Because in my opinion, you have to be subtle to nail golden age Clark (because he was subtle and complex, the story wasnt subtle or complex). And George, did a good performance with subtility.The question of nuance was a debate I having with other people (not myself), but you agreed with this person about Reeves's portrayal being nuanced due to his subtle performance. A subtle performance is not analogous to a complex characterization.
Well thats a really neat opinion, misslane. A subtle portrayal doesnt mean that the writing doesnt necessarily have to be deep writing material. A man who can nail the difference in personality is subtle and complex, aloof yet sociable, ect. Even if the source material doesnt have deep story telling.You said Golden Age Superman was complex because he "was always trying to do his best and was always on the job even as a reporter while remaining aloof yet sociable/likable and was hard working." That's not complexity, and it doesn't even scratch the surface in terms of the questions I asked. Golden Age Superman was a great character, but he wasn't a particularly deep character with a complicated emotional life that was explored on the page.
There you go. /waits for the impeccable circle of misery (for which I already have a reply for)