Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Booster doesn't know what Clark's Hero Name is?

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Tinyeppy
    the Shield \S/ is the family crest of the "house of El" it's not a public thing, it's a personal part of Clark/Kal-el. Some of his closet friends will know but the people don't know the meaning behind it.

    The public believe the "S" on his chest is "Superman" & name only Lois Lane gives him & sticks until he dies.

    It's known as an honor to were \S/, either you're blood related to CK or you have carry his DNA in some form. He prefers if you keep the meaning of truth justice & American way b/c it does pain him to see his family crest be used for evil.

    Some who were the symbol in comics are Kara (Supergirl), Conner (Superboy), John (Steel), Lucy Lane (Superwomen), and Lois Lane (married into the house, believe it's engrave in the stone of her wedding ring), of course all of Kal-el's descendents in the Superman dynasty, where Lois is root of establishing his earth bloodline.

    Booster Gold is from the25th century & there's a Superman in this century, it's just not CK.

    Booster knows all history of the linage of Superman including his marriage to Lois Lane & the birth of her heir. According to DC One Million & All Star Superman. Once Lois dies in the end of the 21 century, He leaves earth in the protection of his son Superman Secundus & wonders the universe for some centuries overwhelm with grief of the lost of his wife.

    But still doing what he does best of course......

    DC comics have establish this storyline as the future timeline of current New Earth characters.

    Informing fans Lois does eventually die but lives a long life, she give Kal-el his male heir & CK is immortal & sometime in his long life he's reunited with his family & wife to love internally forever.

    The best quote of the graphic novel

    "After what seemed to him like an eternity, he had retreated into the sun to await her return and now a Silver Lois Lane and a Golden Superman Prime were reunited. In all the time since her death, life had held little meaning or warmth for him, but now Superman Prime felt he was complete once more."
    Because a female kid just wouldn't do? All Star Superman isn't in continuity. One Million is iffy because time is always changing in the DCU. We know Connor is the next Superman in the current timeline.


    As seen in red robin

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Ragius
      Clark doesn't become Superman until the 26th century - confirmed!

      Amazing.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by vantheman77
        It is Lois and only Lois who will name him Superman.
        Because Lois is the only one smart enough to think of such a simple name? It's simple. A guy who dresses up like a bat, you call Batman, a guy who has the powers of a spider, you call Spider-Man, and a guy who has abilities for beyond those of mortal men, and wears an "S" on his chest, you call Superman.

        A three-year-old could think of that name. But I'm guessing that Lois will probably be the one to name him in the show to keep with tradition.

        Comment


        • #34
          Like stated above.
          Does it matter if Booster told him the Superman name?
          After all he came back from the 25th century to take his spot.

          Maybe Clark will adopt the name "Super Plothole"

          Comment


          • #35
            In all honesty when you think about Booster Gold, how he is a showboat and went back in time to become the world's greatest hero, the first thing that pops into my head in this scene is that he wants a permanent connection to the greatest hero in the world. Instead of blatantly saying Superman he danced around it in hopes that Clark would come up with it on his own and attribute Booster as the man who gave him the idea for the name of Superman, hence cementing himself in history as the man who helped name the greatest hero in the world!

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Estro-gen X
              Because a female kid just wouldn't do? All Star Superman isn't in continuity. One Million is iffy because time is always changing in the DCU. We know Connor is the next Superman in the current timeline.


              As seen in red robin
              Plus One Million simply said Superman Secundus was his "heir". The word "son" was never used. Obviously the heir was a guy since he was called Superman Secundus but not necessarily his son. Maybe it was Supergirl or Power Girl's son or Conner since he has been shown as a future Superman in some comics just as you pointed out. Maybe it was Chris. Maybe it was Superman's son but not with Lois (there's nothing in the text to show that the heir was born/created during Lois' lifetime or that her dna was involved). Or it was someone else altogether.

              I wish they had left it even more vague and not said that the heir was a male.
              Last edited by Exedore; 04-25-2011, 11:34 AM.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Exedore
                Plus One Million simply said Superman Secundus was his "heir". The word "son" was never used. Obviously the heir was a guy since he was called Superman Secundus but not necessarily his son. Maybe it was Supergirl or Power Girl's son or Conner since he has been shown as a future Superman in some comics just as you pointed out. Maybe it was Chris. Maybe it was Superman's son but not with Lois (there's nothing in the text to show that the heir was born/created during Lois' lifetime or that her dna was involved). Or it was someone else altogether.

                I wish they had left it even more vague and not said that the heir was a male.
                But One Million also said that "it all started with Superman and Lois Lane", when they were telling Superman's dinasty story. If it is not their descendance, why put Lois in the middle of it? They could have just said "it all started with Superman" or even "it all started in Krypton". When you put Lois Lane in the middle, the natural conclusion is that she is part of the Superman dinasty somehow. If the idea is that Lois had no part on it, then there would be no reason to say that it all started with them as a couple.

                Otherwise, the reference is pointless, IMO, and it only leads readers to reach a false conclusion that Lois is a part of it, when she isn't.

                Truth is that, by making that statement (It all started with Superman and Lois Lane), One Million left the door open for people to speculate that, somehow, Clark and Lois had a descendance together.
                Last edited by liana; 04-25-2011, 11:57 AM.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by liana
                  But One Million also said that "it all started with Superman and Lois Lane", when they were telling Superman's dinasty story. If it is not their descendance, why put Lois in the middle of it? They could have just said "it all started with Superman" or even "it all started in Krypton". When you put Lois Lane in the middle, the natural conclusion is that she is part of the Superman dinasty somehow. If the idea is that Lois had no part on it, then there would be no reason to say that it all started with them as a couple.

                  Otherwise, the reference is pointless, IMO, and it only leads readers to reach a false conclusion that Lois is a part of it, when she isn't.

                  Truth is that, by making that statement (It all started with Superman and Lois Lane), One Million left the door open for people to speculate that, somehow, Clark and Lois had a descendance together.
                  I went back and read that issue: it does say "blood of his blood". So it had to be a biological heir it seems. But again, nowhere does it say it was an actual son and not a clone or some other sort of creation. Or that Lois' dna was involved. The details are never specified though so we are free to speculate.

                  Here's a scenario: she could have been the maternal figure to a cloned Superman. Not a biological mother obviously but a mother nonetheless.

                  I still think it would have been nice for Chris to be the heir.
                  Last edited by Exedore; 04-25-2011, 12:17 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    I think Booster knows his superhero name, he just didn't want to get in the way of Clark's journey and the flow of time, I guess. He tried to hint to Clark that he sould use the word 'super' as well.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      He knew but didn't want to change the future, by taking away from Lois who is the one who says it but he did hint him that it will change.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Exedore
                        I went back and read that issue: it does say "blood of his blood". So it had to be a biological heir it seems. But again, nowhere does it say it was an actual son and not a clone or some other sort of creation. Or that Lois' dna was involved. The details are never specified though so we are free to speculate.

                        Here's a scenario: she could have been the maternal figure to a cloned Superman. Not a biological mother obviously but a mother nonetheless.
                        As I said, I just don't see the point of including her at all if it has nothing to do with her. If they did include that line is because they wanted writers to believe she was involved. Otherwise, why even mention her?

                        For me, it doesn't make any difference if she is a biological mother or not. That is not important. Being mother is much more than that, however, this isn't about my opinion. This is about a reference that leads people to believe otherwise. There is a purpose on that line, and the purpose was to let people believe that, somehow, Lois was a part of the Superman Dinasty. It could be because they had a kid old fashioned way, or because they mixed Superman's DNA with Lois' as Lex did with Conner.

                        My only problem about that is narrative. If it turns out that it was meant to be "open to interpretation", then I can tell you it was an extremely bad job.

                        Originally posted by Exedore
                        I still think it would have been nice for Chris to be the heir.
                        I love Chris, and I wouldn't have any problem with that. IMO, he is their son (Clark and Lois).

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by smallv17
                          He knew but he didn't want to give it right away so he gave Clark a hint!!..
                          OF COARSE...I`m glad i didn`t have to go all the way to page two to find someone who figured this out

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Agreed, he knew the name but he didn't want to be the one to give it a way.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by Exedore
                              I went back and read that issue: it does say "blood of his blood". So it had to be a biological heir it seems. But again, nowhere does it say it was an actual son and not a clone or some other sort of creation. Or that Lois' dna was involved. The details are never specified though so we are free to speculate.

                              Here's a scenario: she could have been the maternal figure to a cloned Superman. Not a biological mother obviously but a mother nonetheless.

                              I still think it would have been nice for Chris to be the heir.
                              I think One Million is Grant's weakest stories and should probably shuffled off to the 52. Part of what was great about Legion was how things changed from the DCU we knew in 1000 years. Batman is virtually forgotten, the Green Lanterns are gone and their rings seen as low tech, the heroes of other planets were respected as much as Earth's etc...It made you wonder about the interim. Grant created a future that stuck to the same stories as if the DCU never gets better. Its a depressing look the world. The future of the DCU used to be creatively open, we got Legion, Tommy Tomorrow and Kamandi. Its stuck right now because of the insistence of Superman 50 or Batman 100.

                              Also, we have so many Supergirls that are children of Clark through various stories, why can't Kara's male decendant be Superman? We have never seen Kara's impact explored outside of Silver Age imaginary stories where an old Superman retires the role to Superwoman.
                              Last edited by Estro-gen X; 04-27-2011, 05:30 AM.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                I think that it is interesting to note that "Superman" as a name is obvious only after the fact. So far the use of the word has only been in connection to a philosophical idea that has no direct standards for what would make Clark fit it aside from what Carter said. Though becuase of that conversation it does put more importance on the meaning of the name when it is used. Also one of the major points in the discussion between Clark and Booster was that small events can have large concequences in the future and some would think that this is the perfect time for Booster to push things further by letting slip something large?

                                Comment

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