In the lead-up to James Gunn’s Superman, I’m writing a series of short essays about what I think are the important things I feel ought to be in a Superman movie. Or at least, this one. Not every Supe movie needs Luthor, but he’s in this one so I’m going to write about Lex.
I will be informed by what we’ve already seen pre-release, by past Superman depictions on film, and my knowledge (decent, but not extensive) of Superman in the comics. I post these here for your reading entertainment (Avocado can be thin for content I find sometimes) and invite anyone interested to add their thoughts. All predictions are just that: I could be wrong about any or all things, and my opinion is solely mine, though I’m going to try and keep my thoughts in third person.
My hope is to have these up every weekend, with the following topics:
- Lois and Clark
- Lex Luthor
- The Kents
- The Justice Gang
- “Look Up”
The Kents
Ok. This is the post where I go off on Zack Snyder. I’m not a fan of the Snyderverse, but these posts are aimed at both the Superman mythos generally, and the upcoming Gunn film specifically. So I’m not here to crap on Snyder or David Goyer’s visions for Superman for five weeks running. Nor am I here to yuk anybody’s yum and will try and steer clear of the Snydergun War. But this is the exception: Because damn the DCEU did Pa Kent dirty. And I am not holding Kevin Costner responsible. I thought he was a great cast for Jonathan Kent. I also thought he did a fine acting job in Man of Steel. “You are my son” was a great line read.
But mein Gott. There’s no way to sugar-coat this. This version of Jonathan Kent is the antithesis of the character. He is a man who molds Clark not into being a selfless, kind person who can help inspire the people of Earth, but into a morose, aloof god who really seems to dislike people. It’s easily the worst part of Man of Steel, even more than the decision to have Clark Kent kill Zod, because Snyder thinks killing is grown up or something. There really is no clearer indication that the screenwriter dislikes Clark Kent as a character than the way he wrote his Pa.
If Christopher Reeve is the gold standard for Superman on screen (and he is), Glenn Ford has a similar place as Jonathan Kent.
And let me just say it if people don’t know: Glenn Ford was a draw in cinema from the 40s through the 70s. This casting, like Costner’s, carried HEFT.
Also as with Costner’s portrayal, Ford cautions Clark not to expose his secret too hastily, despite Clark wanting to, you know, dominate on the football field. But this Jonathan Kent doesn’t want Clark to stay out of sight forever. Just until he’s able to do… whatever he was meant for.
“When you first came to us, we thought people would come and take you away because, when they found out, you know, the things you could do… and that worried us a lot. But then a man gets older, and he starts thinking differently and things get very clear. And one thing I do know, son, and that is you are here for a reason. I don’t know whose reason, or whatever the reason is… Maybe it’s because… uh… I don’t know. But I do know one thing. It’s not to score touchdowns. Huh?”
The Snyderverse Jonathan Kent teaches his son that, “maybe” it would have been preferable to let a school bus full of children drown rather than risk Clark exposing his secret. In this universe, Clark Kent must only do good if he chooses to do good, rather than having a moral obligation to do so because of the wonders he can accomplish. It’s a very Ayn Randian attitude on the Kents’ part, and that tracks when you know that Zach Snyder likes “The Fountainhead” and there’s really no divorcing Rand’s work from her political philosophy.
Now, I would say that, in a different story, the Pa Kent who is so protective of his adopted son that he warns him not to get involved, not to put himself at risk, could have worked. Indeed, in the comics it has. But it only works if Jonathan experiences a character arc that ends with his realization that he needs to share his son with the world, that he needs to let go. That doesn’t happen here, because of the stupidest death scene I’ve seen in a month of Mondays:
“stupid.jpeg” is literally this file’s name on my computer.
In order to protect his secret identity, Clark Kent is told to look on while a tornado whisks away his loving father, all the while knowing that he could save him. I’m getting mad just thinking about it. Because it’s so easy, if you’re going to kill Pa Kent, to do it right. Superman has amazing powers like unto a god, yes. But he’s not God. And even Superman cannot prevent a natural death:
Instead, Jonathan dies the stupidest death, one which Clark should live in regret about. Unlike Jeff East’s young Clark in Superman, (1978) where he mourns not being able to save his father because…Superman can’t stop heart attacks, Henry Cavill’s Superman should wake up every morning looking in the mirror and thinking about his father would still be alive if he hadn’t stood there like a shrubbery.
If I’m going too off on Jonathan Kent, to Martha’s detriment, I’m sorry about that. I didn’t want to have to go on about how dumb “save Martha” was.
Happily, it appears that both of the Kents may be alive and well during the events of Superman, which will be a refreshing dynamic compared to yet another superhero orphan. What’s also clear is that this Ma and Pa Kent not only shaped him into the much more familiar Superman of our youths.
Jonathan Kent tells Clark “Your choices. Your actions. That’s what makes you who you are.” Martha goes to get her son’s boots so that he can suit up. It’s plain to see that they know that Clark puts himself in harm’s way to protect others, and they do what they can to show that they love him and support him. Wholesome stuff.
Also: Superman has a dog, which I’m including as part of “the Kents.” Who doesn’t love a puppy?
So that’s me on the Kents. Share your thoughts below and have a great weekend.
