|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Aug 29, 2016 12:03:48 GMT -5
Clark owns a car. Saw that a few times too. Why the hell he needs a car is beyond me. Could have sent his mom the money instead but no, he's making car payments just for appearances sake I wondered if maybe the show was sponsored by an auto company...but no...it was Kellogg's. But when you think about it, it would have been pretty un-American for him not to have had a car in the 50s. These are all the kinds of questions that come up when the panels on a page become scenes on a screen. "Sweet is the lore which Nature brings; Our meddling intellect Mis-shapes the beauteous forms of things: — We murder to dissect." Substitute "comical books" for Nature. Thanks, Wordsworth. |
|
|
|
Retcons
Aug 29, 2016 12:04:58 GMT -5
Post by Chris on Aug 29, 2016 12:04:58 GMT -5
For the next 7 years of the show, Clark's mother is never mentioned. He never calls, never writes, never visits, never sends money, nothing. A poor widowed old lady left alone on a farm.
I guess it was edited it out of later viewings, but I could have sworn there was a scene in that first episode where Ma Kent places a single bullet in a revolver, spins the cylinder, closes her eyes, slowly raises the gun to her head, shivers, then cut to a smiling Clark Kent arriving at the Daily Planet for the first time.
I don't know why we need Cary Bates, you guys are pretty baroque already. That was probably the slogan at DC in the 80s when they were dark-and-grittifying everything... "If it's baroque, don't fix it." |
|
|
|
Retcons
Aug 29, 2016 12:08:32 GMT -5
Post by tingramretro on Aug 29, 2016 12:08:32 GMT -5
Clark owns a car. Saw that a few times too. Why the hell he needs a car is beyond me. Could have sent his mom the money instead but no, he's making car payments just for appearances sake I wondered if maybe the show was sponsored by an auto company...but no...it was Kellogg's. But when you think about it, it would have been pretty un-American for him not to have had a car in the 50s. Umm...why? |
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Aug 29, 2016 12:24:56 GMT -5
I wondered if maybe the show was sponsored by an auto company...but no...it was Kellogg's. But when you think about it, it would have been pretty un-American for him not to have had a car in the 50s. Umm...why? Because American identity, as magnified by Madison Avenue and Hollywood, in the 1950s was heavily tied into automobiles. The Interstate Highway System was formed in 1956. Detroit and the Big Three auto-makers were at their peak, building more and bigger cars. White flight to the suburbs started, which required people who had previously not owned autos to buy them. Kids became obsessed with hot rods. |
|
|
|
Retcons
Aug 29, 2016 12:29:55 GMT -5
Post by tingramretro on Aug 29, 2016 12:29:55 GMT -5
Because American identity, as magnified by Madison Avenue and Hollywood, in the 1950s was heavily tied into automobiles. The Interstate Highway System was formed in 1956. Detroit and the Big Three auto-makers were at their peak, building more and bigger cars. White flight to the suburbs started, which required people who had previously not owned autos to buy them. Kids became obsessed with hot rods. Huh. OK. Still, if Clark lived in the city, not far from where he worked, it would still seem pretty pointless, to me. Even without being able to fly. |
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Aug 29, 2016 12:39:04 GMT -5
Because American identity, as magnified by Madison Avenue and Hollywood, in the 1950s was heavily tied into automobiles. The Interstate Highway System was formed in 1956. Detroit and the Big Three auto-makers were at their peak, building more and bigger cars. White flight to the suburbs started, which required people who had previously not owned autos to buy them. Kids became obsessed with hot rods. Huh. OK. Still, if Clark lived in the city, not far from where he worked, it would still seem pretty pointless, to me. Even without being able to fly. But how is he supposed to see the USA in his Chevrolet if he doesn't have one? TV, especially in the 50s, was aimed at a pretty generic mid-western audience along with white suburbanites. And cars were a big part of that audiences daily life. I love watching You Bet Your Life reruns and seeing the Desoto ads for a Groucho Special. And since I suspect my first reference flew over your head. |
|
|
|
Retcons
Aug 29, 2016 12:41:05 GMT -5
Post by Prince Hal on Aug 29, 2016 12:41:05 GMT -5
Because American identity, as magnified by Madison Avenue and Hollywood, in the 1950s was heavily tied into automobiles. The Interstate Highway System was formed in 1956. Detroit and the Big Three auto-makers were at their peak, building more and bigger cars. White flight to the suburbs started, which required people who had previously not owned autos to buy them. Kids became obsessed with hot rods. Huh. OK. Still, if Clark lived in the city, not far from where he worked, it would still seem pretty pointless, to me. Even without being able to fly. Unless he wanted to drive back to Smallville. There are city-dwellers who have cars, but don't usually use them to get around town, opting instead for public transportation. Not that everyone is aware of this, but lots has been written about the need for Superman to be Clark, that having a "human" side helps to keep him grounded (no pun originally intended, but it works now that I'm typing it!). Some of his writers over the years have tried to show how necessary Clark is to Superman's balance. His use of a secret identity is different from virtually every other superhero's; Bruce Wayne (at least in the pre-psychotic era) assumes the identity of Batman, as Barry Allen does with the Flash, Ray Palmer with the Atom, and so on. Superman is Superman. He puts on the identity of Clark. Once he left the bosom of the Kents and Smallville, it can be argued, he did not need to continue "being" Clark. And yet he did. |
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Aug 29, 2016 12:49:07 GMT -5
Just as an aside, there are huge swathes of the U.S. where public transport simply does not exist. And I mean does not exist in any form at all. The only time I've ever been on public transport was during a visit to Las Vegas and that was just to take the buses that run up and down the strip. In the town I live in there aren't even taxis. The only person that I've known in person (as opposed to acquaintances on the interwebs) that never drove is my maternal Grandmother. You simply can't live here without having at least one working vehicle.
Which means, if you want to make Clark Kent relate-able, especially to a 1950s TV audience, he probably needs to have a car.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Aug 29, 2016 12:59:09 GMT -5
In any case, Superman needed a car for the cover of Action comics #1!
|
|
|
|
Post by Ish Kabbible on Aug 29, 2016 13:01:22 GMT -5
Just as an aside, there are huge swathes of the U.S. where public transport simply does not exist. And I mean does not exist in any form at all. The only time I've ever been on public transport was during a visit to Las Vegas and that was just to take the buses that run up and down the strip. In the town I live in there aren't even taxis. The only person that I've known in person (as opposed to acquaintances on the interwebs) that never drove is my maternal Grandmother. You simply can't live here without having at least one working vehicle. Which means, if you want to make Clark Kent relate-able, especially to a 1950s TV audience, he probably needs to have a car. Now, conversely, I lived in Manhattan for 40 years and never owned a car. I don't even have a driver's license. Wasn't worth the effort. To own a car in Manhattan you'd have to be an extremely rich man. First off, there are practically no gas stations in Manhattan, and certainly none for the entire middle section. Secondly, insurance rates would break you. Finally, you'd spend hours looking for parking and the only reasonable thing to do is buy into a monthly spot in a garage. That would cost you, minimally $500 a month So if Metropolis is anything like Manhattan, and it's supposed to be, current Clark can't afford a car. Not without squeezing coal to diamonds constantly |
|
|
|
Retcons
Aug 29, 2016 13:35:33 GMT -5
Post by tingramretro on Aug 29, 2016 13:35:33 GMT -5
Huh. OK. Still, if Clark lived in the city, not far from where he worked, it would still seem pretty pointless, to me. Even without being able to fly. Unless he wanted to drive back to Smallville. There are city-dwellers who have cars, but don't usually use them to get around town, opting instead for public transportation. Not that everyone is aware of this, but lots has been written about the need for Superman to be Clark, that having a "human" side helps to keep him grounded (no pun originally intended, but it works now that I'm typing it!). Some of his writers over the years have tried to show how necessary Clark is to Superman's balance. His use of a secret identity is different from virtually every other superhero's; Bruce Wayne (at least in the pre-psychotic era) assumes the identity of Batman, as Barry Allen does with the Flash, Ray Palmer with the Atom, and so on. Superman is Superman. He puts on the identity of Clark. Once he left the bosom of the Kents and Smallville, it can be argued, he did not need to continue "being" Clark. And yet he did. Tht's partly why I never found him very interesting or relatable, and why that changed after Byrne took over. His Superman was very definitely Clark, a man who thought of himself as just a normal guy, playing the part of a superhero. I much preferred that approach. |
|
|
|
Retcons
Aug 29, 2016 13:42:23 GMT -5
Post by tingramretro on Aug 29, 2016 13:42:23 GMT -5
Just as an aside, there are huge swathes of the U.S. where public transport simply does not exist. And I mean does not exist in any form at all. The only time I've ever been on public transport was during a visit to Las Vegas and that was just to take the buses that run up and down the strip. In the town I live in there aren't even taxis. The only person that I've known in person (as opposed to acquaintances on the interwebs) that never drove is my maternal Grandmother. You simply can't live here without having at least one working vehicle. That's just bizarre. That's utterly incomprehensible to me. I was born and raised in London, I now live in rural Suffolk, and I've never driven, in my 46 years. Tried to learn, once, but gave it up because really, I've never needed to drive. Even living here, pretty much in the middle of nowhere with a local bus service that many consider totally inadequate, there's still a bus into town every hour during the day, every day except Sunday, and a kind of half service on Sundays. |
|
|
|
Retcons
Aug 29, 2016 13:45:50 GMT -5
Post by Prince Hal on Aug 29, 2016 13:45:50 GMT -5
Unless he wanted to drive back to Smallville. There are city-dwellers who have cars, but don't usually use them to get around town, opting instead for public transportation. Not that everyone is aware of this, but lots has been written about the need for Superman to be Clark, that having a "human" side helps to keep him grounded (no pun originally intended, but it works now that I'm typing it!). Some of his writers over the years have tried to show how necessary Clark is to Superman's balance. His use of a secret identity is different from virtually every other superhero's; Bruce Wayne (at least in the pre-psychotic era) assumes the identity of Batman, as Barry Allen does with the Flash, Ray Palmer with the Atom, and so on. Superman is Superman. He puts on the identity of Clark. Once he left the bosom of the Kents and Smallville, it can be argued, he did not need to continue "being" Clark. And yet he did. Tht's partly why I never found him very interesting or relatable, and why that changed after Byrne took over. His Superman was very definitely Clark, a man who thought of himself as just a normal guy, playing the part of a superhero. I much preferred that approach. Well, it makes the character a lot simpler and easier to understand and reduces him to just another guy in an acrobat suit, but, hey, to each his own, I guess. |
|
|
|
Retcons
Aug 29, 2016 13:47:15 GMT -5
Post by tingramretro on Aug 29, 2016 13:47:15 GMT -5
Just as an aside, there are huge swathes of the U.S. where public transport simply does not exist. And I mean does not exist in any form at all. The only time I've ever been on public transport was during a visit to Las Vegas and that was just to take the buses that run up and down the strip. In the town I live in there aren't even taxis. The only person that I've known in person (as opposed to acquaintances on the interwebs) that never drove is my maternal Grandmother. You simply can't live here without having at least one working vehicle. Which means, if you want to make Clark Kent relate-able, especially to a 1950s TV audience, he probably needs to have a car. Now, conversely, I lived in Manhattan for 40 years and never owned a car. I don't even have a driver's license. Wasn't worth the effort. To own a car in Manhattan you'd have to be an extremely rich man. First off, there are practically no gas stations in Manhattan, and certainly none for the entire middle section. Secondly, insurance rates would break you. Finally, you'd spend hours looking for parking and the only reasonable thing to do is buy into a monthly spot in a garage. That would cost you, minimally $500 a month So if Metropolis is anything like Manhattan, and it's supposed to be, current Clark can't afford a car. Not without squeezing coal to diamonds constantly Parts of London are pretty much the same. There's very little parking because the local authorities really try to discourage driving into the city as much as possible. They've also deliberately made it horrendously expensive and awkward to commute into London by car if you live outside it. |
|
|
|
Retcons
Aug 29, 2016 13:48:58 GMT -5
Post by tolworthy on Aug 29, 2016 13:48:58 GMT -5
The Interstate Highway System was formed in 1956. Detroit and the Big Three auto-makers were at their peak, building more and bigger cars. White flight to the suburbs started, which required people who had previously not owned autos to buy them. Kids became obsessed with hot rods. Thanks, I didn't know that. So Johnny Storm's obsession with hot rods in 1961 made him firmly of his time. |
|
