Yacht. That's how it's spelled FYI.

If you go canon wise, it's technically Superman III. It tries to follow the Donnerverse while ignoring Superman III and IV

It’s supposed to take place (5 years) after superman 2. Removing the third and fourth film from the timeline. But that can’t be true since the world looks more modernized. Plus you can even see someone holding a flip phone. In my book superman returns takes place in the Nolanverse alongside the dark knight trilogy and green lantern (2011).

@@thenoirknight5729The problem is that creates too many plot holes and inconsistencies. I think if they had it take place 19 years after superman 4 and cast an actress for Lois that looks more like Margot kidder then it would’ve been better.

Not even a debate lol

Too one sided

(visible confusion)

@@mechanwhal6590 as in, not many people prefer him to a more popular hero like say, Batman

@8F-MUHAMMAD AULIADANNY SYAHRIL Labs the same people know about them both. Underrated as in, most prefer batman over superman

cap

i mean in what sense? because literally the whole planet knows him and use him as a lot of references

True but both are really cool

@@thenoirknight5729 yessir

“If you’re strong, you can fly, you can reach the other side of the rainbow....”

in MoS there was no other way tho

Supes decision was to save the people. He knew Richard was on his way to save Lois and prolong her needing help.

In the man of steel, it's do or die, no decisions, if superman fails, zod will wipe out the humanity.

Henry cavill and Zack Snyder's superman is the best!!!!!!!

@sboulderickmam Then what was Superman supposed to do with Zod in MoS ?? He had no other option.

It seemed to me that Brandon Routh gave the Superman part of his character a more otherworldly quality than Christopher Reeve did.

I thought, as lackluster as a Superman story as it was, that it had a lot of not only great but amazing qualities. It’s severely underrated, and is really half of a “Son of Superman” story. I loved it all.

lacking in the script & enemies, but not a terrible movie no.

The bad parts are that it was generally boring and only excelled at the visuals and action sequences. Most of the casting was really good though too

Yea I see where ur coming from but man of steel was far better hands down

There were limited by time (VFX and chi)

Have you ever taken into consideration that visual effects weren't advanced back then?

@@frankmay3341 it’s not just the vfx, they lacked the vision to portray real physics. Remember Superman picking up a falling helicopter by its skid, or laying on the tracks to act as the rail that’s missing. These are hilariously wrong. They could have made a very fast flight scene, even a shockwave.

@@mrb2349 Superman isn't Homelander. His powers can't be described by the laws of physics. Think of the date with Lois. She was flying with him by just holding her fingers. Superman was projecting his telekinesis (or gravitation field, whatever explanation in the modern interpretation) to let her fly and not be affected by drag/wind/gravity.

@@IdealUserFact. Exactly why he can lift hilariously large objects without them caving in

Lmao! How does it not make sense to you, that this movie, has better cgi, than Supergirl? This movie had a budget on 204 million dollars, while Supergirl has about 1 million per episode, which is around 20 million for an entire season. So if this movie's cgi was worse than Supergirl's, then it would make no fucking sense

Jeppe Noergaard they dont have 1Mil budget per ep tf

Literally just answered your own question...

Because this movie had a budget of like $265 million in 2006 dollars. Supergirl is lucky if it’s got a $265,000 budget per episode.

You were on point buddy

He wasn't bad, but not better.

Sike

You smokin crack

"I can see the future!". Brandon was fantastic as Superman in Crisis on Infinite Earth's! I hope they do something like a new movie or a series