Superman Family Adventures #3

[superfangirl1]

Comments

[shadowpsykie]

there is not emoticon that can adequately express how i am feeling right now.... but i LOVE all those Chris Reeves references :DDDD

[mrstatham]

Yeah. I feel like they're absolutely doing something right when I can read all of Clark's dialogue in that awkward-yet-awesome manner Christoper Reeve had.

[silverzeo]

For a moment, I thought Clark was talking into a card that says Kara, just as a distraction to Lois, but then I realize it was a smart phone... we come a long way in terms of phones...

[q99]

Smart phones- the first time in a loooong time when the look of phones significantly changed.

And probably will again, once we can get the tech in non-flat shapes.

[icon_uk]

Phones have changed rather a lot I'd say, from the earpiece and mouthpiece in same unit handset familiar to the classic landline design which lasted for 60+ years, to the bricks with aerials of the 1980's the the calculator lookalikes of the 90's and 00's, and now the smart phone which looks like, well, rather complex coasters half the time.

[q99]

Yea, but even classic landline phone to brick was mostly styling.

Current ones don't even have grills for the earpiece and mouthpiece.

[fredneil.livejournal.com]

Let's see him change into his costume in one of those.

[icon_uk]

I love Lois just.... finally giving up and not even wanting to know what crazy shit THIS is.

[icon_uk]

Incidentally does this mean that Krypto was staring at Superman's butt whilst practising his heat vision? That's.... odd.

[aeka]

Why can't the more mainstream Superman comics be more like this? :(

[mrstatham]

Because he needs to be edgy and solitary and isolated and a misunderstood alien!!

Which is exactly the the vibe they seem to be trying to go for with the upcoming film. Having watched that teaser, it looks more like an art film about Superman than even, say, a Chris Nolan Superman film, which is arguably what it partially will be. 'You will believe a man can fish' indeed.

[aeka]

I'm actually hoping the full movie will prove me wrong about the Batman Begins feel I got out of the teaser trailer for Man of Steel, though the clips they used at SDCC does give me hope. I remember they did the same with the initial Amazing Spider-Man teaser and the actual movie didn't feel as dark and broody as I thought it would be.

[mrstatham]

See, I didn't even get a Batman Begins feel so much as a Dark Knight feel, and even though they're both by the same guy, BB and TDK just feel so different; The former's actually fun in parts, for one, despite the fact it can be serious.

So I hope you're right. It does feel they're very much trying to sell it as a Nolan-flavoured Superman in the hopes it'll be as big as his Batman, but I do hope it's more like Begins or even Rises rather than TDK. I don't know. I have nothing against art films, but...

[aeka]

For me, what made it feel like the Batman Begins teaser was the travelling around the world bit with a father figure pep talking about what kind of man the male hero decides to become and how he will influence people. The only difference is that Batman Begins at least used its own music where as Man of Steel is using LotR music.

That being said, I do like the fact that unlike Batman Begins which explore's how man wants to deal with the trauma of his parents deaths, the Man of Steel trailer does seem to imply that Superman stands for hope in the good of humanity, which I think is important to have in a Superman movie.

[mrstatham]

I have to admit, that whilst I'm utterly wary of what feels like the desire to make this a complicated and dark Superman film - and I don't feel Superman is either, somehow - I loved the fact that there's actually two teasers, with one using Kevin Costner as Jon Kent, and the other one with Russell Crowe as Jor-El, and both of them bring different things to the table.

It gives me optimism that they're not treating one half of the character as little more than a falsehood; The 'masks' argument when it comes to superheroes always aggravates me; Bruce Wayne isn't meant to be a mask for Batman, to me, and Clark Kent definitely shouldn't be a mask for Superman, because Clark is as much a product of his upbringing here on earth as he is a son of Krypton. So I like that they're setting out with two teasers from each of his fathers, which to me says that both halves of the character are considered equally important.

So whilst I am uncertain of the tone they're going for, I do feel like they at least understand the character.

[aeka]

I think Clark is a complex character in that he is an alien man with an extraordinary power living amongst regular human beings. He shows a lot of himself as both Clark Kent and Superman but also has to hide a lot of himself as well, namely the fact that he's an alien from another world. I do, however, agree that he is most certainly not a dark character, and anyone who tries to write him as such is completely missing the point of his character.

I also share your aggravation of the whole concept of one part of a hero's identity being more 'significant' than the other. For example, I never felt Clark Kent was so much a disguise for Superman, but more of a case of Superman being an extension of who Clark Kent really is. Or at least that's how it always came off to me and it looks like the movie will be playing it from that angle judging by the teaser. In the case of Bruce, while the ending to Batman Begins did establish the "Bruce Wayne, billionaire playboy" persona as the 'mask' for Bruce and that Batman was who he really was, I didn't feel that the execution really came off as such throughout the trilogy. I always got the impression that Bruce Wayne was always the real persona and that Batman was a monster he created to fight crime in Gotham, and the "billionaire playboy" was an image he presented to the public to throw off the fact that Bruce and Batman were the same person. What did annoy me though is that the third movie felt like it was less about the conclusion of Bruce's journey and felt like the character of John Blake was running the show in his stead. :/

[kaileighblue]

Why would you need more than one?

[auggie18]

BECAUSE FUN IS TERRIBLE.

[aeka]

Or very poorly executed in some cases. Worlds' Finest, I'm looking at you. XP

[icon_uk]

Was World's Finest ever MEANT to be fun? (Not saying it is, but I don't recall it being touted as such)

[aeka]

If by "World's Finest" you're referring to the current Huntress and Power Girl book, then yes, the tone of that book IS meant to be fun. Levitz even said so himself. But it's just not working for the fact that Levitz is relying too much on cliches and gender stereotypes in an attempt to make it a fun book that it just feels trite and sexist instead. Even though the flashback portions of the book have a more interesting story going on than the current timeline, the impact is still ruined by the fact that Levitz doesn't know how to write two female friends as people and instead read like a Hollywood friendship snagged right out of a Hollywood script for a high school movie.

Now, if by World's Finest you're referring to the series fronted by Batman and Superman, that's a whole other ball game all together.