Angry in the Great White North

Some thoughts.

Though we only see a moment here or there of special effects, 30 years of technical advancement clearly shows. The original Superman movies were plagued with distracting artifacts of the optical matting technology that was used at the time. Christopher Reeve's Superman often seemed off-colour, for example.

In the trailer for the new movie, we are treated the shot of a young Clark Kent jumping high over a field, and passing in front of the sun. That's a 21st century effect, and the movie will benefit from subtle and yet powerful scenes like that one.

But the voice-over by Marlon Brando intrigues me (this Superman movie continues from where Superman II left off, with Superman having been absent for several years). The Messianic aspect of Superman is being played up in a serious way.

Jor-El chooses to send his only son to Earth, because the people of this planet have the capacity for good, and just need to be shown how to live good lives.

Even the word "El" in Hebrew is another word for God.

One of more interesting theological questions is who is the real person, Clark Kent or Kal-El? In the Chistopher Reeve movies, Kal-El is the real identity, and Clark Kent is a shell, though at the end of the first movie, it is interesting that Superman chooses Jonathan Kent's advice over Jor-El's when deciding to intervene in time.

In Lois and Clark and Smallville, though, Clark Kent is clearly the dominant personality. This is in part because in both treatments, Jonathan Kent does not die while Clark is still young. Moreover, the writers take the view that having been raised all his life as Clark, it seems a bit jarring that he should transform so suddenly into Kal-El, with Clark Kent becoming a mild-mannered disguise.

Doesn't it make more sense that Clark Kent would choose an outlandish costume as a disguise in order to hide his human identity? In order to be able to pursue a more normal human life?

It comes to the heart of the Superman duality. And it echoes a classic Christian debate over whether Jesus saw Himself as man or God. How aware was He of His nature as He grew up, before He went into the desert and returned as a preacher at the age of 33?

Was Clark's childhood generally uneventful, as Jesus' was as depicted in the Bible, or was he aware of his powers. Worse, did he flaunt them like Damien from the Omen movies. Jesus is depicted as doing exactly that in The Infancy Gospel of Thomas:

II. 1 This little child Jesus when he was five years old was playing at the ford of a brook: and he gathered together the waters that flowed there into pools, and made them straightway clean, and commanded them by his word alone. 2 And having made soft clay, he fashioned thereof twelve sparrows. And it was the Sabbath when he did these things (or made them). And there were also many other little children playing with him.

3 And a certain Jew when he saw what Jesus did, playing upon the Sabbath day, departed straightway and told his father Joseph: Lo, thy child is at the brook, and he hath taken clay and fashioned twelve little birds, and hath polluted the Sabbath day. 4 And Joseph came to the place and saw: and cried out to him, saying: Wherefore doest thou these things on the Sabbath, which it is not lawful to do? But Jesus clapped his hands together and cried out to the sparrows and said to them: Go! and the sparrows took their flight and went away chirping. 5 And when the Jews saw it they were amazed, and departed and told their chief men that which they had seen Jesus do.

III. 1 But the son of Annas the scribe was standing there with Joseph; and he took a branch of a willow and dispersed the waters which Jesus had gathered together. 2 And when Jesus saw what was done, he was wroth and said unto him: O evil, ungodly, and foolish one, what hurt did the pools and the waters do thee? behold, now also thou shalt be withered like a tree, and shalt not bear leaves, neither root, nor fruit. 3 And straightway that lad withered up wholly, but Jesus departed and went unto Joseph's house. But the parents of him that was withered took him up, bewailing his youth, and brought him to Joseph, and accused him 'for that thou hast such a child which doeth such deeds.'

Poor kid -- dessicated like some mummy for messing up Jesus' mud puddle. Another one buys the farm for bumping into little Jesus in the street. Reminds me the classic Twilight Zone episode "It's a Good Life":

And you'll note that the people in Peaksville, Ohio, have to smile.They have to thin happy thoughts and say happy things because, once displeased, the monster can wish them into a cornfield or change them into a grotesque walking horror. This particular monster can read minds you see. He knows every thought, he can feel every emotion. Oh yes, I did forget something didn't I.

This is the monster. His name is Anthony Fremont. He's six years old, with a cute little-boy face and blue, guiless eyes. But when those eyes look at you, you'd better start thinking happy thoughts, because the mind behind them is absolutely in charge. This, is the Twilight Zone.

How did the Kents deal with Clark the toddler when he threw his plate of veggies across the kitchen? Peas coming at you like bullets. How do they not fear this super-toddler? Or did Superman grow up as a normal Clark Kent, and only became aware of his super abilities, and his identity as Kal-El, much later, after his moral centre had been fixed in place by the Kents? But if that's the case, wouldn't he see himself as Clark rather than Kal-El? And would that cause him to resent the burden put on him by his Kal-El nature?

Given that Superman Returns carries on where Superman II left off, we might not get an answer to these specific questions, but we might see some consideration of how Superman integrates his Clark Kent and Kal-El personas.

Superman has always been a vehicle to explore the question of the divine and the mortal coexisting in one body without worrying about offending the sensibilities of devout Christians.

For that reason, I've always enjoyed serious treatments of the Superman story. I'm looking forward to this latest take on it.