Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How he dawns the glasses....Really? -_-

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    He wore the glasses for two minutes and NEXT WEEK they will be gone Again!!!

    This is not the NEW LOOK... Smallville is just teasing Superman fans... SVClark will still go around saving people, showing his face, not wearing glasses as his non-superhero self, not flying, AND still being called The Blur.

    Well, maybe the glasses will be put on in the Finale - wow, EPIC!

    Superman continuity here we come... oh, is he already engaged to Lois Lane, working at the DP, and NOT Superman? Smallville is so on track for things

    Comment


    • #62
      It's true, like the comic excerpt posted on the first page, that just a pair of glasses can cause a pretty dramatic change to a person's appearance. I understand that for a decades-long series it may be a bit of a stretch for fans to believe it would have much of an effect to adopt the disguise in the final season, but you sort of have to "pick your battles". Using the spectacles as the signature look for Clark Kent has been a tradition in the Superman mythology for forever, and to not include it would be a grave error on the part of the show runners. So I think, as fans, we just need to accept it. Besides, it really is more than just putting on the glasses to disguise who he really is. He's also changing his mannerisms, acting more "normal", meek, and even a bit clumsy.

      I wore glasses for the better part of 12 years of my life. Never had a date, and was even kind of picked on. Once I started wearing contacts, I started getting a lot more attention from girls and generally got more recognized and popular. It's a strange thing, but glasses do seem to draw more attention away from your eyes. I can believe that it'll have a dramatic change to Clark's appearance. Imagine someone you've known fairly well for years, and one day you suddenly see them wearing glasses. You almost don't even recognize them, you have to do a double-take. The difference is quite surprising. The effect can also depend on the type of glasses.

      ----- Added 1 Minutes later -----

      Originally posted by luckycloisfan
      He wore the glasses for two minutes and NEXT WEEK they will be gone Again!!!

      This is not the NEW LOOK... Smallville is just teasing Superman fans... SVClark will still go around saving people, showing his face, not wearing glasses as his non-superhero self, not flying, AND still being called The Blur.

      Well, maybe the glasses will be put on in the Finale - wow, EPIC!

      Superman continuity here we come... oh, is he already engaged to Lois Lane, working at the DP, and NOT Superman? Smallville is so on track for things
      Well to be fair, next week looks like Clark's just going to be hanging with close friends, so maybe he didn't feel the glasses were needed.
      Last edited by Karot; 02-19-2011, 10:42 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost

      Comment


      • #63
        I really liked how the scene played out..
        There were some really great parts with dialogue too..
        Though, I agree it does look kinda obvious..But I dunno- if we didn't know supes had 2 identities would we match it as the same person? Like sure they look alike- but there's the behavoural factor and the way clark acts now..
        It was kinda funny though, seeing that scene where clark bumped into the guy kinda reminded me of the clark in high school when he bumped into lana with the books lol..
        It's like it come natural to him to adjust the glasses, be average...
        Last edited by ~*smallville_tv*~; 02-20-2011, 12:24 AM.

        Comment


        • #64
          I thought the questions of Clark not wearing glasses and how it would be handled was asked many times in the past to the writers/producers, which is why I have a problem with Clark slapping on glasses a couple of months before he becomes Superman. I don't have the greatest memory but wasn't this question posed to the original writers numerous times since the show started? I always thought they answered in a manner that basically said that they had a plan to address the topic.

          Comment


          • #65
            As a comic book geek it always kinda annoyed me that the glasses worked as a disguise. As a Smallville rework I was kinda hoping that Clark said "I had Zatanna put a spell on these glasses, so no-one will see the Blur's face behind them."

            Still, I know how it has always worked, and I'm looking forward to some geeky, bumbling "Ms. Lane" stuff from TW.

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by ManOfSteel87
              So an alien child crash lands on Earth after his home planet is destroyed, found and raised by humans, grows up with abilities to fly, x-ray and heat vision, super hearing, super strength, indestructable and practically invulnerable except from radioactive pieces of his homeworld. . . and somehow that is more believable than said person being able to fool the entire world as to his true identity with a pair of glasses, different hair style, and different demeanor.
              Your argument — despite the fact that it gets used countless times daily on sci-fi/fantasy message boards and other forums of discussion — is not valid. If your argument were valid, it would mean that sci-fi/fantasy stories are immune from plotholes or other forms of inconsistencies (because that argument could be used for anything, including an onscreen appearance of the Easter Bunny or Santa Claus), and that is not true.

              A story, regardless of how fantastical, has to obey its own rules (i.e., be internally consistent). When it doesn't obey its own rules, plotholes result, or at the very least, disbelief results.

              In Superman stories, we have a man that can fly and do other supernatural things. Why? Because he's from another planet. However, Martha Kent for example, can't fly. Why? Because this story takes place in a real world-type setting, and by default, humans are the same as humans here in the real world. When humans are given supernatural abilities in these stories, there is an in-universe explanation for it.

              Now, since it hasn't been established that the general public in the Smallville universe has vastly inferior facial pattern recognition abilities as compared to the general public in the real world, it creates a problem with the glasses-as-a-disguise thing, which leads to disbelief.

              Regarding "suspension of disbelief"; this is not an unconditional free gift that the audience gives to the makers of fiction. If the makers do their job properly (e.g. avoiding plotholes), then suspension of disbelief among the audience is the natural result; that is, the makers maintain suspension of disbelief among the audience by making sure their story is internally consistent. If the makers e.g. introduce plotholes, then the natural result is disbelief among the audience (i.e., suspension of "suspension of disbelief").

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by Batman_Beyonder
                He could have had Zatanna zap the glasses to change his appearance to those around him, whenever he wore them...

                Seriously the glasses won't full anyone, whose been around him all these years, less long a villain who puts two and two together....

                Ah well.
                Sorry, but the enchanted glasses theory is just too cheesy, even for Smallville. Using magic as a solution is the ultimate deus ex machina. I'm glad they decided to keep it simple.

                If it worked in the comics, why shouldn't it work in Smallville? Clark isn't exactly a public figure, so he won't be drawing too much attention, especially with the glasses, and the mild-mannered persona.

                And if someone does become suspicious, just get Martian Manhunter to shapeshift into Supes, and appear publicly at the same time as Clark.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by MaximRecoil
                  Your argument — despite the fact that it gets used countless times daily on sci-fi/fantasy message boards and other forums of discussion — is not valid. If your argument were valid, it would mean that sci-fi/fantasy stories are immune from plotholes or other forms of inconsistencies (because that argument could be used for anything, including an onscreen appearance of the Easter Bunny or Santa Claus), and that is not true.

                  A story, regardless of how fantastical, has to obey its own rules (i.e., be internally consistent). When it doesn't obey its own rules, plotholes result, or at the very least, disbelief results.

                  In Superman stories, we have a man that can fly and do other supernatural things. Why? Because he's from another planet. However, Martha Kent for example, can't fly. Why? Because this story takes place in a real world-type setting, and by default, humans are the same as humans here in the real world. When humans are given supernatural abilities in these stories, there is an in-universe explanation for it.

                  Now, since it hasn't been established that the general public in the Smallville universe has vastly inferior facial pattern recognition abilities as compared to the general public in the real world, it creates a problem with the glasses-as-a-disguise thing, which leads to disbelief.

                  Regarding "suspension of disbelief"; this is not an unconditional free gift that the audience gives to the makers of fiction. If the makers do their job properly (e.g. avoiding plotholes), then suspension of disbelief among the audience is the natural result; that is, the makers maintain suspension of disbelief among the audience by making sure their story is internally consistent. If the makers e.g. introduce plotholes, then the natural result is disbelief among the audience (i.e., suspension of "suspension of disbelief").
                  Both mine and your arguement gets used countless times by both sides. My arguement boils down to, "it's not real, so either you buy it or you don't". Your arguement, with all of that boils down to, "yeah, but it doesn't make sense that Clark can fool everybody with a pair of glasses b/c people would still notice him." My arguement is more valid in this sense b/c you are looking at fantasy through the perspective of reality instead of through the perspective of what it is. . . fantasy.

                  By definition, science fiction, though a bit of a stretch, could still be within the realm of possibility with the imagined innovations of science. It uses scientificaly established or scientifically theorized laws of nature and science to make their stories possible. On the other hand, fantasy is does not necessarily have to have a logical explanation for events to occur. Smallville and Superman stories in general are not sci-fi, but are fantasy. By the very definition, many elements of the Superman story, specifically the glasses as disguise, require suspension of disbelief b/c it is a part of the story, but there really has to be no logical explanation as to how the glasses could possibly work as a disguise other than that's the way the story goes.

                  Despite this, you do make some valid points. There is a limit to the suspension of disbelief as you said, and a random appearance by Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny would definitely fit that bill. However, glasses as a possible disguise for a super powered alien is not beyond the point of suspension of disbelief. Comparing a random Santa/Easter Bunny apperance to believing the glasses as disguise in terms of the suspension of disbelief is comparing apples to oranges. The glasses are a well established element of the story, whereas the random Santa/Easter Bunny apperance wouldn't make sense.

                  Smallville and other fantasy stories may be "live action" settings, but not "real world" settings. A real world setting would imply that these events could actually take place in the real world. Like you said, humans may be still behave as humans in the real world, but when they get super powers, there's a in-universe explanation for it. In-universe, meaning not in the real world, but in the Smallville world where those things are possible. It goes back to the fact that in fantasy stories, as long as it makes sense in the story, anything is theoretically possible.

                  If you want to look at it in real world terms, people fool others with simple disguises and behavioral changes every day. Actors and actresses get paid millions to do this. Con men fool people all the time by changing their appearance and behavior. Probably closer to a real "superhero" example of a person fighting crime would be undercover police officers who fool criminal and arrest them all the time with a simple disguise and behavior change. So, this type of action is not beyond the realm of possibility.

                  When plotholes occur, we are left wondering how the story got from point A to point B, with little or nothing in the middle to explain. Now, these plotholes can become disbelief when a retcon happens, such as the Jimmy Olsen disaster. You want to talk about disbelief. People cannot believe that Clark can wear glasses and change his behavior to fool people, but two parents can name their two sons the exact same name except for the middle name, and we're supposed to believe that the one we had known for several seasons as the real Jimmy isn't the real one at all? There had been no previous hints or anything that this was a possibility. He was brought in and used as THE Jimmy Olsen and then that happens. To me, the glasses as disguise is NOTHING compared to something like that. The glasses thing is not a plothole. We have seen exactly how Clark is working his way to the disguise that everyone has known since the beginning. There hasn't been a point where Clark just up and starts wearing the glasses one day, and it goes from there. We've seen moments throughout the series where he's dabble with different disguises, with the glasses making occassional apperances. Now, they are becoming more final as a part of his disguise. The glasses as disguise IS a part of the Superman stories, so it does obey it's own rules. The entire Jimmy switch came out of nowhere, and would in fact be something beyond the realm of suspension of disbelief as you mentioned, b/c it was such a stretch and nothing like that had ever been done to a character in the Superman stories before. This also goes back to my point that as long as it works for the story, anything can happen. He didn't just up and one day decided to wear glasses. It has been a VERY long, slow process, but one that we have seen develop throughout the series notheless.

                  One of the rules of the Superman stories is the disguise. People can argue which is actually the disguise, Clark or Superman, but regardless both have been consistant for years. Clark, the bumbling, mild mannered, glasses wearing reporter and Superman, the larger than life superhero that is faster than a speeding bullet, more powerful than a locomotive, able to leap tall buildings in a single bound. Smallville, while maybe not the way I or others like how, is trying to get to that point of having the two personas. Again, it's the way it has always been and you either buy it or not. Honestly, I don't like how they've done it, but I have no problem with it happening b/c that is the way is supposed to be.

                  Again, at the end of the day you either buy it or not. If not, then you have to decide if it is enough of a sticking point for you to not be able to enjoy the story itself.

                  The biggest problem that will occur, and others have alreay hinted at it, is the fact that he put the glasses on in this episode but will he keep them for the remainder of the series? If not, then it could turn in to a problem.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by Batman_Beyonder
                    He could have had Zatanna zap the glasses to change his appearance to those around him, whenever he wore them...

                    Seriously the glasses won't fool anyone, whose been around him all these years, less long a villain who puts two and two together....

                    Ah well.
                    Exactly!

                    ----- Added 1 Minutes later -----

                    Originally posted by Andyville
                    As I said in the other thread... WAIT a while... I am confident that by the end of the series there will be a world wide mojo that will make him look different as Superman...
                    Hope you're right. And I hope it involves Dr.Fates helmet (and/or other magic), or some sort of Kryptonian tech.
                    Last edited by DudeofSteel; 02-21-2011, 03:10 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      He is changing the way he acts too plus his hair so ya it wouldnt work completely no but seriously its SUPERMAN!!

                      ----- Added 8 Minutes later -----

                      Originally posted by BoyScout-ManOfTomorrow
                      I've said it before but the glasses are the least of the shows worries.

                      I lol at this..so true

                      ----- Added 11 Minutes later -----

                      Originally posted by Tylerr
                      It's not like people couldn't have figured it out back then, it's not rocket science.
                      you'd probs have to be looking for it though and clark kent gave no reason for anyone to look for it. He passed by in life unnoticed, he was a loser And i think hair changes and the glasses could work. They are huge glasss they cover half his face anyway. I just hope his hair isnt slicked back cause that looks awful and he actually stood out for me in that elevator

                      ----- Added 14 Minutes later -----

                      Originally posted by Aries83
                      "EPIC FAIL!?" Yeah, right. This is the way that Superman has dealt with his secret identity for decades now, like they were really going to mess with it?

                      People complain that he doesn't have glasses and when he finally puts them on, they complain even more. Unbelievable.
                      i wonder what age are the people that are complaining about the glasses? Cause I know this is smallville but it has to keep certain aspects of the superman story. So I am wondering if it's an age thing
                      Last edited by aerdna; 02-21-2011, 03:57 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by ManOfSteel87
                        Both mine and your arguement gets used countless times by both sides.
                        My argument is always used to point out the error of your argument. By the way, this is not a matter of opinion; your argument is in fact invalid.

                        My arguement boils down to, "it's not real, so either you buy it or you don't".
                        No, that wasn't your argument, that was your opinion. Your opinion is fine; it was the argument you used to support your opinion which was invalid. As a reminder, here is your invalid argument:

                        So an alien child crash lands on Earth after his home planet is destroyed, found and raised by humans, grows up with abilities to fly, x-ray and heat vision, super hearing, super strength, indestructable and practically invulnerable except from radioactive pieces of his homeworld. . . and somehow that is more believable than said person being able to fool the entire world as to his true identity with a pair of glasses, different hair style, and different demeanor.
                        I've already explained why this is an invalid argument, and my explanation is based on the definition of a plot hole.

                        Your arguement, with all of that boils down to, "yeah, but it doesn't make sense that Clark can fool everybody with a pair of glasses b/c people would still notice him."
                        You're no better at summarizing my argument than you are at summarizing your own. In any event, my argument does not need to be summarized because the full version (scroll up) works just fine.

                        My arguement is more valid in this sense
                        Your argument isn't more valid than anything; it is invalid.

                        b/c you are looking at fantasy through the perspective of reality instead of through the perspective of what it is. . . fantasy
                        As I already pointed out, the Smallville universe incorporates many elements that parallel reality (e.g., the general population in the Smallville universe is made up of ordinary humans, the same as in reality). We know that they aren't all mentally-defective in the area of facial pattern recognition ability, because we see them interacting with, and recognizing each other in every episode. So we have a plot hole if glasses make an effective disguise, because it violates the show's own rules (rules which in this instance happen to parallel the rules of reality).

                        By definition, science fiction, though a bit of a stretch, could still be within the realm of possibility with the imagined innovations of science. It uses scientificaly established or scientifically theorized laws of nature and science to make their stories possible. On the other hand, fantasy is does not necessarily have to have a logical explanation for events to occur. Smallville and Superman stories in general are not sci-fi, but are fantasy. By the very definition, many elements of the Superman story, specifically the glasses as disguise, require suspension of disbelief b/c it is a part of the story, but there really has to be no logical explanation as to how the glasses could possibly work as a disguise other than that's the way the story goes.
                        No; no genre gets a free pass when it comes to plot holes. "Plot hole" has a definition, and it applies regardless of the type of story that is being told. Smallville universe people have the same ability to recognize facial patterns as you or I do, and this is demonstrated in each and every episode. If there is an unexplained (invalid explanations don't count) exception for the case of Clark Kent, then that is a violation of their own rules, i.e., an internal inconsistency; thus, a plot hole.

                        Despite this, you do make some valid points. There is a limit to the suspension of disbelief as you said, and a random appearance by Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny would definitely fit that bill. However, glasses as a possible disguise for a super powered alien is not beyond the point of suspension of disbelief. Comparing a random Santa/Easter Bunny apperance to believing the glasses as disguise in terms of the suspension of disbelief is comparing apples to oranges. The glasses are a well established element of the story, whereas the random Santa/Easter Bunny apperance wouldn't make sense.
                        It is not a matter of there being a "limit to the suspension of disbelief". Suspension of disbelief among the audience is naturally maintained as long as there are no plot holes. Plot holes legitimately cause disbelief, whether minor or major. Anyone who is consciously deciding to suspend disbelief in spite of a plot hole has misunderstood the concept of "suspension of disbelief". A story with plot holes can still be entertaining, but that is another matter.

                        Smallville and other fantasy stories may be "live action" settings, but not "real world" settings. A real world setting would imply that these events could actually take place in the real world.
                        Smallville has elements that parallel reality. People's ability to recognize each other is one of those elements. Some other things we can assume parallel reality would include:

                        • People have to go to the bathroom on a regular basis.
                        • People need to eat on a regular basis.
                        • People need to breathe on a regular basis.

                        And so on. Now all of those things don't need to be shown on screen, but a violation of them would be obvious. For example, if Martha Kent got encased in cement and thrown overboard in the middle of the ocean, and wasn't found until a year later; it would be a plot hole for her to still be alive without explanation. The audience would ask, how did she breathe, not to mention eat and drink? If someone came along and said ...

                        "So an alien child crash lands on Earth after his home planet is destroyed, found and raised by humans, grows up with abilities to fly, x-ray and heat vision, super hearing, super strength, indestructable and practically invulnerable except from radioactive pieces of his homeworld. . . and somehow that is more believable than some person being able to survive for a year encased in cement at the bottom of the ocean."

                        ... that would be an invalid argument.

                        Like you said, humans may be still behave as humans in the real world, but when they get super powers, there's a in-universe explanation for it. In-universe, meaning not in the real world, but in the Smallville world where those things are possible. It goes back to the fact that in fantasy stories, as long as it makes sense in the story, anything is theoretically possible.
                        Yes, anything is possible, but there needs to be an internally consistent explanation for it, else it is a plot hole. In the case of my Martha Kent encased in cement example, the explanation could be something like: prior to being encased in cement she took some sort of Kryptonite-based super drug worked up by one of the many Smallville universe geniuses, that put her in a state of suspended animation; and voila, no plot hole. However, without an in-universe explanation, it would be a plot hole.

                        If you want to look at it in real world terms, people fool others with simple disguises and behavioral changes every day. Actors and actresses get paid millions to do this. Con men fool people all the time by changing their appearance and behavior. Probably closer to a real "superhero" example of a person fighting crime would be undercover police officers who fool criminal and arrest them all the time with a simple disguise and behavior change. So, this type of action is not beyond the realm of possibility.
                        Superman becomes the biggest celebrity on earth in the Superman stories. Name a major real-life celebrity that could simply put on glasses and act like a nerd and be able to go anywhere and everywhere and not be recognized by anyone. Your actor and actresses example is a good one actually, but not for the reason you suppose. Do you think that no one recognized Sylvester Stallone in "Tango & Cash" because he was wearing glasses and playing a totally different character than in the Rocky or Rambo movies?

                        When plotholes occur, we are left wondering how the story got from point A to point B, with little or nothing in the middle to explain.
                        Not necessarily. A plot hole is any internal inconsistency. What you're talking about is often a "leap of logic", which may or may not be a plot hole.

                        Now, these plotholes can become disbelief when a retcon happens, such as the Jimmy Olsen disaster. You want to talk about disbelief.
                        Plot holes cause disbelief because they are inherently unbelievable, by definition.

                        People cannot believe that Clark can wear glasses and change his behavior to fool people, but two parents can name their two sons the exact same name except for the middle name, and we're supposed to believe that the one we had known for several seasons as the real Jimmy isn't the real one at all? There had been no previous hints or anything that this was a possibility. He was brought in and used as THE Jimmy Olsen and then that happens.
                        That was an implausibility. Implausibilities are not necessarily plotholes, but they do cause disbelief. A good writer avoids implausibilities like the plague. An example of something that is implausible: someone guesses an elaborate combination to a safe on the first try. It is not a plot hole, but it is highly implausible, thus, unbelievable.

                        To me, the glasses as disguise is NOTHING compared to something like that. The glasses thing is not a plothole.
                        The glasses thing has yet to play out in the Smallville universe, so I can't say whether it will be a plot hole or not. However, in other Superman stories, it was definitely a plot hole (Superman [1978] for example).
                        Last edited by MaximRecoil; 02-24-2011, 06:51 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Maybe Jor-El is doing something to the Superman suit to make people not recognize CK? Maybe that is one of the reasons why he zapped it to the fortress?

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by swellde
                            I thought the questions of Clark not wearing glasses and how it would be handled was asked many times in the past to the writers/producers, which is why I have a problem with Clark slapping on glasses a couple of months before he becomes Superman. I don't have the greatest memory but wasn't this question posed to the original writers numerous times since the show started? I always thought they answered in a manner that basically said that they had a plan to address the topic.
                            I remember reading an interview with Almiles some time ago about the glasses issue. They said that yes, they had a plan for how they'd be introduced, but they felt pretty sure that the fans weren't going to like it.

                            Now, I don't know what that plan was, but as far as PSW's way of handling the situation (and I don't know if it was what Almiles had planned all along)... I'm happy with how it played out. I am curious though, as to what the original plan was. I think they were just going to have Clark wear glasses some day and never address the identity issue... but I really have no way of knowing that.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              I'm more curious as to how they're going to transition from him being called "The Blur" to being called "Superman". He's been The Blur for several seasons now and I think suddenly being called Superman is more of a stretch than the issue with the glasses.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X
                              😀
                              🥰
                              🤢
                              😎
                              😡
                              👍
                              👎