Somewhere In Time
LNiS reminds me so much of Reeve's Superman follow-up. The ambiguity of the "time travel" in both would normally irk me but in these instances it works.
shareHonestly, I don't see any similarity between this and Superman 2. And it was a magic kiss in Superman 2 rather than time travel, unless you're talking the Donner Cut.
shareSomewhere in Time was the Reeve's follow-up to Superman. Superman II was shot at the same time as Superman. SiT is very similar to LNiS.
shareYou've worded that much better.
The OP said "Reeve's Superman follow-up", which was obviously Superman 2.
A "follow-up" is the picture an actor does immediately after a particular role. As Superman I & II were filmed simultaneously and Somewhere in Time was released several months prior to the premiere of the sequel it is Reeve's follow-up to Superman.
shareYou didn't have to elaborate further. As I said before you already described it much better than the OP π.
shareYour lack cinema knowledge is what led to you misunderstanding MY OP.
shareIt's okay, I didn't have any lack of cinema knowledge here. It was just because the OP had put:-
Reeve's Superman follow-up
Rather than Reeve's follow up to starring in Superman.
You clarified what they meant and I was absolutely fine with that. Thanks again ππΌ. share
Wow! You're clueless. I'm the original poster. Is English your 2nd language? "Reeve's Superman follow-up" means the EXACT same thing as "Reeves follow up to starring in Superman". Reading comprehension must not be your strong suit. I didn't say "sequel" which is different from a follow-up. You assumed follow-up meant sequel. You were wrong.
shareLOL. A bizarre double down, given you'd already corrected YOURSELF on this thread!
"Reeve's Superman follow-up" means the EXACT same thing as "Reeves follow up to starring in Superman"
No, it absolutely does not.
You have used "Superman" as an attributive adjective in that sentence structure. And you have used "follow-up" as a noun here, with a quick grab of the definition, as applicable here, telling us:-
"a piece of work that builds on or exploits the success of earlier work."
So following the simple rules of grammar it's quite clear that you were wrong.
Is English your second language or do you understand this now? share