I like the way morality isn't easy for Clark, the way honesty and secrecy are at odds in his psyche.
It's true, this is what makes this incarnation of Clark interesting. It challenges the traditional view of Superman/Clark Kent knowing what is right. I think SV Clark is more in line with DC Kal-El than DC Superman and Clark Kent. I think this makes him more accessible. But I really don't want SV Clark to become Superman because he failed to save someone or because he feels it's his duty. That doesn't sound like 'truth and justice' to me.
I can see Lex as a villain, but I don't want to. But... maybe, if they do it right, in a situation where I'm not sure 'during it right' exists.
There was a discussion in the past where it was debated whether Lex would actually need to 'become' anything to become a villain. It was argued that Lex would just stay the same person, but be faced with different circumstances. We've seen him lie, threaten, blackmail and kill, traits of a 'villain' already there. The only difference the might occur is the context and justification, and has to live with the consequences.
I agree with ryui, exploring the emotional aftermath would make a difference. Emotions reveal so much about the character, but since we don't get to see it, we're cheated. Are we to assume SV Lex felt nothing after shooting Nixon, or hearing that Amanda committed suicide after he left her? Or does it weigh heavily? Either way will define him and take him a step closer or father away from DC Comic Lex.
And I'm not sure that, objectively speaking, Lex Luthor should be so loveable. To my eyes or to Clark's eyes.
No, this is true. TPTB have backed themselves into a corner. It seems that Lex is love much to much. It's impossible to keep him 'good' as Superman needs his future arch-nemesis. But making him 'evil' will alienate so many viewers, unless it's handled spectacularly well. It has to be believable and acceptable for the viewer. Nothing less for beloved Lex *g*
Although saying that 'arch-nemesis' are traditionally tragic-heroes. Not only in comics, but in classical literature. Think the Thomas Hardy's Mayor to Casterbridge, or even Angelo in Measure for Measure. There's hope!
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2003-09-06 02:05 am (UTC)It's true, this is what makes this incarnation of Clark interesting. It challenges the traditional view of Superman/Clark Kent knowing what is right. I think SV Clark is more in line with DC Kal-El than DC Superman and Clark Kent. I think this makes him more accessible. But I really don't want SV Clark to become Superman because he failed to save someone or because he feels it's his duty. That doesn't sound like 'truth and justice' to me.
I can see Lex as a villain, but I don't want to. But... maybe, if they do it right, in a situation where I'm not sure 'during it right' exists.
There was a discussion in the past where it was debated whether Lex would actually need to 'become' anything to become a villain. It was argued that Lex would just stay the same person, but be faced with different circumstances. We've seen him lie, threaten, blackmail and kill, traits of a 'villain' already there. The only difference the might occur is the context and justification, and has to live with the consequences.
I agree with
And I'm not sure that, objectively speaking, Lex Luthor should be so loveable. To my eyes or to Clark's eyes.
No, this is true. TPTB have backed themselves into a corner. It seems that Lex is love much to much. It's impossible to keep him 'good' as Superman needs his future arch-nemesis. But making him 'evil' will alienate so many viewers, unless it's handled spectacularly well. It has to be believable and acceptable for the viewer. Nothing less for beloved Lex *g*
Although saying that 'arch-nemesis' are traditionally tragic-heroes. Not only in comics, but in classical literature. Think the Thomas Hardy's Mayor to Casterbridge, or even Angelo in Measure for Measure. There's hope!