(no subject)
Jul. 11th, 2006 01:52 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
trinityvixenSo, Superman is a good distraction from angsty LJ posts, yes it is. I planned on making one anyway before I got sidetracked.
Last night, I finished the third volume of the animated series, finally, because![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
darkling1 scared me about the finale, a two-part episode ominously titled "Legacy." He'd warned me back when I saw Superman Returns for the first time that, if I didn't want to be depressed about Supes any more, watching that was not a good idea.
It was rather depressing, but really? It was mostly just bad. Ridiculous plotting and half thought out action, boring and angsty. Most of the last disc was that way, actually. The one stand out episode is "Demon Reborn" (and yes, MOTHER, it's because it has Batman in it), but otherwise the B-side of the disc is not worth watching. By that time, they stopped even caring that Superman is supposed to spend half his time as Clark Kent. They have a full episode where Supes is off in deep space without anyone missing Clark at all. Clark's not especially important in the animated series, but he does have his moments of brilliance (like when Lois asks him how he always gets such good stories and he tells her he's really Superman in disguise, using his job at a newspaper to hear about disasters in time to both stop them and scoop her, to which she responds, "You're a sick man, Kent.").
It's sad that the collection with some of my favorite eps--Knight Time! Knight Time! World's Finest! World's Finest! (hmm, a theme...)--has such garbage in it, but it's like any failing series. Towards the end, everything but the kitchen sink is used to drum up interest. Supergirl, the Legionnaires (thank God I've read one of their comics to even get who they were), Green Lantern, Aquaman--they all get their own episodes. The Green Lantern one was decent, Supergirl was kinda cute for her introduction episode (but uninteresting for the rest), but Aquaman was stupid with a Super Capitalized "S." Maybe it's because he's Aquaman. When you call in Aquaman for reinforcement, things must be going pretty bad (wait, hasn't Smallivlle done that recently?).
Then you've got Superman II. Honestly, I wish Christopher Reeve was never Superman in that movie, I love his Clark Kent that much. Best Clark Kent ever, bar none. Though Superman Returns came close, Superman really set the bar high for a Clark Kent that was so foppishly ridiculous that I believed no one would ever mistake him and Superman for distant cousins let alone the same person (maybe if Superman Returns had spent more time with Clark, it could have been just as good--maybe). Christopher Reeve might not have been the greatest actor ever (and boy did the dialogue tickle my roommate when she came home towards the end), but he definitely had a way with separating the characters out. Even when he took off the glasses, it was hard to see Superman in Clark. There's a man who makes his disguise work for him so completely I wondered who it was Lois was fawning over when she figured it out while he was still Clark. Golly.
The only other person to do that dichotomous performance style so well, in my mind, has been Christian Bale, who scares the crap out of me as Batman but manages to schmooze so effectively as Bruce Wayne, you can get why no one else gets it. Oh, and of course, Kevin Conroy rocks at being able to make Bruce sound so different from Batman that the same effect is achieved--and I guess his work is more significant because he does it all with just his voice. But it's different with Batman because Batman is clearly the dominant persona (Batman Beyond had this hilarious bit where Bruce says he knew he wasn't hearing voices because he was crazy--because the voices were calling him "Bruce," and "In my head, that's not what I call myself"). Bruce Wayne is the appearance for everyone else.
In Superman and Superman II, Clark Kent was as much for the audience as the rest of the characters. That's a disappearing act worthy of Houdini, and, I think, the source of much of the criticism for some Superman interpretations that don't make such distinctions, like Lois and Clark or Smallville. In the former, Clark is every bit as assertive as his alter-ego, making such judgments as "he's so mild-mannered he doesn't have a pulse" seem a tad off to say the least. In the latter, Tom Welling makes Clark so gosh-darn cute and perfect and self-sacrificingly brave that he's basically Superman without tights (the bits of Clark-ishness like angst and insecurity and self-doubt are mostly kept away from those who aren't in on the secret because, well, they're not in on the secret).
Personally, I like the idea that Clark can be assertive and I absolutely agree with that line from Lois and Clark that "Superman is what he can do, Clark is who he is" (the animated series had a similar comment, whereby Supes said he'd go crazy if he had to be Superman all the time). But at the same time, I sort of agree with Bill's waxing rhapsodic from Kill Bill Vol. 2 about how Clark Kent is how Superman sees the world. The views don't have to be incompatible, mind. In that way, Marlon Brando's bombastic, allusion-laden speech as Jor-El is fairly accurate. If Clark Kent is who we, humans, are, then Superman is who we want to be and strive to be (well, most of us). Having Clark be a tad less shrinking violet and more firmly polite but otherwise innocuous with ambition and hard work for mottos isn't a bad commentary on humanity. I wish we could be polite and ambitious at the same time.
Still, I do so wuv Christopher Reeve as Clark Kent. Can't have it all ways at once, I suppose.
Last night, I finished the third volume of the animated series, finally, because
darkling1 scared me about the finale, a two-part episode ominously titled "Legacy." He'd warned me back when I saw Superman Returns for the first time that, if I didn't want to be depressed about Supes any more, watching that was not a good idea.It was rather depressing, but really? It was mostly just bad. Ridiculous plotting and half thought out action, boring and angsty. Most of the last disc was that way, actually. The one stand out episode is "Demon Reborn" (and yes, MOTHER, it's because it has Batman in it), but otherwise the B-side of the disc is not worth watching. By that time, they stopped even caring that Superman is supposed to spend half his time as Clark Kent. They have a full episode where Supes is off in deep space without anyone missing Clark at all. Clark's not especially important in the animated series, but he does have his moments of brilliance (like when Lois asks him how he always gets such good stories and he tells her he's really Superman in disguise, using his job at a newspaper to hear about disasters in time to both stop them and scoop her, to which she responds, "You're a sick man, Kent.").
It's sad that the collection with some of my favorite eps--Knight Time! Knight Time! World's Finest! World's Finest! (hmm, a theme...)--has such garbage in it, but it's like any failing series. Towards the end, everything but the kitchen sink is used to drum up interest. Supergirl, the Legionnaires (thank God I've read one of their comics to even get who they were), Green Lantern, Aquaman--they all get their own episodes. The Green Lantern one was decent, Supergirl was kinda cute for her introduction episode (but uninteresting for the rest), but Aquaman was stupid with a Super Capitalized "S." Maybe it's because he's Aquaman. When you call in Aquaman for reinforcement, things must be going pretty bad (wait, hasn't Smallivlle done that recently?).
Then you've got Superman II. Honestly, I wish Christopher Reeve was never Superman in that movie, I love his Clark Kent that much. Best Clark Kent ever, bar none. Though Superman Returns came close, Superman really set the bar high for a Clark Kent that was so foppishly ridiculous that I believed no one would ever mistake him and Superman for distant cousins let alone the same person (maybe if Superman Returns had spent more time with Clark, it could have been just as good--maybe). Christopher Reeve might not have been the greatest actor ever (and boy did the dialogue tickle my roommate when she came home towards the end), but he definitely had a way with separating the characters out. Even when he took off the glasses, it was hard to see Superman in Clark. There's a man who makes his disguise work for him so completely I wondered who it was Lois was fawning over when she figured it out while he was still Clark. Golly.
The only other person to do that dichotomous performance style so well, in my mind, has been Christian Bale, who scares the crap out of me as Batman but manages to schmooze so effectively as Bruce Wayne, you can get why no one else gets it. Oh, and of course, Kevin Conroy rocks at being able to make Bruce sound so different from Batman that the same effect is achieved--and I guess his work is more significant because he does it all with just his voice. But it's different with Batman because Batman is clearly the dominant persona (Batman Beyond had this hilarious bit where Bruce says he knew he wasn't hearing voices because he was crazy--because the voices were calling him "Bruce," and "In my head, that's not what I call myself"). Bruce Wayne is the appearance for everyone else.
In Superman and Superman II, Clark Kent was as much for the audience as the rest of the characters. That's a disappearing act worthy of Houdini, and, I think, the source of much of the criticism for some Superman interpretations that don't make such distinctions, like Lois and Clark or Smallville. In the former, Clark is every bit as assertive as his alter-ego, making such judgments as "he's so mild-mannered he doesn't have a pulse" seem a tad off to say the least. In the latter, Tom Welling makes Clark so gosh-darn cute and perfect and self-sacrificingly brave that he's basically Superman without tights (the bits of Clark-ishness like angst and insecurity and self-doubt are mostly kept away from those who aren't in on the secret because, well, they're not in on the secret).
Personally, I like the idea that Clark can be assertive and I absolutely agree with that line from Lois and Clark that "Superman is what he can do, Clark is who he is" (the animated series had a similar comment, whereby Supes said he'd go crazy if he had to be Superman all the time). But at the same time, I sort of agree with Bill's waxing rhapsodic from Kill Bill Vol. 2 about how Clark Kent is how Superman sees the world. The views don't have to be incompatible, mind. In that way, Marlon Brando's bombastic, allusion-laden speech as Jor-El is fairly accurate. If Clark Kent is who we, humans, are, then Superman is who we want to be and strive to be (well, most of us). Having Clark be a tad less shrinking violet and more firmly polite but otherwise innocuous with ambition and hard work for mottos isn't a bad commentary on humanity. I wish we could be polite and ambitious at the same time.
Still, I do so wuv Christopher Reeve as Clark Kent. Can't have it all ways at once, I suppose.
