I very much preferred Byrne's handling of the Clark/Superman dynamic - Clark is the real personality, Superman the disguise - to previous versions, and the fact that with it came a more well-rounded and believable treatment of Clark's personality. An obviously physically imposing and attractive man, no one - least of all Lois - suspected Clark of being Superman simply because Supes was never dumb enough to suggest to anyone that he lived most of his life pretending to be someone else under cover of a "secret identity."
I think Byrne's take could be an interesting
jumping off point, but I hope it's not the be-all end-all approach the new movie takes. It falls apart for me, when both Superman and Clark are highly visible public figures who have almost exactly the same friends, and the only thing he does is either put on or take off a pair of glasses.
Visuals in a comic can 'cheat' it and minimize it and use other conventions to get a 'difference' across, but I hope the movie takes a much more nuanced approach--and no, I'm not calling for the silliness of the 50s or 60s: I wouldn't mind a new take on the dichotomy/dynamic between Clark and Superman. On another board, I read and interesting idea along these lines: Clark deals with real life issues and the foibles we all have, and is the real person and the
public personality. Superman, though, is not a public figure at all: he shows up, does whatever needs to be done and leaves with a minimum of interaction with the public. When Superman does interact with the public, it's more with the demeanor of a soldier or policeman: calm, cool, and on point. If he's scared, or emotional about something he doesn't show it as Superman, he shows it as Clark. Clark is 'relatable' and Superman is inspirational. Something like that could be a jumpig off point for a new take.
What I don't want to see is a simplistic notion that just because the general public doesn't see Superman as having another identity, that his closest friends (and enemies) as both Clark and Superman don't notice that it's just a pair of glasses. I think there has to be some kind of element of appearance change, posture change, vocal change, and yes, a difference in Clark and Superman's personalities---as Christopher Reeve said, right on the money, either he's a terrific actor or all of his close friends are idiots. It doesn't have to be slapstick, though.
My preference, though, is for the original dynamic set up by Siegel and Shuster from day one: if only they knew who I really was behind this suit and glasses. It's a universal feeling that Siegel and Shuster tapped into and is far more enduring in its elemental form than say, Clark is the football jock who dates the head cheerleader, lives a storybook life, achieves the top of his professional field, marries an extremely hot co-worker who loves him for who he really is, has a swanky apartment given to him by Bruce Wayne--oh, and by the way, he's also Superman and loved by most of the world. Yeah, that's
relatable
I think there is a lot more universal, mythic quality in the original dynamic: Brandon Routh did a credible job of toning down the slapstick that I don't think even old-schoolers are arguing for at this point. I think there's room for a new interpretation, and as long as they don't take the simplistic approach that there is no difference between Clark and Superman, and that no one around him ever notices it
just because, I think TPTB will be fine.
