So please tell me about this John Byrne era

[Webhead2006]

yea that is one thing i hope they are doing, sure they can take the basis of what bryne did and that like making clark more of a real guy, kents alive, power base levels, and corp lex, but then through in elements of those other modern stories while also looking back in the past and see what elements could be pulled in too. I just dont want to see it squarely based on one take/incarnation again like singer did with just doing donner over again.

 

[BH/HHH]

yea that is one thing i hope they are doing, sure they can take the basis of what bryne did and that like making clark more of a real guy, kents alive, power base levels, and corp lex, but then through in elements of those other modern stories while also looking back in the past and see what elements could be pulled in too. I just dont want to see it squarely based on one take/incarnation again like singer did with just doing donner over again.

Agreed

 

[Webhead2006]

crossing fingers this will happen like that

 

[BH/HHH]

crossing fingers and toes (with great difficulty )

 

[SuperDaniel]

Superman/Clark seems to work best for people when it's left vague.

I agree.

 

[The Democrat]

I'm very heartened by this news. I think it's important to note that while Batman Begins and The Dark Knight clearly drew from very specific sources they were, in and of themselves, independent stories set in a very distinct world.

With the same team taking on Superman I'm not surprised to read that they are planning on drawing from Byrne's Man of Steel considering it was essentially of the same importance as Miller's Year One and will offer a very specific grounding. Now does that preclude them from altering and shaping it to fit their vision? Not at all. The one thing that we as fans have going for us is that we've seen how all three of these men have used the wealth of DC comics stories to inform the stories they want to tell.

 

[Webhead2006]

totally i am sure they will look at many sources for superman and draw the best elements in and combine them all to make an all new superman.

 

[SuperDaniel]

I was going through the internet and i found this VERY INTERESTING realistic explanation for Superman`s X-Ray vision by John Byrne:

"Byrne believes that Superman's super-powers basically consist of being able to do anything a normal human being can do, but to do it better. Hence he is stronger that a normal Earthman, for example, and he can see farther. He still can see through solid objects, but although he calls this power "X-ray vision" for convenience's sake, he does not actually project X-rays from his eyes. Instead he uses a combination of his telescopic and microscopic visions to "see through the atomic structure" of an object and focus past it, "as a camera focuses beyond the dust on a lens."

I THINK THIS IS AN ABSOLUTE GENIUS IDEA and i`ve never really thought about it before. It actually makes sense!!!

 

[Nightwing1977]

As a Pre-Crisis fan, I always felt that the truest person was the private Clark that Ma and Pa Kent knew, and the Clark that he acted as in public was a construct, but Superman himself and Superboy was basically the Ma and Pa Kent's Clark.

Don't know if that makes sense, but that is how I saw it.

Agree. I see Superman in the costume as the same Clark Ma & Pa Kent, but one that is hidden from the public & with a costume. I hate Bryne's version, so I'm glad Geoff Johns is changing his origins somewhat. Plus, the "Clark is who I am. Superman is what I can do.". I never buy that "Superman is what I can do", 'cause he is Superman more than Clark. Especially the Metropolis Clark, which isn't who he really is.

 

[Kurosawa]

Agree. I see Superman in the costume as the same Clark Ma & Pa Kent, but one that is hidden from the public & with a costume. I hate Bryne's version, so I'm glad Geoff Johns is changing his origins somewhat. Plus, the "Clark is who I am. Superman is what I can do.". I never buy that "Superman is what I can do", 'cause he is Superman more than Clark. Especially the Metropolis Clark, which isn't who he really is.

Agree on all points. He might spend more time as Metropolis Clark, but that's a necessary escape for him.

 

[SuperDaniel]

You guys do not will never understand post-crisis Superman because Byrne`s Superman is exactely what you guys describe and want.

Superman is real and IS NOT a disguise.

Nightwing, that line is from Lois & Clark and is misinterpreted by a lot of people. If Superman IS NOT what he can do, then WTF? What we do, our action as as person IS who we are.

In the episode "Whine, Whine, Whine", Clark is telling his parents that he is willing to give up being Metropolis Clark to just be Superman. You should watch that episode again instead of talking BS.

 

[Mr. Earle]

I was going through the internet and i found this VERY INTERESTING realistic explanation for Superman`s X-Ray vision by John Byrne:

"Byrne believes that Superman's super-powers basically consist of being able to do anything a normal human being can do, but to do it better. Hence he is stronger that a normal Earthman, for example, and he can see farther. He still can see through solid objects, but although he calls this power "X-ray vision" for convenience's sake, he does not actually project X-rays from his eyes. Instead he uses a combination of his telescopic and microscopic visions to "see through the atomic structure" of an object and focus past it, "as a camera focuses beyond the dust on a lens."

I THINK THIS IS AN ABSOLUTE GENIUS IDEA and i`ve never really thought about it before. It actually makes sense!!!

Dont like it. Besides, how are you going to explain heat vision and flight?

 

[SuperDaniel]

What don`t you like about it? It makes sense from a realistic POW that it could actually be true.

He did. Superman cells are solar powered so the heat-vision is an extension of that. Flight, well...I just always thought of flight as an extension of his aura or just plain will power or telekinetics. Nothing to do with gravity whatsoever.

 

[Asgard]

Am I wrong or did Byrne use latent telekinesis to explain how really heavy stuff like ships didnt break apart when Superman was lifting them from one end and balancing them almost parallel to the ground?

 

[SuperDaniel]

I think he did. It makes sense to me.

 

[Asgard]

Checked out wikipedia and the self telekinesis was used to explain how he flies and that anything he touches would be enveloped in it and would be moved by the force of his will.

 

[Kurosawa]

Checked out wikipedia and the self telekinesis was used to explain how he flies and that anything he touches would be enveloped in it and would be moved by the force of his will.

Yeah, he had TK/Psionic type powers and a force field, all in the name of "realism". Just another way in which he wasn't really anything like the 1938-1986 character at all and more of a new character with an old name.

 

[DavidTyler]

Yeah, he had TK/Psionic type powers and a force field, all in the name of "realism". Just another way in which he wasn't really anything like the 1938-1986 character at all and more of a new character with an old name.

No... it was just an explanation for something that hadn't been explained before.

There really hadn't been an explanation other than he get's his powers from a yellow sun and Earth's lighter gravity. Byrne just went into more detail. He still gets his powers from our yellow sun but it's now understood (by the readers) that radiation is fueling his body and brain to do those fantastic things. One of the elements that brought Byrne to that conclusion was that it was never explained how being under a red sun (along with several other threats) could shut down Superman's powers.

 

[Asgard]

Yeah, I dont really dig Superman having telekinesis, but the other pseudo scientific explanations for his x-ray vision works for me.

Hopefully they dont try to explain his powers beyond gaining them from living under a yellow sun.

 

[Lead Cenobite]

i do have to admit that i never liked the crystal Krypton with the one city the planet has. was that the intent of Donner to have an underground city with no other neighboring cities or habitats in sight?

Just because they only showed one city, that doesn't mean it was the only one. And it wasn't underground either, those big crystaline structures were buildings, like the fortress of solitude but larger.

 

[Daybreak_st]

Not a fan of the explanation. For example where does his superspeed come from? I'd rather they go off the wall with crazy comcis scifi like flash with his "speed force" or green lantern with the whole "emotional spectrum". At least their true to their creations. Are either of these things based in "hard science"? Heck no! But does it work in a comic and come across as interesting and fun, Heck yes, baby!!! It creates its own unique mythology for each character that can be expanded upon exponentially! I love the speed force and the emotional spectrum.

Pigeon holing superman into "realistic science" is counterproductive. it doesn't help the character. The average person just thinks his skin is tough and he's really strong etc. The aura thing is over doing it. His other powers aren't explained in detail why does his invulnerability need to be. In comics characters fall into a few categories, one is energy manipulation (green lantern), another is mental powers, another is "physical powerhouse" to me superman above all others falls into that category, along with thor and hulk. Using the aura explanation moves him into the "energy manipulation" category which is the polar opposite of superman imo. Give me crazy comics science over real science any day.

 

[Daybreak_st]

Also i dislike the crystal krypton, specifically the fortress. You have this enormous structure with little to no function whatsoever. we see one room with a console...that's it. In that huge place, that's the only room we ever spend time in. Why? B/c they can't figure out what to do with the rest of it.

This is why i recommend allowing some scifi concept artists to come in a redesign for a new movie. If you watch any scifi movie special features and see them talk to concept designers, they can explain in detail various design elements from a logical perspective. They think through the designs, and justify why things are a certain way. Why is this smooth vs rugged? Why is it sleak instead of manufactured, etc.? Just watch Episode one (star wars) and watch the interview with chief conceptual designer doug chiang to see what i'm talking about. Regardless of how "alien" something is in a film, they try to justify it in they're own mind as far as functionallity is concerned.

Now with all that said, i don't see any functionallity for the fortress other than one room with a console. I think the crytstals simply have limitations. Just look at the New Krypton comics, once you create a place that you actually have to have someone living there, functioning there in that location, all of sudden the designs need to make more sense. Now the designs for krypton in the comics are much scifi in nature, they still use some of the crystal motif but nothing like the movies. I don't know who the designer for Donner's kryton was but i'd love to hear an explanation for all the crystal nonsense for once. I think it was just the 70s new age ideas about aliens that influence his design, vs a more scifi approach. just my opinion though.

 

[Webhead2006]

No... it was just an explanation for something that hadn't been explained before.

There really hadn't been an explanation other than he get's his powers from a yellow sun and Earth's lighter gravity. Byrne just went into more detail. He still gets his powers from our yellow sun but it's now understood (by the readers) that radiation is fueling his body and brain to do those fantastic things. One of the elements that brought Byrne to that conclusion was that it was never explained how being under a red sun (along with several other threats) could shut down Superman's powers.

Yea that is a good reasoning. But grounding the explantion to the powers. Doesnt mean we have to loose out on going all out crazy scifi/fantasy. Heck i want to see them embrace the more scifi/fantasy aspects to the character. So we can see and do more things. As for krypton/FOS as for me i would keep the crystals to just be storage/computer console stuff. But i agree high time to see new looks for krypton and all that.

 

[Daybreak_st]

Yeah i want to see someone try to explain Darkseid, Doomsday, Mongol or any number of his supervillains powers using hard science.

 

[Kurosawa]

Not a fan of the explanation. For example where does his superspeed come from? I'd rather they go off the wall with crazy comcis scifi like flash with his "speed force" or green lantern with the whole "emotional spectrum". At least their true to their creations. Are either of these things based in "hard science"? Heck no! But does it work in a comic and come across as interesting and fun, Heck yes, baby!!! It creates its own unique mythology for each character that can be expanded upon exponentially! I love the speed force and the emotional spectrum.

Pigeon holing superman into "realistic science" is counterproductive. it doesn't help the character. The average person just thinks his skin is tough and he's really strong etc. The aura thing is over doing it. His other powers aren't explained in detail why does his invulnerability need to be. In comics characters fall into a few categories, one is energy manipulation (green lantern), another is mental powers, another is "physical powerhouse" to me superman above all others falls into that category, along with thor and hulk. Using the aura explanation moves him into the "energy manipulation" category which is the polar opposite of superman imo. Give me crazy comics science over real science any day.

Agree completely. They're outthinking the room and going into to much minutia imo.