Obviously there is little to no danger to his physical well being 95% of the time, that is why the inner struggle is the most important part of superman, which is something EVERY single movie to date hasnt fully captured. You cant just say "he is a middle class american god-child therefor he is 100% perfect and has no problems what-so-ever" in fact you are a huge derp for even thinking of saying that. Growing up is hard enough for most people without not knowing exactly what you are, being competely alone. Not to mention Clark has to adjust to his powers and has to figure out what it all means. Sure he isnt living in some 3rd world country with the threat of dying by some miltia or malnutrition, that doesnt mean he cant have inner struggle of trying to find out where he blongs and how he should live.

You're just saying things now. I never said he has No problems, I said his problems are insignificant. In terms of superheros, Superman is by far the closest to god-like, his moral ground, his ability, and his actions set him apart from every other superhero. It goes without saying (although I continue to repeat myself because nobody gets it) His childhood cannot be considered hard, and he is not a tortured superhero. In fact... His upbringing was so well managed that he becomes the perfect example of restraint, morality, and justice. SO MUCH so that he is uninteresting..

The other movies failed because they cannot add danger, struggle, and conflict where there is none. I feel this movie has added a dark filter, injected some childhood drama, and did the most cliched thin in any superhero story: Turn the people he's protecting against him. I will watch it, (shameless consumer) but I'm sure when it's done I'll have the same feelings I do about everything else superman. They tried to hard to make it something it's not. Superman is too close to perfect.

I could understand it beeing hard, as for all humans, to not be able to 'show off' or keep your ego in check. But i'm pretty sure he understands that he has to do it or else no one would like him for beeing this powerfull.
So that beeing said, this movie will rock once more, just because Superman is the perfect hero. Gentleman, Calm, Intelligent, God-like powers.

Tom Welling is the only superman for me :[

Carl Sagan is my superhero

I don't understand why they would cast a Lois Lane that is a decade older than Superman/Clark Kent.

Poor casting choice.

No it was actually based in the 1930's, 1938/1939 and the New York Worlds fair comics to be exact. Yes it has been rebooted several times, and yes it will be modern in the new movie. But the origin of the story (where him being son of the Kent's etc) was set in the trappings of what the 1930's-1940s were being a small farm family in America meant something vastly different. Granted the golden/silver age comics never focused on any dark leanings, but the timing for his origin story sticks. For the new movie its Nolan again, not the original creator. I fully expect some of that potential difficulty (that went with the original origin story but was never played up) to manifest more. Which brings in alot from my previous post.

My issue with your argument is your arguing for no threat being possible to godlike superman (which was certainly true for a long duration of the comic/cartoon/etc's run), BUT.... The movie is atleast initially restarting his origin story. The character, before his eventual transformation into superman, is NOT a little demi-god, atleast in his own mind. Some recent versions of the superman tale had his powers manifest later in life, while originally he possesed them to some extent since childhood. A changed origin story where he either doesn't start off with his powers, or has them but doesn't understand their extent fits well. Yes its mostly internal struggle, not so much any physical threat, but its still struggle. The ability to affect change, but living under the illusion he CANNOT effect change (because he thinks he would lose his family/be unable to live as a human) would be very formative. I could certainly see situations where it would lead significant wrongs being committed on his family/community/maybe himself while he sits there doing nothing (and feels he was forced to do nothing).

I certainly see your point of "invincible man, cannot be harmed" argument, but your missing the second subtext. Without his belief that he is human he would easily be viewed as an intolerable alien being. His feeling/staying human is key character trait and goal for him as much as it is for say Data from startreck TNG or Pinochio.

agreed. put it better than I ever could.

I appreciate the time and effort you put into this post. It's a well formed argument, although I think we can agree and should have from the beginning. What this boils down to is: What parts of the superman canon will be used, or will this project be stand alone and an entirely new experience. Well, according to the official synopsis he feels alienated by powers beyond his imagination and wants to know what his purpose is. Either way you cannot torture Clark at a young age, in more than one sense. It can't be done because of who he is, the demi-god aspect is too hard to get around. It also can't be done because it would change Clark, and that's where it would feel Fake. His upbringing is key, it's almost what makes this a heroic American story (Alien boy lands on American farm, learns values from a good home and becomes a shining example of justice)

My questions: can they develop enough conflict to achieve a tortured superhero story arch? Why are they even trying to make this movie gritty in the first place? Can they provide a legitimate threat to the world and superman to make the story interesting? Or will the movie end up feeling forced?

The things I knocked off the list that should not happen in the movie: My point from the start.
1: Clark has a rough childhood (including being bullied or being ostracized) - It would contradict everything I know about superman, and his parents.
2: Clark faces a serious threat to his life.
3: Clark spends too much time wrestling with emotions at a young age.

Superman is too old of a story, he lacks the complexity needed for a gritty super hero movie. Attempts to add complexity have failed in the comic book world, and anything attempted on film might seem too flimsy, tacked on, and forced. If not bare bones golden age superman, give me superman too powerful for his home and a trauma serious enough to cause emotional damage (Superman kills people on accident). Then you have valid struggles fit for a gritty superhero movie.

This post was edited by TrouNce on Dec 15 2012 03:11am

i find superman to be incredibly lame, but christopher nolan's reputation and prior works have me very excited for this film.