• We experienced a brief downtime due to a Xenforo server configuration update. This was an attempt to limit bot traffic. They have rolled back and the site is now operating normally. Apologies for the inconvinience.

How will Clark being found by the Kents be handled?

Ultimatehero

Life is infinite
Joined
Jan 31, 2011
Messages
5,471
Reaction score
0
Points
31
I saw 'The Odd Life of Timothy Green' today (which was great, btw, but it might be adoptee bias there) and it got me wondering...

If MOS takes a realistic approach, how could Superman's origin be told realistically?

A couple finds a baby abandoned in a space ship, take him in, have him as their son and no one asks about birth certificates or records or anything?

TOLOTM really brought to mind in Timothy meeting the family that everyone would be, "how did you get this boy overnight?!"

SMALLVILLE (yeah, I know some Superman fans don't like it) did this well with saying Jonathan got help from Lionel Luthor in forging the documents. That's believable that someone with his level of power and wealth could do that.

But, here we don't have that causing one to question...

How do you think they'd ground this aspect of it or not bring it up?
 
good question. well i think the Kents may tell the police that they found him abandoned on the side of the road and would like to adopt him. Being it's a small town and the Kents have a good name they let them rise him as their own. i thinks thats would pass.
 
It will be handled well.

Lol, okay, I think they'll breeze over that part, with Pa Kent bribing some hospital official or going for one of the comics explanations like having the Kents stranded long enough for the baby to believably be theirs. Not sure how Tim Green went, but it's not too impossible to explain a baby if you haven't been seen for three months.
 
Well, they don't necessarily have to show that scene. The movie might pick up from an adolescent Clark Kent, and move on from there. However if they were to explain it, I think Norminator79 has a good idea.

good question. well i think the Kents may tell the police that they found him abandoned on the side of the road and would like to adopt him. Being it's a small town and the Kents have a good name they let them rise him as their own. i thinks thats would pass.
 
We'll, in the very first Superman origin story they actually put him in the system and then came back and said they wanted to adopt him. They just hid the whole rocket ship and told folks they'd just found him on the side of the road.
 
The best way this can be done is for Martha to be pregnant, but she eventually has a miscarriage. Then shortly after, John and Martha finds Clark and passes him off as their baby.
 
Earth One and the backups from Superman and the Men of Steel do feature a realistic way of doing this. I would add that maybe they'll have Martha pregneat, everyone knows it, but they go to the hospital and she has a miscarriage. They decide to hold off telling everybody because its personal as they're grieiving, then the rocket crashes with the baby who could pass as a newborn, and they give him the name that they're now gone son would've had; Clark.
 
^^^
This would be the best idea and would be a believable way to explain Clark. Also it would be like Clark was sent from the heavens to replace the baby Jonathan and Martha lost and wanted so badly. Martha can be very sad and upset that she miscarried or something and then the rocket crashes...
 
I honestly am not expecting a sequence where they find Clark. I'm sure it will be referenced in terms of how it affected Clark and the kents, but it doesn't seem like something they need to retread in order to make us understand Clark better. Who knows though, they certainly could use it to their advantage. If it is there, hopefully it's not just there to have it there.
 
Really, in a rural town, especially a rural town circa 20+ years back? Its really not a problem for two upstanding members of the local community to go "we found this baby by the side of the road, abandoned. Can we keep him?" Sure, it wouldn't be a next-day adoption, but it hardly stretches credibility that they'd be allowed to take care of the baby for the interim unless the real parents show up, and then six months later, be made full and official parents.

( Hell, they could probably go "This is Martha's baby, he was born out at our farm," and even without the three month blizzard, it'd probably be accepted; the assumption at first would be "some friend or relative had an unfortunate unmarried pregnancy, they are taking responsibility for the kid" )
 
Really, in a rural town, especially a rural town circa 20+ years back? Its really not a problem for two upstanding members of the local community to go "we found this baby by the side of the road, abandoned. Can we keep him?" Sure, it wouldn't be a next-day adoption, but it hardly stretches credibility that they'd be allowed to take care of the baby for the interim unless the real parents show up, and then six months later, be made full and official parents.

( Hell, they could probably go "This is Martha's baby, he was born out at our farm," and even without the three month blizzard, it'd probably be accepted; the assumption at first would be "some friend or relative had an unfortunate unmarried pregnancy, they are taking responsibility for the kid" )

Wouldn't they DNA test in those cases?
 
why do they even have to delve into explanation how the Kents adopt Clark? They don't even have to explain it, not everything have to be explained, especailly this one.
 
I'd be interested to see how Clark discovers his powers during his upbringing.
 
Wouldn't they DNA test in those cases?

Why would they? There is no allegation or evidence of wrongdoing. Besides, its 20+ years ago, the technology likely isn't even available in the region.

You mean way back in the early 90/s when people werent connected enough to know who was who? When transients used to get arrested for public drunkenness and the police couldnt find out who they were?
20 years ago wasnt that long ago. And it isnt like we are talking the late 60's and 70's... People were definitely connected enough to notice a baby showing up if a woman wasnt pregnant...
 
I'd be interested to see how Clark discovers his powers during his upbringing.

Yeah, me too.

You mean way back in the early 90/s when people werent connected enough to know who was who? When transients used to get arrested for public drunkenness and the police couldnt find out who they were?
20 years ago wasnt that long ago. And it isnt like we are talking the late 60's and 70's... People were definitely connected enough to notice a baby showing up if a woman wasnt pregnant...

True.. especially in a small town like Smallville.
 
Oh, they'd *notice*, but the assumption would be "they took in the baby of a friend or relative who was pregnant but unmarried." And assuming the Kents are upstanding members of the community, that would probably be that.
 
Really, in a rural town, especially a rural town circa 20+ years back? Its really not a problem for two upstanding members of the local community to go "we found this baby by the side of the road, abandoned. Can we keep him?" Sure, it wouldn't be a next-day adoption, but it hardly stretches credibility that they'd be allowed to take care of the baby for the interim unless the real parents show up, and then six months later, be made full and official parents.

( Hell, they could probably go "This is Martha's baby, he was born out at our farm," and even without the three month blizzard, it'd probably be accepted; the assumption at first would be "some friend or relative had an unfortunate unmarried pregnancy, they are taking responsibility for the kid" )
Uh...no, there's no place in the US where that could happen.

The miscarriage idea is intriguing. If they built it up and then made it a very emotional loss, it could be hugely impactful when they find baby Clark, giving their relationship a whole new feel.
 
same as every origin with the kents driving and something happens to make them pull over then Martha finds him and yada yada yada .
 
Last edited:
I like what Martha said in the original...wasn't it a child of her sisters? Since everybody wants to shy away from the original then why not say its brother's son? The easiest way to do this is just to say its the child of a relative who has passed away or can't care for a child. Having Martha have a miscarriage and then they find Clark and try to pass him off as the result of her pregnancy that nobody knew had been lost is too much work and I don't really care for it. I'd just say, my brother and his wife can't care for their child so we took it in. Simple as that. Best explanation right there
 
I like what Martha said in the original...wasn't it a child of her sisters? Since everybody wants to shy away from the original then why not say its brother's son? The easiest way to do this is just to say its the child of a relative who has passed away or can't care for a child. Having Martha have a miscarriage and then they find Clark and try to pass him off as the result of her pregnancy that nobody knew had been lost is too much work and I don't really care for it. I'd just say, my brother and his wife can't care for their child so we took it in. Simple as that. Best explanation right there

That's the idea that Martha Kent put forth in STM. "We could say that he's a child of my cousin from North Dakota and just now orphaned."
 
The best way this can be done is for Martha to be pregnant, but she eventually has a miscarriage. Then shortly after, John and Martha finds Clark and passes him off as their baby.

I like this explanation, this works for me. :up:
 
I like what Martha said in the original...wasn't it a child of her sisters? Since everybody wants to shy away from the original then why not say its brother's son? The easiest way to do this is just to say its the child of a relative who has passed away or can't care for a child. Having Martha have a miscarriage and then they find Clark and try to pass him off as the result of her pregnancy that nobody knew had been lost is too much work and I don't really care for it. I'd just say, my brother and his wife can't care for their child so we took it in. Simple as that. Best explanation right there
You're right that it may be "too much work" or take up too much screen time. But if you were to go the miscarriage route, it doesn't just serve the purpose of a plot device explaining how people would accept that he's their son. It also serves the purpose of emotionally bonding the Kents and Kal-El in a way that's never been done before, so if done well it could be worth that extra effort or screen time.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Members online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
200,630
Messages
21,776,715
Members
45,615
Latest member
TheCat
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"