Superman tribute video
March 9, 2006 2:26 AM Subscribe
Cool Superman tribute video. It's a DVD trailer but it made me feel nostalgiac as hell.
Thought I was all montaged out after the Oscars but...awwwwwww!
posted by Jody Tresidder at 4:47 AM on March 9, 2006
posted by Jody Tresidder at 4:47 AM on March 9, 2006
Not bad except they missed the Movie Serial Superman, Kirk Alyn. Perhaps they just couldn't get the rights.
I still can't figure out how to post links.
posted by Gungho at 4:55 AM on March 9, 2006
I still can't figure out how to post links.
posted by Gungho at 4:55 AM on March 9, 2006
The biggest smile came over my face when Luthor came up. I never liked how Stuperman was about the supremacy of jocks over nerds. I always preferred those alternate realities where Luthor was the good guy and Supes the baddie. Because really, how many stories do we need where the villain's only attribute is that he's really smart?
posted by Eideteker at 4:55 AM on March 9, 2006
posted by Eideteker at 4:55 AM on March 9, 2006
See, it was supposed to include {http://www.superman.ws/fos/thescreen/serials/}
posted by Gungho at 4:55 AM on March 9, 2006
posted by Gungho at 4:55 AM on March 9, 2006
Eidetaker, Superman doesn't demonstrate any kind of superiority of jocks over nerds. Superman is superior because he's moral, and uses his abilities for good, whereas Luthor is amoral and uses his resources (wealth and intelligence) for nothing but personal gain.
For what it's worth, I come down squarely on the nerd side of the fence, as though I didn't just prove that with the above comment.
posted by Faint of Butt at 5:01 AM on March 9, 2006
For what it's worth, I come down squarely on the nerd side of the fence, as though I didn't just prove that with the above comment.
posted by Faint of Butt at 5:01 AM on March 9, 2006
I always thought Red Meat was spot on with its portrayal of Spuderman.
posted by slimepuppy at 5:51 AM on March 9, 2006
posted by slimepuppy at 5:51 AM on March 9, 2006
Feint of Butte: Thanks for excellently missing my point. Why are nerds painted as the amoral ones? Don't we have enough of the "mad scientist" archetype?
Reed Richards vs. Superman? Don't even kid me. RR would have Superman incapacitated by the third round. One encounter to analyze his abilities, one round to devise countermeasures, and then implementation the final time they battled. I always liked Reed precisely because he was a GOOD supergenius. I never got into Superman because what was the point? (I also believe Dr. Doom was shown to be more than one-dimensional back when Lex was still just TAKE OVER THE WORLD! without a view towards its ends, like a dog chasing a car). Maybe it just comes down to me being a Marvel fan.
posted by Eideteker at 5:51 AM on March 9, 2006
Reed Richards vs. Superman? Don't even kid me. RR would have Superman incapacitated by the third round. One encounter to analyze his abilities, one round to devise countermeasures, and then implementation the final time they battled. I always liked Reed precisely because he was a GOOD supergenius. I never got into Superman because what was the point? (I also believe Dr. Doom was shown to be more than one-dimensional back when Lex was still just TAKE OVER THE WORLD! without a view towards its ends, like a dog chasing a car). Maybe it just comes down to me being a Marvel fan.
posted by Eideteker at 5:51 AM on March 9, 2006
Gungho, you'll notice in the "Post Comment" box on this page down at the lower right hand corner of that box it says in blue, "link".
Highlight the text you want to be a hyperlink in the Post Comment box,
then click on the blue word "link",
put in the url in the "link" pop up box and
then click "OK" in the "link" pop up box.
Hope that helps. :)
posted by nickyskye at 5:53 AM on March 9, 2006
Highlight the text you want to be a hyperlink in the Post Comment box,
then click on the blue word "link",
put in the url in the "link" pop up box and
then click "OK" in the "link" pop up box.
Hope that helps. :)
posted by nickyskye at 5:53 AM on March 9, 2006
Also, I always thought the speech Carradine gives at the end of Kill Bill 2 was a really fantastic portrayal of what I've always found compelling about Superman, without ever being able to put my finger on it:
An essential characteristic of the superhero mythology is, there's the superhero, and there's the alter ego. Batman is actually Bruce Wayne, Spider-Man is actually Peter Parker. When he wakes up in the morning, he's Peter Parker. He has to put on a costume to become Spider-Man. And it is in that characteristic that Superman stands alone. Superman did not become Superman, Superman was born Superman. When Superman wakes up in the morning, he's Superman. His alter ego is Clark Kent. His outfit with the big red "S", that's the blanket he was wrapped in as a baby when the Kents found him. Those are his clothes. What Kent wears, the glasses, the business suit, that's the costume. That's the costume Superman wears to blend in with us. Clark Kent is how Superman views us. And what are the characteristics of Clark Kent? He's weak, he's unsure of himself... he's a coward. Clark Kent is Superman's critique on the whole human race.
Via imdb.
posted by slimepuppy at 5:58 AM on March 9, 2006
An essential characteristic of the superhero mythology is, there's the superhero, and there's the alter ego. Batman is actually Bruce Wayne, Spider-Man is actually Peter Parker. When he wakes up in the morning, he's Peter Parker. He has to put on a costume to become Spider-Man. And it is in that characteristic that Superman stands alone. Superman did not become Superman, Superman was born Superman. When Superman wakes up in the morning, he's Superman. His alter ego is Clark Kent. His outfit with the big red "S", that's the blanket he was wrapped in as a baby when the Kents found him. Those are his clothes. What Kent wears, the glasses, the business suit, that's the costume. That's the costume Superman wears to blend in with us. Clark Kent is how Superman views us. And what are the characteristics of Clark Kent? He's weak, he's unsure of himself... he's a coward. Clark Kent is Superman's critique on the whole human race.
Via imdb.
posted by slimepuppy at 5:58 AM on March 9, 2006
I wrote about the origin of the Luthor vs Superman conflict on my internet web site that is on the web.
posted by beaucoupkevin at 6:06 AM on March 9, 2006
posted by beaucoupkevin at 6:06 AM on March 9, 2006
Eideteker, please accept my apologies for carelessly misspelling your name.
Reed Richards vs. Superman? Don't even kid me. RR would have Superman incapacitated by the third round. One encounter to analyze his abilities, one round to devise countermeasures, and then implementation the final time they battled.
You're absolutely right. And that's why Batman can always defeat Superman, whenever the two come head to head-- it's the definitive example of brains overcoming brawn. Lex Luthor loses, like I said, not because he's smart, but because he's evil. If you're simply objecting to the villainous mad scientist trope, then I suppose I did become distracted by the particulars and miss your point, and for that I apologize. I certainly can't defend the principle in general.
In any event, can't it be argued that Luthor is much more of a super-businessman than a super-scientist? He'll even do consulting work, given the opportunity. There was a terrific issue of Alan Moore's Swam Thing in which he did exactly that-- I seem to recall his going rate was one million dollars per minute.
posted by Faint of Butt at 6:15 AM on March 9, 2006
Reed Richards vs. Superman? Don't even kid me. RR would have Superman incapacitated by the third round. One encounter to analyze his abilities, one round to devise countermeasures, and then implementation the final time they battled.
You're absolutely right. And that's why Batman can always defeat Superman, whenever the two come head to head-- it's the definitive example of brains overcoming brawn. Lex Luthor loses, like I said, not because he's smart, but because he's evil. If you're simply objecting to the villainous mad scientist trope, then I suppose I did become distracted by the particulars and miss your point, and for that I apologize. I certainly can't defend the principle in general.
In any event, can't it be argued that Luthor is much more of a super-businessman than a super-scientist? He'll even do consulting work, given the opportunity. There was a terrific issue of Alan Moore's Swam Thing in which he did exactly that-- I seem to recall his going rate was one million dollars per minute.
posted by Faint of Butt at 6:15 AM on March 9, 2006
Eideteker: Reed Richards vs. Superman? Don't even kid me. RR would have Superman incapacitated by the third round. One encounter to analyze his abilities, one round to devise countermeasures, and then implementation the final time they battled. I always liked Reed precisely because he was a GOOD supergenius.
I think what you're missing though is that Superman isn't an idiot/jock. Depending on the writer, time, plot, etc. Superman has in the past shown extraordinary scientific knowledge and ability--and contrary to his popular stereotype, Superman would prefer to solve things without violence, so he doesn't really fit the jock sterotype. Superman is more that perfect kid in high school that everyone hated, not because of his shortcomings but rather because he didn't seem to have any-- he was good looking & the quarterback, but he also got all A's and played a couple instruments and did a lot of charity work, and most infuriatingly wasn't stuck up at all, but actually really really nice and funny. OMG, I totally hated that guy!
I know Superman is easy to mock, but it's because he's supposed to be so super, as in ueber. He's above us, as slimepuppy points out with his Kill Bill quote. The whole point of Superman is that he's infallible... physically, mentally and ethically. So sure it's easy to mock, but he's easy to mock like Jesus is.
On that point, do the John 3:16 overtones of the new Superman trailer freak anybody else out? I mean, Superman has always been a candidate for sci-fi Jesus, but I think the director is taking it a bit too far (as in, it's so obvious it gets a little sickening).
posted by illovich at 6:24 AM on March 9, 2006
I think what you're missing though is that Superman isn't an idiot/jock. Depending on the writer, time, plot, etc. Superman has in the past shown extraordinary scientific knowledge and ability--and contrary to his popular stereotype, Superman would prefer to solve things without violence, so he doesn't really fit the jock sterotype. Superman is more that perfect kid in high school that everyone hated, not because of his shortcomings but rather because he didn't seem to have any-- he was good looking & the quarterback, but he also got all A's and played a couple instruments and did a lot of charity work, and most infuriatingly wasn't stuck up at all, but actually really really nice and funny. OMG, I totally hated that guy!
I know Superman is easy to mock, but it's because he's supposed to be so super, as in ueber. He's above us, as slimepuppy points out with his Kill Bill quote. The whole point of Superman is that he's infallible... physically, mentally and ethically. So sure it's easy to mock, but he's easy to mock like Jesus is.
On that point, do the John 3:16 overtones of the new Superman trailer freak anybody else out? I mean, Superman has always been a candidate for sci-fi Jesus, but I think the director is taking it a bit too far (as in, it's so obvious it gets a little sickening).
posted by illovich at 6:24 AM on March 9, 2006
There are two (even three) distinct versions of Lex Luthor that have emerged over the years. The Pre-Crisis, Pre-Reboot version whose origins lie in Smallville and who has known Superboy/Superman as a thorn in his side his whole life, and the "modern" version who was an successful businessman in the Trump mode before Superman showed up and ruined everything.
Of these, I personally find the former more compelling, but the latter has had some interesting stories, especially once the Smallville series established him as someone with a connection to Clark's past. The recent Superman: Birthright miniseries did a damned fine job using that as a template to establish their comics relationship, even if much of that series was sort of...ehn.
posted by beaucoupkevin at 6:24 AM on March 9, 2006
Of these, I personally find the former more compelling, but the latter has had some interesting stories, especially once the Smallville series established him as someone with a connection to Clark's past. The recent Superman: Birthright miniseries did a damned fine job using that as a template to establish their comics relationship, even if much of that series was sort of...ehn.
posted by beaucoupkevin at 6:24 AM on March 9, 2006
John Holbo at Crooked Timber wants to get the word out on this sorta-sweet little Superman music video. Seems like a good place for the link.
posted by cgc373 at 6:45 AM on March 9, 2006
posted by cgc373 at 6:45 AM on March 9, 2006
NickySkye; Thanks, but I don't see no "Link" button...What do I need, Super Vision?
posted by Gungho at 6:46 AM on March 9, 2006
posted by Gungho at 6:46 AM on March 9, 2006
On that point, do the John 3:16 overtones of the new Superman trailer freak anybody else out?
Glad it wasn't just me.
posted by Optamystic at 7:06 AM on March 9, 2006
Glad it wasn't just me.
posted by Optamystic at 7:06 AM on March 9, 2006
What, no Fleischer version?
Most visionary of them all.
funny how the 1978 score still resonates the most to me.
posted by Busithoth at 7:19 AM on March 9, 2006
Most visionary of them all.
funny how the 1978 score still resonates the most to me.
posted by Busithoth at 7:19 AM on March 9, 2006
funny how the 1978 score still resonates the most to me.
I was just thinking that. The slow build-up at the beginning still gives me chills.
posted by Cyrano at 7:38 AM on March 9, 2006
I was just thinking that. The slow build-up at the beginning still gives me chills.
posted by Cyrano at 7:38 AM on March 9, 2006
funny how the 1978 score still resonates the most to me.
I'd heard that permission was granted to use that fanfare in the upcoming movie. If so, I will be incredibly happy to hear it, especially if they use it properly. A lot of these great movie themes are easy to MISuse (Jaws, alas, is has jumped the proverbial).
I dunno, man. I'm just glad there's a chance at a movie that doesn't suck like III or IV did.
posted by mephron at 8:13 AM on March 9, 2006
I'd heard that permission was granted to use that fanfare in the upcoming movie. If so, I will be incredibly happy to hear it, especially if they use it properly. A lot of these great movie themes are easy to MISuse (Jaws, alas, is has jumped the proverbial).
I dunno, man. I'm just glad there's a chance at a movie that doesn't suck like III or IV did.
posted by mephron at 8:13 AM on March 9, 2006
Superman's widow, Dana Reeve, died just the other day. Did this already get mentioned on mefi?
posted by sizemore at 8:18 AM on March 9, 2006
posted by sizemore at 8:18 AM on March 9, 2006
It did, Sizemore, but they said Dana Reeves.
*choke*
posted by beaucoupkevin at 8:21 AM on March 9, 2006
*choke*
posted by beaucoupkevin at 8:21 AM on March 9, 2006
beaucoupkevin: Excellent write-up, even if I did have to look up "pear-shaped" in your non-anatomical-proportion sense to find out what it meant (where I come from, it means a man with big hips).
FoB: I'm just riding you. Yes, I'm overstating the "evil will always triumph because good is dumb" thing. But isn't it funny that the same jock-loathing nerds who generally write comics (or did in those days) secretly worship the jocks and deprecate their own intelligence? No, I guess it isn't.
Gungho, you may have JavaScript disabled. I'd suggest you search metatalk for posts on how to make a link on mefi and see if there are any useful references that crop up. (I'd link you, but MeTa is not responding right now.)
posted by Eideteker at 9:06 AM on March 9, 2006
FoB: I'm just riding you. Yes, I'm overstating the "evil will always triumph because good is dumb" thing. But isn't it funny that the same jock-loathing nerds who generally write comics (or did in those days) secretly worship the jocks and deprecate their own intelligence? No, I guess it isn't.
Gungho, you may have JavaScript disabled. I'd suggest you search metatalk for posts on how to make a link on mefi and see if there are any useful references that crop up. (I'd link you, but MeTa is not responding right now.)
posted by Eideteker at 9:06 AM on March 9, 2006
Good video. Can anyone spare me the visit to Ain't It Cool, et. al., and tell me if the new Superman movie is expected to be teh suck or what...?
posted by Banky_Edwards at 9:22 AM on March 9, 2006
posted by Banky_Edwards at 9:22 AM on March 9, 2006
This got me thinking, the ancient Greeks had their mythological figures (Hercules, etc) and we have superheroes (Superman, etc). Other than maybe King Arthur in the Middle Ages, I can't think of the fictional heroes of any other ages. Who did the Victorians think were really cool? What was your typical Renaissance Man's idea of a hero? Hmm...
posted by Orange Goblin at 9:40 AM on March 9, 2006
posted by Orange Goblin at 9:40 AM on March 9, 2006
Banky, I'm not a great fan of Superman (the character, the films, the comics, the TV series etc.) but I have immense faith in Bryan Singer as a director. And as such really actually looking forward to seeing the film.
Also, Singer's video diaries are extremely entertaining. Even though I did stop watching after the 13th or so.
posted by slimepuppy at 9:49 AM on March 9, 2006
Also, Singer's video diaries are extremely entertaining. Even though I did stop watching after the 13th or so.
posted by slimepuppy at 9:49 AM on March 9, 2006
Orange Goblin, check out Heroes: Saviors, Traitors, and Supermen: A History of Hero Worship by Lucy Hughes-Hallett, modeled on Thomas Carlyle's On Heroes and Hero Worship.
posted by cgc373 at 9:54 AM on March 9, 2006
posted by cgc373 at 9:54 AM on March 9, 2006
The whole John 3:16 thing is a hark back to the trailer for the 1978 movie.
Narrator says: "Because of the wisdom and compassion of Jor-El, because he knew the human race had a capacity for goodness, he sent us his only son."
There's a more explicit one than that. I believe, but my Superman DVD is playing up.
posted by Navek Rednam at 9:54 AM on March 9, 2006
Narrator says: "Because of the wisdom and compassion of Jor-El, because he knew the human race had a capacity for goodness, he sent us his only son."
There's a more explicit one than that. I believe, but my Superman DVD is playing up.
posted by Navek Rednam at 9:54 AM on March 9, 2006
Orange Goblin: I've always been partial to Gilgamesh myself. I kick it old school.
Interesting question though... AskMe?
posted by slimepuppy at 9:54 AM on March 9, 2006
Interesting question though... AskMe?
posted by slimepuppy at 9:54 AM on March 9, 2006
do the John 3:16 overtones of the new Superman trailer freak anybody else out?
Wait...so Superman really IS Jewish?
posted by PlusDistance at 11:29 AM on March 9, 2006
Wait...so Superman really IS Jewish?
posted by PlusDistance at 11:29 AM on March 9, 2006
The Victorians had science heroes, didn't they? Jules Verne, Edgar Rice Burroughs and H.G. Wells were all science fiction giants who were writing at the time. Tarzan, Nemo, and John Carter of Mars were fine examples of mythic figures. Let's also not forget Arthur Conan Doyle's finest creation who lived on Baker Street.
posted by ooga_booga at 11:50 AM on March 9, 2006
posted by ooga_booga at 11:50 AM on March 9, 2006
The "John 3:16" thing is all from the 1978 picture. There's an excellent making-of on the SE DVD where Richard Donner and Tom Mankiewicz (who, other credited screenwriters aside, basically wrote the picture) talk about the analogy.
The reason they've included it in the new trailer is because it's a direct sequel to the Reeve pictures, and archival footage of Marlon Brando is being used in his portrayal of Jor-El.
posted by John Shaft at 12:55 PM on March 9, 2006
The reason they've included it in the new trailer is because it's a direct sequel to the Reeve pictures, and archival footage of Marlon Brando is being used in his portrayal of Jor-El.
posted by John Shaft at 12:55 PM on March 9, 2006
I know Superman is easy to mock, but it's because he's supposed to be so super, as in ueber. He's above us, as slimepuppy points out with his Kill Bill quote.
As much as I liked that speech conceptually, I thought Tarantino got it backwards. It's Batman who only exists in costume. Bruce Wayne is an identity Batman uses as cover -- "Bruce" died in a back alley when he was nine. Peter Parker and Spider-Man are one in the same: they behave identically in costume or out (which shows he's probably one of the more mentally healthy superheros out there, guilt-issues aside). But Supes? Supes IS Clark Kent. He grew up on a Kansas farm, for Pete's sake. It's not like he came from Krypton fully-grown, and had to pretend to be like us to fit in. "Clark" isn't some kind of alias: it's his name, what his parents -- the small-town farmers who raised him -- call him. Sure, he's always had his powers, but that's exactly why they're not something that makes him better than anyone else, in his mind.
The best analogy I can think of is, fittingly, a farm related one. When a farmer has sheep, the best way to protect them while they're grazing is with a sheepdog. They put the dog in with the sheep when it's a puppy, where it blends in, thanks to its wolly-looking fur. Sometimes a sheep informally adopts the dog, to the point that the dog will nurse from a ewe. The dog grows up playing with the other baby sheep -- maybe it notices that it's faster or has bigger teeth or better senses than the rest of his adopted family -- and for all intents and purposes, it IS a sheep. Then comes the day when a wolf or a coyote comes looking for a easy meal, and winds up face to face with something that thinks it's a sheep, and will do anything to protect the flock, but has the strength and ferocity to back it up. Supes in a nutshell. He doesn't think of himself as a "dog."
/nerd rant over.
The whole point of Superman is that he's infallible... physically, mentally and ethically. So sure it's easy to mock, but he's easy to mock like Jesus is.
If that's the point, then ... you know ... what's the point? Is there anything less interesting as a character than a completely infallible uberman?
posted by Amanojaku at 2:04 PM on March 9, 2006
As much as I liked that speech conceptually, I thought Tarantino got it backwards. It's Batman who only exists in costume. Bruce Wayne is an identity Batman uses as cover -- "Bruce" died in a back alley when he was nine. Peter Parker and Spider-Man are one in the same: they behave identically in costume or out (which shows he's probably one of the more mentally healthy superheros out there, guilt-issues aside). But Supes? Supes IS Clark Kent. He grew up on a Kansas farm, for Pete's sake. It's not like he came from Krypton fully-grown, and had to pretend to be like us to fit in. "Clark" isn't some kind of alias: it's his name, what his parents -- the small-town farmers who raised him -- call him. Sure, he's always had his powers, but that's exactly why they're not something that makes him better than anyone else, in his mind.
The best analogy I can think of is, fittingly, a farm related one. When a farmer has sheep, the best way to protect them while they're grazing is with a sheepdog. They put the dog in with the sheep when it's a puppy, where it blends in, thanks to its wolly-looking fur. Sometimes a sheep informally adopts the dog, to the point that the dog will nurse from a ewe. The dog grows up playing with the other baby sheep -- maybe it notices that it's faster or has bigger teeth or better senses than the rest of his adopted family -- and for all intents and purposes, it IS a sheep. Then comes the day when a wolf or a coyote comes looking for a easy meal, and winds up face to face with something that thinks it's a sheep, and will do anything to protect the flock, but has the strength and ferocity to back it up. Supes in a nutshell. He doesn't think of himself as a "dog."
/nerd rant over.
The whole point of Superman is that he's infallible... physically, mentally and ethically. So sure it's easy to mock, but he's easy to mock like Jesus is.
If that's the point, then ... you know ... what's the point? Is there anything less interesting as a character than a completely infallible uberman?
posted by Amanojaku at 2:04 PM on March 9, 2006
Is there anything less interesting as a character than a completely infallible uberman?
I used to think that, until I started watching Smallville. He's a completely infallible uberman, and he is utterly alone. That's pretty interesting.
posted by obiwanwasabi at 4:34 PM on March 9, 2006
I used to think that, until I started watching Smallville. He's a completely infallible uberman, and he is utterly alone. That's pretty interesting.
posted by obiwanwasabi at 4:34 PM on March 9, 2006
I used to think that, until I started watching Smallville. He's a completely infallible uberman, and he is utterly alone. That's pretty interesting.
I totally agree, and have consistently enjoyed that show. He might be nigh-invulnerable, but he's far from infallible (Red Kryptonite, anyone?)
posted by Cyrano at 4:43 PM on March 9, 2006
I totally agree, and have consistently enjoyed that show. He might be nigh-invulnerable, but he's far from infallible (Red Kryptonite, anyone?)
posted by Cyrano at 4:43 PM on March 9, 2006
Amanojaku:
your sheepdog comparison is beautiful.
perfect.
i'm going to paste it all over the internets and sing your praises.
obiwanwasabi:
the "alone" aspect has been touched on in certain runs of the comic as well... it's a great angle that is completely overlooked in lesser re-tellings of the supes myth (lois & clark, anyone?).
also:
i wish i could remember the mini-series where lex builds his own super-person (and falls in love with her)... he's painted as a misguided hero: he hates superman because supes lets us humans off the hook. he's super so we don't have to be... and lex believes we're better than that. obviously superman does, too. just two very different takes... one aids us in the meantime, one resents the aid & the need for aid. the bed-wetting liberal vs. the tough-love conservative.
yay comic books!
posted by narwhal at 8:40 PM on March 9, 2006
your sheepdog comparison is beautiful.
perfect.
i'm going to paste it all over the internets and sing your praises.
obiwanwasabi:
the "alone" aspect has been touched on in certain runs of the comic as well... it's a great angle that is completely overlooked in lesser re-tellings of the supes myth (lois & clark, anyone?).
also:
i wish i could remember the mini-series where lex builds his own super-person (and falls in love with her)... he's painted as a misguided hero: he hates superman because supes lets us humans off the hook. he's super so we don't have to be... and lex believes we're better than that. obviously superman does, too. just two very different takes... one aids us in the meantime, one resents the aid & the need for aid. the bed-wetting liberal vs. the tough-love conservative.
yay comic books!
posted by narwhal at 8:40 PM on March 9, 2006
Narwhal:
You're talking about the Lex Luthor: Man of Steel miniseries that was really quite good when it didn't feature impossible-to-understand fights between Superman and Batman.
posted by beaucoupkevin at 10:42 PM on March 9, 2006
You're talking about the Lex Luthor: Man of Steel miniseries that was really quite good when it didn't feature impossible-to-understand fights between Superman and Batman.
posted by beaucoupkevin at 10:42 PM on March 9, 2006
beaucoupkevin:
you're right! and yeah... i didn't really understand the batman references... unless just to say: "look, bats doesn't trust him, either!"
posted by narwhal at 12:01 AM on March 10, 2006
you're right! and yeah... i didn't really understand the batman references... unless just to say: "look, bats doesn't trust him, either!"
posted by narwhal at 12:01 AM on March 10, 2006
« Older Ten thousand Nudie fans can't be wrong | For investors as a whole, returns decrease as... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Doorstop at 4:40 AM on March 9, 2006