Now, a staple of the superhero mythology is, there’s the superhero and there’s the alter ego. Batman is actually Bruce Wayne, Spider-Man is actually Peter Parker. When that character wakes up in the morning, he’s Peter Parker. He has to put on a costume to become Spider-Man. And it is in that characteristic Superman stands alone. Superman didn’t become Superman. Superman was born Superman. When Superman wakes up in the morning, he’s Superman. His alter ego is Clark Kent. His outfit with the big red “S”, that’s the blanket he was wrapped in as a baby when the Kents found him. Those are his clothes. What Kent wears – the glasses, the business suit – that’s the costume. That’s the costume Superman wears to blend in with us. Clark Kent is how Superman views us. And what are the characteristics of Clark Kent? He’s weak, he’s unsure of himself, he’s a coward. Clark Kent is Superman’s critique on the whole human race.
Now, a staple of the superhero mythology is, there’s the superhero and there’s the alter ego...
This was an awful movie.
No I don't care that it was split into two parts, its the same movie following the same unlikable asshole both times.
Clark Kent isn't "average human" he's "anti-Superman." He's the costume he puts on so his loved ones won't be targeted. But ultimately, Superman is what Ma and Pa Kent raised him to be. Superman is just that, a super version of what man can be. The Kent's taught him that it's cooperation and generosity that make humans great, even though they are both self-sacrificing traits. In a world full of people lying, cheating, and stealing because they think it's the only way to get ahead, Superman is there to say "it's okay to be good. I've got your back."
Kill Bill misses the goddamn point. The point is that he is clark and the costume is the symbol. This treats biology as psychology.
Its wrong about Batman, because the way Bruce presents himself as Bruce is a mask, the Bat is his identity and purpose around which his life revolves.
Clark is deined mostly by the relationships hebhas as Clark Kent, Superman is him discovering his history and a responsibility. Kal El is him trying to embrace a history and family he never had the chance to know.
At the end of the day, he’s Clark.
Or, you know, the sociopathic killer giving the speech could not relate.
I like that Bill being an asshole assissin came to that conclusion because he coulnd´t see good in people.
If anything there is nobody with a more clear alter ego that Clark Kent, he was born an alien but he was raised by human parents on human principles. He later discovered his heritage but he didn´t renounced his Kent persona and began calling himself Kal El 24/7. He got a human job like everybody else and became Superman because of his human morals.
Batman on the other hand has Bruce Wayne as his alter ego, his was once Wayne but after his parents where killed he dedicated his life to become Batman. Wayne exist to advance his Batman needs he pretends to be a drunk womanizer to hide the fact that is a crazy vigilante.
Now Spiderman that is an interesting case because he is both Spiderman and Peter no matter if he is in the suit or not. Pre SpiderBite Peter was self centered nerd that saw his new powers on a selfish way and used the Spiderman persona to become rich an famous. After his uncle was killed he changed he changed on a fundamental way both inside the costume and in his civilian life.
This is wrong.
Superman wasn't born as Superman. Batman wasn't born as Batman, Spiderman wasn't born as Spiderman. They didn't just randomly decide to put on a mask and save the world, they all had thier reasons to do so. Resons they they gained while being Clark Kent, while being Bruce Wayne, while being Peter Parker. They may be as mundane as good raising or as earthshaking as murder, but they were there and they all happened while they were Clark Kent, while they were Bruce Wayne, while they were Peter Parker. Without these reasons, they may be villians or random bums doing nothing productive, shooting up cans in the backyard with thier webs, batarangs or laser eyes. But they wouldn't be Superman, they wouldn't be Batman, they wouldn't be Spiderman
that shit movie literally singlehandedly ruined Superman
there's a chart that covers the decline of Superman's popularity and compares it to the rise of Batman's popularity, and the point where it all changes coincides exactly with Kill Bill, because faggots took that movie seriously and started writing all Superman adaptations that way instead of actually bothering to read the comics
>Its wrong about Batman, because the way Bruce presents himself as Bruce is a mask, the Bat is his identity and purpose around which his life revolves.
See, I never liked this interpretation. There's "Playboy Billionaire Bruce," Batman, but still at his core there's Bruce Wayne.
...
Fuck off Bill
...
Or Kill Bill was raised on pre crisis Superman.
>That blonde woman in the back in the fourth panel is totally listening to this conversation
...fuck thats a good point.
>Superfags
>Reading comics
Why do you think Superman threads on this board are just wholesome panels and never about discussion on comics?
...
...
...
...
...
...
Well, "Superman" is how we humans view Kal-el, an alien.
So Superman is actually Kal-el, not Clark Kent.
nigga that has NOTHING to do with pre-Crisis Superman
the pre-Crisis version of the character always emphasized his life in Smallville the MOST
gtfo with your historical revisionism
>That couple that brought their kid to a fancy restaurant
>They didn't even bother to dress him up decently
...
...
>The point is that he is clark and the costume is the symbol
Hi Byrne.
...
Clark Kent is not Superman's alter ego.
...
...
...
This kind of reading is prevelant, and garbage. A films characters saying something isn't actually an endorsement of that thing. Grow up.
...
Nothing like that ever happened in pre crisis Superman. Clark Kent was a made up act in silver age. There was even an issue where Superman thinks of the consequences of giving up the life of Clark Kent. A Bronze age arc had Superman deciding upon living as Superman or Clark Kent. A monolithic identity is a Byrne thing, who started the "hurr durr earth made me" shit.
...
Go read Superman #1. Siegel's version was with Superman and Clark as costumes in their own ways but his actual character shining through in both personas. His snark and playful trickery occasionally pop up in Clark, his foolishness and bumblebees peak out as Superman.
Clark was a guy always trying to conceal aspects of himself based on what he was doing. There was no "real" side. He was a guy named Clark who hid his power and sense of justice as a man and hid his weakness and hubris as a hero.
Fuck off, Byrne.
You don't know anything about Pre-Crisis if that's the case. Dude was still raised by the Kents.
You're a fucking idiot
Clark is Clark, the farmboy from kanses, even when he's wearing the cape.
Pre crisis had a heavy focus on smallville but that’s because of superboy. The character was for sure Superman and Clark was the phony.
90% of DC superheroes are Heroes first and normal humans second. that have always been the case
I have always been of the opinion that "billionaire playboy Bruce Wayne" is an extension of Bruce's innate showmanship. Bruce's life revolves around theatrics. He wears a costume, his sidekick is a circus performer, he brands all his gadgets in his image. It all comes back to the fact that Batman was born in a theater.
Silver/Bronze Age Superman arrived on Earth as an infant that could walk and could remember Krypton. He always knew his origins and that he wasn't human.
Smallville was highlighted in the sense that Superboy's adventures took place there and he loved being an hero there, but he was always hiding his identity even there.
That's Golden Age though, where he arrived on Earth as a baby and didn't remember Krypton. Silver Age Superman ends up a very different character due to the changed origin even if there isn't a specific point "break" point between the two continuities.
True, but idiots on the internet LOVE that quote and agree with it blindly so
>The point is that he is clark and the costume is the symbol
Uh no
Why are you posting the demographic that enjoys Kill Bill?
I don't think a single thing that you said in that sentence is correct. We're introduced to Superman in the Golden Age by Perry White telling Clark Kent about him in his very first issue.Elliot S Maggin was writing Clark as real person years before Byrne could even hold a pencil. And the Silver age was the era that focused on Superman's time as a boy in Smallville.
>using batman as an example of someone that's a human first hero second against superman
m8
>they pass by the table
>kid has actually been well behaved
>I like your shirt! I bet Superman would be proud of your behavior tonight, keep being a good kid!
The duality is only cosmetic to serve the Superman/Clark character further. Clark IS Superman, Superman IS Clark. Clark hardly acts any different except for some exaggerating of clumsiness and overall averageness. His character traits of bravery, and kind heartedness are still apparent. Superman is a symbol that Clark adopts to do his job, Clark is the rest of his life and he really only does what's necessary to be happy.
The whole two identities isn't really that big with Superman, it's mostly cosmetic. I actually kinda wish they hadn't backstepped the world knowing Clark is Superman and somehow found a way to continue that thread and the family making that life work. That being said I don't mind the status quo as it stands.
Like this
Oh wow, the sociopathic, narcissistic killer is so incapable of comprehending the innate altruism of a character that he decides to rationalize it in a way that conforms to their nihilistic worldview.
It sounds...I dunno...kinda familiar.
Who is the real Spider Man? The wise cracking guy or the somewhat boring Peter? Do we ever saw Peter cracking jokes like Spider Man? I know the jokes are a coping mechanism, but that must have roots on Peter's personality, yet i don't remember him ever being "funny" outside costume.
I liked the first one.
Depends on the writer, like always.
I'm sure Pete is known to crack a few jokes. Hell Ditko Pete isn't even a wisecracker, he's a straight up shit talker.
But a lot of writers like to play with the idea that Pete feels a little more free behind the mask but there are also who just say it's a coping mechanism.
I don't think Spidey really works in the whole true face/false face bit.
>And what are the characteristics of Clark Kent? He’s weak, he’s unsure of himself, he’s a coward. Clark Kent is Superman’s critique on the whole human race.
That's not entirely correct. He's only weak and defenseless against serious threats, not other human ones.
Superman is who Kal-El needs to be, Clark Kent i s who he chooses to be
The guy whole sold his marriage to the devil.
What's wrong with "Earth made me"?
That happens halfway through the story.
And his name was George Taylor at the time.
Here's an actual interpretation of the character that makes sense. Bill's just a psycho.
>People missing the point that Bill couldn't see that even with all that power, Clark was still a simple minded farmboy from Kansas. Without that mindset, he would have never become Superman
Isn't the point that bill dosen't understand why superman would want to be Clark Kent the same as he dosen't understand why the bride would want to settle down when she could be a high paid super assassin
It's literally how Luthor views him.