Ah, Superman. I get it now. It was his flying faster than the speed of light that reversed time. He just happened to fly around the earth’s equator east to west by a weird, but otherwise meaningless, coincidence. And when he reversed direction to fly west to east and the earth started spinning eastward again, that’s because … um, hmm. Because he wasn’t flying as fast anymore? That must be it. It sure looked fast, but I didn’t have stopwatch or anything. And all these years I just thought it was lazy writing!
That’s how it works in the comic. In the movie he reversed time by spinning the Earth backwards.
See, after time had gone back, he then had to spin Earth the other way so that time would go forwards.
I think the director must have misunderstood the concept.
But due to time dilation it would seem like days to them.
Meanwhile, Luke had years of training under Yoda.
Get in line. With bonus semi-obscure Grim Fandango reference.
But you know what’s better than a pin? A really long pin. Or a blowgun, in case the crew of space salvagers wanted to go to a space forest and shoot space monkeys for space meat.
I am thinking that the cat had kittens off camera, and they became Alien breakfast.
A big plot hole for me was that the critics loved Prometheus when it was obviously not that good.
The Kill Bill scene (hours in the guy’s car) bugged me at the time.
</scattershot>
In the movie, Donner decided the audience needed a visual representation of what is happening. How would you do this w/o resorting to dialogue?
IMHO, he did the best he could. Does it work in the real world? No, but then, we’re talking about a Superman story. Nothing about it “works” in the real world.
What’s wrong with resorting to dialogue? All it would need is one line earlier in the film, that indicates he can time travel, and then have this as a flashback while he’s flying.
It happens (Superfecundation - Wikipedia) so it is a lot more believable than Spock existing in the first place, or the Genesis Device ever working.
Yes, but you would still have to show him traveling back in time - this is a movie, after all.
So how would you show Superman traveling back in time? The “flying around the Earth” thing makes sense as a visual metaphor.
I agree with this but as someone else above also noted, they shoot themselves in the foot by having him start going back the other way to get the Earth spinning back in the right direction.
If you quote the post you’re responding to, you don’t need to edit when ninja’d by other posters.
It did seem to me at the time (and the kid diring a recent re-run) that they were suggesting that earth really was spun backwards to make time reverse and we both scoffed. Comic book physics, indeed.
And, yes, the shed skin mentioned by Max Torque was all the clue I needed to know the Alien critter was growing. There had been two (or more?) eating scenes already so there were food stores - and no-one worried about rationing food when they’d been woken early? Plenty of food stores on board.
I hated that whiny little shit. She deserves to die 100 times.
Not to mention the Five Point Palm Exploding Heart Technique…
I think it’s fair to say anyone complaining about the film’s lack of realism doesn’t even slightly get the film. Or Tarantino in general.
Aside from the “Pussy Wagon” point, you’d think that wouldn’t matter. I have no idea how police really work, but I’d think they would quite quickly find out which car was his and go and look at it. What if he was killed for his car? Why does he have no car keys? At the very least it’s a pretty big risk for her to be there.
To be fair, it did seem her options were somewhat limited.
As long as we’re on the subject, maybe someone can clear something up:
In Superman II the escape the Phantom Zone prisoners was caused by a terrorist nuclear bomb Superman flung into space to save Paris.
But ISTR that the original idea floating around was to have Superman tampering with time that caused their escape. If memory serves, this was expressed some time prior to the release of the second movie. Obviously, scripts can be rewritten. Just as obviously, rumors can be wrong, and sometimes even wrong information is released to counter spoilers. (But this is usually done to avoid spoiling movie climaxes and resolutions, not opening developments.) Finally, it’s also obvious (to me at least) that I could have gotten mixed up.
Now, I KNOW how Superman II went. I SAW it! Please don’t tell me how it went.
Also, I’m only interested in either verification, or a contrary post based on certainty, not a feeling that the whole idea is silly.
After all, it would have fit in with Jor-El’s warning not to mess with Father Time.
What I heard was that in the original draft, Supes pushed Luthor’s missiles into space, and one of them broke the Phantom zone. Thus the first movie would end with them being released.
I wonder why they built the phantom zone so that it would burst upon the explosion of one small bomb but is impenetrable to all the nuclear explosions happening in stars?
Stars use fusion while bombs use fission. Completely different.
That may have been what I heard, and I remembered it wrongly. It would also be a case of something happening in the first movie that started the conflict in the second movie. Thanks.
In League of Extraordinary Gentleman, the movie, there are several scenes showing Mina Harker walking around in sunlight. Mina is a vampire. A lot of people shouted, “Why doesn’t she burn up in the sunlight?? Plothole!”
Except that LXG, as dire as it is, is based on classic literature – in Mina’s case, *Dracula *-- and in the original *Dracula *novel, he could walk around in sunlight. In fact, Jonathan sees him crawling on the outside of his castle! As Dracula vampirized Mina, it’s unsurprising she would be exactly the same type of vampire as him.
In Terminator Salvation, why doesn’t Marcus notice anything is odd considering how much damage he takes and walks away unscathed? Answer: he’s a cyborg and has been programmed not to think about what’s happened to him by SkyNet.
That is Walter Koenig’s story. I heard it in person at one convention, and have heard it again elsewhere. Koenig made that story up as his explanation for Khan recognizing Chekov.
Well, you see, one version has him interacting with himself, which he knows he didn’t do, but the other just has him stopping something that he thinks happened, but wasn’t there to contradict. Or something.
It’s the Doctor Who explanation. You see, it’s very important that a timelord not mess with his own past, as that can cause – look! Monsters, run!
This is just my fanwank, but it’s my favorite fanwank, so…
In Revenge of the Sith, in the climactic light-sabre battle, Obi Wan eventually ends up on the river bank while Annakin is on a floaty thing on the river, and Obi Wan says “I have the higher ground, it’s over”, or something like that.
This (not unreasonably) strikes many observers as pretty ridiculous, given that (a) Annakin can just float down the river a bit and jump out somewhere else, or jump out onto the opposite bank, or what have you, and (b) how often one or the other of them has had the higher ground already during this epic fight without it mattering.
But I like to think that Obi Wan knew how silly it was to think that this REALLY made the fight over, but was hoping he could taunt Annakin, who was generally at least his equal as a fighter if not his superior, into doing something really truly dumb, like trying to force jump all the way over Obi Wan to a higher position on the hill. Which he did, leaving himself vulnerable, and whack whack with the light saber it really is over.
In other words, Obi Wan is effectively saying “well, I think I’m going to win now, because only a really truly amazingly GREAT Jedi could jump all the way over me and get above me on the hill… and I don’t see any Jedi that powerful around here, no sirree”.