What's your point? My point is that judging every interpretation of Superman as a failure because it does not replicate the Silver Age is foolish. The only way innovation and progress is going to happen is if old elements are reinterpreted along with new elements.Those are the elements that have been recycled over and over since they were first introduced. And those were all new elements at the time. The failure in too much of the last 25 years of Superman has been the reuse of old ideas and the exclusion of new ones. That's why the Death and Return of Superman was the best story of this period-because it brought in actual new ideas and characters: Doomsday, Eradicator, Steel, Superboy, Cyborg Superman and the marriage. That was the only real forward movement the character has had, everything else-Byrne's Man of Steel, the Milton Fine Brainiac, Matrix Supergirl, etc, were revamps of previous concepts that did not equal the originals and did not need to be done.
No, it was not. The Clark/Lex friendship as depicted on the show may have had its basic roots in the Silver Age, but the show did much more nuanced stuff with it. One of the best things about the show was the Clark/Lois romance, which was nothing close to resembling the Silver age. The show isn't even over now, as it is selling remarkably well in comic form. It is way too early to tell how important the show will be considered historically.The best stuff in Smallville was cribbed from the Silver Age. And the show was really over a long time ago, they just padded it to keep it going. It's a non-factor as far as importance.
Lois meeting Clark before he's Superman has only been done as silly one-shot stories. What Smallville and Man of Steel did is to show how Lois is integral to Clark becoming Superman. The emotional and psychological themes the trailer hints at the film exploring are all primarily rooted in Smallville. Jonathan's attitude, in particular, is analogous to how the character was presented on Smallville.I don't see any of those as very important or new.
Yet it sold more DVDs than those shows.Smallville is not a bigger series than any of those. Not even close.
You don't think Smallville has influenced how people perceive Superman and his supporting cast? Smallville is the reason why Green Arrow is now gaining popularity. Arrow would not have been possible without Smallville. Erica Durance has redefined Lois Lane. Her version of the character has received a lot of praise. In terms of pop culture prominence, Smallville's Lois and Clark continue to make "best couple" lists. Almost everyone points to Rosenbaum's Luthor as the template for how to do right by the character. Comics are only a tiny sliver of what the public knows or appreciates about versions of Superman.DKR has been a huge influence on how people perceive Superman, as has the 90's "Death of". For years what people wanted for a Superman movie was Doomsday. Smallville is not as important as either of those.
Superman does not create Clark. Superman IS Clark. Clark IS Superman. I've read Maggin's take, but that doesn't mean I agree with it. A man who is literally two different people is a horrific idea. I'd like to think Superman doesn't view any part of his life as just a really elaborate and extended performance. Byrne's take made Clark the real person and Superman the mask, which was not what was portrayed in the Silver Age, Bronze Age, Maggin's novels, or Reeve's films. So when anyone says Byrne was inspired by Reeve's Superman, I can see how his version of Krypton lines up with that assertion but not his conceptualization of the Clark/Superman identity.Clark was a real character in the Bronze Age. You said you've read Maggin. You should understand exactly what Clark is. Clark was a real character that Superman created. Superman created him for a purpose, but Clark took a life of his own. He is not and should not just be the same character as Superman without the cape on. That's why Byrne did to him.
He was not presented as an adult in most of those stories. He was Peter Pan who is quite the antithesis of a father figure.The stories were often silly, but Superman himself was presented as an adult and a father figure.
Who said he was mindless or naive?He was not a naive child and a mindless do-gooder.
If you are as well read as you say you are, then you would know that the stories that deal seriously with Superman's feelings of loss and alienation are few and far between. Most of the time he's a silly hero who doesn't seem to want to grow up.A good bit of the best Silver Age stories deal with his feeling of loss and alienation and him trying to understand his place in the world. You make it sound like every panel of every story is Jimmy Olsen Turtle Boy. If you are as well read as you say, then you know that's just not true.
This video is also a good look at Tom's acting and the relationship between Jonathan and Clark on Smallville.