The Official Re-Imagining Clark Kent Thread

[Daybreak_st]

I don't know how you guys would feel about this, but I'd personally like to see a very modern tale of Superman. Give him a very pleasant yet quiet personality. Kind of like the guy you just forget about at work because he does his job so well and is always busy working if that makes sense. No bumbling Clark, just a quiet, competant guy that attracts no attention from the guys or girls.

I'd like Clark to be who he really is as a person, but Superman to be who he thinks the world needs.

That way he isn't going around being phony to Lois when he's Clark...and wants nothing more than Lois to love Clark, not Superman.

I'd also like to see Superman become a little angry at people at times, looking down on them as they won't help themselves to make earth a better place and rely on him to solve their problems...but have Lois there to keep him grounded. She shows him how to be more human, which is his drive. So he can be a better Clark who he wants Lois to love. It's changing it up a bit, and might also help keep a bit of that alien-ness in him...showing that he's still working at trying to be human.

Dunno, these could be crap ideas...just thought I'd give it a go

I like your ideas, i've always favored a clark as you describe. Makes a lot of sense.

Anyone else here think it would be kind of cool if in the end of the movie, after Superman saves the day, one of the Villain has covered his tracks enough to think he has gotten away with the perfect crime; then in the last scene Clark puts in print the evidence against this person, say Bruno Manheim for example. This leading to the arrest and conviction, coming from Clark, not Superman.

I'm not sure how to work the whole thing, but I think that would be a cool concept to put in at the end, as sort of Clark's victory.

I also thinkg this is a great idea. I really want to see the reporter side of clark being just as important as superman, it's the only way to justify why he chooses it as a career vs something else. It's something i enjoyed in Lois & Clark and S:TAS, both highlilghted how important journalism was to the big picture of what supes stands for.

 

[Daybreak_st]

I know you re trying to put a fight scene in the origin story, but it doesnt seem right to me. Its hard because Clark's past doesnt have much action so you shouldnt force it. Perhaps there could be some action during Clark's training? You know, Jor-El giving him tasks around the world and all that.
Or if the origin is told in flashbacks, the action could be happening now, with flashbacks in between.

You make a good point, i don't want it to feel forced, didn't realize it was coming across that way. And you're right i think his time is smallville should be peaceful and the emergence of his powers kind of majestic, no need to make them appear in some violent altercation. Hmmm...yeah i think i'll rework some of that.

I still like how the scene is written/described and think i may storyboard it out just for fun. But i'm not that attached to it either. I still like the brainiac probe/lex luthor subplot but there are plenty of ways around that, so we'll see what i can come up with. Thanks for the constructive criticism.

Did you ever read Superman Secret Identity? I absolutely love the scene when he flies for the first time, you can see his joy. I'd love to see something like that onscreen. Also the pics i posted a few pages back of him in africa interacting with wildlife would be awesome to see!

Personally I dont want Lana to interfere with Clark's life in Metropolis. She could appear and make Lois jealous perhaps (causing her to discover her feelings for Clark), but i wouldnt stretch it. I would only give her a cameo in Clark's Metropolis life.
.

yeah, i don't think it would be much more than that. As i said i'd like to show from a logical perspective why clark chooses lois vs lana, as in the comic i'm not quite sure (i've never seen it dealt with at least). And although, lois and clark are growing closer by the second film, it would be nice to see her a little jealous and realize she views clark as more than just a friend.

 

[Mr. Earle]

You make a good point, i don't want it to feel forced, didn't realize it was coming across that way. And you're right i think his time is smallville should be peaceful and the emergence of his powers kind of majestic, no need to make them appear in some violent altercation. Hmmm...yeah i think i'll rework some of that.

I still like how the scene is written/described and think i may storyboard it out just for fun. But i'm not that attached to it either. I still like the brainiac probe/lex luthor subplot but there are plenty of ways around that, so we'll see what i can come up with. Thanks for the constructive criticism.

No problem, thanks for liking my suggestions.
In a smallville movie/tv series, you have to put some action in there, but since the movie will be about Superman, you dont need to clutter down the origin. As you said, its more majestic if Clark discovers his powers and learns how to control them in the farm. I'd give him Krypto btw. I'd have him sneak in the spaceship at the last moment without Jor-El noticing and from there on he and Clark grow up together. When Clark leaves SV, Krypto stays in the farm to watch over it and that's what i'd do in the movie.
Need i repost that scene from All-star Superman that Clark and Krypto play fetch in space and end up sitting on the moon admiring the view of Earth?

Did you ever read Superman Secret Identity? I absolutely love the scene when he flies for the first time, you can see his joy. I'd love to see something like that onscreen. Also the pics i posted a few pages back of him in africa interacting with wildlife would be awesome to see!

No, i havent, but i know what you mean. Superheroes are based on wish fulfillment and how many of us wish we could fly between skyscrapers, over oceans, deserts and forests? If i were the director i'd have young Clark fly all over the world (at night so that nobody finds out) and visit all kinds of places. I'd even have him dive in the ocean and meet Arthur. But they'll never do that.

yeah, i don't think it would be much more than that. As i said i'd like to show from a logical perspective why clark chooses lois vs lana, as in the comic i'm not quite sure (i've never seen it dealt with at least). And although, lois and clark are growing closer by the second film, it would be nice to see her a little jealous and realize she views clark as more than just a friend.

I like how STAS handled it. Lana dated Lex for some time and she inevitably met Superman who she knew was Clark. She wanted him back but Clark had moved on and couldnt go back. It doesnt have to bitter, nor does Clark need to choose. He simply moved on with his life.

 

[Daybreak_st]

I like how STAS handled it. Lana dated Lex for some time and she inevitably met Superman who she knew was Clark. She wanted him back but Clark had moved on and couldnt go back. It doesnt have to bitter, nor does Clark need to choose. He simply moved on with his life.

Yeah that's exactly the sort of thing i'd like to see. I just meant i'd like to see a contrast in the two women, and even if clark doesn't have to "choose" so to speak, we as an audience understand why he views lana only as a friend (has moved on as you put it) but why he is so interested in lois.

I for one have never really seen other than the above and even then i'm thinking, "clark what's so wrong with lana?" You know what i mean? If you could contrast their personalities and show why clark has outgrown lana, somewhat, not casting her in negative light but simply showing that she's more of a country girl at heart who just wants to settle down, she's fun and loves poetry etc. a real girl next door, and clark is past that phase, lois appeals to him more b/c her life is more than just about her own happiness, he's driven to do more like him and wants to help people by exposing the truth, also like him. She also not as laid back as lana, she's more aggressvie with strong views that challenge his own, again something that appeals to him.

 

[Mr. Earle]

Yeah that's exactly the sort of thing i'd like to see. I just meant i'd like to see a contrast in the two women, and even if clark doesn't have to "choose" so to speak, we as an audience understand why he views lana only as a friend (has moved on as you put it) but why he is so interested in lois.

I for one have never really seen other than the above and even then i'm thinking, "clark what's so wrong with lana?" You know what i mean? If you could contrast their personalities and show why clark has outgrown lana, somewhat, not casting her in negative light but simply showing that she's more of a country girl at heart who just wants to settle down, she's fun and loves poetry etc. a real girl next door, and clark is past that phase, lois appeals to him more b/c her life is more than just about her own happiness, he's driven to do more like him and wants to help people by exposing the truth, also like him. She also not as laid back as lana, she's more aggressvie with strong views that challenge his own, again something that appeals to him.

I agree with everything you say and especially the part i underlined. Besides, they say the opposites attract each other (i mean Lois and Clark).

 

[Kurosawa]

He's hardly that. He is a respected journalist. Are all people raised in villages rednecks to you?

Silver Age/Donner Clark is human? He is a caricature!
See my jaw dropping to floor just above? This is where you showed that you dont read current comics and you re stuck to your oldies.
And what is this "DC wants us to accept" thing? If DC takes a certain route for the character for so long, it must be successful and well-liked. They want to sell books after all, not spread a religion.
Why does staying true to the core mean so much to you (not that i think that Superman isnt, he's just more modern and less 1940ies)? What if the core is outdated and the new version is a lot better?
He's DCU's Jesus. He's the most respected hero out there. Final Crisis was a universe wide event that he resolved almost by himself.
It's ok. We can keep discussing though, cant we?
See, there's your problem. Morrison is currently my No1 writer and his Batman my favourite, but in 40 years that Batman will obviously be different to cater to the tastes of that time, when new fans dont like a 40 year old version of Batman that i do, i wont take it as a sacrilege or blasphemy.
Morrison or Siegel or whoever are great writers, but the character cant stay the same forever just to pay tribute to them. Morrison has even admitted that the character he introduced to the mythos and spent so much time developing, and even predestines for a successor to the cowl, Damian, could be killed by the writer that succeeds him in the bat books.

You must be a Siegel family member to be so obsessed with him, and his name, and his legacy, and all that. No one is disrespecting anyone. We just like different things in our time and in my opinion Superman is true to his core, just more modern.
Besides, you have to admit that Siegel cant have done everything right. His Clark was simply unacceptable.
Oh come on, everybody is owned by everybody without losing dignity. And no, he's not Batman's *****. They re bros.

I'm not going to go through here and argue point by point, but I do want to address that the Clark I like best is not the Silver Age version but the Bronze Age version, especially when written and analyzed by Elliot S! Maggin, who is probably my favorite Superman writer.

As for the other issues, I do want to apologize for being antagonistic, but just like you guys, I care a great deal about Supes. We just like different versions. And no, I'm not a Siegel relative. If i was I'd be too busy trying to sue DC than to post on a message board. I always feel respect and consideration should be given to characters creators and that their original versions should always be heavily considered when approaching a character.

I don't know how you guys would feel about this, but I'd personally like to see a very modern tale of Superman. Give him a very pleasant yet quiet personality. Kind of like the guy you just forget about at work because he does his job so well and is always busy working if that makes sense. No bumbling Clark, just a quiet, competant guy that attracts no attention from the guys or girls.

I'd like Clark to be who he really is as a person, but Superman to be who he thinks the world needs.

That way he isn't going around being phony to Lois when he's Clark...and wants nothing more than Lois to love Clark, not Superman.

I'd also like to see Superman become a little angry at people at times, looking down on them as they won't help themselves to make earth a better place and rely on him to solve their problems...but have Lois there to keep him grounded. She shows him how to be more human, which is his drive. So he can be a better Clark who he wants Lois to love. It's changing it up a bit, and might also help keep a bit of that alien-ness in him...showing that he's still working at trying to be human.

Dunno, these could be crap ideas...just thought I'd give it a go

Few comments: I'm not crazy about clumsy Clark either. And I do think he should be a very competent writer. There were a few scenes in early stories where he lost it and fought back a little as Clark, then remembering to act meekly. And I've always found it interesting that even when Superman was clearly established as the true personality and Clark the construct that it was Clark, not Superman who perused Lois. That's what fascinates me so much about that version of Clark...he's an act, but more than just an act. He's like something in between an alternate personality and an act. No other character has a dual persona that is a subtle and as fascinating as Superman's imo. Most of them are the same person, and Moon Knight is just flat out schitzo, although he's interesting too.

Really like your comments about Superman's frustrations with people relying on him. I think he needs to encourage people to follow his example but not to count on him always being there...he has powerful enemies, and you never know what could happen. I think Lois is important in this as well.

Anyone else here think it would be kind of cool if in the end of the movie, after Superman saves the day, one of the Villain has covered his tracks enough to think he has gotten away with the perfect crime; then in the last scene Clark puts in print the evidence against this person, say Bruno Manheim for example. This leading to the arrest and conviction, coming from Clark, not Superman.

I'm not sure how to work the whole thing, but I think that would be a cool concept to put in at the end, as sort of Clark's victory.

I like that...a lot. I want him to fight for Justice in the open as Superman and for hearts and minds as Clark, working together with both his identities. They've done this before, but it's always a welcome thing.

 

[Webhead2006]

good ideas supermike and retro back a page. I definately would like to see an equal amount of time spent on the clark kent reporter side along with his superman side.

 

[SuperDaniel]

The Clark and Lana relationship:

I just love the way it was dealt in Superman for all seasons. That is the best representation of Smallville and its characters EVER!

I`d like to think that when Clark realized his destiny was greater than he expected, when he found out he needed to leave Smallville to do good around the world, that`s when he left Lana behind.

I`d like Clark to think that, at first, just after he leaves Smallville, all he wants to do is save the world and lead no normal life anymore. He doesn`t feel attachment to any city or culture. He is just a man of the world, saving people all around it. Then, when he meets Lois and is attracted to Metropolis, he just falls in love with her at first sight and starts to think differently. That being Superman or a saviour 24/7 isn`t a good idea and settling down would be a good thing.

That`s kind of emotional journey i`d like to see him going through. Him understanding how being normal is needed for you not to be alone. That`s when he gets a job in the planet, the beggining of the Lois & Clark partnership and etc.

So, in my script, that`s how it goes:

Clark as a normal kid in Smallville dating Lana -> finds out he has this amazing powers -> Tornando comes -> Leaves Smallville to help people around the world -> Finds out that doing that secretly isn`t enough/ people want a symbol -> Superman meets Lois, Luthor, go through all theses problems with Luthor, Brainiac and all -> Superman somehow loses this fight/ Governemnt doesn`t like aliens due to Brainiac invasion/ People love Luthor -> Becomes a journalist to spread the word of truth about what really happened/ Partnership with Lois

 

[Mr. Earle]

He doesnt need to write his own stories, there is a female reporter that's crazy about Superman and she supports him as best as she can.

OK, some things i'd like to discuss:

1) Clark's destiny should be decided by him. Not Jor-El, not the Kents, not Lana. I cant stress how important i think this is. He needs to get lost, frustrated and then decide that this is what he wants to do with his life, because that's who he is.
I didnt like it in Smallville that Jor-El has already planned Clark's life for him and is even forcing him to follow his plan.
Clark should have an emotional and spiritual journey like Bruce's (a different one of course) and find his own path. Then he announces his plan to Jor-El and he comes up with a training regime for him.

2) Clark should finish college/universe. If i am not mistaken he did nothing of the sort in the comics but in our day it would be impossible to find a job at the top newspaper in the city. With his super speed, finishing college would be easy.

3) Clark's first days in Metropolis. I think the movie should address that. He is alone in a big urban landscape, as opposed to being with family and friends in Kansas. Not to mention that people in cities are a lot more hostile and cautious than villagers. Clark's loneliness could spark flashbacks when he daydreams about his happier days in Smallville (if they use a non linear narrative like Batman Begins).

 

[SuperDaniel]

Clark actually went to the University of Metropolis in the Byrne era.

And one thing, i don`t like Jor-el training Superman at all. Makes no sense for him to plan ahead like that. The only training i`d like to see is maybe showing him about the history of Krypton and all, almost like an encyclopedia. That birthright thing works fine.

 

[Mr. Earle]

Clark actually went to the University of Metropolis in the Byrne era.

THank god.

And one thing, i don`t like Jor-el training Superman at all. Makes no sense for him to plan ahead like that. The only training i`d like to see is maybe showing him about the history of Krypton and all, almost like an encyclopedia. That birthright thing works fine.

He doesnt have to have planned this. Jor-El is a hax artificial intelligence that contains all the knowledge of the Kryptonian culture, right? Jor-El can simply adapt the training regime for K soldiers to suit superman's powers and teach him how to use them.
"So you say you can fly at tremendous speeds. Lets test how fast you can go and what's your maneuverability at high speeds."
Etc.

 

[Nightwing1983]

I know this is blasphemous, but I really don't think it's a sin to make Clark a little "blumbling." Sure they went a little too far in the first film but even then, in the sequels (yes, including Superman Returns) they actually kind-of toned it down. As someone once pointed out in some podcast, the part in Superman IV where he makes a statement about how the Daily Planet isn't going to sell out shows a bit of an arc for the character, where he still acts somewhat clumbsy and still talks like Kermit, but he's grown a spine.

Also, I think people make WAY too much out of how it draws attention to him and he doesn't want to do that. If he didn't want to draw attention to himself, he wouldn't become a reporter and would never make any friends or go on dates. Acting "bumbling" is a way of creating context. Granted, the way we see it in the movies and such is not only over-the-top but also the external interperetation rather than the internal one; but the point is that if he wanted a low profile, one can argue he'd be better off staying on the farm.

 

[Mr. Earle]

Its not just the bumbling. Modern Clark is one of the two best journalists of the Daily Planet (the other being Lois). He is respected and loved by everyone. In Superman Returns nobody gave a **** that he returned to the Planet besides Jimmy. It was more miserable than the goddamn Batman.

 

[Nightwing1983]

Its not just the bumbling. Modern Clark is one of the two best journalists of the Daily Planet (the other being Lois). He is respected and loved by everyone. In Superman Returns nobody gave a **** that he returned to the Planet besides Jimmy. It was more miserable than the goddamn Batman.

I can see that, but I think it's a valid interpretation (whereas I don't think of him as leaving Lois while he's left a bun in her oven is, especially when he didn't know). Also, in the early days of the Byrne reboot, Lois really seemed to resent him for having gotten the Superman story. Finally, I don't think that's "more miserable than Batman," nor that it's a problem if it is. Yeah, Superman's generally supposed to be positive; but that doesn't mean that Clark has to live this perfect existence.

 

[Webhead2006]

i totally want to see clark who went to college and is a good writer and use the whole being a reporter along side his superman side and all that.

 

[Kurosawa]

He doesnt need to write his own stories, there is a female reporter that's crazy about Superman and she supports him as best as she can.

OK, some things i'd like to discuss:

1) Clark's destiny should be decided by him. Not Jor-El, not the Kents, not Lana. I cant stress how important i think this is. He needs to get lost, frustrated and then decide that this is what he wants to do with his life, because that's who he is.
I didnt like it in Smallville that Jor-El has already planned Clark's life for him and is even forcing him to follow his plan.
Clark should have an emotional and spiritual journey like Bruce's (a different one of course) and find his own path. Then he announces his plan to Jor-El and he comes up with a training regime for him.

2) Clark should finish college/universe. If i am not mistaken he did nothing of the sort in the comics but in our day it would be impossible to find a job at the top newspaper in the city. With his super speed, finishing college would be easy.

3) Clark's first days in Metropolis. I think the movie should address that. He is alone in a big urban landscape, as opposed to being with family and friends in Kansas. Not to mention that people in cities are a lot more hostile and cautious than villagers. Clark's loneliness could spark flashbacks when he daydreams about his happier days in Smallville (if they use a non linear narrative like Batman Begins).

In the Silver and Bronze Age Clark did decide himself to use his powers for good, but he was heavily encouraged to do so and sometimes led to do so by Pa Kent. Sometimes it seemed more like it was their decision; often times it was mutually understood. But a lot of his encouragement and discussion of his powers was with Pa Kent. Martha was much more nervous about him getting hurt, Jonathan was more willing to let Clark play around and he was amazed and fascinated by every thing Clark would learn and then come tell him, even if sometimes what Clark was talking about seeing and doing sort of blew his mind.

And in the Pre-Crisis comics he went to Metropolis University as well, majoring in Journalism. He had also ran the school paper in Smallville and volunteered at the Smallville paper as well. So yeah, he always had Journalism as his goal. Only in the Golden Age did he walk in with no degree and get a reporting job, although that was not unusual for the time.

And yeah, his first days in Metropolis would be pretty tough and lonely, as it is for a lot of kids when they move from home and go to school.

 

[Webhead2006]

hopefully they will have/talk about clark gone to school, love writing as a teen with any smallville scenes. I agree it should be up to clark himself to become a public hero. And i would like his parents alive when is an adult and help him with making his hero look and the whole metropolis look and all that.

 

[Kurosawa]

hopefully they will have/talk about clark gone to school, love writing as a teen with any smallville scenes. I agree it should be up to clark himself to become a public hero. And i would like his parents alive when is an adult and help him with making his hero look and the whole metropolis look and all that.

Well, I'm not a fan of his parents living into his adulthood because I feel a heroic character should ultimately be on their own without guardians or mentors, but I expect them to be around in this reboot.

 

[DavidTyler]

I personally love the idea of his parents being around into his adult years. I've loved how, post-crisis, he's been able to go to them to just unwind and be someone other than the world hero for a few minutes. They're also excellent devices for us to see into Clark's thoughts as well as for exposition purposes. When he shares his inner feelings with them, the writer is really giving the viewers the 'thought balloons' from the comics. The fact that they also add flavour and texture to the tapestry is that added bonus.

It's another reason why I like the costume to be of Earthly origins. He can go back to Martha to have her repair of provide new.

I think that Seigel and Shuster killed them off mainly to keep the supporting cast to what they cold manage. With them gone they only had to deal with Metropolis and the main three: Lois, Perry, and Jimmy. They were writing books mainly for kids and, back then, the less you complicated a story, the easier it was for kids to follow. The fanbase is much older now and that simplicity is actually detrimental to a modern audience used to much more complex entertainment.

The early films actually kept Martha alive though we didn't really see her. BTW, the absolute best scene in the animated movie Superman: Doomsday was the scene with Lois and Martha after Clark's 'death'.

Also - DC discovered that the Kent's were the most popular parts of the Superboy books. When they did away with Superboy, the powers that be decided keeping them alive was desirable.

 

[Kurosawa]

They killed them off because they understood, as writers of heroic fiction do, that ultimately the hero has to be alone. Keeping them alive keeps Superman perpetually Superboy, running home to momma whenever times get tough. Harry Potter doesn't get to run home to momma. Luke has to face Vader alone. It's a classic archetype, and since Superman now lacks it he seems...less complete on a subconscious level. To me it makes Superman less tragic than Batman and in the way DC depicts it, inferior because he's never lost anything that he really cared about since they made Krypton a non-factor to him in 86. It's not a matter of simplicity, its more a matter of Byrne turning Superman into a Marvel character that he was comfortable with as he remade Supes as a Colossus/Spider-Man hybrid. But I don't expect them to fix this mistake, and I expect Superman to continue to be less for it.

I also feel the scene where he realizes that with all his powers, he still couldn't save them...is essential. He couldn't do anything to help Krypton for obvious reasons, and he couldn't save his Earth parents either...even his power has limits. Losing them made him a man.

 

[true316]

I can see that, but I think it's a valid interpretation (whereas I don't think of him as leaving Lois while he's left a bun in her oven is, especially when he didn't know). Also, in the early days of the Byrne reboot, Lois really seemed to resent him for having gotten the Superman story. Finally, I don't think that's "more miserable than Batman," nor that it's a problem if it is. Yeah, Superman's generally supposed to be positive; but that doesn't mean that Clark has to live this perfect existence.

They killed them off because they understood, as writers of heroic fiction do, that ultimately the hero has to be alone. Keeping them alive keeps Superman perpetually Superboy, running home to momma whenever times get tough. Harry Potter doesn't get to run home to momma. Luke has to face Vader alone. It's a classic archetype, and since Superman now lacks it he seems...less complete on a subconscious level. To me it makes Superman less tragic than Batman and in the way DC depicts it, inferior because he's never lost anything that he really cared about since they made Krypton a non-factor to him in 86. It's not a matter of simplicity, its more a matter of Byrne turning Superman into a Marvel character that he was comfortable with as he remade Supes as a Colossus/Spider-Man hybrid. But I don't expect them to fix this mistake, and I expect Superman to continue to be less for it.

I also feel the scene where he realizes that with all his powers, he still couldn't save them...is essential. He couldn't do anything to help Krypton for obvious reasons, and he couldn't save his Earth parents either...even his power has limits. Losing them made him a man.

I agree that Clark's life shouldn't be perfect. One of the issues I have with Bryne's take was that it seemed to remove ALL the hardship from Superman's life. Krypton was depicted as a place where it seemed unusual for a husband to tell his wife that he loved her. You almost feel good for Kal-El that he gets spared that life. Clark was also the football star in high school (with ease of course). When he gets to the Daily Planet he's a popular, award winning journalist and ultimately marries the girl of his dreams. When he's Superman he gets parades thrown in his honor. And if he doesn't know what to do he can go home to Smallville for apple pie and sage advice on how to be a superhero from his loving parents who are both alive. It sounds like a perfect existence.

And that's a problem. I would say one of Bryne's main goals was to make Superman more relatable. However, life isn't perfect. Life is full of obstacles but it is also full of the overcoming of obstacles. If you have a hero that doesn't really have big obstacles to overcome it can be hard to, dare I say it... relate to him. It that sense, I think Bryne had exactly the opposite effect that he had hoped to have.

I wouldn't kill both parents but I would allow Jonathan Kent to die. I just think its a powerful way to connect Clark to the rest of us. It wouldn't be from some supervillain bent on revenge or a meteor falling out of the sky. It would be something like a heart attack or a stroke. I remember when the father of one of my friends had multiple strokes. She was a senior in high school at the time and was understandably devastated. He had serious health issues after that and a couple of years later he passed away. I remember being a groomsman at her wedding some time later and the feeling I had as I watched her mother give her away. That's life. It isn't always perfect. But we face up to it and deal with the tough things as well as the pleasant things.

A hero who doesn't have at least some palpable hardship in his life seems unrelatable to me.

 

[DavidTyler]

They killed them off because they understood, as writers of heroic fiction do, that ultimately the hero has to be alone.

Brother, I don't want to get into a fight with you but this is only your opinion. There are quite a few stories of heroes whose parents aren't killed off .... and remain quite heroic. And, as I pointed out earlier, Martha Kent wasn't killed off in most versions.

Superman doesn't need to be a tragic figure. In fact, he can work much better as a character if he isn't. He would be the antithesis of Bruce/Batman who can only be a tragic figure. There are many other ways Clark can learn that his abilities aren't always the solution. BTW, the argument you posed - that with all his powers, he couldn't save them was an invention of the Donner film - not of Seigel & Shuster. And, again, Martha was left alive so it wasn't couldn't save them - it was couldn't save HIM - meaning Jonathan Kent. soes that somehow making half as tragic?

Keeping them alive keeps Superman perpetually Superboy, running home to momma whenever times get tough. Harry Potter doesn't get to run home to momma. Luke has to face Vader alone. It's a classic archetype, and since Superman now lacks it he seems...less complete on a subconscious level. To me it makes Superman less tragic than Batman and in the way DC depicts it, inferior because he's never lost anything that he really cared about since they made Krypton a non-factor to him in 86. It's not a matter of simplicity, its more a matter of Byrne turning Superman into a Marvel character that he was comfortable with as he remade Supes as a Colossus/Spider-Man hybrid. But I don't expect them to fix this mistake, and I expect Superman to continue to be less for it.

He couldn't do anything to help Krypton for obvious reasons, and he couldn't save his Earth parents either...even his power has limits. Losing them made him a man.

Clark wasn't running home to Momma to solve problems for him. It was his chance to reconnect with his humanity ... his roots .. and feel grounded. He used it to clear his head. Did you completely avoid the Byrne era of the books?

Additionally, it's only your opinion that tragedy is the only real mark of a hero and the amount of it makes you a greater hero. My parents are both alive ... by your standards I don't qualify as a man. Being a Man isn't something that's thrust on you, it's the decisions you make. Same here for Clark. He doesn't become a hero to offset something terrible in his life but, rather, as a conscious choice. THAT, to me , MAKES Clark a man AND a hero.

 

[Webhead2006]

well kuro for me i dont see why his earth parents have to be dead prior to him being superman. He can easily decide and become superman on his own with them still around, and be there for him for moral support and to get into some family scenes here and there. Then also a good place to have stuff about how he grew up. Then down the road in later films for them to come to metropolis or clark to go to smallville with lois and she gets to meet them and all that. Its not like i am saying we have to see them all the time and all that.

 

[Mr. Earle]

In the Silver and Bronze Age Clark did decide himself to use his powers for good, but he was heavily encouraged to do so and sometimes led to do so by Pa Kent. Sometimes it seemed more like it was their decision; often times it was mutually understood. But a lot of his encouragement and discussion of his powers was with Pa Kent. Martha was much more nervous about him getting hurt, Jonathan was more willing to let Clark play around and he was amazed and fascinated by every thing Clark would learn and then come tell him, even if sometimes what Clark was talking about seeing and doing sort of blew his mind.

And in the Pre-Crisis comics he went to Metropolis University as well, majoring in Journalism. He had also ran the school paper in Smallville and volunteered at the Smallville paper as well. So yeah, he always had Journalism as his goal. Only in the Golden Age did he walk in with no degree and get a reporting job, although that was not unusual for the time.

And yeah, his first days in Metropolis would be pretty tough and lonely, as it is for a lot of kids when they move from home and go to school.

Thanks for the info, i really appreciate it.

Well, I'm not a fan of his parents living into his adulthood because I feel a heroic character should ultimately be on their own without guardians or mentors, but I expect them to be around in this reboot.

His parents barely interfere anymore. If anything, Alfred interferes more than them. I'd leave them alive just so i could use them for heartwarming scenes when Clark visits them. Its not like they can give him much advise on his superman job.
"Hey son i think you should try beating Brainiac this way."

They are there like Aunt May is to Peter. They serve as his home, his nest. Kents, the farm and Krypto are some of the best elements of the mythos for me. I cant stand a miserable Superman.

 

[Nightwing1983]

With regards to his parents being alive, I have to say, when I picked up Superman vol 2 #75 when it came out, I was confused when I saw Martha and Jonathan. I thought, "it couldn't be... but is it?" because I was mainly familiar with the movies, old TV show, what cartoons were out there (except the '88 series) and my dad's old comics. I had a trading card of Lex which informed me that he'd become a billionaire, but that they would make a change as massive as his parents' being alive just didn't occur to me.

I think it works both ways. Heck, what if they switched it up this time and had Jonathan live and Martha die? Either way, I think keeping Jonathan alive (the only time Martha died in live action was off camera in the old serial and in the '80s films and even the later was revealed in throwaway dialogue) would only work in an origin and not just a soft-reboot because otherwise, it would just be too confusing to the audience.

That's what I think, anyway.