Re: <<Ask/Answer Thread>>Explanations to common Superman "complaint/plot holes" in mo
I think Nano-technology would be a viable plot device to explain a large number of things in the Superman mythos. We as humans are only now beginning to examine the unbelievable capabilities of nano-technology; it stands to reason that the hugely advanced Kryptonians would already have progressed long past this and perfected the technology.
The suit -
We've long been told that Superman has a mysterious aura or force-field which protects his suit and sometimes those around him. Now I know we're talking about a guy who can shoot fire from his eyes, but I still found this explanation hard to buy - it always felt like they just couldn't come up with a more viable excuse.
Now imagine if the Kryptonians had perfected nano-technology and adopted it aeons ago as an everyday part of their life. Clothes and materials themselves could be made from nano-bytes - similar in texture and function to our normal clothes, but hugely resistant to damage and also able to self-repair.
The Fortress -
Now if the nanobytes are the phsyical manifestation of nano-technology, what is it that actually programs them to build and create? Here is where we could link in crystals - which are huged to store information and could be seen as the 'programs'. Imagine the crystal technology combined with the nano-technology - here is where you can have a single crystal (sent to Earth with Kal-El) with a tremendous amount of information and knowledge on it, including a structure/layout for a home for Kal-El. And thus the nano-bytes are able to access that information and construct the fortress of solitude from the raw materials in the immedate vicinity - in this instance, the Arctic.
I find this more believable than the fact that one single crystal could 'grow' the Fortress, as per normal Superman lore.
The Clark Kent disguise -
This has always been the tricky one. We as viewers know that one actor is playing both roles, so it's very hard to accept that no-one else in the film recognises Clark Kent. Is it so unbelievable though? I know a coupe of people who greatly resemble celebrities but I'd never for a second think it's them. Superman stands tall with his tight-fitting costime showcasing his huge build, deeper voice, his hair is styled differently, and his entire demeanour is different. Clark slouches, wears glasses, baggy clothes, speaks in a softer tone and comes off as clumsy. And there's also the fact that Superman simply doesn't wear a mask - everyone knows him, everyone recognises him - would anyone even suspect that he actually has a disguise? Clark could just be this guy who resembles him.