The "it was all a dream" thing is too ridiculous to entertain, and thank goodness there is no way Singer would do it.

:lol: I can always count on Numanoid to shit on an idea. :lol:


Whatever, it was just an idea thrown out there. Frankly, the kid didn't bother me but I know it bothered others.

Only on ideas that beg to be shat upon. ;)

To be done with the kid (and unemcumber Superman and his daddy duties), you pretty much have to kill him in the next installment of the franchise.

Please Please Please Please Please

Nope. The kid exhibited powers ONCE, and that was AFTER he was exposed to Kryptonite. Otherwise, he's of normal strength. It would be extremely easy to write him as growing up normal and only being able to perform superfeats when exposed to Kryptonite, something which would obviously be limited.

I think the objection is Superman having offspring in the first place. To get rid of that objection, Jason must die, and were he to die at the hands of someone like Brainiac, there would be some serious carnage on the big screen, for sure.

Yeah, that would be cool, but unlikely in a franchise like Superman. The kid would have to be at least a teen before they'd let him die on screen.

Numanoid = Supershitter :D:lol:

Amen to that.

The "it's a dream" cop-out has been completely done to death, and it fascinates me that there are some here that actually think it would be a good move for the series to make.

I think it just goes to show how dissapointed people were with some aspects of Superman Returns.

Dream? No way! Superson will rule. Singer is God. The only thing I would ask is please forget Lex. I'm bored with him -- Brainiac, Cher anybody but Lex!

sorry few days late here seeing this thread and I don't know if this is the same stuff that is linked on the supermanhomepage, since I don't have access to that site at work, but here is stuff I found of the lost kryton sequece w/ storyboards and production art. I definitely think this sequence would've helped explain the absence better and should've been kept in Returns, but maybe they'll use it as a flashback in the sequel. Also, just noticed I started that thread a year ago today, what a coincidence.

http://forum.dvdtalk.com/showthread.php?t=482202

I can always count on <s>Numanoid</s> lopper to shit on an idea.

I think Superman with a dead kid would be even more downbeat.

If they just do the dream angle, they might as well start over. Dream angles are irrelevant in an age where we remake films all the time, often only years apart.

Only on ideas that beg to be shat upon. :)

Now we're remaking posts.

Both of you suck eggs. ;)

..and they're shitty ones at that. :lol:

Actually, if my memory serves me correctly, near the beginning of Supergirl, there's a brief mention on the radio that Superman had left Earth. So Returns is not exactly the first Superman movie to present this idea.

Also, I really got the impression that Returns doesn't take place immediately after Superman II. So Lois did not get pregnant at the Fortress of Solitude. It seems more like she was dating her fiancee, and Superman hooked up with her one last time before he left for Krypton. (There's even a strong implication he immediately left the morning after since she's so upset he never said goodbye.)

My complaints about this movie have very little to do with the kid, Lex Luthor (who I thought was perfectly played by Kevin Spacey), or the story itself.

My biggest gripe has always been it wasn't faithful to the Superman character. Since when is Superman supposed to be gloomy? As you mentioned, he fully accepted his role of Earth's guardian and protector at the end of II. Any feelings of alienation are the result of Bryan Singer projecting the way he feels on the character. (And that's better served in an X-Men story - not Superman.) So I don't think Singer is the right choice for another sequel.

My second gripe is Superman and Lois have zero chemistry together - which is the complete opposite of I & II and a key ingredient to the original film's success. (That missing romance was the first thing wrong with part III, and then it got progressively worse from there when Richard Pryor skied off a building.) Again, I think a different director could have improved on this.

And my third gripe is everyone was so busy paying homage to Donner's version they forgot to give their own movie a heart. It should've had a real "gee-whiz" escapist flair to it. Instead, we got the dreary DC equivalent to Marvel's Hulk movie.

I hate that we even have to have a discussion of whether or not this took place after part 2, or whenever. It's crappy storytelling.

I can't believe that the studio gave the approval for a script where Superman has a kid. While I don't hate the kid entirely, it's just weird because it is so far removed from the comics and it really paints them in a corner for future sequels. Weird.

The main thing I didn't like about SR is Luthor. Yeah, Spacey was good and all. But I want to see Superman in some great fight sequence with a major villian who uses brawn not brain. In other words, I want to see some action!

the corner is having to deal with the storyline of his kid. it has to be addressed if there's a sequel.

Because no one wants to watch Superkid. At least not me.