Justice League official "Zack Snyder" cut on HBO Max

Jonathan Kent being an asshole only works if Clark vibrantly tell him to go fuck himself (preferably in those words). The problem is that Snyder wants to portray Clark as being passive without really exploring that, oh yeah, Jonathan was abusive to Clark and that's wrong.

 

has there been any other iteration where Jonothan Kent has been an abusive S.O.B?

I can remember an interview with John Scheider when Jonothan's time to die on Smallville came and how was expected because it's an event that in the mythos plays such a big role in Clark'ls life.

 

Well, depends on the version of the mythos. Certainly it's a key event in Superman '78, which remains THE touchstone iteration of the Superman narrative in the minds of the general public (and deservedly so). It's indeed employed to good effect in Smallville, and Geoff Johns put Jonathan's death to devastating use in his excellent "Brainiac" comics arc. (Other, lesser talents have also offed the poor old fellow. )

But there are also prominent and successful versions of the story where Jonathan is still alive, even far into Clark's adulthood, like in John Byrne's post-Crisis comics reboot, or Lois & Clark: The New Adventures of Superman. I personally prefer my Jonathans alive, but can't argue that his death isn't often effective, narratively and emotionally.

 

I dunno but I definitely feel like MoS was actually a great chance to explore the generational divide between Boomers and Millenials but Snyder winds up, well, hating his Millenial lead character.

Clark should be hungry and shouldn't pull punches with his actions. He can take strong positions because he IS strong. He can advocate for the end of homelessness and hunger without the fear of assassination and his 'cool factor' as a hero would make the youth amd activists really fight harder and louder than before.

 

Honestly all the way through Smallville I kept imagining what my life would be like if my dad had kept telling me that I can't do what I really want, can't let anyone find out about my secret, etc. I blame Jonathan for how repressed Clark was. Turns out when Clark let people in like Pete, Cloe, Oliver, and Lois nothing bad really happened because of it. Jonathan kept Clark hidden in the barn. It's kind of obvious on the rewatch how much changed after he died, and Clark looked to Martha for advice.

Not saying Jonathan was bad bad, but being overprotective is a form of abuse.

 

I'm due for a Smallville rewatch when I can find the time (it's a huge undertaking). I loved Schneider as Jonathan my first time through, which was a good while back at this point. I didn't have any of the negative vibes you're describing, but I can't really dispute you without a fresh look.

 

You presume Clark would adopt a rather radical (for rural Kansas) adversarial relationship with Jonathan. That would be highly inconsistent with trends in that region of the country in the period where Clark was growing up. He could, of course, have acquired that attitude at college/university after having left home, where such "radical" attitudes abound (they don't seem radical on campus--but they certainly would in Smallville). However, Jonathan is dead before that kind of rebelliousness would likely manifest (assuming this version of Clark even went to college/university).

There isn't nearly enough about Jonathan on screen to suggest Clark would develop such an attitude (the idea that Jonathan is an abusive father is, on its face, laughable--based on what we are given). And if he did, that certainly would have been far, far less "traditional" than Snyder's take on the character. I can only imagine the hyperventilating such a characterization would have generated (I'd be willing to watch a film that explores such an approach, but I suspect it would make Man of Steel seem like a "true blue, perfect Superman portrayal" for my friend The Realist).

 

^ Appreciate the shout-out. A rebellious Clark, however, would at least have had some spirit, instead of Snyder's perpetual mope. As I suggested a page or three back, that character tone is a big part of what makes me react viscerally against Snyderman -- the guy just seems so burdened and joyless.

 

There's no such thing as "whataboutism". Your post is the deflection and hypocrisy I predicted. You attack anyone who likes the Snyder movies, then attempt (and fail) to soft-sell it. You referring to Snyder fans as a "cult" and questioning their psychological health is nothing less than a hate-filled attack, all because someone does not support or praise your favorite version of a comic-book character. This is always followed by your attempt to shift blame/responsibility. That's not only textbook hypocrisy, but disturbing considering the level of hate you routinely spew at people you do not know.

From others who hate Snyder and his fans, including one who is so hyper-defensive over the MCU, that he's been repeatedly called out by innumerable members for trashing any DC movie thread out of his irrational hatred of Snyder, Nolan, The Joker, etc.. Yeah, you are in such good company...

 

The godawful shambles that Kansas is in would easily radicalize Clark. He has the power to teach the people to demand better, if he's going to become a superhero he'd do it that way.

 

When a super-powered alien first makes his presence known, human nature would kick in, and that means they would not celebrate him as their camp counselor/Daddy figure. He is a creature with no blood connection to mankind at all, so rational minds would know he cannot be trusted right out of the gates, which MoS and BvS successfully illustrated.

.

Then you do not care about the origin and intended development of the character. You only care about the one that fits that watered down version which DC's publishers and editors worked to remove, as that version of Superman was a silly aberration. You cannot get away from that.

For the reason films have origin stories..Batman Begins, Captain America: The First Avenger, Man of Steel, etc. The early period of a character are defining and important in presenting him as he was meant to be.

Wrong again. It did not take Superman decades to become a cultural phenomenon-an icon. He was an overnight success, so his iconic status was earned in that early period, hence the reason that less than a full year into is existence, actor Ray Middleton became the first person to portray Superman at the 1939 World's Fair. Its the reason that in the same year--1939-- the unforgettable 80-foot inflatable Superman was part of the Macy's Thanksgiving Parade. That was the early, often brutal, judge and jury, Depression-era Superman. He was already a breakout icon, long before the silly disasters at the hands of Weisinger/Plastino/Swan, et al.

...which should tell you that in the wake of the disaster that was Superman Returns, no one---WB included--wanted to see the Donner-tribute version again, and now we have the Snyder version.

Astoundingly poor comparison. Once again, you're trying to argue that early Superman was a one-off, in the way Spock from "The Cage" was. Wrong again, as the Superman I'm talking about was 1) an instant success and 2) was the way the character was presented for a number of years because that early version was embraced by the public. That is not the case with Spock at all.

Routh in CW-COIE was stunt casting, much like Burt Ward and others in that production. Again, the public did not love that Donner tribute film, or the fact Routh was attempting to mimic Reeve.

Superman was darker from the beginning. You would have a point if he was not

I repeatedly referred to Superman Returns.

Smallville? The series endless Superman fans despised due to spending years selling the series as what one critic once called it, "Party of Five: The Superhero Years?" For all of the talk about a character adaptation not being "on model," Smallville was on the Mount Rushmore of adaptations deviating from the source.

About the CW-Superman: he was never universally loved. In fact, he was criticized for a number of reasons. Moreover, it remains to be seen how the forthcoming series will do; if it sinks into low ratings territory, that might be a strong indicator that one half of the series lead is not cutting it, and I'm not talking about Lois. If its a hit, then Hoechlin will be seen as holding up his end of the series for audiences to invest their time into.

You have a far different recollection than those who did not like Routh attempting to mimic Reeve, especially in a film released only two years after Reeve's death.

Exactly.

Well said.

 

Traditional to his origins / early period.

Interesting.

 

A simple "no" would have sufficed.

 

He told him that he should have let a bus full of children die. He KILLED HIMSELF to win an argument.

 

Like I just said in my last post via meme, "You're wrong. Get out".

 

Yeah, Zack Snyder's Jonathan Kent was a real piece of work all right.

 

People clearly don't care about letting the facts get in the way of a story.

 

It's honestly pretty triggering to think about the mental gymnastics and bullshit that Jonathan put Clark through and who was then rewarded with Clark's reverence in the film's climax. As someone who has been abused it really is upsetting to see.

Speaking of which, this video essay is a brilliant tackling of Snyder's ideology.

 

^ You're embarrassing yourself by alleging a portrayal of Jonathan Kent's behavior that is demonstrably false, so just stop it.