Nerd thoughts

[terrie]

Isabelle. Let me state that I am one of the many who does not like her. I get the feeling we're all supposed to go "Ooooo, mysterious" when her powers and purpose comes up, but for me it's more like "Huh? I'm sorry. Was I supposed to be paying attention?" She was way cooler when she was simply something Richard and Lily worried about. I was predisposed not to like her for having "super-super powers" as it were. I disliked her even more when she killed Lily. And when she hurt Richard, well... I look forward to her death.

Sean. Sean is being an idiot. He really should be going to Tom, who would understand why Sean first got tangled up with the Nova group. I mean, Tom is really the one out there protecting the 4400, even if they don't get that. I am reminded that the future didn't want Sean. It was going for Kyle. Which leads me to...

Tom. The longer the show goes on, the more I think the 4400 exist for Tom's sake. The show does this neat balance between ensemble show and Tom as main character show. Which explains why they were going for Kyle. The realtionship between Tom and Kyle would have been a big plus for the 4400.

Kyle. Where is Kyle? I mean, I get that he's on trial and all, but, what, no bail? Maybe they were afraid that he'd be killed by a 4400 with a grudge.

Gone. I love this two-parter. Very cool. One complaint, though. When Diana was in the hospital, where the hell was Marco? He was fairly strong in the first half of the episode, but then it was like "Well, we ran out of money to pay Richard Kahan, so he's not here."



Okay, they're trying to build on the 80's movies, which means that in the first movie, they had to be about 18. I get that they're trying to appeal to a young audience, but, if so, they would have done better to break with the previous movies. Seriously, the actors are simply too young for what I being presented with. Someone on my flist also commented that this gave us a slightly wimpy Lois. I missed the "tough as nails" Lois.

Now, don't get me wrong. I really enjoyed this movie. I will be getting the DVD, no ifs, ands, or buts about it. But the ending was only so-so, in my mind. I mean, Clark is the LAST person to say that having Jason raised by a man who loves him and cares for him, but just happens to not be his biological father, is somehow wrong. But I really, really hope Richard knows. Because if Lois is lying to him, that's bad. And she deserves all the fallout that will happen when it comes to light.

The main problem for me is that we got so little of Clark. We get this hint of a great guy, mainly in Jimmy's reponse to him, but we don't really see the guy. Maybe I got spoiled by Lois and Clark, which, for me, will likely always define the relationship between Clark, Kal-El and Superman. But, even if he's a bit more Kal-El and a little less Clark, Superman always comes last. Because except when he's with Lois, Superman is simply an icon. And even when he is around Lois, he's still only partially a person.

A few people have commented that this is simply a relaunch movie, so you really can't judge till the sequel. There's probably some truth in that. It's all about "This is our cast of characters. Superman is really cool." I really hope the sequel does better. What I love about Superman is the characters. I wanted to see Clark tell his mom about Jason. I wanted to see Jason let slip to Clark that he knows Clark is Superman. I wanted to see Clark the guy, not Clark the cover story. Maybe next time.

ETA:</> Totally non-spoilery. How cool was it to hear that theme music? It had me bouncing in my seat. Thankfully, there were only six of us in the theater (it was a noon show), and everyone else was in front of me, so no one noticed me being a big dork.

Comments

[suburbaknght.livejournal.com]

As previously noted, Lois and Clark is my favorite depiction of Superman ever but it's a very unique depiction. It's the only depiction to break with the Terentino concept (fuck you, Terentino! You haven't created a damn thing worth watching since Pulp Fiction. Sorry, I'm back now) by focusing on Clark. To quote Clark from the second season, "Clark is who I am. Superman is just what I can do."

The movie Superman has always defined the character by his capabilities and so it makes sense. Clark has no capabilities and so is left by the wayside. Singer utilized this to good effect, showing us a Superman who was trapped by the abilities that made him beloved but also alienated him, both socially as shown by his profound loneliness, and metaphorically as illustrated by his lying helpless in the hospital bed because his invulnerability "protected" him from the surgery to remove the kryptonite from his body.

At the same time that isolated him from the audience. Singer kept the audience at arm's length as much as the public and Lois. That doesn't work. Stranger in a Strange Land works becuase it focuses on Juble and the girl as much as the man from Mars. Singer focused on no one.

That said I look forward to the DVD, but more for the director's commentary than to see the movie again.

In which I ramble.

[terrie01.livejournal.com]

Actually, L&C is not totally unique in making Superman a guy who happens to have nifty powers. But he's usually one of the more blurred characters. In L&C, Superman was like a role Clark played. In some of the comics, Superman was simply one more aspect of who Clark is, not a seperate thing at all.

By contrast, Batman as the "real" person makes a LOT of sense. The closest thing to a "defining" moment in Clark's life is when Krypton went boom. But he has no memory of that, so it's a bit like saying the Declaration of Independence was a defining moment in the life of any American. It had a humge influence, but not much personal impact. Batman, by contrast, has a very specific defining moment -- his parents' deaths. Everything he did afterwards led to one thing -- Batman, not Bruce. All that is Superman, though, is the values of the Kents given form. Which is why I've always thought the movies' choice to kill off Jonathan Kent was a horrid mistake. He and Martha Kent are Superman, in a way. It was like the first movie was trying to give him a "driving" reason a la Batman. I've never liked that. Batman has a driving reason. Batman aslo needs SERIOUS therapy. Superman is a decent "human" being who knows you help when you can, simply because you can. In today's suspicion-driven world, we could use a hero who's a hero out of simple decency, so I think they really missed the boat by using that aspect of the 80s movies.

And the L&C Lois would kick this Lois's ASS. I do worry that they thought that since she was a mother, she ought to be softer. I would have loved a Lois that was all hard edges in her job, but still a caring and decent mother. THAT would have totally made this movie for me.

Re: In which I ramble.

[suburbaknght.livejournal.com]

Agreed. Terri Hatcher was an excellent Lois Lane. By the same token I loved Dean Cain's Clark Kent but hated his Superman.