Should any of these things be addressed?

[Thundercrack85]

In a reboot. Just some things that I've never really seen addressed. But your average movie goer might wonder.

1. Why or how Kryptonians look virtually identical to humans. Perhaps they are somehow distantly related, since they can noticeably naturally procreate. Have never seen this addressed.

2. Why no one notices Clark Kent and Superman are one in the same. Old comics had some rather odd explanations, but these days no one seems to ever notice.

3. How Superman can fly.

This would be in-universe explanation.

 

[wattabrownsound]

i think how his suit is made needs to be addressed too especially if its made from material that doesn't look it was sewn together like the Superman Returns suit.

 

[El Payaso]

I agree about how no one can tell Superman = Clark plus glasses. That HAS to be addressed.

That said, I'd also add how humans and the government would trust an alien that can see through walls and is indestructible. And rescuing a plane or helicopter is not enough.

 

[The Guard]

Yes.

 

[SuperMike335!!]

In a reboot. Just some things that I've never really seen addressed. But your average movie goer might wonder.

1. Why or how Kryptonians look virtually identical to humans. Perhaps they are somehow distantly related, since they can noticeably naturally procreate. Have never seen this addressed.

2. Why no one notices Clark Kent and Superman are one in the same. Old comics had some rather odd explanations, but these days no one seems to ever notice.

3. How Superman can fly.

This would be in-universe explanation.

1. No, let the comics fill in gaps like that. Superman is a mythic character, and as such, some disbelief has to be suspended.

Its better off to just make the movie "look good", and take the matter as seriously as you can, without pointing out obvious things like that to make it more realistic. This is Superman after all; there are so many laws of physics broken anyway.

Not only that, he does not look 100% human. Well, not for a human that does not workout. He is taller than the human average, and he has a world class athletes physique, 225-235 pounds of muscle (depending on source book), even though he does not have to work out to maintain it. Best reason for him to have big muscles and not have to workout is that he is an ALIEN.

2. This one should be explained, but it is easy enough.

Best way to do this is to just lead the audience in the right direction, by adding in a line Clark says to one of his confidants in the know. There could be a scene where this person, say Ma Kent, asks him how he is doing at keeping his secret, and he responds with "mom, its working better than I thought it would. You were right, by me NOT wearing a mask, nobody even thinks I have another life, they just assume I have nothing to hide and am Superman fulltime".

Throw in one more scene where he actually tell Lois, blatantly that he is Superman, when she asks how he gets all the stories so fast, and then Lois doesn’t believe him. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0QVvbhMm24

I personally prefer a bigger Superman, 6’3" to 6’4" and 225-235 pounds of muscle, and I know that Clark would stand out as he would be build like Arnold Schwarzenegger (not when he was competing but after he lost 20 pounds to become an actor), but nobody can tell how ripped/cut Clark is in a suit as Clark. He just looks rather tall, big and broad shouldered.

But being its well known at the Daily Planet that he is from a small farm town, people just assume he’s big because he grew up on a farm. We could toss that in a scene too, with someone at the Planet commenting to Perry about how big Clark is, and Perry just tells him "Oh yeah, he’s a big boy alright, grew up in Kansas on a Farm".

The big muscular Superman is part of the Comic visual medium, and the movie should just look good. We don’t need him to look as big as a competing bodybuilder, but again we can get away with him looking like a big guy in the suit. Big guys are a dime a dozen anyway, so as long as people cannot tell how cut he is, and they won't in the suit, then they won't notice it.

The reasons given in the movie do not have to be perfect, they can be flawed reasons, but still good enough to draw attention away from things.
Keep in mind, Superman is fantasy fiction and myth. He shoots lasers out of his eyes after all, which brings me to three.

3. No reason to explain how he can fly.

Again, its myth, just like how he looks passably human, but is from krypton. This is just one of those places you have to suspend disbelief.

Like I have said, just make it look good because no matter how hard you try to explain things to add realism, there are people who can still poke holes in all of it, because after all, it is all fiction. I can understand trying to more realism with say Batman, because he has no Powers, but with Superman might as well just focus on good aesthetics, good dialogue, take the subject seriously, and give it an epic feel.

 

[B]

I'd like the glasses issue to be addressed, I've always liked the idea that the reason hes always wore glasses is because his eyes have an unearthly blue look to them & in some bizzare way wearing glasses somehow makes them look more...normal

But as for what you've suggested the glasses issue has always been one that has bothered me, how come a group of reporters somehow cannot put a connection together that Clark Kent is Superman.

This was posted by Ron El over on The Planet & I like how Batman sort of explains why people (especally reporters) do not make the connection between Superman/Clark Kent dispite them having similar physical look

"By going maskless as Superman you divert most people from thinking you spend part of your time as someone else. After all, its not like you'd wear a mask in civilian life."

 

[SuperMike335!!]

"By going maskless as Superman you divert most people from thinking you spend part of your time as someone else. After all, its not like you'd wear a mask in civilian life."

Yep, its the best reason.

It meets the criteria of Occam's razor. Most simple solution is often the best one.

 

[ChickenScratch]

In a reboot. Just some things that I've never really seen addressed. But your average movie goer might wonder.
1. Why or how Kryptonians look virtually identical to humans. Perhaps they are somehow distantly related, since they can noticeably naturally procreate. Have never seen this addressed.
2. Why no one notices Clark Kent and Superman are one in the same. Old comics had some rather odd explanations, but these days no one seems to ever notice.
3. How Superman can fly.
This would be in-universe explanation.

1. As mentioned before, Kal-El does not look exactly human, just close enough. I can't remember what graphic novel I read it it, I'm thinking "Superman: Birthright" or one of those later retelling. His mother described his eyes of a shining blue not seen in nature, they seem to glow and have the clarity of gems. I'm pretty sure there was more but that's as much as I remember now after a day of watching football.

2. If you read any books on spy-craft and espionage that are not novels but historical or even biographies one thing that comes up a lot is how spies deal with disguises. It basically breaks down to a disguise gets you noticed, change mannerisms, speaking style (mostly rhythm) and most importantly body language because most communication is body language.

Connecting in that, we've seen Clark with books on acting in his bag when he moved to Metropolis. Plus, like they said in The Prince and The Pauper, "They never look for a Prince in a gutter."

Ok, I'm done, gonna go have some pie and watch cartoons.

 

[SuperMike335!!]

1. As mentioned before, Kal-El does not look exactly human, just close enough. I can't remember what graphic novel I read it it, I'm thinking "Superman: Birthright" or one of those later retelling. His mother described his eyes of a shining blue not seen in nature, they seem to glow and have the clarity of gems. I'm pretty sure there was more but that's as much as I remember now after a day of watching football.

2. If you read any books on spy-craft and espionage that are not novels but historical or even biographies one thing that comes up a lot is how spies deal with disguises. It basically breaks down to a disguise gets you noticed, change mannerisms, speaking style (mostly rhythm) and most importantly body language because most communication is body language.

Connecting in that, we've seen Clark with books on acting in his bag when he moved to Metropolis. Plus, like they said in The Prince and The Pauper, "They never look for a Prince in a gutter."

Ok, I'm done, gonna go have some pie and watch cartoons.

Very impressive Mr.Scratch...

I was not familiar with the spy stuff, but I like them.

 

[Webhead2006]

in a way i would like things to be explained in some good manner but then other times would like it to be more open ended so we dont have all the details. Though i agree the whole secret identity of clark kent and his superman persona should be explained in some cool fashion so it makes the whole secret id thing a bigger importance.

 

[Spike_x1]

1. No, let the comics fill in gaps like that. Superman is a mythic character, and as such, some disbelief has to be suspended.

Its better off to just make the movie "look good", and take the matter as seriously as you can, without pointing out obvious things like that to make it more realistic. This is Superman after all; there are so many laws of physics broken anyway.

Not only that, he does not look 100% human. Well, not for a human that does not workout. He is taller than the human average, and he has a world class athletes physique, 225-235 pounds of muscle (depending on source book), even though he does not have to work out to maintain it. Best reason for him to have big muscles and not have to workout is that he is an ALIEN.

2. This one should be explained, but it is easy enough.

Best way to do this is to just lead the audience in the right direction, by adding in a line Clark says to one of his confidants in the know. There could be a scene where this person, say Ma Kent, asks him how he is doing at keeping his secret, and he responds with "mom, its working better than I thought it would. You were right, by me NOT wearing a mask, nobody even thinks I have another life, they just assume I have nothing to hide and am Superman fulltime".

Throw in one more scene where he actually tell Lois, blatantly that he is Superman, when she asks how he gets all the stories so fast, and then Lois doesn’t believe him. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0QVvbhMm24

I personally prefer a bigger Superman, 6’3" to 6’4" and 225-235 pounds of muscle, and I know that Clark would stand out as he would be build like Arnold Schwarzenegger (not when he was competing but after he lost 20 pounds to become an actor), but nobody can tell how ripped/cut Clark is in a suit as Clark. He just looks rather tall, big and broad shouldered.

But being its well known at the Daily Planet that he is from a small farm town, people just assume he’s big because he grew up on a farm. We could toss that in a scene too, with someone at the Planet commenting to Perry about how big Clark is, and Perry just tells him "Oh yeah, he’s a big boy alright, grew up in Kansas on a Farm".

The big muscular Superman is part of the Comic visual medium, and the movie should just look good. We don’t need him to look as big as a competing bodybuilder, but again we can get away with him looking like a big guy in the suit. Big guys are a dime a dozen anyway, so as long as people cannot tell how cut he is, and they won't in the suit, then they won't notice it.

The reasons given in the movie do not have to be perfect, they can be flawed reasons, but still good enough to draw attention away from things.
Keep in mind, Superman is fantasy fiction and myth. He shoots lasers out of his eyes after all, which brings me to three.

3. No reason to explain how he can fly.

Again, its myth, just like how he looks passably human, but is from krypton. This is just one of those places you have to suspend disbelief.

Like I have said, just make it look good because no matter how hard you try to explain things to add realism, there are people who can still poke holes in all of it, because after all, it is all fiction. I can understand trying to more realism with say Batman, because he has no Powers, but with Superman might as well just focus on good aesthetics, good dialogue, take the subject seriously, and give it an epic feel.

 

[DavidTyler]

One of the things I always thought they could do (in addition to the 'no one thinks Superman has another identity) is for Clark's glasses to dull down the blue of his eyes. The lenses could also make his eyes look just a touch larger. That would be enough of a change where his acting skills could separate the two identities...

Keep in mind that Superman in front of a crowd is also an act.

 

[SuperFerret]

In a word, no. Explaining those things are entirely unnecessary.

 

[M.O.Steel]

In a reboot. Just some things that I've never really seen addressed. But your average movie goer might wonder.

1. Why or how Kryptonians look virtually identical to humans. Perhaps they are somehow distantly related, since they can noticeably naturally procreate. Have never seen this addressed.

2. Why no one notices Clark Kent and Superman are one in the same. Old comics had some rather odd explanations, but these days no one seems to ever notice.

3. How Superman can fly.

This would be in-universe explanation.

none of the above.

 

[NotFadeAway]

I agree about how no one can tell Superman = Clark plus glasses. That HAS to be addressed.

That said, I'd also add how humans and the government would trust an alien that can see through walls and is indestructible. And rescuing a plane or helicopter is not enough.

If I had my way, Earth would fear Superman up until the end of the origin film. It would take the whole film for Supes to win people over. The only person who would believe in Superman from the get go would be, you guessed it, Lois Lane.

 

[M.O.Steel]

One of the things I always thought they could do (in addition to the 'no one thinks Superman has another identity) is for Clark's glasses to dull down the blue of his eyes. The lenses could also make his eyes look just a touch larger. That would be enough of a change where his acting skills could separate the two identities...

i like this. maybe those high powered reading glasses that throw off the eyes

heck, even when he wears glasses in real life he doesn't look the same.

 

[M.O.Steel]

If I had my way, Earth would fear Superman up until the end of the origin film. It would take the whole film for Supes to win people over. The only person who would believe in Superman from the get go would be, you guessed it, Lois Lane.

i like this and completely agree with this. that's why i think there's a lot of potential in a origin movie.

they make it fresh even with the same story.

 

[\S/JcDc\S/]

Why no one notices Clark Kent and Superman are one in the same. Old comics had some rather odd explanations, but these days no one seems to ever notice.

I have always liked the idea of Jor-el speaking to him at the FOS letting him know he is ready:

"My son, up until now you have learned about humanity through your Earth parents. Although you have been raised as a human being, you are not one of them. There will be times when being a human, will not be enough. At times you must act as Earth's savior. Use your powers for this reason alone. I give to you the symbol our family carried on Krypton. When you wear this symbol, it represents your power as a Kryptonian. The human beings you have become attached with, will no longer view you as one of them. They will only be able to see you as my son Kal-el. There are 2 lives you must lead, life as a human, and life as a Kryptonian. I give you the means to separate these lives, but ultimately it is up to you on how to balance them."

Basically when wearing the symbol/suit those that know and care about him as a human being, can only see him as the Kryptonian that he actually is. A mind wiping to some extent, but imo effective.

When Lois gives him the name Superman, he accepts it. He could say he is Kal-el, but chooses to balance the Kryptonian with the human side accepting what the humans choose to call him. Not a godly Kryptonian, but just more than a man... A super-man

 

[SuperMike335!!]

Basically when wearing the symbol/suit those that know and care about him as a human being, can only see him as the Kryptonian that he actually is. A mind wiping to some extent, but imo effective.

When Lois gives him the name Superman, he accepts it. He could say he is Kal-el, but chooses to balance the Kryptonian with the human side accepting what the humans choose to call him. Not a godly Kryptonian, but just more than a man... A super-man

Exactly, because as Superman he seems so above everything, humans would fall into the mindset of seeing him as just what they see and nothing more than a fulltime superman.

Its also normal for humans to create hero exaggeration. No matter how tall Superman is for example, people will think he is a half foot taller than that, because of the impression he gives them. They see him as a Mythic god.

That is another thing that actually should be explained, as it would make a good character development.

I mean about him not being a god.

He could be talking to Lois, as she is taking notes for a story "is Superman a god?", and he responds to her with "absolutely not. I cannot be everywhere at once, I am not omnipresent, even as fast as I am".

To which Lois responds with (somewhat sadly) "and that’s why you cannot save everyone?"

Superman responds with "I can see through walls, but I cannot see eveything either, I am not all seeing".

Lois; " I know now, so you don’t pick and chose who you will save, you just do the best you can?".

Superman; " Yes, I will always do everything I can to save anyone, but as powerful as I am, I do not have the power to save everyone from harm, and I certainly do not have the power to save their soul. I should never be confused with a god either".

 

[Webhead2006]

that wouldnt be a half bad idea \S/

 

[\S/JcDc\S/]

that wouldnt be a half bad idea \S/

Thanks, I think it would satisfy fans without going to scientific/marvel'ized

 

[NotFadeAway]

i like this and completely agree with this. that's why i think there's a lot of potential in a origin movie.

they make it fresh even with the same story.

Exactly, there are just so many little story additions and changes like this that could make a new origin story that much more original and fresh, along with the bigger changes such as Clark Kent being the Post-crisis real person, traveling the world as a freelance journalist as seen in Birthright, Lex Luthor NOT being the villian from the word go, etc etc.....

As far as our idea about Earth fearing Supes at first, I had a thought/ What if, for his debut appearence, Superman appears without a cape? And then, after seeing the fearful reaction he recieves, Clark decides to add a cape as a way of trying to put humans at ease and seem less threatening.

 

[Webhead2006]

those are good reasons

 

[Thundercrack85]

Exactly, there are just so many little story additions and changes like this that could make a new origin story that much more original and fresh, along with the bigger changes such as Clark Kent being the Post-crisis real person, traveling the world as a freelance journalist as seen in Birthright, Lex Luthor NOT being the villian from the word go, etc etc.....

As far as our idea about Earth fearing Supes at first, I had a thought/ What if, for his debut appearence, Superman appears without a cape? And then, after seeing the fearful reaction he recieves, Clark decides to add a cape as a way of trying to put humans at ease and seem less threatening.

While I like the idea of the world fearing Superman at first, I think the cape would actually have the opposite effect. It makes him look more impressive, and therefore more unsettling to paranoid humans.

 

[BestGirl]

Has the purpose of the cape ever been addressed in the comics?