Another flaw in the movie Superman Returns.The story line suggests that Lois Lane's son is the product of the romantic union between Lois and Superman that took place in Superman II.
That's proven when their son exhibits super human strength in order to save his mother.
But if Clark Kent turned himself into a regular, power-free human being in order to consummate his relationship with Lois Lane, then he wouldn't have passed on any powers to his progeny.
Right?
33 comments:
he would still have the powers in his genes. if i dye my hair, im still blonde in my genes
hey that does make sense though right? if he was human when the child was made then the child wouldnt have super powers. haha im big superman fan and i think the whole idea of superman even having a son is absolutly stupid in the first place and the new superman returns sucked. Its nothing compared to the original superman movies with chris reeve or the adventures of clark and lois with dean cain and terri hatcher. and whos to say the child is even clarks.. i know smallvilles not exactly the same thing but lois did have things with aquaman and the green arrow.. but whatever.. even though the green arrow doesnt even have powers. lol hes still cool though..lol
one last thing all u spiderman fans suck. spiderman has no real powers.. he waers a suit that has sticky stuff so he can stick to walls and shoots webs out of a can full of sticky stuff he madde..peter is not actually a spidr and superman could kick his ass anyday..
Stick with the comics...Superman marries Lois and they have a son and daughter in the future. As with all movies from books/comics, they change it to the way they want it to be and are able to change whatever they want. If you have enough money you could start a movie/story line where superman has a sex change, or any other off ball thing. Then your story line to some would be gospel and nothing else is right.
follow the comix, no movie ever made can be true to the ORIGINAL, the COMICS
Even without his powers, he was still from Krypton. So if it is his son, he would have all the powers of his father...if anything it may not be as strong simply cause Clark was suppossed to be a full human during their love making
another fatal flaw. He didnt leave immediately after 'consumating' his relationship with Lois Lane. he probably would have noticed that she was pregnate.
But I agree that the "mortal" Clark Kent wouldn't have passed on his powers.
If anyone had gone back and watched it, they made love before he made his choice to give up his abilities.
You're wrong. If you go back on watch the movie, you'll see that he had to become human before he could make love to Lois Lane.
No. Seriously. You're so wrong.
And the logic that he couldn't pass on powers is based on what exactly? His mother said he would have to give up his powers to be with a human woman. Where in the great science manual of comics did that mean his offspring couldn't have powers? Their still going to be half Kryptonian, right? Now unless there's some deleted scene or insinuation in the film that said he was now genetically a human being, then what logic are you using to call this a flaw?
You know, there's a surgical procedure that can blast the pigmentation in someone's skin, making them a completely different color then they were before (it's used to even the tone of people with skin color splotches). But it doesn't mean their kid is going to come out the same shade, or a new nationality. All you did was take away from something from the individual, not from his line. This really isn't any different. Your making an insinuation that isn't supported anywhere in the films or even common logic.
I totally agree with the comment before mine. Simply because his powers were stripped, it doesn't mean that his Kryptonian biology changed. All that chamber did was make it so his skin cells can't absorb yellow sunlight, which is Kryptonians power source. No power, no powers. Any offspring he produces will still retain his Kryptonian DNA, resulting in the ability to absorb yellow sunlight, resulting in a kid with the powers of his father. As if this was even an arugement. Anyone who disagrees with me clearly needs to take, or retake Biology class.
Okay. It's not like Superman had a nosejob or got a tatoo.
He was changed into a human being.
What part of that has anything to do with being from Krypton?
Once he's turned into a human being, he is like other human beings.
DNA rules do not apply in a fictional world.
He's not real.
HE MAY NOT BE REAL BUT THE SCIENCE BEHIND THE MOVIE REMAINS THE SAME, DNA IS DNA.
Well if you watch the Richard Donner cut they did it first then he changed to human. But i do agree that he sould have seen it before he left.
Even though Clark Kent and Lois Lane slept together, think about this. Could it be that his son could only have that one chance to use his power to save his own mother? I mean he was freaking out that man was going to kill his mother... That could have given the son a chance to use some sort of power to stop and protect his mother. He still although half human, he still will get older, die sooner, and will have problems half of us humans, where his father is FULL blood Krypton, he gave up his superpowers to sleep with Lois. Heres an idea, my father, who is a computer geek, great with computers... Remember he also said "You will be different" meaning he will not be like his father in the same as powers...
Check out the Richard Donner cut of Superman II. Superman Returns makes more sense after having watched that.
On the other hand, it's just a fiction movie, so just accept the fact & watch it...
Not necessarily...It's true that Superman sacraficed his powers to be with Lois in Superman, but as we all know in the comic book world, anything is possible. One is to assume that Superman and Lois lane have had other romantic close encounters to follow, after all, she got pregnant before superman's disappearance, which means technically she would have to had to concieve with his offspring somewhere between Superman IV and Superman Returns. According to Superman IV, Martha Kent passed away but is very much alive in Superman Returns. We also need to keep in mind that the DC Universe has had many changes since the early Christopher Reeve movies, including a whole new origin for the man of steel.
dude superman returns takes place after part 2 not part 4...idiot
Anonymous said...
dude superman returns takes place after part 2 not part 4...idiot
April 1, 2008 4:49:00 AM EDT
Where on earth do you get your info from lol your the idiot cus if you look at the films superman returns is after superman IV
No. Anonymous is Right. This movie takes place after the original Superman II as if III and IV never happened.
No. Anonymous is Right. This movie takes place after the original Superman II as if III and IV never happened.
Do you guys get the fact that this is a movie? Stop arguing about flaws. Nothing applies to movies, not even science. If it's possible for superman to shoot lasers out of his eyes then it is completely possible that he could pass his genes to his son. The producers could've made his son powerless if they wanted to.
Since we're discussing a movie where a man can fly and crystals can create continents, perhaps we should stick to flaws such as acting, plot, editing, etc. instead of the biology/chronology of an alien superhero.
I'd also like to go back to the "stick to the comics" comments... fine, but which comics? Let's talk about Superman's origin/backstory... do you want the original Siegel and Shuster origin? The John Byrne origin? Birthright? Smallville? (Not a comic, but I'll throw it in there anyway.) The comics change all the time, and while I love them, there have been entire years of Superman comics that were just awful.
And by the way, pretending III and IV never happened might be the best thing they could do. I'll admit III had its moments, but I would take Returns over III and IV any day.
Taking my own advice, I'll say that the only problem I had with Superman Returns was what I felt to be the slow pace of the film and the rehashed jokes/lines from the earlier movies. There were times I felt I could quote the movie word-for-word because the dialogue was taken directly from Superman I or II. Still, I loved the movie and can't wait for Man of Steel.
Ugh, ok I just spent to long writing out my opinion here and lost it all!
So in short, I loved Superman Returns, yes they should give The Man of Steel a new female love interest, it's time. Brandon Routh captured Superman and me. He was made for that part, period. I am so glad that Bryan took his time searching, he was worth the wait. Lois was very bland. Jimmy was good, Lex Luthor..Spacey did a great job..again, it's time to get a different villain in there.. he has alot of enemies..I hope Bryan works with some. Also I would love to see then give Brandon more, meaning let Superman kick some major BUTT! The sad elements of him nearly dying are important..those vunerabilities are just a part of what endears him to his followers, along with his caring so...
well I will stop here.. I loved the movie, and I cant wait to see a or the new one...more more more!
Just make sure Brandon plays the role... again, he was made for it!
The device that Kal'El used to make himself human was essentially a highly concentrated blast of Red Sun, which would dampen his ability to absorb the rays from our yellow sun. This means that he is still Kryptonian but can no longer absorb the empowering yellow sun rays. Genetically he is still Kryptonian but unable to manifest his powers to to his inability to absorb the rays of the yellow sun.
Superman and Lois got it on first and then superman lost his powers.
Superman did not turn into a human being because he does not have Human DNA there for when you take away his powers he will never be "Human" and still be Kryptonian.There for the genes that was past onto his son are still Kryptonian and Human DNA
You people are total f**king nerds,..but,..I will help out. In the ORIGINAL cut,..and by that I mean the one in the theaters in 1978. (The one that Donner released in the theaters,..so THAT IS THE ONE that all sequels and prequels follows or predates,..not some "directors cut" after the fact....some 20+ years after the fact, mind you) In that original film,...YES, Superman goes into the Fortress chamber FIRST,..then heh heh,...enters Lois' chamber. Anyways,...Superman would have blown Lois' vagina out her back when he came. Like he could "control" that convulsion. Dont forget,..Clark was a 24 year old virgin at the time. He would have killed her. And since babies dont know anything of "pulling punches",...wouldnt the fetus have kicked right through her uterus? Like she could carry, to term, an infant for 9 months with superhuman strength kicking the shit out of her insides.
The offspring of human Lois and Superman's inborn son would share the same blood supply suring the pregnancy. For the term of the pregnancy Lois would have a growing percentage of the full power. Also there's no reason why Lois would not eventually have the full power later on. The source of the power is the yellow Sun.
To the poster of Dec 18th,
As you can recall from the mythos that is Superman/Clark Kent's childhood, he developed his powers slowly, over years. So the zygote and fetus of the young child would not have had the super strength that he exhibits ONCE in the film. This means Lois would have been safe from any super uterus punches.
kk, But. superman got his powers by the sun rays over the years. what if superman brought his kid near the sun.. would he get powers.? & if i was lois id be like Dude, no fair xD
Wow... "Anonymous" from january 7... Try to come up with your own comments and don't rip of Kevin Smiths "Mallrats"- quotes as if they were your own :)
if any one really new anything about superman they would know that he was sent to earth because he looks like one and his dna is not human so therefore a human woman cant have a kryptonion mans child end of story
Post a Comment