You know, I’ve never really been a fan of Superman. A character with ever ability imaginable just doesn’t thrill me…For all intents and purposes he is immortal (technically he did die once, but they brought him back).
But what really gets me is his costume. He wears glasses when he’s “normal” and takes them off to be Superman.
So I have a question: What happens when Superman gets a smudge on his glasses and needs to take them off to wipe them? Can;t people see he is Superman?
Super Speed
He’s got super speed. He can take his glasses off, wipe them, and put them back on his face before anyone even notices.
Duh.
He never cleans his glasses. He justs looks through the smudge with his X-Ray vision.
The thing that is interesting about Superman, that hasn’t been explored in the films (I don’t watch the T.V. shows much nor do I read comics) is the choices he makes. What kind of temptation exists for a man who could be God to a world, but yet choses to serve humanity? I’d like to see that played out more in the new movie. The Donner movies deal with that theme, but steer clear of any real dark side. Isn’t that interesting for you?
Pen: watch Smallville. The juxtaposition between the choices of Clark and Lex is a major part of the series. And both of them are represented as men who (for different reasons) have massive power compared to those around them.
I really lost interest in the series early. They are out on DVD. When does it start to get good? Maybe I’ll pick it up from there.
As for GCCLF’s first post, you have to consider the histroical perspective of Superman’s origins. One who choses the American way of life at a time when the country needed a strong here. He was American propoganda for the Depression era nation.
Each season gets progressively better as the characters mature.
Lana is still a dumb, annoying little girl but the clark/lex dynamic gets really good in seasons 3 & 4.
I’d say if you are going to watch only part of the series watch seasons 3, 4 and 5.
The season 5 episode “Lexmas” is EXACTLY about what you are talking about.
I’m sure you guys have seen Kill Bill part 2. The part were Bill talks about superman was an interesting take on how superman sees humanity. Basically week an unable to take care of itself.
I liked that dialouge, but I thought it was out of place for Bill’s character.
What’s interesting is that he was created by a canadian before that canadian got to america.
Anyway, he represents an ideal, a neitzche like super man! lol the galactic man. a hero who does the right thing. A person who uses power responsibily. YOu know, all those things that regular humans are not. 
p.s don’t lay no kirkegaard on me
actually (warning: nerd knowledge coming)
he never died. he simply depleted himself of his energy reserves and was stored under ground in a grave, thus making it impossible to recharge his energy using earths yellow sun. He was sleeping.
The thing with Superman . . .
IS that he’s pretty much the FIRST superhero. Sure characters like THE PHANTOM, DOC SAMPSON and THE SHADOW saw print before that issue of Action Comics but the collection of concepts that have been loosely associated with the “super hero” first came together with SUPERMAN. Yes that character is a sort of god… or perhaps more accurately, a sort of fallen angel. I remember coming across an essay that made reference to his Kryptonian name, Kal-EL, and its similarity to many of the Angels named in Jewish scripture which end with an EL; Raphael, Michael, Gabriael, Azrael, etc.
So in a sense the story of superman could be read as an allegory for anangel amongst humans. Some would cast superman as a sort of “Christ” figure, but to loosely quote a current superman writer: “what would modern day religion look like if God rocketed his only son to earth to save him from the distruction of Heaven?” Along these lines Judge’s Pen is spot on about the interest being more strongly rooted in his choices rather than his “powers.”
Readers and writers seem to have generally forgotten that over the course of 70 plus years of publishing his core “powers” have changed quite often. He didn’t always fly; hence the “leap a tall building in a single bound.” The same is true for that character’s design as well. Take a look at what he used to sport.
Still, writers have gotten a bit superficial in their need to continually “up” the stakes with stronger and stronger villains. Or as was done in the 80’s, make superman “more realistic” with a specific set of abilities and limitations. The key to superman’s dramatic potential (right; this is a comicboook character we’re talking about here) is not the SUPER part of SUPERMAN, but the MAN part of SUPERMAN.
Recently DC comics have decided to relaunch a new Superman comic All Star Superman. The goal of that particular book is to sort of detach the character from the DC comics mainstream and present it with-in the context of its iconic nature. Not everyone reads comics and still fewer read superman comics, but most everyone has some sort of idea about Superman, based of the movies or the Black and white series or the cartoons or whatever. This comics seeks to tap into all or any of that.
I’d recommend it to anyone, Old reader or new who wants to check out superman with-out any of the baggage associated with comics these days. No mega crossovers or secret twists based on some obscure character mention on page 5 of some obscure comic spin-off. Just a good, fun and colorful comic with great art and writing.
El for Elohim
Raphael = healed by god
Michael = like god
Gabriel = man of god
Azrael = whom god helps
The aspect that always bothered me was the whole secret-identity/love-interest thing. Spiderman was worse that way. Just tell Mary Jane or Lois or whoever who the hell you are. Don’t give me that whole 'protect them from villains if they remain naive" rap. I mean it’s not like Lois or MJ escaped the damsel in distress fate. It just reeked of this nerdy “if only she know who I really was” attitude. Come on, it’s spidey, it’s the man of steel (and woman of tissue). Just be honest. The only secret identity that worked for me was Batman, and that was just because of the nature of that particular character. OK, ok, I accepted the Diana Prince thing too, but for entirely different reasons.
As for the glasses, if I could accept that a man could fly, or secrete webs, or whatever, I could easily accept the glasses thing.
You have to cater to your market.
So how do you think that Superman has the ability to fly?
The four things that come into play in flight are thrust, lift, drag and weight.
A bird flys because it is very light and very steamlined. The thrust and lift come from the wings and tail feathers.
A plane flys also because they are light and streamlined. The thrust comes from the engines and the lift comes from the shape of the wings.
So how does Superman fly. As I understand it, he is extremely dense. He’s not streamlined especially with that cape flapping around. There is no thrust unless he has extremely powerful ****s and there is no lift.
My guess. ESP. He’s got such a powerful mind, he can levitate.
Wouldn’t that be telekinesis? If that’s true, why can’t he move other objects with his mind?
All Star Superman (or ASS) is addressing the “Secret Identity” aspect of Superman and Lois in an interesting manner. Currently Lois and Clark are actually married, (so are Spiderman and Mary Jane so how’s that for wish fulfilment there Gene?) IIRC this happened after Clark’s brush with death.
The premise behind the Clark->Lois->Superman triangle went something like this: Clark Kent wants to be loved by Lois for who he was rather than for being Superman (Superman is actually Clark’s secret Identity which allows Clark to do all the things he would normally seek to do). Lois has a huge infatuation with Superman and as a result tends to compare bumbling Clark to that seemingly impossible standard. Superman would then disregard Lois’s interest in hopes that she would eventually see those same characteristics in Clark (strength, compassion, kindness, small town values etc…). How effective this rationalization of that classic adolescent fantasy is, depends on the writer.
For your amusement and edification I present to you the SUPERMAN IS A D*CK website.
As for the rational for his Flight,amongst other powers, it depends on when you’re reading. Back in the 80’s it would be said that he sort of nullified Gravity by force of will… So, he would actually be able to lift greater weights when flying then when standing (this also meant he could fly a sinking ship out of harm’s way with-out it cracking in half or him punching right through it). Allot of the 80’s logic was indeed based on Clark having Telekinetic abilities.
These day his powers are generally written as Kryptonians having existed in a “higher plane of reality” and the destruction of their planet forced the baby Kal-EL to crash land on a lower plane of reality; earth. As a Kryptonian he could in essence disregard any law of physics he chooses. However, as Clark Kent, he’s limited by a very human upbringing and tends to only manifest “powers” as needed.
That’s some good crack the writers are smoking these days ain’t it?
Design,
Here is the link for the original page hosting the images shown at the link you provided. Not sure if you have seen it yet, but if not, check it out. I haven’t laughed that hard in a long time (perhaps because I’m a former comic book junkie myself) Note: for link to work, you have to replace the astericks with Richard’s nickname (hope this is okay to post Gene)
http://www.super****ery.com/galleries.html
I have watched Smallville since it’s inception and while it has a teen beat vibe to it, I am still hooked. I agree that it has picked up some steam since the first couple of seasons as the most captivating aspect of the show is the relationship between Clark and Lex. Lately, there has been a lot of tension in that area as they slowly but surely are drifting apart and beginning to embrace their respective destinies that we all know … kinda like watching these last few Star Wars movies: you knew who the characters would eventually become to be, but it was interesting to see the choices and circumstances that led them on that path.
SimonM – I agree with your overall assessment of Smallville too, but I didn’t care for the Lexmas episode. To me, it felt like a feel-good filler episode (kinda like the Krypto episode) that presented an interesting scenario but didn’t really advance the current storyline in any way. I’m also not to crazy about the whole Jonathan Kent vs. Lex Luthor political race as of late, but I still really enjoy the show and watch it faithfully every week.
I understand where you are coming from RE: the Lexmas episode and had it focussed on the Clark / Chloe / Santa plot more I’d agree. However Lex’s little failed Christmas Carol routine really drove home what is going on within the man who eventually becomes one of the most iconic villains of comic books in a way that kept him quite human.
I have just been looking at that super****ery.com site. That is one of the greatest computerized time-wasters since tetris!