16. Hey, Joey? This is viewed by people other than yourself. Why don't you try and get a unique perspective for once, and not what our society majority wants you to think? You're the, and I quote, "proud of being f$#%ed up in the head" one, by hiding behind the mask of majority. Superman is everyone's idol, for each person's INDIVIDUAL reasons. If some guy wants to think of him as gay, well, it suits his fantasy. Same goes for a girl. If she so chooses, then she will fantasize about having Superman to herself. Whether or not he is gay is irrelavent, and up to whoever is doing the fantasizing. But that's ALL we can do, whether he is gay or straight, because HE. IS. NOT. REAL.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted at 3:38PM on Jun 22nd 2006 by Athena

17. Back in 78, the same rumors flew around about Christopher Reeve.
Twenty eight years later we still haven't grown up as society.
Sad really.

Posted at 4:02PM on Jun 22nd 2006 by Damian

18. Hey Joey, Does DL mean anything to you? Nice try....but we all know!

Posted at 4:12PM on Jun 22nd 2006 by George

19. If Superman ate more p*ssy, he'd be SupperMan!

Posted at 9:56PM on Jun 22nd 2006 by Z O L T A R

20. If Superman ate more pussy, we'd have Supperman!

Posted at 10:01PM on Jun 22nd 2006 by Z O L T A R

21. I am sick and tired of movie makers feeling like someone has to be gay for it to be a success.Thank goodness the makers of Superman didn't cave to this nagging pressure.

Posted at 10:02PM on Jun 22nd 2006 by letstalk

22. The superman comic was produced in the 30's along with most other comic books. This was at the end of
world war II or during the depression. The comics were developed to give us something to not be depressed about at that time. To start a conversation on declaring a collection of ink and paper as being
gay is about the stupidest thing that I have ever heard. The gentlemen that developed Superman and
many other comics were Jewish. I think that they had a really good reason to try and find something to
end their depression especially if you consider what happened to them during the war. This is just a movie
put out for entertainment. I want to thank those of you creating this garbage for destroying our entertainment.

Bob M.

Posted at 10:59PM on Jun 22nd 2006 by Robert M Magneson

23. Superman is not gay!!!! Anyone that implies that is gay is scum. His charater has been straight form the beggeining and always will be straight. The fool from advocate magazine that wants to publish such vile gargbage should fired and publicly humiliated for trying to tarnish a image children and adults have enjoyed for almost 70 years. i'm not a homaphobe i just don't like anything related to homosexuality.

Posted at 11:14PM on Jun 22nd 2006 by dave from ny

24. Superman is not gay! Anyone implies that is scum. That jackass at advocatre magazine that trying to tarnish Superman's image should be fired and publicly humiliated. In the 70 year history of Superman he has never been gay or intended to be gay. His custom has always been a disguise so that he can work at the daily planet and be the first person on the scene whens there's trouble. Superman has been enjoyed by children and adults since the late 30's and his image shouldn't be ruined by some idiot from advocate magazine's gay fantasy.iam not a homophobe i just don't like anything the relates to homosexuality.

Posted at 11:26PM on Jun 22nd 2006 by dave from ny

25. in today's socierty its not fashionable unless we include anyone that is gay/lesbian. superman is not gay. in fact he's a cartoon character brought to life. of course we can question the emblem on his chest but that sign on his chest was there long before the gay pride movement(maybe they should pick another sign to use). ive never been a big fan of superman but get real people they have'nt and never will have a gay man portray him in the movies. that should give you a really big sign there he's straight. he wears a costume for a diguise to ensure his saftey and that of his loved ones.

Posted at 11:40PM on Jun 22nd 2006 by ericka

26. I have asked several of my friends and like me he is not manly enough for us, he looks quite gay, so the gays have their own super hero. I will not go out to see this movie, I will wait for a free showing

Jen

Posted at 11:53PM on Jun 22nd 2006 by Jconye

27. You know, people's sexuality means nothing. Really. Especially a fictional freakin character. I'm bisexual, but does that mean it's a big deal? Joey should know that what you don't like in other people is what you don't like in yourself.

Posted at 12:10AM on Jun 23rd 2006 by someone

28. dont hate on superman!!! gosh you ppl can be so childish at times.. its sad

Posted at 12:30AM on Jun 23rd 2006 by *LEtty

29. Being that this is the re-re-re-release of Superman, some creative PR might be needed in order to re-invent this wheel. Since the 'gay crisis' scam seems to have worked so well for the Republicans, why not use it to revive a tired old comic book character? Sure to be a financial windfall for those privleged few. At least this time it's all just about a harmless movie, and not about perpetuating more death and destruction in the middle east and elsewhere.

Posted at 3:39AM on Jun 23rd 2006 by Jeff Howard in Tucson

30. Hi anon ..

Yeah well just wanted to make a point that Singer is ruining the Myhts that were built for his own little tap on the shoulder and glory! by screwing up the whole stories we grew up reading, while he WAS NOT reading them!

Sorry but anyone with that much budget could have done as well as Singer. The only different thing is, that if they would have given the premise to Kevin Smith (Instead of the obligatory weird crap he was asked to write in the first place by the Infamous Hairdresser that Failed Upwards in Hollywood) or any other DC writters they would have brought the essence of the Superman Mythos. Instead they give it to Singer and his two dweebs who decided to do all these stupid changes.

Is the movie going to make a gazzillion dollars... YES IT WILL!.. But this should have been another character than Supe's...

And if me plublishing a comment like that will "ruin" the whole story for you then you must be one of the people who never saw Lords of the rings because the books probably ruined the movie for you!... Unless reading the books was just too much and you decided to wait to see the movie!!

I still say go see the movie (Don't download it if you ain't going to see it you Pirates!) Are the effects amazing, yes, are the actors any good, yes, is the story good? would be if this wasn't Supe's... The only thing I have to say negative about the movie is the fact that Singer screwed up by giving all these stupid twists that don't have room in the Superman Legend.

Like I said, any mediocre Director with 100 million would have done the same great effects, could have chosen these actors to play these characters, but the story would've probably been 1000 times closer to the real Myth instead of trying to create "this new world"... DO I like the "He'S been away for 5 years" - Yes I do, I think this was probably the only thing that Singer brought that made me say Cool!

Is it stupid that the best reporters in the world don't figure out that Supe's is back = Clark is back, so OH MY GOD! HE'S .. In the comics Superman goes away way back in the early 90's, but they had a plan... Clark had given his folks stories to send to the planet while Clark was way undercover.. Not a great plan, but still at least THEY MADE AN EFFORT TO COVER THE FACT THAT CLARK AND SUPE'S WEREN'T ANYWERE TO BE FOUND FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME! And this from people with regular comic book writer's salary... How much was Singer paid for the most stupid way to do this?

Weird contradicting myself but there it is.. go see the movie, but remember that this should not be THE Superman story, just like the X-men movies.

Hope next time Warner gives K. Smith the chance to do his own take without having him fight Super-Spiders, and freaking Polar bears.

Posted at 9:42AM on Jun 23rd 2006 by FreedomFinger