Superboyfriend

may flowers bloom daily at noon

Kal-El is not just Superman, he's  Superboyfriend.  All Lois Lane needs to mention is "woman's touch" and "dinner" and he's not just ordering out, he's flying to far off continents to fetch her munchies and exotic florals to improve the mood.

After dinner, a little suggestive banter...

"I thought we might, uh..." [cork popping]

He's also got Super Bedroom Eyes (x-ray vision, don'cha know).

Lois is a goner.

voila...
Super Dessert!

Superman II is so 1980. Could you imagine a superhero plot now in which a superhero must renounce all his powers to have sex? Although, come to think of it, the most promiscuous heroes -- billionaire playboys Tony Stark and Bruce Wayne -- don't actually have super powers so maybe this plotline is telling.

Comments

[Blinking Cursor]

Man, does this post bring back memories! Saw this in the theatres when I was a kid, and these scenes made me ship Lois and Supes. Years and years later, I would find out that Margot Kidder and Chris Reeves had a brother/sister type relationship, which freaked me out, and must have squicked out the actors while performing the scene. For the record, neither Kidder or Reeves thought Lois and Supes should have had sex, citing it was out of character for Supes to do so. They got overruled by the producers, the Salkins (sp?), who were french and believed that the sex would be a selling point. Which, y'know, is kinda of typical of a) producers, b) the French.

Anyway, as for the whole gives up powers for sex bit...though I'd like to think that may have been an homage of sorts to the "Man of Steel, Women of Kleenex" story. Basically, this story by Larry Niven trys to apply real word physics and psychology to Supes and sex, and how due to his powers, Supes cannot ever have sex with an ordinary mortal woman. However, I think that may be crediting the producers with too much thought and creativity. More likely, the whole give up powers for nooky bit was just cribbed by some dude as filler or whatnot whilst the producers sorted out internal trauma/drama. Supes II is wildly uneven due to Richard Donner being fired half way through filming. They had to hire another director, and the Salkins were also in financial troubles too, so the whole behind the scenes story is pratically a movie in itself.

[NATHANIEL R]

Blinking -- you know a lot about this movie! I always loved it when i was a kid but after rewatching it lately I'm suddenly realizing i've been way too generous about naming it as one of the very best superhero movies. It is totally uneven as you say (and it looks a little cheap too... at least by today's standards)

[Daniel Armour]

It's definitely a compromised film but I still think it's fun. The Richard Donner Cut is slightly superior but also has it's fair share of problems. As for it looking cheap, Richard Lester wanted to give the film a more comic book look so he used zooms and flat angles to simulate that. The first Superman, on the other hand, was shot in a David Lean fashion.

Also adding to the cheapness was the fact that they had to re-shoot things so that Lester would get credit instead of Donner. Add to that, some of the actors either looked quite different (Margo Kidder), had to be shot around (Gene Hackman, who refused to come back) or completely cut out (Marlon Brando).