• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

who looks the most like superman from the comic books.

who looks the most like superman from the comic books.

  • kirk alyn

    Votes: 1 3.8%
  • george reeves

    Votes: 1 3.8%
  • chris reeve

    Votes: 10 38.5%
  • deab cain

    Votes: 2 7.7%
  • tom welling

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • brandon routh

    Votes: 4 15.4%
  • henry cavill

    Votes: 8 30.8%

  • Total voters
    26
While I don't disagree with your statements, the fact still remains that, for whatever reason, the producers (old and new [and the new were around under the old regime]) stuck to the original intention of the show.

Only in the most superficial sense. No, they didn't have him put on the blue suit and the cape, and they didn't have him fly, but those are minor trappings. In every other respect, they were writing a Superman show those last 2-3 years. I mean, my God, we saw the formation of the Justice League, we saw the Legion of Super Heroes and the Justice Society, we saw the battles with Doomsday and Darkseid, we saw Cadmus and the Suicide Squad, we saw Clark share his secret with Lois and all but marry her.

None of that was the original intention of the show. The original intention of the show was to revamp the story of Superman's origins in a way that would fit the mold of a WB teen drama, that would stay as far as possible from the comic-book roots of the story in order to make it more palatable to an audience that wasn't into comic books. (The same philosophy generated The WB's short-lived Tarzan series in which the entire show took place in New York City, Jane was a cop, there was no talking to animals, and the name "Tarzan" was only spoken once in the entire series.) "No flights, no tights" was originally more of a metaphor, a symbol of the overall mandate to reinvent the mythos in a more mainstream form and avoid the more fanciful four-color aspects of comic-book storytelling. And it worked. In its heyday, according to anecdotes I read at the time, there were people who became fans of Smallville without even realizing that it had anything to do with that Superman guy from the funny papers. To them, it was just a teen drama about a guy from another planet, Dawson's Creek meets The X-Files.

By the last few seasons, that was clearly no longer the case, for two very good reasons. One, movies like Iron Man and Batman Begins and The Incredibles had made superheroes hot, so the original belief that a comics-based show had to divorce itself from its comic-book roots to succeed no longer applied. Two, because the series ran so much longer than expected, they simply ran out of stories that fit the original paradigm of the show, and so they had to throw in more and more characters and storylines from the comics in order to keep going. So while "no flights, no tights" was originally a shorthand for a much broader agenda to avoid comic-book elements as much as possible, by the last few seasons it had eroded down to an arbitrary and extremely narrow restriction on exclusively those two things -- Clark wouldn't fly even though multiple other characters could (Supergirl, J'onn, Hawkman, etc.), and Clark wouldn't wear the tights even though multiple other heroes wore colorful costumes. So even though it was expressed in the same words, the meaning of it had changed profoundly. Originally it was the defining storytelling philosophy of the whole series, but by the last couple of seasons, it was an arbitrary restriction that had no real impact on the way the stories were told.


But Welling simply did not want to play Superman, ever.

I don't know Tom Welling, so I have no real idea of what he did or did not want to play. But it seems to me that the producers/writers didn't want Superman on their show either.

He already was Superman in every way that mattered. He was teaming up with the freaking Justice Society, battling Zod and Darkseid, working as a reporter at the Daily Planet, and engaged to marry Lois Lane. He had a dual identity, he had a superhero nickname, and he had a special costume he wore when fighting crime. They just weren't the nickname or the costume, but that's a trivial distinction. (And sure, he could only run fast and jump high rather than flying, but the same was true of Superman prior to about 1941, and I think it's true of the young Superman Grant Morrison is currently writing about in Action Comics.) Functionally speaking, in every important respect, these were stories about Superman. So don't tell me the producers didn't want Superman on the show. They had Superman on the show, or as close as they could get given Welling's unwillingness to wear the glasses or the tights.
 
Do you really think I'm that stupid and didn't realize all that? Truth is, I'm not sure what you are getting at anymore. You first claim that Welling never wanted to play Superman, but then claim the series had him play Superman. Which is it? Perhaps both, so I guess that begs the question what constitutes "playing Superman" to you?

If your claim is that Welling never wanted to wear the suit, then that is very different from "playing Superman" (as you explained at length that he did).

Also, I'm not arguing for or against what the writers wrote for their character on the show. I'm just recounting what they have said in interviews and cons in which the producers (from any season) said they choose to avoid the costume in the show as well and were always open about not having the costume being worn until the very end with the reasoning that he was still learning how to be Superman. While your points are observant, what the producers have continually said is what they have continually said. From their point of view, they were telling Superman-like stories, but didn't feel Clark was Superman yet.

While Welling might have had some aversion to wearing the suit (which I have only heard stated on fan forums, never any legit sources), it clearly wasn't the only reason it never appeared.
 
Do you really think I'm that stupid and didn't realize all that?

I make no assumptions about you as an individual. I've never met you; I don't even know your name. All I see are words on a screen. This is an extremely impersonal form of communication, so it shouldn't be taken personally. I see an assertion that the show did not materially change over its run; I disagree with that assertion; and I explain my reasons for that disagreement. That is not an attack, it is simply an essay. I learned in school that it's not enough to simply assert a thesis; one must present evidence and argument to support it. I also learned that one should be thorough, even at the risk of telling readers things they already know, because one can make no assumptions about any given reader's familiarity with the material. This is not a private conversation between two people, but a public forum read by many people, a lot of whom might not be aware of the same details that you or I know. Therefore, those details should be made clear for the benefit of all potential readers.


Truth is, I'm not sure what you are getting at anymore. You first claim that Welling never wanted to play Superman, but then claim the series had him play Superman. Which is it?

Again, the key difference is between surface and substance. Welling refused to dress as Superman, and was reluctant to dress as bespectacled Clark Kent. That's the surface, the outward appearance. Because of that, the writers were unable to portray his character overtly as Superman, in terms of actually using the name, the costume, and the power of flight. But in every other respect, they were writing the equivalent of stories about Superman.

Heck, they did the same thing with Green Arrow. They wanted to use Batman, but they couldn't get the rights, so they told the stories they wanted to tell about Bruce Wayne/Batman but changed the name to Oliver Queen/Green Arrow (an easy substitution, since the comics' GA was originally a thinly disguised imitation of Batman anyway). The surface was different, but the substance was the same.


Also, I'm not arguing for or against what the writers wrote for their character on the show. I'm just recounting what they have said in interviews and cons in which the producers (from any season) said they choose to avoid the costume in the show as well and were always open about not having the costume being worn until the very end with the reasoning that he was still learning how to be Superman. While your points are observant, what the producers have continually said is what they have continually said. From their point of view, they were telling Superman-like stories, but didn't feel Clark was Superman yet.

Yes, that's what they tried to live up to because it was the original conceit of the show, but the problem is that the show ran on so much longer than it was ever intended to that it became essentially Zeno's Paradox -- they couldn't reach the finish line of him technically being Superman, but they got asymptotically closer until the difference was infinitesimal. Hell, they told a lot of stories about things that ideally shouldn't have happened until after he was Superman -- the arrival of Supergirl, the emergence of the Justice League, the romance with Lois, the battles with Doomsday and Zod and Cadmus and Darkseid. So in that sense, they were well past the line already. It got to the point where his not being called "Superman" and not wearing tights and a cape was no more than a technicality.

Sure, they may have said differently in interviews, but that's publicity flack. They had to stick to the party line and make it sound like they knew what they were doing. But in practice, they had clearly overextended themselves. The idea of "Clark Kent before he's Superman" couldn't really be sustained for ten years, so for the last few years they were telling what were effectively Superman stories -- stories that, in every prior incarnation, took place after he was Superman -- while artificially and awkwardly prolonging Clark's unreadiness. It got to the point where it was totally ridiculous that the show was full of active superheroes with nicknames and costumes and everything, and full of people flying all over the place, and Clark had been positioned as the greatest hero of them all, but he was still stuck in this arrested stage of development far beyond the point that it made any sense to keep him there. Maybe that was because of Welling, or maybe it was because of some overly rigid attachment to a promise they made back when they thought the show would end with season 5 or 6. Either way, it was forced and contrived, and tacked onto what were, to all intents and purposes, Superman stories.
 
Christopher, I agree with much of what you say. However, you are clearly not understanding what I am trying to communicate and/or taking what I am saying and applying it to a wholly different argument. I'll admit it is a splitting hair difference, so it is easy to misunderstand. Anyway, because of that, this conversation cannot continue.
 
This guy:

article-2046303-0E44456A00000578-526_634x383.jpg
 
That's a dude. He got himself cosmetically altered to look like Superman.

...or possibly Denise Crosby from The Naked Now. ;)
[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCOetbPm7KU&feature=youtube_gdata_player[/yt]
 
we saw the battles with Doomsday ...

Wait?! We did?!

Yeah there was like one or two fights with Doomsday...hardly a battle.

In fairness, Smallville's Doomsday was never about interpreting the big epic Metropolis-based battle from the comics. It was about using Doomsday in a way where he could be an effective adversary/parallel for a young Clark, whilst also setting up his return in the future when Clark is actually Superman.
 
In fairness, Smallville's Doomsday was never about interpreting the big epic Metropolis-based battle from the comics. It was about using Doomsday in a way where he could be an effective adversary/parallel for a young Clark, whilst also setting up his return in the future when Clark is actually Superman.

Yes, and the way they handled Doomsday on the show was infinitely better than the comics' version. Sure, we didn't get much of a fistfight on the show, but the comics' version was nothing but a fistfight. Their Doomsday wasn't a character, just a crude, lazy plot device to show up out of nowhere and beat Superman to death. Smallville's Davis/Doomsday was a richly drawn character who had an interesting story arc. Given a choice between action and characterization, if you can only have one, give me characterization any day.

And seriously, anyone who was actually expecting Smallville to give us some big action throwdown was seriously deluded about the show's budget. (Although to be fair, they took the criticisms about the Doomsday finale to heart and really improved their action sequences in season 9. The moments of action were still brief, but the composition and execution were far more imaginative and effective, so they were much more satisfying.)
 
Last edited:
who looks the most like superman from the comics.

none of them i'd say...

Superman in the comics isn't something any actor can pull off...

he's at least 6 foot 2, built in a way to make Mr Universe jealous, blue eyes and black hair... it's impossible to actually get an actor that would fit the part properly...

supermanbatman00822.jpg

M
 
who looks the most like superman from the comics.

none of them i'd say...

Superman in the comics isn't something any actor can pull off...

he's at least 6 foot 2, built in a way to make Mr Universe jealous, blue eyes and black hair... it's impossible to actually get an actor that would fit the part properly...

That's why they said "most like," not "exactly like." It goes without saying that no actor will look exactly like a comic-book character (unless the character is directly modelled on that actor to begin with), so it should be obvious that that's not what's being asked. The question is who comes the closest.
 
They did some creative and interesting things with Doomdsay. Davis Bloom was an interesting character...they got too hung up on using "hosts" though on "Smallville". It was a creative way of not having to bring in potentially expensive guest stars I'll give them credit. I think you give the "Smallville" writers too much credit Christopher. It could be a great show at times, it teased the fans too much, frustrated us too much, and had a ton of bad filler episodes. They were great with the mythology episodes and the show gave us amazing new additions to the mythos in Lionel Luthor, Chloe Sullivan and to a degree Tess Mercer. Not to mention Rosey's Lex Luthor was simply amazing. It was a flawed series though. Let's not kid ourselves. How'd this become a "Smallville" thread?
 
I'd say all of them, with the addition of John Haymes Newton and Gerard Christopher to the mix. No vote actually from me until someone gets a real life photo of Superman....:lol:
 
Their Doomsday wasn't a character, just a crude, lazy plot device to show up out of nowhere and beat Superman to death.

In fairness, that was kinda the point of comic Doomsday. He wasn't meant to be some nuanced personality. He was simply a (mostly) mindless and endless wave of destruction; a force of nature. I say "mostly" because we see in those books that he enjoyed the death and destruction he was bringing (though he likely had no idea why he did, which, in some ways, is scary).

I encourage checking out the From Crisis to Crisis Superman podcast at the Superman Homepage. They are currently going through an exhaustive account of the Death and Return Superman. It is quite insightful considering the research they've done including interviews by the writers and artists of the time.

How'd this become a "Smallville" thread?

Somebody save me?
 
^ It's ignoring the Last Stand at least. I'll Give the original poster credit for that...and Broc hit it on the nail regarding Doomsday as a "character". He wasn't supposed to be much of one. He was kind of "developed" much later on during the bad sequel fight and given a bit of a back story in subsequent stories...but that original version of him, was meant to be mysterious and unknown and a force of nature. A true beast in every sense of the word who for some reason (then) targeted Superman.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top