Showing posts with label Heroes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Heroes. Show all posts

Sunday, April 18, 2010

Superman Sunday: Origins (Part 1)

We'll start small today. Clocking in at just one seven(ish)-panel page, the Superman origin in "Action Comics #1" is one of the shortest on record. The thing I like about these short origins is that, while they don't offer much depth or detail, they do expose what the creators thought was most important about the character.

In that regard, this first origin story is particularly interesting. Read it for yourself:
A year later, they expanded it to a full *two pages*!

We start with Krypton. Or, rather, we don't. Superman's home planet isn't named in this opener. We don't spend any time lingering on Jor-El or Lara or the Council or any of the other trappings of Superman's pre-Earth origins. For Siegel and Shuster, the most important part of this story was starting it quickly, getting the exposition out of the way and the protagonist into the spotlight. So we have a "distant planet" dying of "old age," and a scientist who sends his infant son off in a rocket toward Earth. Other, later stories would fill in the gaps there. "Old age" would be replaced as a cause for the planet's destruction (over and over and over), but the endpoint is always more or less the same.

There's something almost Biblical about the way the second panel's meaning has changed over the years. Just as the serpent in Genesis is never identified as Satan--that's a later interpretation--the "passing motorist" was never identified as the Kents (especially since the noun is singular). Indeed, this iteration of the origin gives Clark no human family whatsoever! Moving on through the third panel, we might conclude that Clark grew up in an orphanage, which I think would make for a very different Superman mythos: just imagine how that would have been reinterpreted in 1985.

Panel three gives us a first glimpse at one of Clark's feats of childhood strength. Strangely enough, this one doesn't get referenced much in modern adaptations--probably in part because the orphanage rarely makes it into the origin these days. I'll be interested in seeing some of the early versions of the "lifting tractor to get ball" and "lifting truck" scenes that usually fill this role. Why this scene? Well, it establishes what happened to Clark after crashing on Earth, and it demonstrates that he's always been extraordinary.

I'd also like to take a moment to note the doctor's glasses flying off. That's just good comedy.

Panel four is a run-down of Superman's powers--interestingly enough, showing Clark out of costume in all three shots. This establishes the rules of the character--rules which, of course, would be stretched beyond all recognition within 20 years or so. I find it interesting that it mentions that "when maturity was reached" he found he could do these incredible things. The idea that Superman's powers developed slowly over time, only hitting their apex when he reached adulthood, was a cornerstone of the Man of Steel reboot, and has been a part of the mythos (to varying degrees) ever since, figuring heavily into "Smallville," for instance. I think the Silver Age focused more on the image of the infant holding up the chair, leading to stories of Superman as a boy and a baby, with the same powers he has as an adult. I like that the pendulum swung back the other way, toward the blurb atop this panel, though it seems to have found a bit of middle ground since the Byrne revamp. In any case, we establish that Superman can leap tall buildings in a single bound, lift giant weights, outrun a locomotive, and withstand the impact of anything less than a "bursting shell." Whether or not a bursting shell--or something more powerful--can actually hurt him is not, as I recall, directly addressed in these early issues, though I haven't read all of them.

It's worth noting how specific some of the ability descriptions are: "1/8 of a mile," "twenty-story building," etc. I'm reminded of the old Official Handbooks to the Marvel Universe, which delighted in such scientific-sounding minutia, explicitly describing characters' strength classes by how many tons they could lift. Some comic traditions are old.

Panel five drops Clark's first name, and it's a bit confusing, to be honest. I'll cut Siegel and Shuster some slack: this is their first big work, and they've been at it for years. They're naturally going to be more familiar with the character than their audience, and I think I blame that for this "calling the character by his first name as if the audience is already aware of what his name is" flub. Here, we get the briefest explanation of our protagonist's motives (good guy: check!), and the note that he's a hero by choice, from an early age. There's a part of me that's tickled by this, knowing that Superman started as a villain, but this also sets the stage for the strong sense of morals (which don't always jive with the law) possessed by our protagonist in the early years.

The next panel is a glimpse not only of the costume, but of the way the character would be narrated for decades. Compare "And so was created... [pause] SUPERMAN! Champion of the oppressed, the physical marvel who had sworn to devote his existence to helping those in need!" to "Look! Up in the sky. It's a bird. It's a plane. It's Superman! Yes, it's Superman — strange visitor from another planet who came to Earth with powers and abilities far beyond those of mortal men. Superman — who can change the course of mighty rivers, bend steel with his bare hands, and who, disguised as Clark Kent, mild-mannered reporter for a great metropolitan newspaper, fights a never-ending battle for Truth, Justice, and the American Way." It's exposition with its own climax and denouement.

I'll note in particular a phrase that you rarely hear about Superman anymore: "champion of the oppressed." At some point, I'd like to do some really deep research into the sociopolitical sentiment and cultural mores of the late 1930s, just to get a better idea of why the early Superman enemies were mostly crooked politicians and fatcats. There's something cathartic about that even now (and something very much in line with Jewish folklore), and I wish we saw a bit more of that in modern Superman comics. It'd be a great way around the problem of Superman's small and paltry rogues gallery if he spent more of his time righting social and political ills--without, say, taking a side in political issues. Corruption is corruption.

Finally, we have what I think is the most interesting part of this page, the most striking thing about what Siegel and Shuster thought was important to include: a justification for Superman's powers. The third panel explained the origin of his abilities (highly evolved/advanced biology), which would remain intact for some time thereafter, but this panel attempts to make those abilities seem less outlandish. I mentioned above that some comic tropes have a long history; this is one of them. This is "The Science of Superman" in 1938.

It's also one more reason I'd like to better understand the cultural milieu of the time. I've grown up in an era where superheroes are commonplace in fiction, where people bending steel and flying are a typical part of suspended disbelief. I've read before that either Siegel and Shuster thought the character might be too outlandish and unbelievable to be salable, or that they had a hard time selling the character for similar reasons. I don't know how true that is, but this panel seems like it's trying to preempt that sentiment. It also makes sense of why Superman's powers steadily grew over the next several years: if people were willing to accept a man who can jump an eighth of a mile, why not a little farther? Siegel, Shuster, and the other creators (along with the limitations of radio) pushed the boundaries of suspended disbelief slowly and steadily, until we had a minor god by the middle of the century.

I suspect the power creep--and the Comics Code, of course--is a major part of why Superman's enemies shifted from human ills to sci-fi/fantasy villains. When Superman can shatter planets, it suddenly seems a bit less like justice and more like bullying for him to lead socialites down into unsafe caves to teach them a lesson. Still, DC, if you're listening, I know I'd buy a regular series starring the Golden Age Superman in the '30s and '40s. Especially if Jon Bogdanove or Dave Bullock were drawing it. As long as you're doing this First Wave stuff, doesn't it just make sense?

So that's the beginning. Depending on how you count it, seven-ish panels to establish Superman as Clark Kent, champion of those who have none, to give him a tantalizingly brief backstory, and to explain and justify some of his amazing abilities. And this is how it would remain...until January 16, 1939. And until next week, Superfans!



Superman Sunday: Origins Master List

Tuesday, December 04, 2007

Quick Medical Question

Regarding H.R.G., doesn't a blood transfusion require, you know, a heartbeat?

I've got a No-Prize answer or two ready, sure, but that seems like a pretty basic error. I wonder what Polite Scott would say.

Wednesday, November 28, 2007

More on Heroes

Welcome, Mohinder, to the ranks of the world's dumbest smart guys. Be sure to check in with Dr. Richards.

West is finally a worthwhile character. Too bad it took nine episodes to get there.

I really like Monica.

Bob is a much better villain than H.R.G. was.

I'm glad Sylar is powerless (at least, so far as I've watched--still half of Monday's episode left to go), because this season would really blow otherwise.

When do we find out that it's not the Shanti virus but Maya's power that kills 93% of the population? Or, alternately, when do we find out that Maya's power is the cure?

Monday, November 26, 2007

Speaking of Heroes

I don't care about Maya and Alejandro.

Thursday, September 27, 2007

Heroes Takes a Fall

Spoiler warning, and all that.

So, um, the "Heroes" premiere? Kind of disappointing. Not quite as disappointing as the season finale, but certainly lacking that sort of crazy dramatic energy that characterized most of the first season.

I think part of the problem is that some of the plotlines feel pretty predictable at this point. How long is it going to take Hiro to realize that he's going to have to take Kensei's place, for instance?

I liked the comic book touches, though. There's the turn toward hopelessness (a mainstay of "time has passed" reboots) with the end of Parkman and Petrelli's marriages, there's Nathan's drinking problem and Noah's undercover dealings. Not to mention the Legacy Virus. But the two most "comic book" moments of the whole show were the "Of all of us, I never expected it to be you" scene, with the silhouetted assassin, and the mysterious amnesia there at the end. Fantastic.

But still, it felt kind of...blah. Just, flat. I suppose the series premiere was pretty lackluster too, so I hope it'll just pick up again like it did before. I'm not sure about the virus plot or the fact that Sylar's still out there; I thought they cured the disease in the last season (in Molly, with Mohinder's antibodies), and I think Sylar's going to end up overused and boring. We'll get to the mid-season break, and the recently-revealed silhouetted assassin is going to head back to his headquarters, greeted by a mysterious voice. As he turns around to attack, the camera will pan around to Sylar, sitting ominously in a chair, and we'll get the "To Be Continued" screen for a month and a half. I guess it's a consequence of being so comic book inspired that it feels like the plots are predictable, but I really hope they pull out some twists and prove me wrong.

On the bright side with regard to predictability, once we saw Claire's classmate flying, I figured he'd turn out to be Peter, keeping an eye on her (did Peter ever meet the illusion-making woman?). Now, I have to wonder. It's possible that it's Sylar (can he shapeshift into something other than a cockroach? Can he use telekinesis to fly?), and it's possible that it's just another Hero with flight as a power, but the show so far (it seems to me) has been operating on the old-school Legion rules: no repetitive powers.

Now that I think about it, though, the obvious option is that he's related to Claire, and is another child (illegitimate or otherwise) of Nathan Petrelli.

So, yeah, despite a slow start, I'll be watching "Heroes" religiously this season. Every time I think I'm out...

Tuesday, May 22, 2007

Reasons to Rearrange the Keyboard #147

No more embarrassing unintentional comments about "superherpes."

No blogging today: I'm sequestering myself until I manage to watch the season finale of Herpes.

What the--? Damn it!

Monday, March 05, 2007

April 23?!

April 23!April 23?!

Damn it.

Well, looks like I have some extra time for the next few Mondays. Hopefully I'll be able to pick this up again. Sorry for all the delays.

Friday, January 26, 2007

Give me the lowdown (but keep it on the down-low)

Hey, blogohedron! I seem to have misplaced some things, perhaps you--yes, you!--can help me find them. Drop a message in the comments if you have information regarding any of the following:
  • Some comics blogger did a recent post about Marvel Comics, and said something about how the combination of traits made them perfect for teenagers. I know it's a fairly common sentiment, but I wish I could remember who did that recent post on the subject. Can you help me out?
  • Where can I purchase more free time? Or, perhaps, a device to slow the passage of time? Does anyone know the phone number of a Hiro Nakamura?
  • Speaking of "Heroes," I only just noticed that the Homeland Security agent is played by Stacy Haiduk, who was Lana Lang on the old "Superboy" series. What has the rest of that cast been up to?
  • Speaking of "Superboy," I just picked up the first season set. I remember watching the show as a kid, but the only episode I remember in any detail is one where Clark's at a house with some friends, and a witch casting a spell on Superboy causes Clark's face to disappear, so he grabs a Superboy mask to cover up the magical effect. Anyone know what episode this was from? I can't find any place online with descriptions of all the episodes, and few if any mention a witch.
  • When you're alphabetizing, do you put titles that start with "Dr." and "Doctor" in the same section (Do-), or in separate places (Do- and Dr-, respectively)?
  • Which, if any, are the good seasons of Lois and Clark? I don't know that I actually ever stopped watching the show (I remember the whole thing with the baby left on their doorstep, and wasn't that the last episode?), but I distinctly remember it sucking for awhile before it ended. I liked the show, but I also had no taste at the time, so I'm hesitant to buy any of the sets.
  • How long do you think it'll be before the Extra Special Edition of Superman Returns, with all the deleted scenes (possibly added back into the picture) comes out? I give it until a few months before the sequel at most, but I wouldn't be surprised to see it show up again at Christmas this year or next.
  • Which of the upcoming Marvel Movies are you least excited about, Ghost Rider, Iron Man, or Fantastic Four (4?): Rise of the Silver Surfer. Yes, I realize I left one out. No one is more excited about any of those films than Spider-Man 3.
That should do it for now. Comment away!

Addendum: I found the Superboy episode in question; it's "Yellow Peri's Spell of Doom" from season 2. The special effects are pretty cheesy, but the dialogue is far, far worse. Still, it was a decent episode, and the sequence that stuck with me from childhood is pretty decent. Besides all that, Gerard Christopher looks great as Superboy (a little too beefy and a little too fake as Clark Kent, though), and the S-shield on his costume is perfect, better than any I've seen in any of the live-action incarnations. 'Twas a fun show, and a nice trip down memory lane.

Friday, January 12, 2007

I've been watching Heroes...

And I've been greatly enjoying it, despite some initial trepidation and trying to get over some of the scientific inaccuracy. I mean, I can let it slide in comics, but this is pretending toward a greater sense of realism, and so pseudoscientific garbage like the 10% Myth really stands out. It's easy to suspend disbelief for the normal comic book insanity: breaking the laws of physics on a daily basis, magic and Kirbytech and Unstable Molecules and impossible Mutant genes and whatnot. But when real-world pseudoscience (see: Grant Morrison's use of the Million Monkey Myth in JLA: World War III, or talking about aquatic crackpot Masaru Emoto in Frankenstein) ends up in the fictional world of comics, I cringe. I don't know if it's because somehow seeing it accepted as true in a fictional universe somehow validates it in the real world, or if it's because comics used to frequently take the time to teach the audience real science, in-between instances of defying the same, or if it's just because the real-world pseudoscience isn't nearly as believable as the comic book stuff, but it's annoying nonetheless.

Where was I? Anyway, I've been watching Heroes, and I admit that I haven't seen a lot of the talk about it in the Blogohedron. But has anyone else picked up on the sheer metafictional brilliance that is Hiro Nakamura? Here, we have a character who wants to be a superhero, who knows about his special abilities, and who has, since the beginning, been the character with the most focus on comic book superheroics and conventions. And he's Japanese; he speaks only a little English. Which means he has to be subtitled for the English-speaking audience. Which means, when we watch Hiro, we see a picture, and we see printed words. We have to pay attention to both in order to understand.

Hiro is a comic book character. Everyone else is in a TV show, a medium of sight and sound, but Hiro is in an animated comic book. Unlike even his companion Ando, who speaks some English, we have to read Hiro as we would any other comic book character, by synthesizing words and pictures together. So the character who knows the most about comics, who behaves and thinks most like a comic book character (I'm waiting with bated breath for him to say "with great power..." in Japanese), is the one which the audience perceives most as a comic book character, because of the way the creators have played with the television medium.

That's freakin' brilliant. Good show, Heroes. Good show.