Posted on 06/28/2006 4:41:44 PM PDT by Para-Ord.45
So Lois Lane is a single mother . . . and a slut. That's the most disturbing part of "Superman Returns," heavily marketed to kids and in theaters tonight.
Or is that "Lois and Her Feelings," co-starring Supe? That's what this dull, 2-hour 33-minute long latest rendition in the Superman series seemed like.
A better version would have been more relevant. It's great that new Superman Brandon Routh saluted America's troops as "the real Super Heroes," a tie-in with Warner Brothers Pictures' effort to send a million plus postcards of support to troops overseas.
But put your money where your mouth is. In World War II, Superman's comic book inventors had him fighting the Nazis. Today, they won't dare show him fighting contemporary Nazis--Islamofascists. Lex Luthor working with Al-Qaeda terrorists, with both evil forces getting defeated--that would have been dynamic and exciting, a great plot. But, unfortunately, too politically incorrect, current, and exciting for the Hollywood culturatti.
Some have asked whether Superman is still relevant post-9/11. He would be . . . if he was fighting the post-9/11 enemy and being a man while doing so.
Instead, we got a dumbed down, girlie-man version of Superman in "Superman Returns." Like every sensitive, slacker metrosexual, Supe's gone off for five years to "discover himself." In the meantime, the dullest Lois Lane ever has a child out of wedlock. Nice message to send to your kids who will be begging to see this. No smoking lectures by Superman and plugs for tofu sandwiches got a lot of play though. Script-writers were more concerned with that kind of health than the splendid problems single motherhood brings.
In what is more reminiscent of a Maury Povich "Who's the Daddy?" show than a Superman plot, Lois apparently slept around and thinks the cutesy kid--very annoying and distracting in the film--is her fiance's child, not that of the other guy she was simultaneously sleeping with--the Man of Steel.
Hard to still call him that, because in this film he's far less muscular. Even the formerly bright red of his cape is now a muted, dingy brownish-burgundy. All masculinity is toned down, in favor of the testosterone of career woman Lois, who doesn't believe in marriage. Too busy riding the space shuttle.
That hardly makes her spectacular. Kate Bosworth has nothing on Margot Kidder (aside from her far-left wackoism) or even Terry Hatcher. Their renditions of Ms. Lane were far superior. Bosworth's is as ho-hum as the lady at the supermarket looking for her Clairol fix. The only thing that seems apropos is Lane's Pulitzer Prize for her "Why the World Doesn't Need Superman." It's the work of unethical journalism--a "hell hath no fury like a woman scorned" by a jilted lover against her boyfriend.
In the real world's Daily Planet a/k/a The New York Times, the "Pulitzer-level" stuff is "Why Al-Qaeda is Less Dangerous to the World Than President Bush."
And by the way, there's no Internet in this movie--a glaring absence when Lois' editor is lecturing about what sells newspapers. Uh, nothing sells newspapers these days. They're in rapid decline.
There are no memorable lines like the ones Margot Kidder's Lois uttered to Christopher Reeve's Supe: "You've got me? Who's got you?"
More like, who's got this movie?
With a $300 million budget, Warner Brothers must have a hit with this film. There's so much marketing hype and so many product tie-ins, it will be hard for it to fail. And with newcomer Brandon Routh's spot on impersonation of Christopher Reeve playing Clark Kent/Supe, he's not as difficult to adjust to as Bosworth's Lois. His imitation invites the comparison, and he doesn't live up to it. Christopher Reeve can smile from the grave that he died undefeated champion of Superman portrayals.
"Supe Returns" writers also paid too much attention to the accuracy of minute and unimportant details, such as the fact that Kryptonite was found in Addis Ababa. But who cares about those things?
Is that more important than the messages projected to America's kids--especially girls who may want to emulate Lois Lane? And is it more important than an exciting, believable, and relevant plot? Hardly.
Still, aside from it's dullness and the poor examples it sets for kids, "Superman Returns" is a fun, escapist film.
But nothing to write home--or even, Krypton--about.
I thought more of 'Thuperman'.
Thank you. That's what always drew me to Marvel characters. Peter Parker was Spiderman sure. But he had problems. Heck, even Ghostie had some problems that were real life. You may not have had superpowers but you could relate to them. Marvel has always been a better written comic. DC was well, just charactictures. You couldn't relate to a sulking millionaire down in a dungeon who saw things only in black or white nor could you sympathize with a character who nothing could destroy. I don't think anyone would have really missed Superman after a few years when he was 'killed off' back in the 1990s. Superman having problems that the average guy could face may be the best thing for the character
On IMDB it says Lois and Clark married in Superman 2
BTW: You realize that there is a Lois Lane (a street) in Southfield, MI.
Yeah! That's kinda' what I was aiming for and I like your term better.
I sure would hate to be Jimmy Olsen in that scenario.
I believe you mean that Bale was in "Batman Begins." It was Keaton who starred in Batman Returns. But you are correct; Batman Begins was by far the best of the Batman movies. IMO, Christian Bale is second only to Adam West :)
Or maybe as my son said before he pronounced his s right-- Pooperman
I have NO PROBLEM believing a liberal made this movie.
I have seen enough spoiler lines about this effort to "re-envision" this american icon.
YOU are missing the point. A good story makes a movie, not special effects around a PC plotline.
FAG-neto and those gay-rights advocates from Westchester County never did it for me, in either the comics or the movies.
Did you go see the movie?
Jimmy, I noticed you dropped a bar of soap on the floor. Someone could slip on it and get hurt because of carelessness. Be a good citizen and pick it up.
Some people just have dumb taglines. seeing the world how it is, does nothing to change it for the better. You suffer from moral relativism.
Perhaps hollyweird believes single mother slut lois is a conservative just because she did not have an abortion and (has yet) to come out as a lesbian.
You said the world doesn't need salvation so why do I hear it calling out for a Savior. I am going to make that my Tag. Most uplifting thing I have heard in a movie in years and much more important than Superman saying truth justice and the American way.
For me there will always only be one Superman. Goerge Reeves:
...and only one Lone Ranger. Clayton Moore:
Bothe were aware that they were icons for the kids of that generation and both took it seriously and lived up to their images.
Despite the typical Hollywood aura, I thought Christopher Reeves did a decent job. The one thing from those movies that could have been changed is that Lex Luthor shouldn't have been played with so much camp.
Yeah...like acknowledging the reality of the millions of single/unwed mothers in our society today.
There's a world of difference between acknowledging something and glorifying it, between admitting to the fact of its existence and presenting it as desirable, a proper role model or as something to be emulated.
The creators of Superman intended and conceived of the character as a role model, a champion of the morals and values to which we should aspire, a fighter for good over evil, and an icon to inspire us towards those same goals.
They did not intend for it to be a celebration, nor even a mere documentary or chronicle of the "gritty", "seamy" or even just plain "real" aspects of society. The purpose of the Superman mythos was not "to deal with realities we'd rather ignore!", it was to inspire us to strive towards those noble goals of which we dream. If you want gritty portrayals of reality, rent the Frank Miller Sin City DVD.
It appears from the reviews I have read that the movie's creators may have even achieved some of those inspirational goals. I will know better after I've seen it. However, their deliberate choice to portray the Lois Lane character as an unwed mother undermines that purpose and is a serious flaw in the movie.
It is an undeniable reality that there are millions of unwed/single mothers in our society today, but it is also an undeniable reality that this is not a good thing. The movie creators' choice to portray the Lois Lane character as an intelligent, capable, Pulitzer Prize winning professional journalist, a role model for little girls everywhere, who also CHOOSES to be an unwed mother, sends a clear message that this is a perfectly acceptable or desirable choice for SMART women today.
They didn't have to do it this way, but they were determined to plug an agenda whether you can acknowledge that reality or not.
The more I'm seeing people react to it, the more I want to see it for myself.
I love it when people trash a movie immediately. Generally that will make me watch it.
Ironically, they're making a movie about George Reeves' mysterious death. Guess who's playing George Reeves? You guessed it, Ben Affleck.
Good catch. Seems like I've driven by it. Probably doesn't cause as many double-takes as Exit 69, Big Beaver Road in Troy, but interesting nevertheless.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.