Superman/Smallville question (1 Viewer)

[Hunter P]

Richard Donner didn't have to re-interpret. He got it right the first time. Superman could have very easily been moved to the 90s without any particular changes being made to the baseline story.

Is that supposed to mean that Superman "reversed time" in the comic also?

Heck, after watching this week's episode, I was just wondering if Clark would run around in blue tights before graduating college (or rather, before the last episode.) Didn't mean to stir up the age-old debate of movie interpretations.

With that said, continue on with the debate. This is getting interesting.

 

[Jason Seaver]

Richard Donner didn't have to re-interpret. He got it right the first time. Superman could have very easily been moved to the 90s without any particular changes being made to the baseline story.

There is no "right" or "wrong" way to do it. Richard Donner & company did a very good "traditional" interpretation of the origin story. But, just because Superman: The Movie was good doesn't invalidate doing it another way.

Also, doing 22 hour-long TV episodes per year is different from doing 12 22-page comics per year (although Superman appears in many more) which is different from doing a single feature.

Gough & Millar have come up with a pretty good way to do Superman stories for TV in the aughts, and the time period they're covering hasn't been covered in great detail in the current comic continuity. It's not a carbon copy of the comic (not the modern one, not the Silver Age one, not the Golde Age one), but it does do a pretty good job of pulling bits of many previous interpretations of the character in, piecing them together, and fitting them with current youth culture.

...But, of course, trying to convince Jeff, and many like him, of this is somewhat pointless. It's like arguing over religion - he's got a bedrock belief that pop culture icons should remain immutable between times and media, and trying to convince him that alternate interpretations can be interesting, valuable works is just not going to get you anywhere.

 

[Patrick Sun]

I never did like the whole "reversal of time" from the first Superman film. That was cheesy IMHO.

It's stupid because it says that time moves forward as long as Earth is spinning in the same direction as it always has. And somehow entropy/time is reversed because the Earth is made to spin in the reverse direction? Puh-lease!

How this is consistent with Superman comics that were published up until 1978 is beyond me. Oh what? Donner ADAPTED and went with a re-interpretation of the laws of physics for his Superman film? Wow! Whowouldathunkit?

Donner may have gotten the first 2 acts of his Superman film right, but the 3rd act wasn't really all that "right".

 

[Aaron Thomas]

Actually, this series reminds me a lot of "The New Adventures of Superboy" circa issue #50. (1982-1984? I can't believe it's been twenty years. Wow.) Pete and Clark's parents are in on the secret, Clark defends Smallville from crooks and monsters, and Lana finally shows romantic interest in our hero after a blonde makes her move...

Aaron Thomas
Superboy was a pocket universe puppet who broke free from his master's strings.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Give the show to me, I'll repair the damage.

I always love it when fans say stuff like this. (Nevermind common sense or reality.) I'd almost like to see you try as I bet it would be quite entertaining. But I'm digging what Millar and Gough are doing far to much to through it away to see some uber-fanboy who doesn't understand it stamp it out.

 

[Jeff Kleist]

Common sense and reality firmly in place. Give the show to me starting next season and I will repair the damage.

Of course I wouldn't be doing it by myself, hire people like John Byrne, people who know the character and respect him in a way Millar and Gough do not.

 

[Dan Rudolph]

I thought Superboy was a clone of Kal-El created by Cadmus Labs around the time Superman "died" fighting Doomsday?

Not quite. He was supposed to be a clone of Superman, but Cadmus was unable to get a tissue sample as he's invulnerable. In the end, they faked it by cloning Dabney Donovan (Cadmus director) and modifying him to look like Superman and have a reasonable imitation of his powers.

 

[Derek Baker]

Give the show to me, I'll repair the damage. I'll work for room & board and what comes out the other end will be Superman, and not Clark the Supervillain Slayer or Dawson of Krypton

That made me laugh so hard!!!

Very funny!

I'm just grateful that there's something to do with old Supe on TV...

 

[Dominik Droscher]

Anyone else confused?

 

[Jacinto]

John Byrne? You're telling me your basis for "purity" of the character is coming from Byrne's revision of the character and mythos 48 YEARS after Superman's first publication?! That's "pure"? That's not "blasphemy"?

I always figured Jeff's idea of "purity" for Superman stories would've gone all the way back to Siegel and Shuster's first version of the origin: Kal-l is sent to earth in a rocket by his father, Jor-l, as the planet Krypton explodes. A motorist rescues the baby from the burning ship and turns the child over to an "orphan asylum". Attendants are astounded by the child's feats of strength. When he reaches maturity, Clark Kent (why is he suddenly called that?) decides to use his strength to benefit mankind as Superman!

Now that's "purity". It's lame, yes, but it is "pure"...

 

[Patrick Sun]

*Chuckle*

 

[Jeff Kleist]

John Byrne? You're telling me your basis for "purity" of the character is coming from Byrne's revision of the character and mythos 48 YEARS after Superman's first publication?! That's "pure"? That's not "blasphemy"?

I said he cared, I didn't say that I would use his revision
Siegel and Shuster are gospel, with the exception of him being able to fly instead of "leap tall buildings in a single bound"

 

[Chad R]

Kryptonite was invented for the radio show, so that would have to go too. Unless you want to make an exception, like you will for flying, to fit your interpretation of the Superman mythos.

 

[Jeff Kleist]

of course Kryptonite would have to be in there, it's part of the classic set of superman characteristics.

The character developed over about a decade into what we know as the classic model for Superman, but it was all done with the blessing of S&S, and at least somewhat with their involvement

 

[Jesse Blacklow]

Jeff: You make some good arguments, but perhaps you don't realize that Shuster and Siegel lost all rights and credits to Superman to DC comics in the 1940s. Therefore almost all of what we consider "Superman" is a perversion of their vision. In fact, they wanted more of a "Superboy" character, if not as bland as Tom Welling's portrayal. At least Smallville acknowledges them every episode, unlike what DC did to S&S for more than thirty years (side note: Warner Bros. bought DC Comics and forced them to pay and honor them for their creation).

Also, this is the WB. I mean, c'mon, it's not like they have need to have the geek appeal of CSI. If they wanted Superman like it was in the comics, the series would have been a one-season flop on the SciFi channel.

EDIT: And I thought I wasn't still Comic Book Guy. Once a geek, always a geek. Why do I continue to take these things as seriously as I do? Oh well...

 

[Chad R]

Exactly, comic books and superhero characters change and evolve over time (and as far as I know heat and x-ray vision, two classic superman characteristics cam long after S&S). To cut them off at a certain point is to cut the legs off of these things. They are open to new ideas, fresh approaches and changing directions. That's the nature of comics books as has been developed over 70 years or so. Characters evolve over time, and most importantly with the times. That's all Smallville has done and to fault them for it is wrong.

 

[Lew Crippen]

That's all Smallville has done and to fault them for it is wrong.

Well said.

 

[Hunter P]

And I really don't like that they portray Lex Luthor with hair. John Shea should be forced to shave his head for the role.

I realize that Lex first appeared in the comics with hair but this is ridiculous...err, whoops, wrong show. This post is about 10 years too late.

 

[Keith Helms]

As someone who starting reading DC comics in the 60s it pissed me off when they decided to "hit the reset button" on the universe a couple of times in the 80s and 90s. Oops, this character never existed. Oops, that character still exists, but has a different alter ego and a different history. My personal ultimate insult was when they changed Princess Projectra of the Legion of Super Heroes into a snake!

Having said that, I've really come to like Smallville. It may not conform 100% to one of the comic incarnations of Superboy, but it uses many of the elements of classic Superboy (friends with Lex Luthor, crush on Lana Lang, Pete Ross knows his secret, Red and Green Kryptonite, etc.). I really like the concept that many of Clark's super powers start to manifest themselves during adolescence. Maybe most viewers are impatiently waiting for him to break out the costume and start flying through the skies, but I'm just enjoying the ride.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Maybe most viewers are impatiently waiting for him to break out the costume and start flying through the skies, but I'm just enjoying the ride.

Couldn't have said it better!