Superman Returns What Purpose Did Clark Serve in SR?

[Angeloz]

I'll admit I don't care if there was a purpose or not. I liked Clark in Metropolis. As stated though he found out a whole lot of information as Clark (Jason, Richard, Lex and Lois being missing and where she was). But I also think even though he's hiding as Clark. I still believe Clark in Metropolis and Superman are still aspects of his personality. Maybe he sometimes brings things out more but I think he's just exaggerating things. Clark is his unsure, clumsy and slightly geeky side. And Superman is him being able to use his abilities and show confidence doing so. Clark on the farm doesn't have to hide parts of himself except to the neighbours.

Angeloz

 

[El Payaso]

Clark pretty much served no purpose in the "Singerverse", except to put in a few cameo shots when not being Superman, basically reducing Clark's importance to the overall character.

And what was that tremendous Clark's importance in the previous movies again?

 

[Kabuki_Jo]

walk around looking dorky and infactuated like a teenage boy.

 

[El Payaso]

^ Same as in STM and SII.

 

[Kabuki_Jo]

Yep.
Time for Zach to step in and finally delivery an adult Superman flick.

 

[afan]

I don't see Clark Kent as a disguise or an alter ego...he's the man himself...but he's also this alien being who puts on a costume and becomes 'Superman".
Which also means he's not the clumsy fellow of the Reeve movies...I'd veer more towards the George Reeves version of Clark and go deeper from there into his character.

I agree on the George Reeves version, and the whole tone of the show as an example of the proper use of the character(Superman),
but the mild mannered reporter on the Daily Planet staff is definitely a disguise.

The problem is that people are splitting the caharacter into seperate identities. It's really not that complicated. He is always the same man, who wears functional disguises, or uniforms if you will. Much the same as Bruce Wayne will disguise himself as Matches Malone, but no one would ever suggest that Matches Malone is the "real man".

At the time of the creation of the character a major metropolitan newspaper was the cream of the crop at gathering news and information quickly, hence the mild mannered reporter disguise at the Daily Planet allowed him to learn quickly of the need for Superman. His role as a reporter also allows him to investigate and gather info.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I agree on the George Reeves version, and the whole tone of the show as an example of the proper use of the character(Superman),
but the mild mannered reporter on the Daily Planet staff is definitely a disguise.

The problem is that people are splitting the caharacter into seperate identities. It's really not that complicated. He is always the same man, who wears functional disguises, or uniforms if you will. Much the same as Bruce Wayne will disguise himself as Matches Malone, but no one would ever suggest that Matches Malone is the "real man".

At the time of the creation of the character a major metropolitan newspaper was the cream of the crop at gathering news and information quickly, hence the mild mannered reporter disguise at the Daily Planet allowed him to learn quickly of the need for Superman. His role as a reporter also allows him to investigate and gather info.

IMO thats exactly what purpose the SR Clark serves, amoung others.

 

[afan]

Just curious, AVEITWITHJAMON, have you seen any of the George Reeves Adventures of Superman TV series?

I know you have stated that SR is your introduction to the character, and you have expanded your interest to reading the comics also, and I think you might enjoy seeing a version of the character that is devoid of the "soap opera" atmosphere of SR and focusses much more on the Adventures of angle, which features a very different take on Clark Kent.

 

[buggs0268]

Considering in SR it seemed like the Singerverse went with the direction that Superman (Kal-El) is the real guy, rather than Clark Kent (a direction, I add, I don't agree with)...what was the exact purpose of Clark being in the movie?

I don't really remember him really doing anything, aside from being around when Lois sent that fax in from the ship. He wasn't in the film a lot.
The film didn't really suggest that Clark was trying to become romantically involved with Lois...since well, it instead just focused on Superman and Lois.
And as well, the Clark on the Kent Farm in the beginning was just Superman with his costume off.

So, what was the purpose of having Clark in the Singerverse, aside from just being forced to since you're dealing with the Superman comic book character?

See...I always preferred that Clark is the real guy...aside from being better storywise, it gives Clark a real purpose in being around in the first place.
As I tend to see Superman and Batman as opposites...well, their personas are different too. With Batman, the Batman persona is the real person rather than Bruce...while with Superman, Clark Kent is the real person.

When you look at other Superhero films, both alter-ego and hero have a lot to do. Spiderman series really has peter and Spider doing a lot of things. In Donner's films, both Clark and Supes have a lot of things to do and say. In SR Clark is pretty much looking around stupidly, or doing something dumb, but not really doing much of anything. Just standing there. Hell an episode of Superman the Animated Series had Clark and Superman doing more in a 20 minute time period than this movie did in over 2 hours. Hell, the Superman meets Batman movie had two heroes sharing screen time, and both alter ego's for both heroes had more screen time in that movie, and it is just over an hour long.

Routh was basically just set dressing most of the time.

 

[El Payaso]

In Donner's films, both Clark and Supes have a lot of things to do and say.

And once again, what was all that Clark did and said in STM and SII?

 

[ScottishFogg]

Lets leave the name 'Kal-El' out of this for now, otherwise it gets confusing:

Essentially there are three sides to this character (and Singer explained this on "Look Up In The Sky");

- Clark On the Farm (The real man who grew up in Kansas under a human alias)

- Superman (Clark's public superhero identity, known as an alien who became Metropolis' savior; an exaggerated public persona).

- Metropolis Clark Kent (An invented personality that Clark uses to throw Lois, Jimmy, Perry etc off from discovering hes Superman in metropolis).

This works out beautifully because Clark's Superman personality tends to sometimes come out of Metropolis Clark Kent too; especially in front of Jimmy (who doesnt know Superman closely).

Lois knows Superman intimately but doesnt know barely anything about Metropolis Clark, he doesnt stand out to her.

Lex knows Superman intimately but has never even met Clark Kent (in both forms).

So this 3-way method of dealing with his identity works out believeably in this context.

What Singer needs to do for the future films is to throw more of a central focus to the real Clark. Hes essentially the guy who plays the two exaggerations of Metopolis Clark and Superman.

I dont consider Superman to be the real person becuase in the deleted Smallville scenes there seemed to be some debate with farmboy Clark as to whether he should even go back to Metropolis and be 'Superman' or stay on the farm.

Clearly 'Superman' is something he does, Kansas Clark is who he is. The greatest irony of all this is neither Lois, Jason, Jimmy, Perry or Richard know his true personality. Thats one of the more interesting facets of the character.

that's the best i've heard it put yet. clear and succinct.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Just curious, AVEITWITHJAMON, have you seen any of the George Reeves Adventures of Superman TV series?

I know you have stated that SR is your introduction to the character, and you have expanded your interest to reading the comics also, and I think you might enjoy seeing a version of the character that is devoid of the "soap opera" atmosphere of SR and focusses much more on the Adventures of angle, which features a very different take on Clark Kent.

I may have watched some as a kid, but its highly unlikely that i have ever watched any of the George Reeves TV series, and i doubt i will to be honest as from what i have seen i wouldnt enjoy it. Also, to be honest again, i liked the soap opera elements of SR.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

I think Clark served a very worthy purpose in SR. If it wasnt for Clark he wouldnt have found out Lois was engaged and had a kid, if it wasnt for Clark he would have never found out that Lex wasnt in prison any more and the reasons for that. If it wasnt for Clark he wouldnt have met Jason OR Richard.

Plus, if it wasnt for Clark he wouldnt have known Lois and Jason were missing and he wouldnt have known were to find them. He also wouldnt have known that Richard was flying out there, which would have made his choice to help Metropolis instead of Lois a LOT harder.

Also, notice throughout the movie, he tries to get Lois to talk to him or tries to get her to go somewere to talk, but she either always ignore's him, changes the subject, or talks to someone else. So he DOES try and woo her as Clark, but when he sees she isnt interested, he tries as Superman, hence the rooftop scene.

When you look at other Superhero films, both alter-ego and hero have a lot to do. Spiderman series really has peter and Spider doing a lot of things. In Donner's films, both Clark and Supes have a lot of things to do and say. In SR Clark is pretty much looking around stupidly, or doing something dumb, but not really doing much of anything. Just standing there. Hell an episode of Superman the Animated Series had Clark and Superman doing more in a 20 minute time period than this movie did in over 2 hours. Hell, the Superman meets Batman movie had two heroes sharing screen time, and both alter ego's for both heroes had more screen time in that movie, and it is just over an hour long.

Routh was basically just set dressing most of the time.

Please Buggs, read my earlier post above, and then tell me Routh's Clark served no purpose in the movie.

 

[Qwerty©]

When you look at other Superhero films, both alter-ego and hero have a lot to do. Spiderman series really has peter and Spider doing a lot of things.

That's very different, Spider-Man is basically Peter Parker in a costume. Not comparable.

In Donner's films, both Clark and Supes have a lot of things to do and say.

They didn't really do much more than was shown in SR, especially Clark.

In SR Clark is pretty much looking around stupidly, or doing something dumb, but not really doing much of anything.

In SR, Clark is the human anchor for Superman. He uses Clark to talk to Lois and his friends, also to find out if anything is going on that he can fix as Superman. This is shown in SR. Look at the scene where he admires Lois in the elevator, all the scenes where he uses his super-hearing to find out whats going on, when he gets the co-ordinates, and when he finds out Lois has a kid. Basically everything that affects Superman, he found out as Clark.

Hell an episode of Superman the Animated Series had Clark and Superman doing more in a 20 minute time period than this movie did in over 2 hours.

Because the time period is shorter, things have to go faster. Also the cartoons are for children, who have shorter attention spans. But the main thing is Clark in STAS is a different Clark to the one in SR. In STAS, he is the main personality rather than a front.

Routh was basically just set dressing most of the time.

Yeah, all he did was be the main protagonist

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

^I totally agree Qwuerty.

 

[afan]

I may have watched some as a kid, but its highly unlikely that i have ever watched any of the George Reeves TV series, and i doubt i will to be honest as from what i have seen i wouldnt enjoy it. Also, to be honest again, i liked the soap opera elements of SR.

Too bad.
Interesting, that you can have a preference without sampling both.

Well, if you do decide to watch even one episode in order to research the character and experience a version different from SR, I highly recommend, "Panic in the Sky". It even includes a plot that easily could be adapted to SR's, a world without Superman theme.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Too bad.
Interesting, that you can have a preference without sampling both.

Well, if you do decide to watch even one episode in order to research the character and experience a version different from SR, I highly recommend, "Panic in the Sky". It even includes a plot that easily could be adapted to SR's, a world without Superman theme.

I might catch some on TV one day, but that'll be the only way i'll see them, i wont 'seek them out' so to speak. From the excerpts i've seen, its not something i would enjoy.

 

[hitmanyr2k]

And once again, what was all that Clark did and said in STM and SII?

A hell of a lot more than Clark did in SR. Clark in STM at least had his character established with a memorable presence...something to build on. He interacted with people and put up such a great front that no one in their right mind would ever think this bumbling, awkward, cowardly guy is Superman. Especially Lois since she witnesses Clark "fainting" when they get mugged.

Clark in SR is nothing but a mute that stares at people in the office. And apparently if anyone sees him hanging around the office doing nothing and has a mild inclination that this guy could be Superman (since all the pieces fit) all Clark has to do is look at that person and then smile and wave lol. Problem solved...no way that guy could be Superman because Superman would never smile and wave at anyone

Perry even puts him on an assignment to go check out the blackouts and what does Clark do? Stands around the office doing nothing. It makes me wonder how the guy could keep a job as an investigative reporter.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

^Your kidding right? Just because we didnt see Clark doing any work doesnt mean he didnt do any.

Also, when Lois and Richard look at him, what is he doing? He's reading a document, so how is he doing nothing there? Also, it wasnt just the fact that he smiled and waved at them, it was HOW he did it.

He looked around first, like he was confused and lost (something Superman NEVER seems to be), and THEN smiled and waved at Richard and Lois as if they hadnt been there all night, as if he'd just noticed them, he was looking a bit dozy. Also, he did all this in a totally geeky way.

 

[El Payaso]

A hell of a lot more than Clark did in SR. Clark in STM at least had his character established with a memorable presence...something to build on.

1.- Presence is not something the character did or said.
2.- What was built on presence?

He interacted with people and put up such a great front that no one in their right mind would ever think this bumbling, awkward, cowardly guy is Superman.

Exactly like in SR.

Especially Lois since she witnesses Clark "fainting" when they get mugged.

And for different reasons, the same Lois was in SR.

Clark in SR is nothing but a mute that stares at people in the office.

And talks to Jimmy, Lois, Richard and Jason.

Then I can say SR Clark has a social life going to a bar for a beer with Jimmy. Which Reeve's Clark never did.

And apparently if anyone sees him hanging around the office doing nothing and has a mild inclination that this guy could be Superman (since all the pieces fit) all Clark has to do is look at that person and then smile and wave lol.

Stupid thing SR shouldn't have took out from the previous movies.

Problem solved...no way that guy could be Superman because Superman would never smile and wave at anyone

Errr.... how about "that guy can't be Superman because he wears glasses"?

Perry even puts him on an assignment to go check out the blackouts and what does Clark do? Stands around the office doing nothing. It makes me wonder how the guy could keep a job as an investigative reporter.

Because at times he can deduce where Lois is kidnapped without using his super-powers?

 

[DrMylesOBoogie]

Its a good question that can be answered quite simply. U see Bryan Singer is a moran.

 

[El Payaso]

deleted

 

[04nbod]

The real person to me is Clark on the farm.

Superman he has to hid his emotion a little better and he needs to appear as the strong symbol he is.

As Clark he needs to appear a little weaker and not in just a physical sense.

They are all different imo.

Except Kal-el is the same as Clark on the farm.

exactly! superman is a symbol, clark kent in metropolis is an act and clark on the farm/kal-el is the real man. Labels all of 'em

clark in the city is useful because nothing goes through metropolis without the daily planet knowing- as well as important internaional events. We saw this as he looked up at the TV's

 

[Justice Bringer]

Its a good question that can be answered quite simply. U see Bryan Singer is a moran.

*moron

 

[El Payaso]

*moron

Spelling correction I'll assume. :P