Post by formersamhmd on Apr 3, 2018 16:57:16 GMT
Eh, once Luthor shows up it's more Luthor who carries the film.
Superman II also focuses on Clark's personality in regards to his feelings with Lois. In fact, he gives up his relationship with Lois to save the world. Mass consensus has already declared it a good movie. There is no disqualification.
He gives up his powers (that will save millions of lives) to be with a Nutbag like Kidder's Lois (especially when SMII and Quest for Peace gives us much better love interests in Lana and Lacy) despite her being an illiterate, chain smoking scatter brain. Then when he's repowered he sadistically tortures Zod (even if he does or doesn't kill him) with a smile on his face, goes back to beat up that redneck trucker and then violates Lois' mind for...reasons.
Sorry, that ain't Superman.
And yes, WW had a strong supporting cast as all good movies do, but it still focused on her personality, which is the point.
Compare her personality to someone like Steve Rogers', and you see difference between an archetype and a character.
Just look at Naked Lunch.
I can think of at least two things wrong with that movies' title.