[starman]

http://filmforce.ign.com/articles/667/667940p1.html

[Dark Helmet]

Sweeeet

[Randman]

It looks good. I like the angle Singer is taking in making it a continuation of the first two Donner movies, hence the use of Brando as Jor-El and the iconic John Williams score.

Now if they have a shot of Chris Reeve somewhere in the film (they could superimpose footage of him walking on the Metropolis streets).

[El Gato]

I just started watching Smallville, and while it's kind of cheesy, it's got me hooked on the Superman story again. I think the writers do a good job of integrating different elements from the comics.

Anyway, I'm looking forward to the movie, it's gonna be a good summer flick.

OT: Wasn't Nicholas Cage supposed to be involved with the movie somewhere along the line?

[Dark Helmet]

Originally Posted by El Gato

OT: Wasn't Nicholas Cage supposed to be involved with the movie somewhere along the line?

ya the ugly rat-toothed bastard WAS supposed to be superman at one point.

[Stogieman]

Looks good. Can't wait to see it.

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by El Gato

OT: Wasn't Nicholas Cage supposed to be involved with the movie somewhere along the line?

He even named his son Kal-el Coppola Cage.

[JoshuaZ]

Looks good. Superman was always kind of a dopey kid.

[Sijmen]

It's just a teaser by the way. Apart from that, it looks great! I only don't like the way he opens his eyes at the end. It should've been done slowly, it's just as if he is afraid for something be he has to look at it.

[RAILhead]

Kate...

[ink]

Originally Posted by RAILhead

Kate...

Superman is HOT!!

[pman68]

Yes, I would concur, an improvement over Margot Kidder.

[dcmacdaddy]

"I have sent to them you, my only son"
Is Superman supposed to be an allegory for Jesus now?

Anyway, good-looking flick. I like the way some of the scenes have this slightly washed-out look to them. It's as if we are just seeing now a movie shot a long
time ago.

[MacNStein]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy

"I have sent to them you, my only son"
Is Superman supposed to be an allegory for Jesus now?

hasn't he always been?

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by MacNStein

hasn't he always been?

Well, that was always one possible interpretation from the film-goers perspective. But now the movie makers seem to want to explicitly draw that comparison between Superman and Jesus. And that is what has me . Why would they so blatantly put forth an explicitly Christological comparison between Superman and Jesus? That seems to take some of the fun out of it for me as a film-goer. If the movie is going to tell me what to think about a character then it makes it more difficult for me the viewer to project my interpretations onto the movie. It narows the scope of possible interpretive applications if a movie comes with such a strongly pre-defined interpretation for the main character.

[RAILhead]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy

Well, that was always one possible interpretation from the film-goers perspective. But now the movie makers seem to want to explicitly draw that comparison between Superman and Jesus. And that is what has me . Why would they so blatantly put forth an explicitly Christological comparison between Superman and Jesus? That seems to take some of the fun out of it for me as a film-goer. If the movie is going to tell me what to think about a character then it makes it more difficult for me the viewer to project my interpretations onto the movie. It narows the scope of possible interpretive applications if a movie comes with such a strongly pre-defined interpretation for the main character.

Dude. Chill-out. Wait until you see the movie before going off the deep end.

[E's Lil Theorem]

Nifty. I saw it last night while watching Smallville.

Speaking of Smallville, what the crap is going on? I mean, Lana (Kristin Kreuk) hasn't been on as much this season. She's the main reason I watch that show!

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by RAILhead

Dude. Chill-out. Wait until you see the movie before going off the deep end.

I'm sorry, is thoughtful discussion about a movie preview not allowed?
Or do you just have nothing thoughtful to say and felt like criticizing someone?

But I must say, I am hurt by this attack of yours on me. Most everyone else
you attack gets the HA! HA! guy but all I got was a dumb one-line insult.
Aren't I worthy of a HA! HA! insult? (sniff)

[starman]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy

Well, that was always one possible interpretation from the film-goers perspective. But now the movie makers seem to want to explicitly draw that comparison between Superman and Jesus. And that is what has me . Why would they so blatantly put forth an explicitly Christological comparison between Superman and Jesus? That seems to take some of the fun out of it for me as a film-goer. If the movie is going to tell me what to think about a character then it makes it more difficult for me the viewer to project my interpretations onto the movie. It narows the scope of possible interpretive applications if a movie comes with such a strongly pre-defined interpretation for the main character.

You think this is NEW?

Dude, that voice-over is Marlon Brando from 1978! This isn't new. The whole "Jesus" parallel has been drawn for the last SIXTY YEARS.

Mike

[production_coordinator]

IMHO, people drawing a connection between Jesus and Superman are looking for a connection. There are numerous "only son" parallels in history...

I KNOW for a fact he was talking about Isaac... the only son Abraham. Opps, wait, he was talking about Robert II... the King of Scots...

There are parallels, but they could be made for just about any super hero.

[BlueSky]

I noticed the Superman/Jesus parallel in the original film ("only son"...). There was also the fact that Superman disappeared between boyhood and adult while he was learning stuff...something that parallels Jesus.

[spacefreak]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy

Well, that was always one possible interpretation from the film-goers perspective. But now the movie makers seem to want to explicitly draw that comparison between Superman and Jesus. And that is what has me . Why would they so blatantly put forth an explicitly Christological comparison between Superman and Jesus? That seems to take some of the fun out of it for me as a film-goer. If the movie is going to tell me what to think about a character then it makes it more difficult for me the viewer to project my interpretations onto the movie. It narows the scope of possible interpretive applications if a movie comes with such a strongly pre-defined interpretation for the main character.

Then don't see the movie. It's not the filmmakers' faults that you have been oblivious to the parallels for 5 or 6 decades now.

[RAILhead]

It's kinda hard not to criticize when you post something like that, man. As many have said already, everyone — well, most everyone — knows that Supes was a "messiah-like" figure.

[sknapp351]

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/.../superman.html

Superman was created by two Jewish teenagers before WWII. I find this interesting in regards to the association with Jesus.
SAm

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by sknapp351

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/.../superman.html

Superman was created by two Jewish teenagers before WWII. I find this interesting in regards to the association with Jesus.
SAm

The prophecy of Jesus came from the Jews.

[Lancer409]

Originally Posted by Railroader

He even named his son Kal-el Coppola Cage.

Forget the kid ... his WIFEY IS HOT!!!

Alice Kim Cage ... yum..

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Originally Posted by Kevin

The prophecy of Jesus came from the Jews.

No.

The prophecy of a Messiah came from the Jewish religion. And they reject the Christian belief that the Messiah (as Jesus Christ) has already come .

Come on now.

greg

[lavar78]

Originally Posted by Railroader

He even named his son Kal-el Coppola Cage.

It's Kal-El Cage. I refuse to believe a huge Superman freak like Nick Cage would get that wrong.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton

No.

The prophecy of a Messiah came from the Jewish religion.

Right, which I basically just said.

And they reject the Christian belief that the Messiah (as Jesus Christ) has already come .

The idea that a "Man from space" giving his "only son" to "save the world" is indeed a Jewish prophecy.

That was my point.

Them at the time not accepting Jesus had nothing to do with it.

[MacNStein]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton

No.

The prophecy of a Messiah came from the Jewish religion. And they reject the Christian belief that the Messiah (as Jesus Christ) has already come .

Come on now.

greg

Most do, but not all. There are quite a few messianic Jews out there.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by pman68

Yes, I would concur, an improvement over Margot Kidder.

There was just something about her at the time... I guess I dig petite brunettes.

[::maroma::]

Originally Posted by Kevin

There was just something about her at the time... I guess I dig petite brunettes.

She was real cute back then. That is until she went all psycho. Anyone see the Family Guy episode she made an appearance in? Basically it was just her screaming and flipping out.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Originally Posted by Kevin

The idea that a "Man from space" giving his "only son" to "save the world" is indeed a Jewish prophecy.

You are completely and utterly wrong. Please sit down and be quiet.

Originally Posted by MacNStein

Most do, but not all. There are quite a few messianic Jews out there.

How does that work? Wouldn't accepting Jesus Christ as the messiah be anathema to Judaism?

Or do you mean "Jews" in the context of those of Jewish descent (ie. not of the Jewish "religion" ... perhaps a "Christian Jew" or what have you)? Sorry, the distinct between "Jew" and "practicer of Judaism" gets confused with me sometimes. I meant the latter.

I'm no expert by any means. I get a little bit of the debate, however...my entire extended family is associated with a non-denominational fundamentalist Christian church, and my father is a preacher. I'm rather agnostic, at best. My girlfriend is a Ukranian Jew who grew up in Israel, although neither her nor her parents are practicing Jews to any degree (beyond her mother's most amusing hints that she should be dating a "nice Jewish boy" ). Anyways, I feel that there should be some easy way to differentiate between Jewish heritage and Judaism, because it can get rather confusing.

I just can't wait when they get to start meeting each other and my parents invite them out to church.

greg

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton

You are completely and utterly wrong. Please sit down and be quiet.

Um....




No

[invisibleX]

Originally Posted by E's Lil Theorem

Nifty. I saw it last night while watching Smallville.

Speaking of Smallville, what the crap is going on? I mean, Lana (Kristin Kreuk) hasn't been on as much this season. She's the main reason I watch that show!

Really? I've been wishing she'd die for about three seasons now. Not hot in my books.. an extremely annoying actor as well.

[E's Lil Theorem]

Originally Posted by invisibleX

Really? I've been wishing she'd die for about three seasons now. Not hot in my books.. an extremely annoying actor as well.

She may not be a great actress, but, in my book, she has a going on. I'm a superman fan, but I don't think I would kept watching Smallville throughout the years without her in the cast.

[goMac]

I think he means Superman fits the description of the Jewish Messiah. You have to realize Christians justify Christ as the Messiah because he fits the Jewish description of the Messiah.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by goMac

I think he means Superman fits the description of the Jewish Messiah. You have to realize Christians justify Christ as the Messiah because he fits the Jewish description of the Messiah.

I don't think there is any justification needed.

[ink]

Next thing you know, people will be saying that X-Men is an allegory for the civil rights movement....

[goMac]

Originally Posted by Kevin

I don't think there is any justification needed.

Well, there probably is.

a) Jesus never once claimed to be the Messiah. When asked at his trial he would not answer the question.
b) Jesus did claim to be the son of god, but you have to understand in Israel, Son of God was the term for anyone holy. Usually the King of Israel when Israel was under it's own rule and the head priest were always addressed as a son of god.

Christians had to go back and justify it after the fact, as Jesus never claimed to be any sort of holy prophet.

[JoshuaZ]

If Superman is the Messiah... dude...

Who knew the Son of God could shoot laser out of his eyes. Or that he had a weakness to kryptionite.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by goMac

a) Jesus never once claimed to be the Messiah. When asked at his trial he would not answer the question.

Yes, yes he did. That is why he was crucified. That is why they started stoning him as well. If he did not, why did they do it?

b) Jesus did claim to be the son of god, but you have to understand in Israel, Son of God was the term for anyone holy. Usually the King of Israel when Israel was under it's own rule and the head priest were always addressed as a son of god.

No, Jesus also said "I am" that is what God referred to himself. This is what why the jews wanted to crucify him.

The Jews therefore said to Him, "You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?" Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am." Therefore they picked up stones to throw at Him; but Jesus hid Himself, and went out of the temple. (John 8:57-59)

Tell us what he meant by that.

And then went onto say...

"I and the Father are one." The Jews took up stones again to stone Him. Jesus answered them, "I showed you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you stoning Me?" The Jews answered Him, "For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God." (John 10:30-33)

The Jews knew what he was saying. It was no mystery.

And Jesus cried out and said, "He who believes in Me does not believe in Me, but in Him who sent Me. And he who beholds Me beholds the One who sent Me. I have come as light into the world, that everyone who believes in Me may not remain in darkness." (John 12:44-46)

He was claiming to be THE MESSIAH.

And so when He had washed their feet, and taken His garments, and reclined at the table again, He said to them, "Do you know what I have done to you? You call Me Teacher and Lord; and you are right, for I am. If I then, the Lord and the Teacher, washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another's feet." (John 13:12-14)

Not only was he a teacher, but also the Lord.
And then the last...


Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but through Me. If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also; from now on you know Him, and have seen Him." Philip said to Him, "Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us." Jesus said to him, "Have I been so long with you, and yet you have not come to know Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; how do you say, 'Show us the Father'?" (John 14:6-9)

If he wasn't the Messiah, why must one go through him to get to the father?

Christians had to go back and justify it after the fact, as Jesus never claimed to be any sort of holy prophet.

Nonsense.

This whole "justify" thing is revisionist history from those that have no clue.

[JoshuaZ]

Here we go again.....

[Kevin]

You'd think people will learn not to bring it up. Constantly. Forever. 24/7

Might as well stick it into the religious/politics forum.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Yes, yes he did. That is why he was crucified. That is why they started stoning him as well. If he did not, why did they do it?

No, Jesus also said "I am" that is what God referred to himself. This is what why the jews wanted to crucify him..

Read it again. Jesus was crucified because a few years earlier another guy who did claim to be the messiah led a Passover revolt in Palestine, got a bunch of people killed and pissed off the Romans. Jesus was crucified in a plot between the Pharisees and the Romans because they were afraid he would cause another uprising. He had actually done nothing wrong under Jewish law. This was why they kept trying to get him to admit he was the Messiah. If he claimed he was the Messiah they could arrest him. This is all detailed in the Bible. They even talk about the lives of the many vs. Jesus's life.

Originally Posted by Kevin

The Jews therefore said to Him, "You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?" Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am." Therefore they picked up stones to throw at Him; but Jesus hid Himself, and went out of the temple. (John 8:57-59)

Tell us what he meant by that.

And then went onto say...
"I and the Father are one." The Jews took up stones again to stone Him. Jesus answered them, "I showed you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you stoning Me?" The Jews answered Him, "For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God." (John 10:30-33)
The Jews knew what he was saying. It was no mystery.
And Jesus cried out and said, "He who believes in Me does not believe in Me, but in Him who sent Me. And he who beholds Me beholds the One who sent Me. I have come as light into the world, that everyone who believes in Me may not remain in darkness." (John 12:44-46)

And so when He had washed their feet, and taken His garments, and reclined at the table again, He said to them, "Do you know what I have done to you? You call Me Teacher and Lord; and you are right, for I am. If I then, the Lord and the Teacher, washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another's feet." (John 13:12-14)
Not only was he a teacher, but also the Lord.
And then the last...

Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but through Me. If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also; from now on you know Him, and have seen Him." Philip said to Him, "Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us." Jesus said to him, "Have I been so long with you, and yet you have not come to know Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; how do you say, 'Show us the Father'?" (John 14:6-9)

Nonsense.

Huh? Father was what everyone in Judea called God. Jesus used the informal form, but [b]told everyone else to use the same form.[b] All Jesus is saying is that he feels close with god. You have to understand, in context, in ancient Judea, being with God was seen as carrying out God's will. Anyone who spent their life following the commandments and living free of sin was seen as with god, or even an incarnation of sorts of god. All Jesus was saying was live like he does, because he lives the way god does. The quote directly above this is saying this pretty directly.

You also have to understand there has been a lot of people going back and editing the Bible. The New Testament wasn't written until 50 years after Jesus died, and the people who wrote it had probably never even seen Jesus. None of the New Testament books even agree with each other on most things. If anything, chunks of the Old Testament are probably more accurate because the Jews were very good with historical records.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by goMac

Read it again. Jesus was crucified because a few years earlier another guy who did claim to be the messiah led a Passover revolt in Palestine, got a bunch of people killed and pissed off the Romans. Jesus was crucified in a plot between the Pharisees and the Romans because they were afraid he would cause another uprising. He had actually done nothing wrong under Jewish law. This was why they kept trying to get him to admit he was the Messiah. If he claimed he was the Messiah they could arrest him. This is all detailed in the Bible. They even talk about the lives of the many vs. Jesus's life.

WHERE DID YOU READ THAT FROM?

Certainly not the Bible.

Huh? Father was what everyone in Judea called God. Jesus used the informal form, but [b]told everyone else to use the same form.[b] All Jesus is saying is that he feels close with god. You have to understand, in context, in ancient Judea, being with God was seen as carrying out God's will. Anyone who spent their life following the commandments and living free of sin was seen as with god, or even an incarnation of sorts of god. All Jesus was saying was live like he does, because he lives the way god does. The quote directly above this is saying this pretty directly.

No, not at all. Else the Jews wouldn't have gotten upset.

Why did he say, through only him would you get to the Father?

You also have to understand there has been a lot of people going back and editing the Bible. The New Testament wasn't written until 50 years after Jesus died, and the people who wrote it had probably never even seen Jesus. None of the New Testament books even agree with each other on most things. If anything, chunks of the Old Testament are probably more accurate because the Jews were very good with historical records.

You mean that is your idea.

Certainly not factual. Just like your first paragraph.

You like Warung, like taking ideas you agree with, and treat as fact.

While I can never prove that Jesus did indeed say these things, According to the Bible he did indeed. So no justification was needed.

Now, if you want to say people re-wrote the Bible, and added or took away stuff to justify him being the messiah (Even though that is why he was crucified) you can believe that. But it certainly not something you can prove.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by Kevin

WHERE DID YOU READ THAT FROM?

Certainly not the Bible.

Sure did. The Jews didn't have the power to put anyone to death. Only the Romans did. And the Romans didn't really care about the people who popped up every few years claiming to be the Messiah. Because the Pharisees didn't have the power to kill Jesus, he had to be convicted of a Roman crime and be put to death under the Roman justice system. Hence, he was convicted for in-sighting rebellion. This is why Jesus first starts in a Jewish court on Thursday night (where he isn't actually convicted of anything) and then transfered to a Roman court on Friday morning (where he is brought up on charges, and then killed not by the Jews but by the Romans). Jesus is killed Friday afternoon and is nailed through not only the feet but the arms so that he dies a quick death, as sundown Friday is the Sabbath and Passover and the Jews didn't want people hanging on crosses dying in Jerusalem over the Sabbath. Again, this is all in the bible.

Originally Posted by Kevin

Now, if you want to say people re-wrote the Bible, and added or took away stuff to justify him being the messiah (Even though that is why he was crucified) you can believe that. But it certainly not something you can prove.

Oh but it is. Earliest copies of the Bible date to 50 years after Jesus died, by four different people, all telling different stories, only one of whom wrote the later books. In the Old Testament, the book of Genesis was written 300 years after the book of Exodus. Also, Mosses never crossed the Red Sea, he crossed the sea of reeds. Reed was mistranslated to red during a Christian translation of the Bible.

Yes, it is proven there are many edited things in the bible.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by goMac

Sure did.

Ok show me where in the Bible it supports that story.

The Jews didn't have the power to put anyone to death. Only the Romans did. And the Romans didn't really care about the people who popped up every few years claiming to be the Messiah. Because the Pharisees didn't have the power to kill Jesus, he had to be convicted of a Roman crime and be put to death under the Roman justice system. Hence, he was convicted for in-sighting rebellion. This is why Jesus first starts in a Jewish court on Thursday night (where he isn't actually convicted of anything) and then transfered to a Roman court on Friday morning (where he is brought up on charges, and then killed not by the Jews but by the Romans). Jesus is killed Friday afternoon and is nailed through not only the feet but the arms so that he dies a quick death, as sundown Friday is the Sabbath and Passover and the Jews didn't want people hanging on crosses dying in Jerusalem over the Sabbath. Again, this is all in the bible.

You are skirting the issue. The Jews wanted him dead because he claimed to be God, and the messiah. Hence why at the top of his cross it said "King of the Jews"

Oh but it is. Earliest copies of the Bible date to 50 years after Jesus died, by four different people, all telling different stories, only one of whom wrote the later books.

The stories really weren't that different. And the parts that are, are inane.

In the Old Testament, the book of Genesis was written 300 years after the book of Exodus. Also, Mosses never crossed the Red Sea, he crossed the sea of reeds. Reed was mistranslated to red during a Christian translation of the Bible.

And this detracts anything from the message even if these "facts" are true in what way?

Yes, it is proven there are many edited things in the bible.

You mean not things added that everyone wanted to add.

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by goMac

Again, this is all in the bible.

Actually, Kevin was refuting your stating this:

Originally Posted by goMac

Read it again. Jesus was crucified because a few years earlier another guy who did claim to be the messiah led a Passover revolt in Palestine, got a bunch of people killed and pissed off the Romans. Jesus was crucified in a plot between the Pharisees and the Romans because they were afraid he would cause another uprising. He had actually done nothing wrong under Jewish law. This was why they kept trying to get him to admit he was the Messiah. If he claimed he was the Messiah they could arrest him. This is all detailed in the Bible. They even talk about the lives of the many vs. Jesus's life.

That part is NOT in the Bible. But a nice CYA in your return post to Kevin

Originally Posted by goMac

Oh but it is. Earliest copies of the Bible date to 50 years after Jesus died, by four different people, all telling different stories, only one of whom wrote the later books. In the Old Testament, the book of Genesis was written 300 years after the book of Exodus. Also, Mosses never crossed the Red Sea, he crossed the sea of reeds. Reed was mistranslated to red during a Christian translation of the Bible.

Yes, it is proven there are many edited things in the bible.

And this keeps you from believing what Jesus said? You better hope you're right. Myself, I believe.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Ok show me where in the Bible it supports that story.

You are skirting the issue. The Jews wanted him dead because he claimed to be God, and the messiah. Hence why at the top of his cross it said "King of the Jews"

Jesus never said he was the Messiah. Please find me text in the Bible where Jesus says he is the Messiah directly. The reason they put King of the Jews on his cross was because he was convicted for trying to start an uprising by claiming he was the Messiah, which was a false charge. No where did Jesus claim to be the Messiah, and like I said, when directly asked, he wouldn't even answer.

Originally Posted by Kevin

The stories really weren't that different. And the parts that are, are inane.

And this detracts anything from the message even if these "facts" are true in what way?

You mean not things added that everyone wanted to add.

I'm saying a lot of things in the Bible have been changed to fit a message. The message the people 50 years after Jesus died wanted to convey was that he had resurrected. Jesus being the son of god was not taught by Christians themselves until around 300 AD. Until then it was taught that Jesus was only a man. Again the reason this is is because someone mistranslated and took the son of god to be a literal title.