Tom Welling as Superman

[eXperiment]

This one's for Hulk, Serene, and Kal-El 8, my Chloe-lovin' buds:

<- Loves handing out heart attacks.

thats awesome

 

[avidreader]

Thanks guys, it means a lot.

I just love tinkering with photoshop, but for some reason my favorite subject is always the same guy... Hmmm..

I didnt realise you did that. That's awesome!

 

[AgentPat]

Do you think there is a desire there though? On Wellings part I mean. Does he want to continue down that road? I don't know I always get the feeling from his interviews that he doesn't want that. Not because he doesn't want to play the part but just the evolution of the show doesn't seem to follow that formula.

Well, first thing to keep in mind is that Welling dances through super raindrops any time he's asked to publicly comment on Superman-related endeavors beyond the scope of SV proper. It's an odd "strategy," particular since he's keenly aware of what's been going on *outside* the box.

Of the comments that he HAS made, the ones that stick out to me are the ones where he talks about SV and his enjoyment playing Clark. He likes the character quite a bit. He's in a unique position to develop Clark from the ground up, and that excites him. It would any actor. That's what's important to him. I don't think he really cares what funky wardrobe they might make him wear going into the future. As long as he's still building a character that doesn't have all the answers yet, he'll be happy. All the spin you hear about Welling not wanting to play Superman is simply ridiculous. He's genuinely concerned about doing the show and the mythos justice. He knows what the fans want, but he doesn't want to make it too easy for the character either. There's a delicate balance between the cast, the writers, the studio, and the fans. When it comes to life after SV, Welling's perfectly content to let the rumormille do its own thing and step out of the way of progressively mounting snowballs.

I know things change but they still seem to stay true (not very well I know) to the "no tights, no flights" crap. They BEND the hell out of that rule but would they all be willing to go that far?

"They?" The cast? The producers? The studio? Who "they?" 'Cause I think you'll get different answers from various people, depending on the question. LOL

Personally, I don't see the cast being interested in continuing after seven years with another show, ala "Metropolis." I just don't see it happening. Would the studio be interested? Pfft. Only if there was money to be made, and lots of it. Based on the success of SV, I'd say that was a good bet, but sans the established cast, the forecast on such an endeavor is questionable, not to mention redundant - it's been done before (L&C). A one-off film for TV, DTV, or Feature seems more plausible, especially since the main cast are interested in pursuing film careers.

I think they go great together. Durance is my favorite Lois.

I think both bring a new "feel" to the table for their respective characters. There's a palpable spark between the two that's not present between Clark and the other characters. A lot of that is writing of course, but the way they (metaphorically) beat each other up is delightful. Durance's Lois is caustic in a "I-don't-think-before-I-speak" kinda way, which is perfect because Welling's Clark can be naive in a "I-don't-think-before-I-act" kind of way. Both traits are perfect since the characterization applies regardless of age.

Call it fanboy wishing but I think Welling and them would stay on longer if a good opportunity existed.

Agreed. And if anything, I bet Welling would be the easiest sell. (Discussions at the contract table not withstanding of course LOL.)

that's awesome

Thanks! I wish I could take credit for it, but all I did was scan it.

 

[bulok]

When I think of "Smallville" I think of Clark, not the town itself. That is afterall one of Lois' nicknames for him.

Clark/Superman is afterall a product of small town America more than he is of Krypton. Strong, dependable, and honorable. I think "Smallville" will always be about Clark kent, not Lex or Chloe or even Lana. Smallville IS Clark Kent. I think the show would go from the town of Smallville to Metropolis and beyond if need be so long as the fans are watching.

 

[MJZ]

I'd have to agree with you there. I think if they gave him more of a chance to grow he would. I think one of the pitfalls they he has had to deal with is they really dont let him do as much. Granted they have allowed him to do more but they seem to want him to keep that stoic characterization. Not allowing him to move as much and let the actors around him do more comes to mind. I think they should let him become more animated in his performance. Really see what he can do and not just as a redK story or just some middle of the season story. Really let him open up throughout the season and let him craft the character. I mean yes it is Clark Kent and he has limitations on things but that doesnt mean he cant become more of a dynamic character. IF they do that perhaps it could lead to something bigger on the show or maybe him in the suit for at least some of the final season. Hell I dont see why they can't let it go for quite some time more. He is after all only what....19..20 on the show? He still has a lot of stuff to do.

Yeah his character has remained pretty stagnant. He's also very re-active, rather than proactive.

But, given his comments in Vessel I think he's finally realized that Jor-El ain't so bad. If they keep pushing in that direction we should be set.

 

[KalElofKrypton]

Traditionally there are three roles:

- Smallville Clark (CK in his usual personality)

- Metropolis Clark (the disguise, bumbling with the glasses)

- Superman (Kal-El of Krypton; America's hero)

In the SV universe, there will be no Metropolis Clark disguise....G+M have stated instead that Superman itself will be the disguise somehow, and regular Clark (Smallville Clark) will continue..

How theyll even pull that off is beyond me... but its pretty messed up.

Yes, that is very messed up. Superman is, in a way, who he is. Clark Kent is the disguise to hide his identity of Superman. I think if Smallville goes far enough for this idea to come into play, if this idea is used it will need some very creative writing.

 

[The Caped Knight]

SUPERMAN is the real deal & Clark Kent is the disguise . Just like BATMAN is the real deal & Bruce Wayne is the disguise. The way smallville has it. Is messed up.

 

[Scooter]

I've always though there were two Clark Kents. One for the Daily Planet (disguise), and one for alone time - the farm, generally - and that one is more or less the "real" person. Superman is an extension of that, but also a public figure.

 

[TKodami]

I've always though there were two Clark Kents. One for the Daily Planet (disguise), and one for alone time - the farm, generally - and that one is more or less the "real" person. Superman is an extension of that, but also a public figure.

I'm with ya, Scooter. It's impossible for me to think of a public persona of any kind as the "one real person." We all act, speak, and think in different registers depending on the social context. We all also have parts of us that we keep secret (Fortress of Solitude, anyone?--well, not counting Supes' handy dandy Silver Age Robo-minions). I'm of the opinion that you have to take the totality of the person and their behaviors or "disguises" in order to see the real person.

"Farm Clark" is who I generally see the most authentic persona, but not the only one. And certainly not always the most salient one. When AlMiles talk about SV Clark being the real person--it's that his SV persona, his "Clark on the farm" is his authentic self. When they project it into the future, I see a L&C-like future. A "Clark Kent is who I am; Superman is what I can do" deal, where the cape & tights are so much of a symbol that people can't see Clark--still his decent, good, not-to-bumbling self from SV--is Superman because they just can't comprehend Superman as anything less than a Golden, eagle-toting God.

(I wish I had that Scan from the 2nd TPB Batman/Superman collection.)

 

[Pickle-El]

Any new manips?

 

[RakuMon]

Ahh... the trickle-down effect...gotta love it.

I was just going to make you guys and gals aware of this darn thing, but you are all great bloodhounds (in the nicest way), everybody is so quick on the button, instant news arrives before the instant!!


Anyway, in regards to the subject at hand...

Nothing wrong with speculating Whatsoever...
(hey, if Fox can do it with the X...)

I remember a story my local delivery guy was telling me once, about some customer who ordered a veggie because they claimed that they didn't make the supreme with the kind of topping he wanted... until they informed him that, oh yes, that topping was definitely available, and in fact if and when the cirumstances demanded it, they'd fully incorporate it into the menu...


For those wondering more about my pizza delivery guy...
(and those with a question mark over their heads right now)

My delivery guy isn't required to wear a uniform...but despite the stigma associated with his restaurant, he's not --and never has been-- adverse to putting one on ...should they ask him nicely enough...

Remember the speculation that SV could go DTV? If not, scroll back 10 or so pages. It was an AdAge article that talked about possibly doing live action Superman movies on video. Anyway, a recent LA Times article is cause for more speculation. To wit:

Warner to Proceed Straight to Video
The studio is launching a direct-to-DVD business with plans to release 10 to 15 movies a year.
By Claudia Eller, Times Staff Writer
May 30, 2006

Looking for new, less risky ways to boost profit, Warner Bros. is launching a direct-to-DVD business that will release 10 to 15 low-budget movies a year.

First up will be a sequel to the studio's 2005 hit "The Dukes of Hazzard," scheduled to go on sale at the end of this year or in early 2007.

Movies made exclusively for DVD typically are done on the cheap without the costly stars and lavish production expenses associated with theatrical films.

Adhering to that model, Warner aims to keep each direct-to-DVD movie's production budget to $5 million or less, although some films may cost slightly more. The "Dukes" sequel, for example, won't reunite cast members Jessica Simpson, Johnny Knoxville and Seann William Scott.

The new venture, a partnership between Warner Bros. Pictures and Warner Bros. Home Entertainment Group, aims to cash in on what has been a lucrative, relatively inexpensive business for such rivals as Walt Disney Studios and Universal Pictures.

"We recognize that the made-for-video business is a place we need to put emphasis and devote considerable resources," Warner President Alan Horn said. "Discipline is the key to the ultimate success of the new venture for us."

Still, the direct-to-DVD business is no sure bet. It faces increased competition from boxed sets of popular television shows such as "Lost," "24" and "Desperate Housewives," one of the hottest areas in home video.

"The made-for-home entertainment business can be very profitable if you select the right projects, control your development and production costs and time your releases to minimize your marketing expenditures and maximize your exposure," said Louis Feola, Universal Pictures' former home video president who oversaw such popular direct-to-video franchises as "The Land Before Time."

Jeff Robinov, Warner's production president, and Kevin Tsujihara, president of the studio's home entertainment group, will oversee the new division, which is expected to be operating within three months. The two are looking to hire an executive to run the day-to-day operations of the unit, which is expected to have 10 staff members, including its own creative, business and marketing personnel.

Robinov said the division would produce live-action DVD prequels and sequels to existing Warner Bros. movies such as "Dukes," which grossed $80.3 million domestically but was not the kind of hit that would justify spending the large sums required to make and market a theatrical release.

Still, Robinov said, "That doesn't mean they don't have audience interest and built-in awareness."

Robinov added that although profit margins in the direct-to-video business could be thinner than in theatrical releases, such built-in awareness along with creative marketing could mitigate the financial risks.

Tsujihara said a "Dukes" sequel allowed Warner to repackage on DVD the original film and episodes of the popular 1980s TV series it was based on.

Warner's new division also will produce and acquire original made-for-DVD movies running the gamut of genres including horror, comedy and action films. Last month, Warner, a unit of media giant Time Warner Inc., announced it would finance three, under-$5-million DVD-only horror films to be directed by Daniel Myrick ("The Blair Witch Project"), producer Tony Krantz ("24") and TV writer John Shiban ("The X-Files").

Until now, Warner has released direct-to-video titles on a scattershot basis, mostly animated family fare from the studio's "Scooby-Doo," "Tom & Jerry" and "Loony Toons" franchises. The studio plans to continue releasing family-oriented DVDs, including films culled from its DC Comics library of characters, among them Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman.

"We've had an existing slate of four to five of these evergreen titles a year, and they are fairly profitable," Tsujihara said. "We'd like to put together slates that have a mixture of genres."

http://www.latimes.com/technology/l...ll=la-headlines-technology&ctrack=1&cset=true

Just some... er... food for thought.

 

[Kane]

Until now, Warner has released direct-to-video titles on a scattershot basis, mostly animated family fare from the studio's "Scooby-Doo," "Tom & Jerry" and "Loony Toons" franchises. The studio plans to continue releasing family-oriented DVDs, including films culled from its DC Comics library of characters, among them Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman.

Just some... er... food for thought.

Ya they are refering to family animated releases for the DC comics properties specifically in that paragraph.

Examples so far are this summer's "Superman:Brainiac Attacks" and theyve already revealed that they want to do an animated Superman Returns tie-in DVD (like Animatrix for the Matrix Trilogy).

Nothing to really do with Smallville.... but probably good news for Superman/DC fans anyway.

 

[Ultimate_Superman]

Ya they are refering to family animated releases for the DC comics properties specifically in that paragraph.

Examples so far are this summer's "Superman:Brainiac Attacks" and theyve already revealed that they want to do an animated Superman Returns tie-in DVD (like Animatrix for the Matrix Trilogy).

Nothing to really do with Smallville.... but probably good news for Superman/DC fans anyway.

Yep though the reviews for the new S:TAS movie are not that good. I am still going to get it. and the SR tie in is going to be more like Star Wars: The Clone Wars only with out it being short clips and more or less a long movie to bridge the gaps between this new movie and the next one.

 

[Thunder Emperor]

SUPERMAN is the real deal & Clark Kent is the disguise . Just like BATMAN is the real deal & Bruce Wayne is the disguise. The way smallville has it. Is messed up.

i think you don't read the comic books do you, clark kent smallville (aka the comics/ kal-el is the real deal, clark kent metropolis is the disguise, or to put is simply. Superman is what i do and clark kent is who i am. You know who named him superman, it wasn't him. Go read a comic book before you start stating crap.

 

[Ultimate_Superman]

i think you don't read the comic books do you, clark kent smallville (aka the comics/ kal-el is the real deal, clark kent metropolis is the disguise, or to put is simply. Superman is what i do and clark kent is who i am. You know who named him superman, it wasn't him. Go read a comic book before you start stating crap.

No he is right and your right it really all depends on who writes and how you look at things. Superman is the real person most of the time. It started out with Superman being the real person then thanks to Man of Steel Clark became the real person. Now they switch it back and forward depending on who is writing. As far as Batman he is right about that one.

 

[Thunder Emperor]

No he is right and your right it really all depends on who writes and how you look at things. Superman is the real person most of the time. It started out with Superman being the real person then thanks to Man of Steel Clark became the real person. Now they switch it back and forward depending on who is writing. As far as Batman he is right about that one.

as for batman he is right, but as for superman I still say, if not for the kents, there will be no superman period. he powers mean nothing without the upbringing.

 

[Kaboom]

so what youre saying is Superman is like a pu...an uncarved block.

 

[Ultimate_Superman]

as for batman he is right, but as for superman I still say, if not for the kents, there will be no superman period. he powers mean nothing without the upbringing.

Fair enough and I agree to a some degree. Though I still feel like Superman is the real person because he is not being himself with out using his powers. Thats who he is Super.

 

[Thunder Emperor]

Fair enough and I agree to a some degree. Though I still feel like Superman is the real person because he is not being himself with out using his powers. Thats who he is Super.

but remember superman is abotu the power he weilds, but how he weilds it. because if he sued it for evil, he would not be name by lois or the people of metropolis as superman, but as something else. it is becasue he decided to help people. that is why he is superman becasue of the decision he made.

 

[millennium movies]

He will never play Superman.

 

[AgentPat]

He will never play Superman.

Psst.... he already does.

Wait for it....

 

[millennium movies]

Smallville is not Superman. Only a cheap Clark Kent soap opera. You SV fanboys can keep dreaming that he will one day play him. Hopefully one day you will get past the fact he WASN'T casted in the films. Hey if it makes you happy go ahead dream on!

Cute cat btw!

 

[The Watchman]

Clark on the farm, more than anything else is closest to who he actually is, so Welling certainly IS playing Kal-El, and maybe the truest "personality" thereof...

...He isn't Metropolis Clark Kent (disguise) he isn't Superman (the pubilic hero persona)

 

[The Watchman]

Smallville is not Superman. Only a cheap Clark Kent soap opera. You SV fanboys can keep dreaming that he will one day play him. Hopefully one day you will get past the fact he WASN'T casted in the films. Hey if it makes you happy go ahead dream on!

Dude, uncalled for...everything the character of Superman is meant to stand for and how the fans actually act make me sick.

 

[AgentPat]

Clark on the farm, more than anything else is closest to who he actually is, so Welling certainly IS playing Kal-El, and maybe the truest "personality" thereof...

...He isn't Metropolis Clark Kent (disguise) he isn't Superman (the public hero persona)

This works for moi. Nice breakdown.



Y'know, it never ceases to amaze me how SV fans can state till they're blue in the face how much they're beyond ecstatic that Welling wasn't cast in the film, but still be completely ignored. Make a statement like "he's Superman" however, and self professed fans of the character and the mythos are all over us like white on rice. LOL Eh, whatcha gonna do?

Hey Millennium, just so you know, I'm not a fanboy, and there's no such word as "casted." Oh yeah, and I'm glad Welling wasn't cast in SR. If he eventually goes on to portray the character in a feature film or DTV, I'd want it to be *after* SV concludes its run on the small screen, and I'd want it to be based on SV's modern continuity and character history, not one that's nearly 30 years old. I don't *want* to see him change his style or approach. He's made the character real and relatable through his own personal interpretation, and THAT's the one that actually MEANS something to me right now.

It's rather funny how audiences are apparently being expected to accept the other guy as the new Superman simply because he shares the same name and a "vague" history with one that we DO care about. Uh, no. Doesn't work that way. Sowee. As far as I'm concerned, new dude is just playing a character in an oddly familiar, but disturbingly wrong costume.

There's more depth to this Kal-El and this Clark than I've ever seen in any live action portrayal before. Your mileage of course, may vary...