Dude, haven't you ever seen a time travel movie?
No. I'm a moron.
Yes, I've seen time travel movies. They all have their own internal logic/paradoxes mostly, from Primer to Terminator to Back to the Future to Timecop any myriad number of other movies. Like for instance, Superman, where SPINNING THE WORLD BACKWARDS
(lol) rewinds everything that happens on the planet BUT SUPERMAN, since he's the one doing the spinning.
When time is reversed, EVERYTHING is reversed.
What? No it's not. Because HE'S not reversed. He's doing the reversing. Later on in this argument you use "Back to the Future" and When time is reversed, MARTY isn't reversed. It's not like he becomes a zygote and zips back into his fathers dick, right? That's sorta the same argument I'm making about Jason, since Superman isn't going back in time with Lois at the fortress. It very MUCH matters where someone is physically at the time of the reversal in the SUPERMAN movies. At least it matters where SUPERMAN is.
And if you use Back to the Future's time travel "rules" as a guide, as soon as you create another timeline via time travel, a second time traveller is also created, hence Marty seeing himself at the end of BTTF I. He went back in time and came
But--why would I? I'm watching Superman. I'm using SUPERMAN'S rules of time travel as a guide. When he goes back in time, he doesn't create another alternate timeline and another alternate Superman. So at that point, it's pretty obvious I can't use "Back to the Future's" rules because they, at that point, have NOTHING TO DO with Superman.
HOWEVER, all of this is meaningless when considering that fact that if you reversed the rotation of the earth, time would NOT rewind, but continue forward,
Sure--in real life. But in the cinematic universe of the Superman movies, apparently spinning the earth's rotation backwards reverses time. That's what we have to work with, that's what you have to keep in mind, and there ARE rules to it, and your reasoning doesn't match up.
What your argument sounds like is a mix-n-match of cinematic tropes to explain to yourself by any means necessary that Superman never impregnated Lois so as to ensure that no one tries to tie "Superman Returns" into any sort of continuity since you don't like it.
Which is fine.
I like it, but I don't NEED to have Returns tied into continuity. But since people here are talking about making fan edits to do just that, I figured I might as well explain exactly HOW that can work without having to re-introduce one of the hokiest, crappiest, poorly implemented and poorly thought out "powers" in the entire Superman lexicon, almost worse than a Cellophane S and Eye-Beams that can move the bricks back into the great wall. So far, the only halfway explained reasoning as to why the Super-Kiss belongs there is from the guy who says "It's been there 25 years." and no one else can come up with a reason why the kiss works any better than spinning the world backwards again.
If you're talking about making the best Superman II without any sort of connection to returns, then simply cut out all the world spinning nonsense AND the super-kiss and have Clark trusting Lois on that Balcony to stay quiet about the secret and then have him fly straight to the North Pole. That's the simplest, and probably best choice if all you're concerned with is making Superman II itself the best Superman II it can be, everything else be damned. Re-introducing the Super-Kiss means you either have to a) excise the balcony scene or b) have Clark ruin it (like he ruined it by spinning the world back) the next morning with Crackhead Lois getting kissed on her skeletal face to forget.
Bizzle, are you serious about advising newcomers to skip Superman II in favor of Bryan Singer's ultimate fanfic?