Smallville - Season 1

The first season of Smallville focuses tightly on three main characters of the Superman universe, how they interact with each other, their personal victories and their failures. Those characters are Clark Kent, Lex Luthor, and Lana Lang. And their stories and personalities help make a show about a superhuman relatable and appealing.

.

The Man in Superman

Possibly one of the most enthralling parts of Smallville is Clark Kent and his story. Unlike any comics I have read of Superman, the Clark Kent featured in this TV series is endlessly relatable. Essentially, he is a good person given extraordinary powers and, thanks to excellent parenting, has turned into a young man who is responsible, humble, and benevolent. In this season we see his high school years, how his relationships with his friends flourish, and how he approaches difficult moral decisions that we encounter in everyday life.

What is perhaps this series' greatest accomplishments is the fact that Clark, an inherently good person, is actually interesting to watch and easy to empathize with and aspire to. A common effect of fiction is that the villains often end up being more interesting than the heroes and, in this show, they have managed to do the impossible. I see in Clark aspects of myself, a true empathy. I also see aspects of myself and of life in Lex Luthor and Lana Lang as well, but to see it in Clark Kent, the man who will be Superman, I find that to be amazing. In the comics, Superman is often dull, two-dimensional, and a good but wooden character. To connect with his character in this way in this show is an unusual deviation from the norm, and I want to make sure to emphasize that and point this out.

Part of what makes this possible is the fact that, despite his goodness, he still has his failures. He may have powers beyond comprehension, but this doesn't mean he doesn't make mistakes. As one often sees in Smallville: Season 1, Clark has to overcome the same hurdles that we did when we were young; uncertainty of self, how to accomodate the feelings of others, the pain of unrequited love. Clark epitomizes the ideal of teenage innocence and benevolence, and yet does so in a way that gives him surprising depth.

.

Ambiguity and Shadow

Lex Luthor is another complex character who helps make the show immensely engrossing to watch. In the comics, Lex Luthor is Superman's arch nemesis, a rich man with no powers of his own who opposes Superman because he believes that Superman holds back humanity's own potential for growth and adaptation. In Smallville, we see a Lex Luthor that hasn't been seen before, as Lex Luthor who meets and befriends a young Clark Kent despite differences of wealth and upbringing. It is an unlikely friendship that is as true as it is odd, and despite the fact that it never happened in the comics, in Smallville it seems to make all the sense in the world.

The foreknowledge that Lex Luthor will eventually become a villain actually serves to make Lex Luthor an incredibly interesting character. He is, in fact, my favorite part of the show, and a great deal of that has to be attributed to the fantastic acting by Michael Rosenbaum. Lex has a magnetic personality; he is clearly Machiavellian in thought and purpose. He is a leader. Yet, at this age (young like Clark), he is also dedicated to doing the right thing, even though this can often be at odds with his own business sense and the wishes of his Hobbesian father, Lionel Luthor. This makes for a conflict that is wholly intriguing to watch. Lex Luthor presents himself as confident, self-interested, suave, and powerful, but his actions give you the sense that he wants to do good for Clark and the town of Smallville, despite the fact that everyone regards him as a dangerous, power-hungry mirror of his father.

It is hard to convey how interesting it is to watch Lex Luthor. You get the sense that he is trying to do good, but that sense wars with the sinister feeling that he is doing it for some unseen insidious purpose. Or is he? It is one of the most intricate and engrossing characters I've ever seen in any story format.

.

The Heart of Smallville

Lana Lang is an unexpected addition to Smallville's strengths. In the comics, Lana Lang is merely the first love interest of Superman, a love interest that is swiftly passed in favor of the similarly named Lois Lane in the city of Metropolis. In Smallville, I was impressed with how Lana was made into a fully fleshed out character; a young woman seeking her purpose in life. Even more so than Clark, Lana is the moral compass of the show. While, as with everything else, there are exceptions to this rule, Lana consistently seems to lead the way with regard to personal growth and maturity.

A number of themes surround her that often end up affecting the other characters as well. Through Lana we see the effects of popularity in high school, how that negatively affects those around her, and how being regarded as the most beautiful and most accomplished girl can, in fact, be not felt at all by the recepient of such judgments. Lana is these things, popular, accomplished, beautiful. But it is clear that not everything she touches turns to gold, and that she is not certain of herself. While at times the universe of Smallville can seem to revolve around her, oftentimes this is merely a slow illustration of her own doubts. It feels as if Lana's story is one that will spearhead the show into new territories. Her search for what to do with her life is one that is interesting to watch, and something that will undoubtedly have ramifications for the show as a whole.

.

Conclusion

As mentioned in earlier posts, Smallville's strengths lie with its intricate character development and interactions. In this post I hoped to highlight some of those characters and how they make the show interesting.

As for the powers and the show's presentation, it is a bit more mixed. The developers' go-to way to keep Superman in check is often to just give every villain some powers related to kryptonite, Superman's weakness. So far, this is tolerable, but we'll see how long it will keep up. As for the show's presentation, it can occasionally feel quite 'emo' and very much like a teen drama. The show's theme song makes me want to projectile vomit at the walls, but I endure it as well as I can. But, for those skeptical, I would point out that it is an intelligent show with a lot of moral complexity, hidden references to the comics, and excellent dialogue among mature characters.

The question is whether you can overcome the occasional teeny feel and omnipresent nineties songs. If you can, then you should definitely check out this show (or at least Season 1) because it is amazing. If you can't, then grow a pair and get over yourself... but I will understand.

9/10

Starcraft II

Written by Joe the Revelator

Not A Heinlein Future

Somewhere on earth right now there’s a downtown skyscraper with the word Blizzard emblazoned on the placard. At the top of this building is a penthouse with a golden throne, surrounded by mounds of money of every denomination. On this throne sits the emperor of Blizzard Entertainment. At the flick of a switch near his armrest a dozen space marines pour from hidden compartments around the walls, wielding real space rifles, donned in working power-armor.

Well, maybe things aren’t so bad yet. But Blizzard commands droves of monthly subscribers through their World Of Warcraft franchise, royalties from Diablo I & II sales, and now the sequel to the Korean dominated real-time strategy game; Starcraft. Their subscribership is so vast that if their next patch featured achievements for snuffing out game reviewers with chloroform and lime, I won’t be here.

Campaign Mode:

Even if you’ve never played Starcraft or its successive expansion Brood Wars, Starcraft 2 won’t leave you in the dark about its past history before it shuttles you off to a future of cosmic mayhem. A soothingly robotic female voice helps catch you up on Starcraft lore with a loading screen slideshow during the hour-or-more installation. After which you take the lead of the rebel Terran forces, through war hero and melancholy space cowboy Jimmy Raynor.

The future of Steroids: So big... how did he ever fit in a vulture?

Mild-mannered engineer with 20” guns.

Specters- Seriously, how much must you bench-press to sneak up on people?

Command troops from the war-room of a starship or from the barstool in a Terran dive, through 29 diverse strategy missions that increase in complexity and difficulty, all but a few of which are played strictly from the earthling’s perspective. A series of novelty Protoss (mystic alien space-shaman) missions are available near the beginning of the game, but they offer few rewards or insights, aside from bridging the storyline from the first game to the second. The Zerg (see movie; Aliens) have no missions of their own, though speculations and teasers suggest the player will control the hive mind for the next expansion; Heart of the Swarm.

During the missions all three races, Zerg, Protoss, and Terran, are thrown together on planet-side battlefields to hash out their differences like bees in shaken jars. Between these romps are remarkable bits of dialogue, eclectic cultural references, and lively characters, which act like glue holding together violent interspecies confrontations. The storyline, while not as engaging as some roleplaying games, is better written than any RTS has a right to be, with a conclusion that leaves the player satisfied right up to the point when the credits stop rolling and the multiplayer games start.

Multiplayer Mode:

I don’t know if I can stress enough the importance of multi-tasking in Starcraft 2, and the game itself is more than willing to educate you. Every mode of play outside the campaign seems designed to hone your skills for crushing real opponents. The challenge missions teach you how to defend against popular early-game tactics, to produce and deploy units accordingly, and how to maneuver your tiny fighting men during combat to minimize the damage they take.

The game holds your hand as you rise through the difficulty levels against AI opponents, then through practice matches with other new players, and finally, through ranked matches. And with every tiny victory you’re given a pat on the back which comes in the form of achievements; clever little merit badges with descriptions of what you did to win the match.

After all that practice and all those achievements it’s time to face some real opponents, and unless you’ve found some real latent talent for Starcraft 2 or you were a junkie of the first game, be prepared for total destruction.

The leagues in which every player is auto-separated into offer some measure of fairness. Almost the same slant as filling a soccer stadium with men, charging them 60 bucks apiece, and giving them lead pipes with the comfort that they’ll be roughly separated into divisions. The ‘gold medal’ players will do fine. The ‘bronze’ players will be brained.

I myself was humbled into the lowest possible league, having played my trial matches buzzed on whisky, and found my opponents to be grossly overwhelming or borderline retarded. One Zerg player actually apologized for beating me in a span of a few minutes. Another sent wave after ineffectual wave of the smallest, least threatening units in the game, until I carpet bombed his base. Larger team match-ups, IE; 2v2, 3v3, or 4v4, make for even greater chasms in skill.

The Final Ruling:

I don’t know if the single player campaign alone can justify the steep price of the game, especially if you don’t intend multiple playthroughs for all the achievements. But when you get down to it, Starcraft 2 was never meant to stand on single player mode alone. It’s not an RPG. It thrives as a community, an entity composed of sweaty nerds willing to commit their time and reflexes to the good of the galaxy. So unless you hate RTS’s or playing with other live human beings, pick up a copy of Starcraft 2 or abuse your friend’s guest pass, and see if you can’t lead an army of super-intelligent drooling insects.

Schools and Summers

In my time studying to become a teacher of high school social studies, one issue in has been of particular interest to me: school summers and how to address them.

As most everyone knows, in the United States of America our schools (elementary, middle, and high) have a lengthy break of about three months during the summer. In the past, this existed because boys and girls were needed back at the farm to help work the fields and livestock alongside their families. Currently, its unofficial purpose is to give children a break and allow them to go on vacations with their families.

But is this summer necessary? Is it good? In this post I will attempt to argue that we should have full school years (with some caveats) and that free summers are unnecessary, outdated, and hinder the ability of children to acquire knowledge.

Rationale

Summers were made no-school zones so that kids could go home so as to have everything ready and taken care of come fall and wintertime. This issue no longer exists, with maybe a fraction of a percent of children still utilizing the summer break for this purpose.

Studies have shown that kids lose substantial amounts of their garnered knowledge when left to their own devices for so long. This is learning decay. Over the summer, kids have no desire to study or learn, and thus the information that they worked for over the previous year is often lost as soon as possible. This would be fine if the knowledge snapped back into place at the beginning of the new year, but it often fails to do so. The first month or two of the new school year almost always is spent repeating lessons from the previous year. This wastes precious hours intended for new teachings and serves to cripple the class as a whole.

Free summers are a significant reason why American kids do not compete well when measured against students elsewhere. The United States is one of the only nations that continues to follow such an outdated method of teaching and there is little reason for it. Consequently, if we were to spread school days out across the year, we would prevent the effects of learning decay. Even now, school days are being lost due to the recession, which will only exacerbate the loss of student knowledge over the summers. But, if the school year were stretched out, even the loss of a day or two here or there would not overly affect a student's ability to retain knowledge. After all, school would occur the following week, almost always without fail.

This is not to say that children (and, for that matter, the teachers) do not deserve a break, however. We all look forward to the summer and its promise of free time, even when it proves to be an illusion. In response, I would point out that adopting a full school year does not equate a kid in class every weekday for twelve months. Holidays would still exist and the spread of days could potentially create a three to four day school week, along with the occasional week off for vacation time so that the school can recover, get new supplies, etc.

Hurdles

The biggest hurdle to pursuing such a change in policy is the tradition. Students would howl screaming in all directions if they heard that their free summers would no longer exist. Parents would say that the stress of the school year needs to be broken up by months of time off. However, there are easy answers to this. Stretching the year so that it includes summers would result in a regular occurrence of three to four day weekends. There would still be the occasional week or two off so that schools can recuperate, have time to hire new staff, and prepare for the next session. This would give kids more than adequate time to rest between days of classes.

Another big hurdle is the fact that, to a certain extent, our economy is shaped around the concept of summers being off for the younger folks. Part-time summer jobs exist because of it. Amusement parks and entertainment centers would lobby against it. There are probably a host of other business interests that would find the idea abhorrent; a change like this would affect more than just those involved in the education field. The all-powerful teacher's unions would go up in arms over it, as they do for any suggested change to the profession. The only way to handle this is to be strong in the face of said opposition. In the beginning, this would appear a radical departure from the norm but, in the end, it would be beneficial for every child in America.

Conclusion

Eliminating summers and stretching school years out across the months is arguably necessary and good for the kids. Time will still be had for fun and relaxation; if anything, they will have consistently have more time to recover with this plan than with our current approach. By keeping kids in school throughout the year this will substantially reduce learning decay, kids will be less inclined towards bored delinquency (a common problem for kids whose parents work full-time), and kids will have more opportunities to catch up with their education if they fall behind. School years will no longer be packed stress-fests where the teacher is desperately trying to cram an entire subject's learning into a short time period. More time will be available for reading and studying for tests. Time will no longer be spent on catching up except on an individual basis through tutoring.

However, the hurdles will be difficult to overcome, and such a plan will likely not see daylight for years. Given the times, people will complain about the cost of rearranging school years like this, even though it is essentially a one-time down payment on organization and education that will pay off for the rest of the kids' lives. On a year-to-year basis, the only increase in costs will be relatively minor; keeping the school's lights on where previously they would have been off.

I hope that this outline of this current dilemma was informative for those interested in education, and I hope that eventually America will be able to adopt such a plan that will reduce or end summers entirely. Time will tell and I have my fingers crossed. Are yours?

The Book of Eli

The Book of Eli is one of those movie rarities. It is an action movie that makes you think. Set in a post-apocalyptic landscape (yes, another one of those), The Book of Eli follows the travels of one lone wanderer who keeps very careful care of a mysterious and important book.

.

Day After the Fall

Post-apocalyptic movies seem more and more prevalent these days. From 2012 to The Matrix, 9 to Terminator: Salvation, the trend is one that is both interesting and unsettling. One could take measure of this trend and say that we enjoy movies about people surviving on a day-to-day basis without the complexities and murkiness of daily life. With these movies, the enemy is often very easy to see and concerns that dog us every day would no longer exist. This is part of the reason zombie movies are so popular. You don't have to worry about your day job or your homework when the zombies break out. Instead you get to do cool things that you couldn't before; you could go take over the mall, barricade the doors, then play with all the toys in the Apple store. You could go to the food court whenever you get hungry and just grab anything without paying. Sure, you would have to get something out of the freezer and make it yourself, but the point is that a post-apocalyptic world is one where all those silly laws and barries to fun and enjoyment are gone. You can ride shopping carts down an escalator for all you care.

Alternatively, perhaps post-apocalyptic movies are so popular these days because they act as a form of desensitization. Although the recession has ended, it sure doesn't feel that way, and watching a movie set in a wasteland subconsciously allows us to relax. Our jobs may suck. We may not even have jobs. But, hell, at least we aren't being pursued by crazy cannibals on motorcycles everytime we go get something to eat. At least we don't have to wash ourselves with hand moisturizers to try to clean ourselves. We don't have to kill people over a drink of water. Post-apocalyptic landscapes can be relaxing as well as liberating, as strange as it sounds.

Yet, oddly, the post-apocalyptic setting really doesn't seem all that important or dominating in The Book of Eli as it might have been. The reason is because of the plot. For the story to happen, it must be in a time after civilization's fall. There has to be a reason for this one book to be so valuable. And, after the skies turn gray and the landscape withers, books are one of the things doomed to fall apart, burn, and decay, making literature of all forms an unexpected rarity.

.

The Power of Words and Religion

It is very difficult to talk about The Book of Eli without revealing major plot points. But I will reveal that one of its central themes is that of religion and its capacity to affect people in positive and negative ways. Not what you would expect in a movie with a lot of action, but an interesting topical choice that resonates throughout the film. In The Book of Eli, we see two sides of religion: the personal side where people use religion and faith to act in moral ways, and the manipulative side where people use religion as a tool with which to control and influence others.

Before I start, though, I must point out that I am not religious. Yet, surprisingly, this did not affect my appreciation of the film. One of the most interesting things about the movie is how faith keeps the main character going, and it shows a good example of faith being utilized toward a benevolent goal. This personal touch and belief in religion is evident in everything Eli does, and this resolute determination towards achieving that goal is easy to empathize with, even for someone nonreligious. For, even if faith were not in the equation, it is admirable to see someone devote themselves utterly to some end or ideal. Uncompromising characters are easy to like, and it is those who compromise their beliefs who seem weakest in the end, even if those compromises are necessary and good.

On the other hand we have the manipulative side of religion, and its capacity to be used as a tool to affect others. As sad as it is to hear, history shows us an endless sequence of events where religion is utilized to get people to do things that they shouldn't. The Crusades were brought about by a religious call to arms against a region that had done nothing to deserve an enormous invasion. The introduction of monotheistic religions (belief in only one god instead of many) in ancient Rome brought about an era of religious persecution against those who refused to commit to a similar belief. Religions even today can still elicit inequality and questionable acts: a lack of women's rights among many Muslim countries, extreme Islam inducing men and women to explosively martyr themselves on others, extreme Judaism preventing any compromise in the Israel-Palestine region, the near decision to burn the Qu'ran in Florida, the inability of women to serve as Catholic priests, and the recent discoveries of pedophilia among many religious leaders across the world along with the failure to punish said leaders in a meaningful way. This is not to say that these acts are the norm for religious people (far from it), but these examples merely illustrate the darker side of how religion can work to cloud minds and occasionally induce destructive zealotry. The Book of Eli touches on this negative aspect of religion with regard to the villain and how he elects to use religion as an "opiate of the masses". This idea has historical precedence and is a warping of original intent that happens far too often.

.

Conclusion

All in all, The Book of Eli is an excellent movie about these twin facets of religion and how they might factor into a post-apocalyptic world. Denzel Washington represents Eli magnificently and he fits the role well. Given how easy it is for popular actors to simply act as themselves and get away with it, Denzel manages to avoid that pitfall completely. And, on top of what I said, there is much which I didn't touch on in respect to those who have not seen it. This movie is great and, so long as you are okay with a handful of brutal action scenes, is as rewarding as it is awesome.

9/10

Smallville and the Ubermensch

Smallville shows us a Superman that most of us have never read, heard, or thought about. A Superman before he was 'Super'. Certainly, he has his powers and he is perfectly capable of using them for good, but Smallville is about the journey in getting there; getting to the point where he is willing to put on tights and cape to go fly around full-time to save people from danger.

.

Social Connections

The primary reason Smallville has been so appealing to me is its incredible success in humanizing Superman/Clark Kent. I have never been so impressed by a TV show's ability to present situations that I can genuinely empathize with through experience. Most of Smallville (Season 1, where I am at) is about Clark and his years in high school, how he copes with friendship, love, and day-to-day life as a teenager that is secretly far more unique than his classmates.

What one would expect would be for the show to focus on Clark's powers and his learning process in using them safely and, in that, Smallville is no slouch. But what surprised me was how, instead of being simply a sequence of superpowered events, the show spends most of its time on Clark and the people around him, what makes them happy, sad, and how they each learn in their own ways how to approach life and each other. Clark may have superpowers but, for all intents and purposes, he could be completely powerless and Smallville would still be a great show.

It is hard to write about how something that deals with abstract feelings and social concepts can do so in such a brilliant way. But I can say this. Even though Clark is, at his core, a superhuman, it is very rare for me to empathize so completely with someone in book, film, or show. Despite his powers, he goes through high school and events in his personal life in a way that resonates with me personally and relates to my own trek through high school and, for that matter, life. The actors portray their characters brilliantly, the writing seems great to me; each of these elements combine to make me really feel for Clark, his friends, and even his enemies. It addresses teenage conflict and drama, but in a way that isn't overly emotional or hard to take seriously. Even the villains are easy to relate to. I've yet to see a villain-of-the-day who I didn't feel some connection with; most are honest, ordinary people who utilize unexpected powers in ways that are often wrong. But you can see where they are coming from. This is an impressive accomplishment, particularly since I've never seen a villain-of-the-episode method able to do that.

.

Powers and Portents

But, despite the mesmerizing character interactions and relatable story events, this is still a show about a young Superman, and his powers are of great importance. In this, Smallville is succeeding, although with one hitch. At this point, the show represents Clark's powers in three manifestations: his incredible speed, his super strength, and his x-ray vision. Each of these is utilized reasonably and, though you can see budgetary constraints holding down the extent of their use, I rarely found myself skeptically raising an eyebrow or losing immersion in the show whenever they showed up. Even though Clark is empowered thus, he still gives a sense of vulnerability and danger when needed, and only occasionally does it occur to me how outclassed other villains are when he is put next to them.

However, part of that has to do with the gratuitous use of Kryptonite everywhere in the show. For those not in the know, Kryptonite is a mineral from the asteroid shower that originally destroyed Superman's home planet. When he arrives on Earth in his escape pod as a child, he is accompanied by some of the Kryptonite residue from his planet's destruction. When he is near Kryptonite, though, his powers are weakened considerably and he is vulnerable to pain and death like any normal individual.

The problem is a complex one for the show, and I both understand and condemn their use of Kryptonite within every single episode. It has been used in a good way with how it has brought powers to normal people of Smallville; seeing how a person like you and me reacts and uses unforeseen powers is always interesting. But the bad part about this is that, no matter what, Kryptonite is almost always used as an equalizer to bring Clark nearer to the villains' power level. Every single time so far, Kryptonite has been nearby when Clark goes to confront the villain and, every single time, he is weakened by its presence, knocked around for a bit, then overwhelms the villain when he is distanced from it.

So far this hasn't bothered me that much, as the use of superpowers has been a mostly pleasant diversion from the meat of the show: character interaction. But, if this keeps up, it is just going to get more and more annoying and feel more and more contrived. We'll see what will happen, but thus far it represents a caution sign for me. If it continues, and issues like this become more and more prominent, it will weaken the show as a whole.

.

Conclusion

So far I am greatly enjoying Smallville. It has shown me a side of Superman that I've never seen before, and I am able to fully accept Smallville's casting as having excellent representations of Clark, Lex Luthor, Lana Lang, and his adopted parents. So far, compared to the aspects of Superman's character I touched upon in the previous post, Smallville has been doing an excellent job of balancing Superman's unique and inherently lonely character with his gradual bonding with humanity as a whole. Time will tell with regard to the other facets, the danger of abusing his powers for his own goals and the potential for his idealistic heart to blind him from the murkier paths of life.

I will talk in more detail about this and the characters when I finish Season 1 and write a review of it. Until then, I can definitively say that, so far, Smallville is a great show and, so long as nineties-era music and the occasional teenage 'emo-ness' doesn't bother you, it is definitely worth checking out.

The Legendary Superman

For those not in the know, Smallville is a television series about the young life of Clark Kent, or the man who later becomes the comic book hero Superman. About his growth from teenager to adult and from small-town to bustling city of Metropolis, Smallville features an odd mix of confronting societal issues, chronicles of self-growth, and conflicts with superpowered people and beings.

I must admit that I went into Smallville guarded and skeptical. A story about Superman's youth in the middle of nowhere? Ten seasons long? How can one squeeze that much story out of his early years? One of my friends recommended against watching it. He said that, while it started strong, it went swiftly downhill afterward. But, despite these concerns and despite the warning, I started watching it anyway.

I'm glad I did.

.

The Man of Steel

Before I get into my impressions of the show, though, I want to give some background on Superman himself and what I know of him going into the series. I do this to both give a detailed look at what makes Superman such an interesting character, and also so I can reference differences later that arise between my perception of Superman and Smallville's.

Superman is, essentially, the living embodiment of humanity's idealism and capacity for good. Everytime I've read comics with him, it seems like he is on a moral plane above everyone else, but in a good way. It is this capacity to care and love unconditionally that defines him as an individual; it is this quality that makes us want to sigh in relief or stand up in cheer when he shows up to save the day. Given his status as a Kryptonian, an alien not of this Earth, he has powers far beyond that of any other superhero. It is this, along with his otherworldliness, that helps to paint him as a sort of messiah figure. It is easy to regard him as a god walking the earth. Or, in his case, soaring above the clouds.

It is this paradox that defines his personality. For those who write him well, a major aspect of his psyche is the desire to fit in with those of earth who surround him. When given time to dwell on it, it is easy to see that he is truly alone; he may look like a human, but he will never be regarded as one. For it is clear that he is something more; his powers are so impressive that he is able to maintain a completely idealistic and empathetic view that no other person can truly empathize with. After all, for you and me, life is something that has to be approached with caution. Superman doesn't have to worry about being mugged. He doesn't have to worry about bills. He may live among us as Clark Kent but, if he wanted, he could drop that alter-ego in a second and go for a jog around the moon. It is this key difference that both lends him his shining faith in the potential of good in everyone and separates him from us.

Thus it is that Superman's constant struggle is threefold. He must fight with a loneliness; there is no one else like him. He must endeavor continuously to fit in among humanity even though he will never truly succeed. And, finally, he must hold onto that optimism and idealism no matter what. For if he fails to do so, he risks misusing his powers or losing touch with humanity and becoming completely detached, totally alone.

.

How to Corrupt a Superman

I was going to stop at this point and start talking about Smallville, but I think I'll expand on my analysis of Superman and talk about Smallville in part two. For I'll be curious to see if these aspects of Superman I'm about to touch on will feature later in the television series and, for you curious readers, you will be able to see more of what makes Superman a multifaceted character who has great potential in any story, comic book or otherwise.

Three comics stand out in my mind as being excellent depictors of what makes Superman interesting. They also reveal that Superman is hardly invincible. While he may be near impossible to kill, the real way to get the reader to empathize with Superman is to attack his sense of self and his perception of the world around him.

The first among these is not even a Superman comic, but deserves mention. It is called Irredeemable, and it is a deconstruction of Superman; what would happen if Superman really existed among us? The viewpoint taken is a very dark one. It looks at the Superman figure and points out all the stresses that would be laid upon him. Bad governments would want to duplicate his power for themselves. Good governments would want him to solve the world's problems for them. He would be called upon for peacekeeping, ending wars, alleviating poverty and hunger... And, though he is Superman, he can't be everywhere at once. At the same time, would he not wish for peace from all the expectations, all the adoration? For, despite his immense powers, he has feelings, dreams, and worries. In this comic, faced with such overwhelming pressure, the Superman figure snaps. Most of the story is a detailed process of figuring out why he snapped, and the difficulty of surviving in the post-apocalyptic landscape that would follow. With such an immensely powerful figure able to do what he wants whenever he wants, an insane Superman would be an event akin to armageddon.

The second is the comic, The Dark Knight Returns. While mainly a comic about Batman, it features Superman as an important supporting character in a Cold War era world where crime, death, and despair have never been so prevalent. In this world, Superman figures that the only thing he can do to serve the interests of peace is to essentially serve as a superweapon of the United States, presumably to deter and end wars before they can start up. We see scenes of Superman destroying an entire invasion fleet by himself, an action within which he is so detached that he muses upon Batman's own approach to doing good (vigilantism), and condemns it. Essentially, Superman's idealism blinds him to the reality, that he is being used by the government for reasons of realpolitik, and that sometimes one has to look at things rationally and realistically to make real difference and so as not to undermine the beneficial efforts of others.

Lastly, we have Kingdom Come. This comic features a world where Superman and the old guard of superheroes have retired; their morals regarded as outmoded and quaint in an era of increasing complexity. In this comic, his wife and adopted parents have died, and he has become detached from humanity, writing them off when they decide to embrace a new breed of heroes, heroes who are willing to kill criminals instead of incarcerate them over and over again as they break out and claim more lives. In an hour of dire need, Superman returns to save the day, but does so in a way that has him doing what he thinks needs to be done without consulting anyone or working with any humans at all. The story is a compelling one and shows that Superman's connection with humanity is of immense importance. Clark Kent, imaginary as he is, is a key part of who Superman's being. And without that human touch, Superman is doomed to fail.

.

Conclusion

These comics serve to show us three important strains on Superman, and what makes him an interesting character to read about. He must face enormous stresses and maintain his own personal well-being. He must insure that his potent sense of idealism does not blind him to reality. And he must make sure that he does not lose his connection with other people who are not like him. I'll be curious to see if Smallville touches on any of these traits and, if so, how they approach them.

Next up, Smallville, and my assessment of both the tv series so far and its treatment of Superman.

The Karate Kid (2010)

Written by Joe the Revelator

Wax on, Wax off.


There is no Mr. Miyagi. There’s none of the angst and pain of entering a new high school, and consequently, adulthood. There is no dojo. In fact, it’s not even karate. It’s kung fu. So why would a respectable Jackie Chan movie bear the title The Karate Kid?

Because we’re American, it’s marketing, and we don’t care.

Calling it a Jackie Chan movie isn’t altogether fair, either, since the freakishly talented Jaden Smith has far more screen time and fight scenes. And the only fisticuffs involving Jackie Chan take place in a back alley where his character, the sullen Mr. Han, beats up a pack of school bullies who are hounding his potential student.

Of course he turned the bullies’ attacks so they’d beat themselves up, so Smith explains, more to ease tensions in the audience than as a reflection of martial arts. Maybe it’s the slew of Jackie Chan movies on the shelves that feature him kicking gangsters in the teeth and jumping through shopping carts, but seeing him put the same moves on children has an awkward, almost comical quality to it. The ‘quit hitting yourself’ argument doesn’t really work when you’re using joint locks and throwing kids into each other. Or does it?

Most of the movie marches to a familiar tune; a young family is transplanted to a new home in a foreign land (China) due to family hardship. They quibble. They cry. They fight. But underneath the struggle lies the deep love that is found between a caring mother and her good-hearted son. There is childhood romance and enriching cultural messages of tolerance and understanding, and even a few genuine emotional moments; which are a bit unexpected from a high-budget reboot of an older franchise that dated itself so badly it can barely be taken seriously anymore.

Gone are the chest-thumping pop-collared thugs of the original Karate Kid, jamming to boom box tunes from atop their menacing dirt bikes. They’ve been replaced by 12-year-olds in modest school slacks and Chinese uniforms. And although the fight has moved away from the California beaches onto the playgrounds of Beijing housing tenements, the youngster’s brawls are no less brutal. In fact, pound for pound, the tykes that persist in harassing Smith’s character deliver punches and kicks as well as any adult, circling each other like starving survivors from Lord of the Flies. I’ve never myself inquired about kung-fu tournament rules in China but I assume they’re outrageously lenient, since chops and roundhouse kicks to the face and neck are rewarded with points scored. And the final championship-winning kick looks like something Colonel Guile from Street Fighter would do.

Despite the violence, which isn’t as frequent as it may seem, the movie often reminds us that it’s a friendly story. It immerses us in beautiful Chinese landscapes viewed from a rolling train, serene mountain waterfalls and temples where the masters train, traditional festivals and shows, and a few glimpses into better known landmarks and wonders. Even Mr. Han’s dingy, scrap-strewn house manages to look quaint and humorous with its rigged furnishings.

Verdict:

If you consider yourself an adult and your hand is still hovering over the DVD box, then you might do better picking up a copy of the original Karate Kid or a Jackie Chan flick like Legend of Drunken Master. But if your kids are screaming in the back seat, if you’re curious about yet another Hollywood reboot, or if you just like to watch kids get punked UFC style, pick this up.