The Plot-Holes of Superman Returns

Originally posted by chase el
actually he didnt lift the kryptonite continent.. he used his laser vision so he could lift the continent from UNDER the kryptonite.... using the crust as a shield... but then some krptonite seethed through... but he purposely went underneath the crust to shield himself

Well, there could easily have been lead in the crust...

know one cares, most people don't have so much time on their hands to listen to this garbage anyway, spam off.

Ignore Weintraub, a lot of members of IMDB believe he's a troll. He is.

For #1, I don't think Clark would have thought the he an alien, with drastically different DNA, would have been able to know that he could have a child with Lois, I also don't think he would be looking at her stomach with x-ray to see if she is.

as for #3 and #4 I'm going to ask everyone to think about what happened during the Infinite Crisis when he fought Superboy prime. He flew a ring of huge chunks of Kryptonite, through a red sun, and then crash landed on a living Green Lantern planet, still having enough strength to beat Superboy Prime before he collapsed. To sum it up, Kryptonite does not turn him into a helpless baby unless for prolonged periods of time. And I doubt the validity of yor information on how his physiology speeds up it's half life. Also keep in mind, that the Kryptonite in the movie never glowed, at all.

Originally posted by Blind
Instead of building off the Pre-Crisis Superman Christopher Reeves movie, they should have just re-started this franchise as well. I heard Kevin Smith had an awesome scripte all written, and Singer tossed it in the can.

I lost respect for Singer for that. I like what he did with the x-men, but I can't believe he did Superman this way. It was my least favorite movie of 06. I think that says something, because I got dragged to Hoodwinked.

Kevin Smith did indeed write a scrpit on it, but producer Jon Peters had some whacko ideas that he forced Smith to write in, such as a Superman that couldn't fly, a didn't wear his trademark suit. When Tim Burton came on the project, he tossed out Smith's script. Burton then cast Nichloas cage as Superman. 😘 When Singer came aboard, Peters had finally wisened up and let people do it the right way.

Go to youtube, type in "Kevin Smith" and "Superman" and look for a nearly 20 min video where Smith talks about his involvement inthe project, it's pretty darned funny. Or go to wikipedia and look up "Superman Reborn" the orginal title for the project.

Originally posted by Blind
Instead of building off the Pre-Crisis Superman Christopher Reeves movie, they should have just re-started this franchise as well. I heard Kevin Smith had an awesome scripte all written, and Singer tossed it in the can.

So what? Did you actually hear about what Smith's script included? I'm glad it was thrown out because frankly, it was garbage. And it wasn't Singer who threw it out anyway.... it was Burton.

Ok, just to make sure I've got everything cleared up, I'm going to be a bit more descriptive on what a GREAT script Smith wrote under Peters direction.
In it we have a Superman who can't fly, and doesn't wear the classic red and blue costume (was deemed to faggy by Peters). I also hear that Braniac would have had a gay robot sidekick, and a pet Chewbacca like character. Peters also wanted Sean Penn to play Kal-El because he had "the look of a killer" 🙄 Additionally, Peters wanted Smith to include a fight with a giant spider (later dubbed a Thanagarian Snare Beast), when he couldn't have that he later put that idea in another movie he produced. A piece of crap we all know as Wild Wild West. There also would have been a nice scene between Lois and Clark on Mt. Rushmore where they talk about their relationship. It would have been a nice touchy little scene, vital to the plot. Buuuutt Peters wanted to cut it out, there wa no time for too many scenes with Lois and Clark, as Peters demanded wall-to-wall action! Peters and the fellows at WB seemed a tad bit more concerned with making money off of merchandising instead of actually making a decent movie. Then, lucky us, we got Tim Burton instantly threw out Smith's script. Under his direction, it's rumored we would have gotten Chris Rock as Jimmy Olsen, and Jack Nicholson as Lex Luthor. Of course that didn't last long and Burton later dropped out of the project. Afterwards, about two directors, scripts, and possible actors for Superman we get Singer, who actually made a decent Superman film.
And with that ladies and gents, I hope you all have a newfound appreciation with the final product we recieved. 💃

those plotholes can easilly be argued that is why it hasn't been massly publicized and I love the doctor thrown at the end. I find it ammusing to read none the less as the movie was descent and that's the fact. The sequel will be godly.

Damn right. And RedAtom, may I add that you have a fantastic sig.

Thank you for the keen complement. All credit goes to The Pittman. Only user I request sigs from this day and age.

I really think it was never intended to be historically accurate. First of all, your hypothesis about Singer not knowing about superman is completely false. Singer was very clear that he was an avid superman fan, and wanted to do the series "justice" It is because he valued the original movies so much that he "rehashed" so much, he was trying to stay true to the originals.

As for the glasses, it always bothered me as well, they should not be there, but in the end I have always believed it was more of an artistic statement than anything. It also makes clark readily distinguishable as a boy (as if the super speed and jumping across a cornfield wasn't enough....) Again, in the end I think it is simply Singer taking a little bit of artistic license. (silly as it is) He knew they didn't belong, but thought they looked good.

Originally posted by Madvillain
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PLOT-HOLE STUDY #2 - Why Does Young Clark Wear Glasses?

By Dr. Thomas Weintraub
Tuesday, November 21, 2006

This plot-hole is never explained in Superman Returns. And this aspect never shows up in the comics, for young Clark Kent never wore any glasses as a kid. Superman Returns gives no explanation whatsoever about the glasses and what purpose they serve young Clark.

There were many people who saw this movie, both Superman fans and non-Superman fans, that were left scratching their heads over why on Earth young Clark would want to wear glasses. We have reviewed the movie several times, and it has not given a single answer, not even a hint as to why Bryan Singer decided to include young Clark wearing glasses.

As a matter of fact, this aspect even conflicts with the original Superman, the film that Singer rehashed, as we see young Clark wearing no glasses. The glasses on young Clark was obviously something that Singer came up with, however, he has yet to explain why and what purpose this serves.

My hypothesis is that Singer knew nothing about Superman, thus, he added the glasses without knowing why or what for -- he just felt it was the thing he had to do.

So with the analysis presented, the plot-hole that needs to be answered is the following:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why Does Young Clark Wear Glasses?

First, please don't use words that you don't understand. Apoptosis is, as you said, PROGRAMED CELL DEATH. It has nothing to do with damage to cells from an external source. Now that we are done with that bit of stupidity (lol, easy, I'm just kidding here...)

I am not sure where your getting this whole bit about lois leaving shards in him. Lex luthor put one shard in him, which broke cleanly OUTSIDE his body (clearly visible sticking through his suit). She pulled it out and tossed it. He was kryptonite free.

And yes, he flew under the crust. and lifted it up, not the kryptonite island. And as to your "only lead can shield kryptonite" that is not true. Distance itself is a shield. By your logic if I held a piece of kryptonite up in the air and superman flew overhead 10,000 feet up he would fall to the ground because he doesn't have lead in between himself and the kryptonite. wrong. Like any other form of radiation it has a range. (this is why when we take portable x-rays in hospitals we can stand just outside the room with no lead shielding and be ok, because the radiation falls off very quickly.

So to answer your question, 1)He did not have any kryptonite in him when he lifted the island, and 2) he flew under the crust, lifted it (not the island itself) into space. Only as he got higher up into space did the kryptonite begin to grow through the crust and get close to him, at that point the weight of the island was much less, as it was already in space (mass x distance squared). So while he was quickly weakened, he was strong enough to give it a good heave and fall back to earth. The shards that were pulled from him afterward were not from the original shard lex put in him, but occurred subsequent, during the whole continent struggle scene.

Lastely, And this is actually something I liked about the movie, Singer made the effects of kryptonite much weaker. In past movies, superman would be crying in pain and on the floor if kryptonite was even near him. In this movie, it seems to take away his strength, but isn't so "over the top". I actually liked that. (the scene where the sweat beads down his face letting lex know he was weak). i.e. the kryptonite weakened him and took away his powers, but he still walked up the steps. Maybe not true to the comics, but again, I liked the touch (otherwise it is just too much).

SO yeah, 1)kryptonite is weaker in this movie, 2)kryptonite was not in him after lois took it out 3)flew under the crust 4) shielded by distance and earth 5)re-exposed to (weaker)kryptonite only once he lifted the island high

Originally posted by Madvillain
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PLOT-HOLE STUDY #3 - Why Isn‘t Superman Dead?

By Dr. Thomas Weintraub
Tuesday, November 21, 2006

Kryptonite is known to cause Superman with a sudden onset of symptoms akin to that of fever, nausea, tremors, and pains in limbs and joints, just to name a few. These symptoms are documented in the comic books over the nearly 68-year-history of Superman comic books.

However, in Superman Returns, Lex Luthor stabs Superman with a kryptonite shiv and breaks it off, leaving a piece of it embedded in Superman’s body. But after Superman’s rescue by Lois, she removes as much of the shiv as possible, but still leaves a substantial amount left inside of his body. But for some reason Superman does not feel any weakness. He is up and flying around as if he is devoid of kryptonite poisoning. This leads to the most ludicrous scene of the film.

Superman, with the kryptonite shiv in his body, still flies around and manages to lift the Kryptonite Continent -- emphasize KRYPTONITE CONTINENT. An entire continent made out Kryptonite cannot be lifted by Superman, either with or without kryptonite embedded in his body. Thus, with the over exposure and prolonged radiation poisoning of kryptonite in his body, Superman should be dead. But he is not.

So with the analysis presented, the plot-hole that needs to be answered is the following:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why Isn’t Superman Dead?

BTW, to add insult to injury...

You'll notice that when he falls though the roof, and it frames him floating (btw, also incorrect technically, as clark as I understand it learned to fly in the fortress, when he became "superman" but not as a boy).

Anyway, to add insult to injury you'll notice that not only does clark wear glasses, but they actually have a PRESCRIPTION! (notice the scene where he is framed that it bows the light. i.e he has corrective lenses...lol--that is kinda silly no? Again, artisic license me thinks..

Originally posted by SilentKnight
I really think it was never intended to be historically accurate. First of all, your hypothesis about Singer not knowing about superman is completely false. Singer was very clear that he was an avid superman fan, and wanted to do the series "justice" It is because he valued the original movies so much that he "rehashed" so much, he was trying to stay true to the originals.

As for the glasses, it always bothered me as well, they should not be there, but in the end I have always believed it was more of an artistic statement than anything. It also makes clark readily distinguishable as a boy (as if the super speed and jumping across a cornfield wasn't enough....) Again, in the end I think it is simply Singer taking a little bit of artistic license. (silly as it is) He knew they didn't belong, but thought they looked good.

Don't know if I would consider it a plot hole but when the shuttle hit Mach 1 the airplane should of instantaneously been ripped to shreds.

Originally posted by sapphiremouse
the sayin using the crust as a shield is about totally lame.....unless superman is a master alchemists and can turn any mass into lead. which from what i understand is the only thing that can block the kryponite radiation. that whole scene was completely unrealistic. nice try singer , you suck making movies...dont know squat. 💃

Yes, some kryptonite leaked through and he could see it as he lifted. It's not so much a plot hole, as much as a demonstration of his force of will, using every bit of the energy he absorbed (and remember, he still had a tiny fragment of kryptonite stuck in his side) to lift it into space. We saw the effort nearly killed him.

One question truely central to the plot is actually, "How did Lex Luthor Clone Kryptonite"?

The movie pretends to answer this by stating that the crystals inherit the traits of the minerals around them. That flew with me for awhile. Ok, so the crystals inherit the traits of kryptonite....that seems reasonable.

Until, that is, you realize that what makes "Kryptonite" lethal to superman is the radiation that was impregnated in the actual pieces from the explosion of the planet around the red sun. So, when the crystals inherited the traits, it really would have just made a kryptonian island, not a kryptoNITE island. And that, I must say, would have made Lex Luther look like quite the jackass...

I suppose you could argue that radiation is nothing but gamma radiation that results from the decay of subatomic particals, and so--if something turned into the same "element" or composition of elements it, theoretically, would mimic it's radiation. That somehow the explosion changed krypton INTO kryptonite, and that kryptonite is not just krypton + radiation. Maybe.....but it seems to me that kryptonite is radioactive in the same way that a spoon at churnoble is radioactive, it isn't actually the spoon that is radioactive, but rather the explosion of the power plant, and that radioactivity is spread over otherwise normal substances. In short, radiation is not a mineral, it is not a substance--it is energy.

I suppose you could try to, again--say this is duplicated by cloning the mineral that is emitting the radiation, but as demonstrated above....seems a little suspect.

Of course it is ok that Supes had glasses as a boy.

They show superman's son tossing a piano, and looking at his
inhaler as he discovers he does not need it.

Its entirely plausible that he supes powers as an adolecent are only turned on during a period of extreme emotion or adrenoline induced.

the shard of kryptonite superman was stabbed with was the most radioactive and harmful piece seen in the whole film
the island was made up of much weaker form of kryptonite, so even though there may be tonnes of it, only the sheer volume posed a threat to superman, but it was not life threatening and only depowered him
when he went for a sun dip/sun bathe he gains enough energy to overcome the small shard still inside him just long enough to lift the island, but it took all his strength doing so
no kryptonite in its most harmful form is seen in any part of the film
so it is not a plot hole, it shows how powerful and epic superman is
😛

also i liked the scene of him running and jumping through the fields, i don't care if he had glasses or not
it was much better than the original film of young clark running with the train, which is one of the very few parts of first movie i thouht was a it lame
difference being though, i don't say the first film is sh1t just because of that one lame scene, it is still an awesome film

Originally posted by SilentKnight
First, please don't use words that you don't understand. Apoptosis is, as you said, PROGRAMED CELL DEATH. It has nothing to do with damage to cells from an external source. Now that we are done with that bit of stupidity (lol, easy, I'm just kidding here...)

I am not sure where your getting this whole bit about lois leaving shards in him. Lex luthor put one shard in him, which broke cleanly OUTSIDE his body (clearly visible sticking through his suit). She pulled it out and tossed it. He was kryptonite free.

And yes, he flew under the crust. and lifted it up, not the kryptonite island. And as to your "only lead can shield kryptonite" that is not true. Distance itself is a shield. By your logic if I held a piece of kryptonite up in the air and superman flew overhead 10,000 feet up he would fall to the ground because he doesn't have lead in between himself and the kryptonite. wrong. Like any other form of radiation it has a range. (this is why when we take portable x-rays in hospitals we can stand just outside the room with no lead shielding and be ok, because the radiation falls off very quickly.

So to answer your question, 1)He did not have any kryptonite in him when he lifted the island, and 2) he flew under the crust, lifted it (not the island itself) into space. Only as he got higher up into space did the kryptonite begin to grow through the crust and get close to him, at that point the weight of the island was much less, as it was already in space (mass x distance squared). So while he was quickly weakened, he was strong enough to give it a good heave and fall back to earth. The shards that were pulled from him afterward were not from the original shard lex put in him, but occurred subsequent, during the whole continent struggle scene.

Lastely, And this is actually something I liked about the movie, Singer made the effects of kryptonite much weaker. In past movies, superman would be crying in pain and on the floor if kryptonite was even near him. In this movie, it seems to take away his strength, but isn't so "over the top". I actually liked that. (the scene where the sweat beads down his face letting lex know he was weak). i.e. the kryptonite weakened him and took away his powers, but he still walked up the steps. Maybe not true to the comics, but again, I liked the touch (otherwise it is just too much).

SO yeah, 1)kryptonite is weaker in this movie, 2)kryptonite was not in him after lois took it out 3)flew under the crust 4) shielded by distance and earth 5)re-exposed to (weaker)kryptonite only once he lifted the island high

Lois did leave a piece of shard in him, the hospital removed it from him while he was on the stretcher broke off.

Your logic about having distance from the kryptonite would work if it was just Lex's kryptonite shank or ring but it was a whole island. Superman should have been feeling the effects from metropolis. Here in the U.S. we can get hits of radiation from Japan's meltdown. Dirt doesn't protect you from radiation..
So he shouldn't have been able to lift the island with kryptonite still in him. Singer demonstrated that kryptonite takes away his powers in the supes asskicking scene earlier. The island was made of the stuff, dirt included.
The whole sequence was silly and Singer says he had supes willpower his way past kryptonite poisoning.