the way) you "evaluation of me is without merit because I have not revealed anything about me in my criticism as I will reinforce that I have been critical of Bryan Singers direction in this movie not the characters actions. Bryan singer presented them .... (con't)
chiefrstrong 2 years ago
completely out of character for who they were and what made them so popular. HOWEVER... considering your last two post in these comments its clear that I hit the bulls eye when I question why you were so adamant in your defense of this movie and took my criticism so personally. If you can't see that sir, I would suggest you quickly take your own advice and seek that professional help.
This is obviously driving you and clouding your vision, god only knows how it's affecting you elsewhere.
chiefrstrong 2 years ago
Uh...I'm not the one with a Youtube thing on here about Superman abandoning his son chiefrstrong this is is your site. And FYI what ever daddy problems I had I came to terms with a long time ago! Maybe it's time you do the same. Forgive the people who wronged you, exercise your demons and get on with your life
MrLofton 2 years ago
How senile is chiefrstrong? In ABSOLUTELY no point in that clip is evidence that Superman abandons his son. In fact, if Superman did in deed abandon his son, then when he found out Jason is his son, why did he go to him and gave him the same words Jor-El gave him? Hm?
Potrimpo 2 years ago
Well it's in the whole movie POT. You applaud it, I don't. It's not the character of Superman.
chiefrstrong 2 years ago
Then you miserably failed to see Superman, and this movie makes it so obvious. Simple as that, douche.
Potrimpo 2 years ago
(("Uh...I'm not the one with a Youtube thing on here about Superman abandoning his son chiefrstrong this is is your site.")) I'm not the one who cried "my daddy wasn't there for me" You did in an earlier post.
chiefrstrong 2 years ago
You know what...just continue being a miserable 44 year old who probably spends most his time in a liquor bottle have a nice day!
MrLofton 2 years ago
something else you remeber your father doing? And a habit you picked up yourself.
chiefrstrong 2 years ago
Oh NO my only bad habit is coca cola's (sodas) I don't drink cept for an ocassional beer when I'm out
MrLofton 2 years ago
Yes, I picked up common sense and intelligence from my father. Seems as though your old man missed something onto you.
Potrimpo 2 years ago
Ain't that the truth, friend. Ain't that the truth.
Potrimpo 2 years ago
Don't project your childhood issues on me because I wont except them. My issue with this movie has nothing to do with what's apparently troubling you. But what's troubling you is so bad that's all you see.
You have not come to any terms even if you think you have.
chiefrstrong 2 years ago
What's troubling me is how you can easily speak out against the greatest superhero of all time, and how you can easily make up stories to prove a point that you don't have.
Potrimpo 2 years ago
I've made it crystal clear in this dialogue between you and I that it is the direction Bryan Singer chose for this movie that I have contempt for and his work I have criticized.
chiefrstrong 2 years ago
(But what's troubling you is so bad that's all you see) No my friend it's whats troubling you...Superman Returns came out how many years ago now.. and your still bitching and crying about it YOU NEED HELP YOU NEED HELP YOU NEED HELP.
MrLofton 2 years ago
Singerman Repugnant was released 28 June 2006. Becuase I work so much in Summer I neever saw it in the theaters. The DVD was released in December 2006 but I never saw it until March 2007. Finnally learning how to extract videos from DVD I did so and posted that clip in Novemeber 2007. If you look at the dates on the comments you'll notice that this video went unnnoticed even by me for over two years. WEll ... until you came along.
chiefrstrong 2 years ago
I spoke me piece once, in November of 2007. You just found it. But what ever is eating away at you wont allow you to let it go. You are projecting your issue on me again and I will not accept it for you.
Get up from the computer and do some serious self exploration. Then get help. You really do need it.
chiefrstrong 2 years ago
And here you are sitting on your ass blasting the greatest superhero of all time. Douche.
Potrimpo 2 years ago
At this point it has become clear you are illiterate. That- means-you-can't-read.
chiefrstrong 2 years ago
chiefstrong you do have either father abandonment issues, or maybe you had a kid and left the mother and your guilt is coming out on this Youtube clip my advice seek prodessional help, come to terms why did your daddy leave you, or find your lost kid and try to be in his or her life. Cause mentally this is really bothering you and it doesn't take a professional to see you need help!
MrLofton 2 years ago
Thats kinda harsh there chiefrstrong, i mean its not like the guy wants to abandon the kid, but realistically whats he gonna do "Hey everyone, im Superman and this is my kid, and we're gonna go to a ballgame together, just so all the bad guys know" realistically even, superman being a major figurehead for the world needs to leave his son out of the spotlight so that he has a chance to be a normal kid, this concept applies in real life fr politicians, diplomats, etc
Disturbed87113 2 years ago
(("Thats kinda harsh there chiefrstrong, i mean its not like the guy wants to abandon the kid..."))
What he wants is not what he did. The character was far and above those issues that would be relevant to average people, hence the name Superman. for what ever the reason Bryan Singer lost site of that. This Superman is the average street thug that "will always be there fo' my baby" Well that isn't Superman.
This Superman and all the explanation is garbage.
chiefrstrong 2 years ago
Its understandable that the guy isnt a normal person, but being raised on earth isnt he subject to the same sociocultural crap of everyday human life as well? I mean if he was a hardcore kryptonian attitude wise im sure you would have seen what you wanted to see, but Bryan Singer had to encorporate some aspect of him being emotionally vulnerable. And like i said he isnt abandoning the kid, not really, after all he does say that "he's always around" hehe
Disturbed87113 2 years ago
That's not what I meant. The character of Superman and Lois Lane was far and away above the character of what we would define as normal people. That is what made them who they were. Bryan Singer didn't respect that so Superman and Lois Lane are now just a super powered John Doe and a popular Jane Doe. His Kryptonian origin gave him his powers but had nothing whatsoever to do with his character. And there was no such origin that made Lois Lane the extraordinary character she was ....
chiefrstrong 2 years ago
And you failed completely to explain how this isn't Superman or Lois. Let's see now, a man from another world falling for an intrepid woman with all his heart, and she feels the same for him. And that nothing can come between them.
Potrimpo 2 years ago
And also, douche. What makes you an expert as to what a wife beating social degenerate says? Unless you are one yourself, which wouldn't surprise me. Man, you need a lesson in love and devotion. Preferably from a woman who can tolerate you. Like Rosanne Barr.
Potrimpo 2 years ago
Do I need to be an expert to watch the news?
chiefrstrong 2 years ago
Just because you watch the news, douche, doesn't make you an expert. You can watch the weather report as much as you want, and still have no fucking clue as to what the meteorologist are talking about or how they figure these things out. THAT I can understand. But you have demonstrated time and time again that you need an expert to explain the incredibly obvious.
Potrimpo 2 years ago
The question was... "Do I have to be an expert to watch the news?" Which was a reply to your previous comment/question...(("And also, douche. What makes you an expert as to what a wife beating social degenerate says? " )) It requires not status of expertise to witness.
chiefrstrong 2 years ago
Oh I know things cause I watch the news. Does the news dictate how to recognize in this case a wife beater? Does it make you an expert as to social structure and order? You proved beyond all doubt the answer is no.
Potrimpo 2 years ago
The extraordinary character she was before Bryan Singers meddling. The aspect of Superman being emotionally vulnerable has been around since 1938. Bryan Singer just screwed it up by making these character subject to the conventional social quagmire of our time. And that line about "I'll always be around" is what every wife beating social degenerate says to every one of the mothers of his children between welfare paydays.
chiefrstrong 2 years ago
And by the way, douche, if Superman did in deed abandon his son, then when he found out he was Jason's father, why did he go to Jason? Hm? Why? Why did he give those words to Jason the way Jor-El gave them to him?
Potrimpo 2 years ago
Douche, you contradicted yourself. You said Superman has been emotionally vulnerable since 1938, and yet you say he shouldn't be subjected to the conventional social quagmire of our time. Both of those goes hand in hand, douche.
Potrimpo 2 years ago
No they don't. Being emotionally vulnerable just means he's subject to the same ups an downs any person is. Being subjected to the conventional quagmire of our times would mean he might use his x-ray vision to look through women's clothing, break and enter some ones home, invade their privacy or have a child he doesn't take responsibility for. Being just like everyone else is not being what was created to be Superman.
chiefrstrong 2 years ago