The Four Color Media Monitor: TV's Superman attacks the approach to parental responsibility in the new cinematic one

Dean Cain, formerly the Man of Steel on Lois and Clark (with the great Teri Hatcher in the Girl Friday role) on NBC, came out against the way Lois Lane's handling of her child was depicted in Superman Returns in an interview with USA Today (via Debbie Schlussel):

Q: How does Kate Bosworth compare to Teri Hatcher as Lois Lane?

A: Teri's Lois had a hard exterior with a real soft interior. The whole thing with Lois having a child (a 5-year-old son, Jason) in the film was a little unsettling. I have a child (Christopher Dean Cain, 6) and that changes things. Lois Lane is always going to be an intrepid reporter, but I would never bring my child to a place where he could possibly get in danger — yet she does, which was kind of surprising.

Okay, that does it, I'm not wasting my money on a movie that does something as slapdash as that.

They seem to be discontent with heat vision too:

Q: What was the biggest difference between your series and the film?

A: I wasn't in the water as much as Brandon. And the film's special effects were a lot better than ours. It ups the credibility when it comes to flying. They also changed the heat vision. I had little laser beams that came out of my eyes, and his are more like heat waves.

Sounds like excess to me. What next, Superman as a human flare cannon?

For the record, here's Debbie's transcript from her discussion of the movie on MSNBC's Scarborough Country.

It seems to me your title is a little misleading.

In the quote (and article itself) it seems less like he's criticizing the single parent aspect so much as bringing the child into a dangerous situation aspect.

And mild criticism is hardly an attack.

Posted by kalinara | 1:42 AM

You've got a point. I'll try to change the title a bit.

Posted by Avi Green | 7:05 AM

There, I think I've fixed it.

Posted by Avi Green | 7:07 AM

I have not seen Superman Returns yet, due to family commitments in the last week. I will see it this Saturday night, but the links and what I read on them led me to think just one thing. Again not having seen the movie yet, Does this make Kal-El the biggest "dead-beat" dad all time?!?!?!?

After all he went farther away than most.

Bobb (ducking and running.)

Posted by Bobb | 10:16 AM

Bobb: If by the links you mean those in this page, or other by nutballs like Debbie Schussel, I would recommend going to see it with an open mind and form your own opinion. Something discouraged around here.

In www.rottentomatoes.com the movie has a "fresh" rating of 75%, which is good rating. Not as high as some other comic book movies like Spider-Man, but encouraging indeed.

Posted by R. Johns | 4:48 PM

I thought the film was excellent. I really didn't see how Lois "knowingly" exposed Jason to danger. (Did she know the yacht was Lex Luthor's?)

My view is that the film handled the situation very well. Obviously, the child isn't Richard's, so I think people are overreacting.

As for the heat vision: I totally agree. It was lame compared to even the original 1978 film and sequel. You could barely see it when Routh used it, as opposed to the deep red beams that Supes and Zod used against one another in "Superman II."

Posted by ColossusHube | 5:36 PM

In a post our esteemed host deleted (surely by mistake) I mentioned that the heat vision has been portrayed like that in the comic books since the character was redone in 1986. Even though lately it's been reverted to its original form.

Posted by R. Johns | 6:37 PM

Mr. R. Johns,
I will go see it because I am a Superman fan. However the only closed mind I see here is the person that I am posting to, and it's not Avi. I like to read/watch all types of opinions even those you call "nutball", do you protest too much?

I guess you did not notice that the post was somewhat in jest, hence the "ducking and running" comment.

Guess my humor is drier than most people like.

Bobb

Posted by Bobb | 9:06 AM

Thanks for the replies, Bobb and Hube. R. Johns, to say the least, crossed the line at one point, and thanks to that, now finds that the blog is otherwise off limits to him. I will allow his current messages to remain intact for now, but if he tries these stunts any further, he will once again be shown the door. Dissent is always welcome, but trolling is most certainly not.

Have a good weekend, everybody!

Posted by Avi Green | 11:29 AM

Just for curiosity, what was the "line" I crossed?

Posted by R. Johns | 6:01 PM

Well I saw it today. In Imax and 3-D, at my wifes urging. I was left a bit off by the Baby". Both by Lois's taking him into danger, but also by the timing of the child and Lois.

Spoiler space:

Unless the gestation of a child of Kryptonian and Terrian union takes a very long time. Are we left to assume the night after Kal & Lois made love, she slept with (I forget the generic White's name.) the next night. How else could he think the child was his? Is there a stupid gene you have to have to be hired at the Daily Planet?

Has anyone read the novel adaptation? Does this make any sense?

Other than the other holes in the plot, it was O.K..

Bobb

Posted by Bobb | 6:13 PM