Character development and personalities

[SuperDaniel]

I wouldn't say creation. Its more like Clark Kent was transformed and grew into Superman. And the Clark that was left is a disguise for him to relate to humans and aid his quest by uncovering the truth in things.

 

[The Sage]

Heh, watching Superman go to the movies and sports games is a bit weird. I'd rather have that saved for Clark. I just want to see that he isn't always putting up some invisible wall to protect his identity. I'd like to see him enjoy his life and creating genuine connection with people like any other human being, in spite of the great responsibility he feels.

The whole "He's only his true self when he's at home" reminds me too much of Bruce. I'm ok with Bats being miserable and having no good ending. Not Supes though.

When did I say he's miserable when he's Clark? He enjoys himself when he's Clark. As Clark, he's able to have those experiences and friendly connections. Being Clark isn't a burden to him.

I wouldn't say creation. Its more like Clark Kent was transformed and grew into Superman. And the Clark that was left is a disguise for him to relate to humans and aid his quest by uncovering the truth in things.

 

[Rodrigo90]

It depends on how its looked.

'The Superman Image' is a symbol to the world. His personality is not. But in most stories,he abandons that perfect personality,and we see him at his most vulnerable-human. Superman reverts to basic human emotions and characteristics...

Also if he wasnt Clark Kent,why would he bother living that life behind closed door's of his apartment in Metropolis?

It is truly difficult to pinpoint who he is. I guess the true formula is Superman < Clark Kent. Clark Kent < Superman.

But there was a Clark Kent before there was a Superman.

 

[Kurosawa]

Well, on Smallville Lois knows that Clark is a construct and even helps him do it. She knows she will be married to Superman. I like this version also.

Smallville is a completely different situation from any other version of Superman, and basically there is no trace of nebbish Clark Kent except as the eventual disguise. Lois has basically always known Clark as the heroic type. It's an interesting variant, but one of the reasons it fails to feel like Superman to me is because there is no real secret kept by Superman. Everyone and their brother knows Clark's secrets on that show.

But one thing that i like from post-crisis is that Lois was always shallow in pre-crisis, falling for Superman because of his powers since Clark was basically the same person as Superman inside disguised by a mild-mannered facade. On post-crisis, they corrected that by making her fall in love with Clark when she is able to see past her prejudices and finds out basically they were the same person inside. Nice, kind, humble. It makes more sense if Clark is less than a joke. I dont like the Chris Reeve Clark because theres no way Lois would ever fall in love with a bumblin fool. Reeve toned down by SIV and was able to attract someone like Lacy...

To me, Lois was the sort of person who basically too competent for the world and had Superman never came into her life, she would have burned out from boredom by the time she was 30. She is, in her own way, as superior to most people as Lex, it's just that with Lex it led to him looking down on humanity. For Lois, had Superman never came along, she would have become jaded to the world and to the never ending victories of cruelty. One of the best scenes in STM was when Superman tells her that he stands for "Truth, Justice and the American Way.", and she sneers at that idea...to which Superman replies, "I'm sure you don't REALLY mean that, Lois."..and she immediately shuts up. Superman gave Lois something to believe in again. Lois does not love Superman because of his powers. She loves Superman because of what he does with his powers. Lex is just as impressive as Superman and maybe even more so, considering he doesn't have superpowers, but Lois wouldn't give him the time of day because he's a self-centered, cruel egotist who cares only for himself. Her attraction to Clark is for two reasons: 1) because Clark comes off as an underdog and Lois roots for the little guy, and 2) because just enough of Superman comes out of Clark (sometimes by mistake) that Lois knows there's more to him than there seems. And the quality of his writing, which is so close to her level to challenge her, lets her know that there is something about him. But I do think Chris Reeve's Clark is a bit too slapstick myself.

I truly understand the feeling of being an outcast because i have this immigrant feeling myself. I live in the US and i`m from Brazil. And no matter who many friends i have here, i still will always feel different. I think this is important to Superman also. However, the point is that this loneliness is over by the moment he starts a relationship with Lois.

That very well may be true...it was never addressed with the Silver/Bronze Age version (except the occasional Imaginary Story), but yes, marrying Lois might have been what would have made him complete. It's certainly a nice thought. Kal-L was pushing for Kal-El to marry his Lois for just that reason. The Post-Crisis version already had plenty of support from people like his parents and Lana, so even before he married his Lois, he never felt that pain or loneliness. It might be part of why they never pulled the trigger on marrying the Silver/Bronze Age Superman off...because they felt he was a better character being more isolated and lonely.

 

[KRIM]

When did I say he's miserable when he's Clark? He enjoys himself when he's Clark. As Clark, he's able to have those experiences and friendly connections. Being Clark isn't a burden to him.

My position was more of that if his personality isn't wholly genuine, then neither are those emotions and connections he's made while under that guise. If both Daily Planet Clark and Superman have to uphold a certain image that is far removed from who he actually is, that's an isolated state of affairs he's dealing with.

I want him to be comfortable with just relaxing in his own skin, rather than being on guard. That means not having to worry about moving or saying something that may give his identity away.

 

[The Sage]

My position was more of that if his personality isn't wholly genuine, then neither are those emotions and connections he's made while under that guise. If both Daily Planet Clark and Superman have to uphold a certain image that is far removed from who he actually is, that's an isolated state of affairs he's dealing with.

I want him to be comfortable with just relaxing in his own skin, rather than being on guard. That means not having to worry about moving or saying something that may give his identity away.

Which is why I go with the view that as Superman he's being himself, not holding up an image or putting on a display.

 

[hopefuldreamer]

Ah, but see that's the problem with the films. They portray him pretty much as perfect as well. He's not. Superman loses his temper, he get's angry. There have been times he's grabbing Luther by the collar, eyes burning red about to burn a hole in his head. He doesn't (unless it's an alternate reality) but the anger is still there.

We need to see more of that...he may be an alien...but he has emotions like a human.

Yeah I think it'd be great to show that 'break' in his facade around Luthor. Really shows he's got to him.

It's when he's under public scrutiny that he has to be 'perfect' to keep the trust.

After examining it a bit more, I do find it disconcerting Clark's only true relationship (early in his career) is with his parents. There's a bit of interpersonal disconnect in both his public identities, and now I'm not so sure I even like that immense isolation.

Heh, watching Superman go to the movies and sports games is a bit weird. I'd rather have that saved for Clark. I just want to see that he isn't always putting up some invisible wall to protect his identity. I'd like to see him enjoy his life and creating genuine connection with people like any other human being, in spite of the great responsibility he feels.

The whole "He's only his true self when he's at home" reminds me too much of Bruce. I'm ok with Bats being miserable and having no good ending. Not Supes though.

But unlike Bruce, his human persona has friends. It doesn't matter that he can't be honest with them. It doesn't mean that they don't have real relationships. Lois, Perry, Jimmy, they all mean a lot to him. He's sees them on a daily basis. They laugh, they socialise, they work together as a team. They are very close, despite the big secret.

That's why I think there is much more 'being himself' when he's Clark, than when he's Superman. They certainly know Clark better than they do Superman.

Nobody knows Superman's favourite colour, food, music. Nobody knows where Superman likes to hang, or who he likes to hang with. Nobody knows what school Superman went to, whether he plays sports, what kind of sense of humour he has etc etc.

But the people that know Clark, can know all these things. Which to me, says that he can be more himself, and more of a real person as Clark, making that identity the primary one.

But like I said, neither is a true person. They are both a mask.

My position was more of that if his personality isn't wholly genuine, then neither are those emotions and connections he's made while under that guise. If both Daily Planet Clark and Superman have to uphold a certain image that is far removed from who he actually is, that's an isolated state of affairs he's dealing with.

I want him to be comfortable with just relaxing in his own skin, rather than being on guard. That means not having to worry about moving or saying something that may give his identity away.

Well i'm sure he wants that too t:

 

[SuperDaniel]

Nobody has these questions because they know Superman isn't human at all. To the average joe, Superman is Superman 24/7.

BTW, Superman is definitely NOT a mask. He doesn't have to pretend to be right or confident. He always is or at least will find a way to do the right thing.

The thing is, these normal questions do not relate to Superman. Superman isn't supposed to be relatable. Thats not the point. The point is to understand and care for his choices and find a way to make the audience do that.

For example, if there's a disaster and people are dieing, and they show that, they will understand why Superman uses his powers to help.

Also, if for example, he can hear everything, what is going to stick to his head is the cries for help of people in need. If they show that, you understand why he is a good guy, etc etc.

One recent story that did that was Action Comics #775. Superman showed in that story that he is simply the best. The king of Superheroes.

The challenge of this new movie isnt making Superman relatable. Clark serves this function already. The point is showing why Superman is the way he is and why he chose a life of service to others and make people think that is totally cool and awesome.

 

[MOS]

In my opinion, neither Clark Kent nor Superman is a disguise. Sure, he has friends and family that he tries to protect, but trying to disguise himself as one or the other is just drawing attention to himself. Let&#8217;s start with Clark first. He may have been born on Krypton or, as in the John Byrne revamp, of this part which I may be the only fan of, on Earth due to a birthing matrix, but no matter what, seriously, how many of us can remember what happened a few days after we were born? So Kal-EL is out of the question as being the &#8220;real&#8221; personality. It&#8217;s just a name that Superman, not Clark, uses. That leaves us with Clark and Superman. Even if he was born on Krypton, he was raised on Earth, as a human, Clark Kent. The whole argument about him being &#8220;special&#8221; or whatever because of his powers is totally bogus. Why? Would it really make sense if a baby, a few months old or not, could really be born with incredible powers and, not knowing how to control them, somehow doesn&#8217;t cause millions of dollars of property damage? That means that the best and most realistic way of having him discover his powers is to have them develop slowly, like star emerging during his teenage years and finish by his late teens. So while the teenage Clark Kent would be smarter, faster and stronger than most of the other kids his age, he wouldn&#8217;t be &#8220;superhuman&#8221; and therefore, wouldn&#8217;t be treated differently by his friends, like Pete or Lana, or his parents. By the time he has all of his powers, he&#8217;ll have practiced how to hide and control them. Now for the personality: His parents would have taught him to help others at all times, and that he has a duty to his country and the world, in other words, to be a complete boy scout, no matter what, if he was their biological son or not, or whether he had powers or not. We&#8217;ll get back to the boy scout thing in a while. Anyways, yes, Clark Kent is who he is.
Now, on to Superman. Clark is who he is, Superman is what he can do. Even the Silver Age version admits that. The combination of his powers and how he chooses to use them that&#8217;s what makes him Superman. Superman isn&#8217;t Hancock, he isn&#8217;t going to beat up a mugger, then literally throw him into jail and go and grab a drink. Superman would step in the way, and let his expression speak for itself. Mugger breaks his club/stick/whatever, and, panicked starts to run off. Superman flies overhead, grabs him by the collar, brings him to the police station, and returns to the victim, checking on them to see if they&#8217;re okay, and if they have everything with them, all in a calm, confident, yet gentle and caring manner. That, not fancy colors or the incredibly awesome ability to fly, is what makes him Superman. Now, I&#8217;m getting to the Clark-or-Superman thing. Honestly, I don&#8217;t see the need for a disguise. I mean, he&#8217;s Superman. Why would the average person wonder if he has a normal life? He&#8217;s Kal-El from Krypton, that&#8217;s all. There&#8217;s no reason to suspect him of being Clark Kent. I mean, is anyone really going to notice that Clark and Superman have the same personality? I mean, the boy scout thing I mentioned earlier actually helps this way. With Clark, being a complete boy scout will get him considered a dork and ignored. With Superman, however, it&#8217;s a belief, an ideal. Parents are going to use him as a role model for their kids, the same way they used guys like Christopher Reeve in the real world. Another thing is that Clark Kent already has a whole life built. Why would he tear it down so he can be Superman for real, and have Clark as a disguise? That&#8217;s Batman&#8217;s job. Bruce Wayne is his name and a disguise. Batman is who he is. But, unlike Batman, Superman has friends, like Pete, and Lana, who I mentioned earlier. By making Clark a disguise, he&#8217;s severing his ties to the real world. A huge point that I mentioned at the beginning is that trying to disguise himself is just calling attention to himself. I mean, look at how well that worked with the Reeve or the Silver Age versions. My opinion is that he shouldn&#8217;t really disguise himself. I mean, Clark and Superman have the same ideals, but so do a lot of people in Metropolis. I mean, Clark uses the power off the press to combat evil and corruption, and to fight for truth and justice, the kind of time when Superman can&#8217;t be the hero. The only major things he would be doing is to but on a pair of glasses and hide his powers as Clark, while as Superman, he should remember to &#8220;forget&#8221; personal details, like who adopted him and where he grew up. Now, I&#8217;m not saying he should pull an Iron Man and go &#8220;I&#8217;m Clark Kent. I&#8217;m also Superman&#8221;. But the disguise is really unnecessary. Now, if it&#8217;s someone like Lois Lane who has constant contact with Clark and Superman, it goes something like this: Metallo attacks Metropolis. Lois and Clark hurry to the scene Lois is about to turn to see if Clark is right behind her, and to discover that he&#8217;s not there, but just then, Superman comes flying out, punching Metallo until he&#8217;s a pile of scrap. Lois stands there, transfixed, until he leaves, and then turns to see Clark standing right next to her, taking notes. How does this work? When he&#8217;s out of site of Lois, who&#8217;s hurrying to get to the scene, Clark sneaks off, changes to Superman, and comes flying out. In the few seconds between when Lois sees Superman flying off and when she turns to see Clark, using superspeed, he changes back to Clark and is right next to her. Boom, no reason to suspect him and no lame excuse like &#8220;I bumped into an old lady on the way&#8221;. This is why Clark Kent and Superman are the same, not two different parts of his personality. Well, that&#8217;s just my opinion. Tell me what you think.

 

[Man of Steel]

In my opinion, neither Clark Kent nor Superman is a disguise. Sure, he has friends and family that he tries to protect, but trying to disguise himself as one or the other is just drawing attention to himself. Let’s start with Clark first. He may have been born on Krypton or, as in the John Byrne revamp, of this part which I may be the only fan of, on Earth due to a birthing matrix, but no matter what, seriously, how many of us can remember what happened a few days after we were born? So Kal-EL is out of the question as being the “real” personality. It’s just a name that Superman, not Clark, uses. That leaves us with Clark and Superman. Even if he was born on Krypton, he was raised on Earth, as a human, Clark Kent. The whole argument about him being “special” or whatever because of his powers is totally bogus. Why? Would it really make sense if a baby, a few months old or not, could really be born with incredible powers and, not knowing how to control them, somehow doesn’t cause millions of dollars of property damage? That means that the best and most realistic way of having him discover his powers is to have them develop slowly, like star emerging during his teenage years and finish by his late teens. So while the teenage Clark Kent would be smarter, faster and stronger than most of the other kids his age, he wouldn’t be “superhuman” and therefore, wouldn’t be treated differently by his friends, like Pete or Lana, or his parents. By the time he has all of his powers, he’ll have practiced how to hide and control them. Now for the personality: His parents would have taught him to help others at all times, and that he has a duty to his country and the world, in other words, to be a complete boy scout, no matter what, if he was their biological son or not, or whether he had powers or not. We’ll get back to the boy scout thing in a while. Anyways, yes, Clark Kent is who he is.
Now, on to Superman. Clark is who he is, Superman is what he can do. Even the Silver Age version admits that. The combination of his powers and how he chooses to use them that’s what makes him Superman. Superman isn’t Hancock, he isn’t going to beat up a mugger, then literally throw him into jail and go and grab a drink. Superman would step in the way, and let his expression speak for itself. Mugger breaks his club/stick/whatever, and, panicked starts to run off. Superman flies overhead, grabs him by the collar, brings him to the police station, and returns to the victim, checking on them to see if they’re okay, and if they have everything with them, all in a calm, confident, yet gentle and caring manner. That, not fancy colors or the incredibly awesome ability to fly, is what makes him Superman. Now, I’m getting to the Clark-or-Superman thing. Honestly, I don’t see the need for a disguise. I mean, he’s Superman. Why would the average person wonder if he has a normal life? He’s Kal-El from Krypton, that’s all. There’s no reason to suspect him of being Clark Kent. I mean, is anyone really going to notice that Clark and Superman have the same personality? I mean, the boy scout thing I mentioned earlier actually helps this way. With Clark, being a complete boy scout will get him considered a dork and ignored. With Superman, however, it’s a belief, an ideal. Parents are going to use him as a role model for their kids, the same way they used guys like Christopher Reeve in the real world. Another thing is that Clark Kent already has a whole life built. Why would he tear it down so he can be Superman for real, and have Clark as a disguise? That’s Batman’s job. Bruce Wayne is his name and a disguise. Batman is who he is. But, unlike Batman, Superman has friends, like Pete, and Lana, who I mentioned earlier. By making Clark a disguise, he’s severing his ties to the real world. A huge point that I mentioned at the beginning is that trying to disguise himself is just calling attention to himself. I mean, look at how well that worked with the Reeve or the Silver Age versions. My opinion is that he shouldn’t really disguise himself. I mean, Clark and Superman have the same ideals, but so do a lot of people in Metropolis. I mean, Clark uses the power off the press to combat evil and corruption, and to fight for truth and justice, the kind of time when Superman can’t be the hero. The only major things he would be doing is to but on a pair of glasses and hide his powers as Clark, while as Superman, he should remember to “forget” personal details, like who adopted him and where he grew up. Now, I’m not saying he should pull an Iron Man and go “I’m Clark Kent. I’m also Superman”. But the disguise is really unnecessary. Now, if it’s someone like Lois Lane who has constant contact with Clark and Superman, it goes something like this: Metallo attacks Metropolis. Lois and Clark hurry to the scene Lois is about to turn to see if Clark is right behind her, and to discover that he’s not there, but just then, Superman comes flying out, punching Metallo until he’s a pile of scrap. Lois stands there, transfixed, until he leaves, and then turns to see Clark standing right next to her, taking notes. How does this work? When he’s out of site of Lois, who’s hurrying to get to the scene, Clark sneaks off, changes to Superman, and comes flying out. In the few seconds between when Lois sees Superman flying off and when she turns to see Clark, using superspeed, he changes back to Clark and is right next to her. Boom, no reason to suspect him and no lame excuse like “I bumped into an old lady on the way”. This is why Clark Kent and Superman are the same, not two different parts of his personality. Well, that’s just my opinion. Tell me what you think.

Well, it took me a while to read this, and in that time, SHH logged y out, but I get what you're trying to say. I agree that Clark and Superman are the smae, not different. Just next time, use paragraphs, please. It's easier to read.

 

[SuperDaniel]

Its like this...

This Clark Kent of Smallville, the honest, kind son of Jonathan and Martha, raised in Smallville with human emotions and ideals grew up and transformed himself. He became Superman. By the moment he became aware of his responsibilities and how he could make a difference in the world, this Clark Kent chose to abandon his ordinary life on Smallville and decided, for the rest of his life, to serve others and help those in need. And he realizes over the course of events that this quest for truth and justice needs to be done in two ways:

1)Being a man of action: The old farm Clark Kent, i'd say, we refer now as Superman. Superman is not a mask or a creation. It is who he really is and who he grew up to be. He is free to use his powers to save people. He uses a colorful costume on purpose. To be this symbol, this ideal.

2) Being a man of words: In order to protect his family, he devised a secret identity, Metropolis Clark Kent, with glasses and mild-mannered gesture to IMITATE being human and blend with people. And, as he finds out that some things he cannot change or improve as Superman, he decides to be a reporter to uncover the truth in things.

Its not that hard to understand.

 

[SuperDaniel]

Well...i stumbled upon this article on EW and I thought it was interesting:
http://popwatch.ew.com/2011/03/18/how-superman-could-change/

What do you guys think?

I personally don't think this idea is bad at all. But maybe it is a bit too much and makes him too much like Batman.

Superman in this movie, though, needs a wake up call. A defining moment that makes him go "This is what i wanna do with my powers. This is why I help people". A good upbringing isnt enough, imo.

Superman needs something like this:

"I can't help thinking I could`ve done more"

 

[KRIM]

I admire the novel approach to the origin. Though I too, think it might parallel Bruce's story a bit too much. I would maybe instead have Kal-El be around 3-4. Old enough to vaguely comprehend the tragedy and loss of loved ones, but young enough to not have too much of a bond with his parents and planet.

It would also be intriguing if the sight of the disaster became a repressed memory. The longing to fill an emotional void, and the seemingly innate aversion to pain and suffering would be a result of that forgotten catastrophe clawing its way out onto his consciousness. Combined with the Kent upbringing, it really solidifies his moral foundations. Also goes a long way in displaying why Clark is so adamant in maintaining a balanced sense of justice.

I'm surprised no one has done it sooner. Now I think I've disappointed myself since this won't be in the film.

 

[RoughNTumble]

yeah I like the 4 year old kal-el idea, but it is a little depressing knowing it has almost no chance of making it in lol

it's exciting to talk and speculate about what they could do, but not so much about what we think should happen

 

[hopefuldreamer]

Nobody has these questions because they know Superman isn't human at all. To the average joe, Superman is Superman 24/7.

BTW, Superman is definitely NOT a mask. He doesn't have to pretend to be right or confident. He always is or at least will find a way to do the right thing.

The thing is, these normal questions do not relate to Superman. Superman isn't supposed to be relatable. Thats not the point. The point is to understand and care for his choices and find a way to make the audience do that.

For example, if there's a disaster and people are dieing, and they show that, they will understand why Superman uses his powers to help.

Also, if for example, he can hear everything, what is going to stick to his head is the cries for help of people in need. If they show that, you understand why he is a good guy, etc etc.

One recent story that did that was Action Comics #775. Superman showed in that story that he is simply the best. The king of Superheroes.

The challenge of this new movie isnt making Superman relatable. Clark serves this function already. The point is showing why Superman is the way he is and why he chose a life of service to others and make people think that is totally cool and awesome.

I think your missing what I was trying to say.

I KNOW no one is asking those questions of Superman... that was exactly my point. How can Superman be his primary identity when that identity does not have identifiable characteristics of a human personality?

He might FEEL more at home when he doesn't have to hide his powers, and when he's helping people... but that doesn't make Superman the 'real person'.

Clark is still the real person, the person with an actual life. With friends, with hobbies, with human memories and experiences. And just because he has to hide his powers, doesn't mean that that persona is a disguise.

In both personas, he has to change himself slightly, but both are equally who he is.

P.S. I don't think he 'pretends' to be confident, but I do think he makes an effort to appear more confident and unshakeable in the public eye than perhaps he naturally is at home. He has fears, insecurities and doubts like the rest of us, but as Superman he has to appear to always be confident and never have doubts.

Its like this...

This Clark Kent of Smallville, the honest, kind son of Jonathan and Martha, raised in Smallville with human emotions and ideals grew up and transformed himself. He became Superman. By the moment he became aware of his responsibilities and how he could make a difference in the world, this Clark Kent chose to abandon his ordinary life on Smallville and decided, for the rest of his life, to serve others and help those in need. And he realizes over the course of events that this quest for truth and justice needs to be done in two ways:

1)Being a man of action: The old farm Clark Kent, i'd say, we refer now as Superman. Superman is not a mask or a creation. It is who he really is and who he grew up to be. He is free to use his powers to save people. He uses a colorful costume on purpose. To be this symbol, this ideal.

2) Being a man of words: In order to protect his family, he devised a secret identity, Metropolis Clark Kent, with glasses and mild-mannered gesture to IMITATE being human and blend with people. And, as he finds out that some things he cannot change or improve as Superman, he decides to be a reporter to uncover the truth in things.

Its not that hard to understand.

I really don't see it this way. I don't think he decided to dedicate his life to serving the planet, and gave up a human life to do it.

I think he decided that he couldn't sit back and watch people get hurt, and so he needed a way of becoming two people in order to use his abilities freely while still maintaining that normal life.

At the end of the day, he became a succesfull journalist because he's good at it, and he enjoys it. He also fell in love, made friends, and made a name for himself in the city as Clark Kent, not just as Superman.

That persona is just as important to him, because he wants to have both a normal life and be able to help people.

It's one of the fundamental differences between Clark Kent and Bruce Wayne.

None of Bruce's personas lead him to a normal life. He has Batman, which is him being himself in the sense of letting loose his anger. You have Bruce when he's with Alfred or anyone else who knows the truth... but those times are rare and fleeting and utterly hidden away from the public eye. And then you have Public Bruce, who is very far removed from the truth.

No where in there, is a man who is trying to live a normal life at the same time as being the hero. He has dedicated himself to his creation.

Clark works really hard to be able to have BOTH. Because he is not as inwardly damaged as Bruce. He is not as traumatised. He knows that it is just as important to have a life himself, as it is to focus on saving others, because if he looses that life, that connection with humanity, then it could cause him to start seeing things differently. He might start succumbing to the temptations of being such a powerful symbol.

Well...i stumbled upon this article on EW and I thought it was interesting:
http://popwatch.ew.com/2011/03/18/how-superman-could-change/

I think the article is very well written, and there are some things in it that I completely agree with.

But I don't think you have to give Superman a childhood trauma to make him more relatable. And I think if you do, then your missing what makes Superman different from all the other heroes out there.

'So I submit that Superman needs some traumatic shellshock in his soul in order to speak meaningfully to today&#8217;s 9/11 haunted, Japan-quake-rocked audiences. He needs a Bruce Wayne/Joe Chill moment. He needs a Peter Parker/Uncle Ben moment. He needs a Tony Stark/Enlightenment-in-Afghanistan moment. Superman needs his direct, unforgettable brush with tragedy and catastrophe. The boy who fell to Earth needs a hard, heartbreaking encounter with Fallenness.'

I agree with this statement to a certain extent, but I really don't see how that moment of fallenness has to be in his childhood. I think a 'Birthright' moment of clarity, would work just the same as Tony Stark's moment of Enlightenment, without having to delve into the 'let's make him more like Batman'.

One of the biggest reasons that Superman is my favourite hero is that he's NOT angsty. He's not deeply scarred or full of anger.

I mean, sure, he has a hell of a lot of stuff to deal with. He knows he is an alien on earth. He knows all his kind are dead. He knows that he is lying to everyone, which he hates doing, and he has to deal with that guilt. He also has to deal with all the times that he couldn't save someone, when he got there a little too late, or when he has to decide between one call for help and another. He has the conflict in his mind of knowing that there are problems in the world that he could solve by force, and make everything better... but he has to stand back and let the world sort some of it's own problems out, or he'd be in danger of becoming a tyrant.

How is all of that not interesting enough, not relevant enough, without throwing him seeing his parent's death into the mix?

And you know what makes him so amazing to me? That he can deal with all of that, and still wake up feeling positive in the morning. Still keep his optimistic view of the world, despite everything that he must see. Never give in to the temptations... to try an easier way, or to just give up all together. That he can socialise and come across to everyone at the Daily Planet as a happy, salt of the earth kind of guy.

I think that's incredible. And the more of that they tap into, the better the film will be.

 

[8wid]

I think Clark is the disguise, Superman is just a nickname, and Kal-El is the real person.

 

[SuperDaniel]

I really don't see it this way. I don't think he decided to dedicate his life to serving the planet, and gave up a human life to do it.

I think he decided that he couldn't sit back and watch people get hurt, and so he needed a way of becoming two people in order to use his abilities freely while still maintaining that normal life.

At the end of the day, he became a succesfull journalist because he's good at it, and he enjoys it. He also fell in love, made friends, and made a name for himself in the city as Clark Kent, not just as Superman.

That persona is just as important to him, because he wants to have both a normal life and be able to help people.

It's one of the fundamental differences between Clark Kent and Bruce Wayne.

None of Bruce's personas lead him to a normal life. He has Batman, which is him being himself in the sense of letting loose his anger. You have Bruce when he's with Alfred or anyone else who knows the truth... but those times are rare and fleeting and utterly hidden away from the public eye. And then you have Public Bruce, who is very far removed from the truth.

No where in there, is a man who is trying to live a normal life at the same time as being the hero. He has dedicated himself to his creation.

Clark works really hard to be able to have BOTH. Because he is not as inwardly damaged as Bruce. He is not as traumatised. He knows that it is just as important to have a life himself, as it is to focus on saving others, because if he looses that life, that connection with humanity, then it could cause him to start seeing things differently. He might start succumbing to the temptations of being such a powerful symbol.

I agree with all this. However, when he is Clark he puts a persona, a mild-mannered persona, based on his father, Jonathan Kent. He wears glasses that he doesn't need, he slouches. It is an act of some sort because he pretends to be something he is not. He pretends to not have powers and to be normal. BUT HE ISN'T NORMAL. HE IS SUPERMAN. This is one of the fundamental things of Superman.

Clark Kent is his secret identity and not Superman. He uses Clark Kent to connect with people but he uses him also to write about the truth.

That doesn't mean it is a total act but it is more of an act than when he is Superman.

Superman is really who he is. And if you dont see this way, your missing the point of Superman altogether.

 

[Kurosawa]

Well...i stumbled upon this article on EW and I thought it was interesting:
http://popwatch.ew.com/2011/03/18/how-superman-could-change/

What do you guys think?

I personally don't think this idea is bad at all. But maybe it is a bit too much and makes him too much like Batman.

Superman in this movie, though, needs a wake up call. A defining moment that makes him go "This is what i wanna do with my powers. This is why I help people". A good upbringing isnt enough, imo.

Superman needs something like this:

"I can't help thinking I could`ve done more"

This is why Superman worked better when Ma and Pa Kent died when he graduated from HS. Their deaths are not his motivation, but it brings much needed pain and pathos to the mythos. They need to die.

 

[Rodrigo90]

They don't need to die,though I see what you mean.

But the thing I like most about the Kent's is that they are strong characters,and are particularly useful for making Clark vulnerable and showing his emotions to them.

Cause the only decent scene with Routh in SR was when he was with Eva Marie Saint,that was the ONLY time I didnt think Superman was a lifeless robot.

 

[Kurosawa]

I love the Kents but keeping them alive did way more harm than good. It's why Superman seems so juvenile and his life seems too perfect to be believed. If Krypton isn't important to him and he never loses his adoptive parents either, then he's never felt loss, and that on top of everything else about him just makes Superman's life too perfect.

 

[Rodrigo90]

That's true.

But what I think would be best is to have Clark become Superman,go through the hardships and listen to the guidance of the Kent's,and then have them taking away from him.

 

[hopefuldreamer]

I agree with all this. However, when he is Clark he puts a persona, a mild-mannered persona, based on his father, Jonathan Kent. He wears glasses that he doesn't need, he slouches. It is an act of some sort because he pretends to be something he is not. He pretends to not have powers and to be normal. BUT HE ISN'T NORMAL. HE IS SUPERMAN. This is one of the fundamental things of Superman.

Clark Kent is his secret identity and not Superman. He uses Clark Kent to connect with people but he uses him also to write about the truth.

That doesn't mean it is a total act but it is more of an act than when he is Superman.

Superman is really who he is. And if you dont see this way, your missing the point of Superman altogether.

I feel that I care about and understand Superman as a character very deeply, and after the posts that i've been making that you've mostly agreed with, I find the idea that i've 'missed the point of superman altogether' because I don't agree with you, both insulting and laughable.

For whatever reason, we see things differently. It can be a matter of preference, what incarnation we grew up with etc. Neither of us is wrong, it's just an irritating truth that there are always going to be those differences between the fans.

IMO it all depends on the interpretation as to how much of disguise Clark Kent is.

I mean, what your saying fits the Donnerverse to a T. Clark Kent is absolutely a disguise.

But when you look at Lois and Clark, it's clearly not. Clark Kent is the person, Superman is what he can do.

Which is why I think the movie would do better to include elements of BOTH personas being a disguise. It serves to respect BOTH sides of this arguement.

Show Clark getting pissed off with something in his Metropolis life, and flying off into the clouds just to have a bit of time being himself, and then maybe hearing a cry for help and saving someone. Show how much that makes him feel better about how complicated his life is.

But equally, show Superman having to put on his public face... maybe for a speech, or against Luthor or something, and then have that face crack when no one's looking. I.e. have him confront Luthor in a public place, and as he turns a corner, have him punch a wall in frustration or something.

I love the Kents but keeping them alive did way more harm than good. It's why Superman seems so juvenile and his life seems too perfect to be believed. If Krypton isn't important to him and he never loses his adoptive parents either, then he's never felt loss, and that on top of everything else about him just makes Superman's life too perfect.

How is his life perfect just because he hasn't lost his parents? And the issues for an adopted child are not insignificant just because they don't remember where they came from... especially when their real parent's become such a big question to him when he starts developing Super Powers.

Superman's life is far from perfect. He has to lie all the time, he has people constantly wanting to kill him, he has to always maintain and image of perfection for fear of persecution, he flys into crime scenes/natural disasters... can you imagine the kind of horrors he has seen? The amount of dead bodies he must have uncovered in the rubble of all the earthquake, tornadoes, tsunami's etc that he's helped clean up? Women, children, babies. And who knows how many times he's literally gotten there a second too late... seen someone die screaming his name...

Can you not imagine what it would be like to have that haunt you every night? To always be the first on scene. And unlike every day heroes like fireman, policeman, paramedics etc, he has the added pain of people's judgement.

The knowledge that there are plenty of people at scenes like that thinking 'why couldn't you have saved MY loved one?' Always expecting more from him, expecting a miracle, and not quite understanding that the help he provides is not infinite.

No... his life is NOT too perfect...

 

[El Payaso]

And if you dont see this way, your missing the point of Superman altogether.

Yes! That and he's not a real fan.

 

[sf2]

I love the Kents but keeping them alive did way more harm than good. It's why Superman seems so juvenile and his life seems too perfect to be believed. If Krypton isn't important to him and he never loses his adoptive parents either, then he's never felt loss, and that on top of everything else about him just makes Superman's life too perfect.

why must superhero have an unfortunate life???

we have the last 4 movies where superman's parents were dead, were they the better stories?

definitely the answer is no. so the problem isn't the live or dead of his parents. it's the writer's ability to come up with a good story.

and for the past 30+s years, they still fail to deliver a good established superman story.

 

[Keyser Soze]

I thought I'd share some of the scattered thoughts on the characters I had in the old thread:

SUPERMAN
For me, the magic ingredient in Clark Kent that makes Superman the greatest superhero of all time isn't the "Super" part. It's not his Kryptonian heritage or the amazing powers it gives him. It's the "man" part. His humble, honest, loving upbringing with the Kents instilled in him unshakeable values of decency and kindness, and a desire to use his powers selflessly, to help others. Despite all his powers, despite being an alien, Superman to me is the quintessential symbol of the best in humanity.

He's also an American icon. That's not to say he's not a global hero, but even as a non-American myself, I recognise Superman as being as American as apple pie. I know both sides of the political fence have tried to claim him as their own, but Superman cannot be a Conservative or Liberal icon. He has to be something bigger than that. This is the story of an alien from another world who was raised in the American heartlands and embraced in the big city, created by the children of immigrants. He first appeared at a time of recession and crippling financial woe, and helped inspire the country and remind them of all the great values their country could stand for.

In terms of his personality, I'm of the opinion that Clark Kent is the real person, and Superman is the disguise. Clark Kent is a polite, honest, Southern farm-boy whose bright intellect has landed him a job in the rude, crime-ridden big city. He's a fish out of water, and is a bit awkward and clumsy, but he's not putting on the act of a frail, wimpy nerd like in the Donner films. He's a big man, and looks it - with the right posture, and enough clothing coverage, muscle can very easily be mistaken for fat. And he's not a pushover. He's principled, and he'll stand up for what's right. Some visual obscurement aside, he's the Clark that was raised on Smallville by Ma and Pa Kent, and his optimism and unshakeable morality should lift and inspire the Daily Planet in a microcosm of how Superman lifts and inspires Metropolis. As a journalist and as a man, Clark Kent is a kind of hero in his own right, even without his alter ego.

Not that the alter ego isn't important. Clark Kent is an ordinary man with doubts and anxieties, but as Superman he casts them aside, as Superman must be unswayable, unimpeachable in his goodness. He is Clark's love letter to humanity, to everything he believes our spirit is capable of. Our world gave him a home, gave him a family, gave him a life, when he had nothing. Superman is the gift he wants to give back, to all of us. He is a creation to inspire, to make Metropolis and the world it represents look up and see something bigger than its own petty personal issues. He is a rallying figure, someone who has all these gifts and wants to share them, someone without flaws or hidden agendas, someone who will never give up, who will never let us down. Batman wants to protect the innocent by stamping down on crime and bringing criminals to justice, but Superman wants a world where crime is no longer necessary. He sees the good in everyone, even Lex Luthor. He doesn't just want to save people: he wants us to see him saving people, and lift ourselves up and follow his example.

I'll write up more if it occurs to me. More thoughts on other characters to follow.