I was listening to Kevin Smith’s review of MOS on Hollywood Babble-On. His co-host was disgusted with how Jonathen Kent was portrayed, which I’ve seen echoed in chat boards. He made some great points about how something core to who Superman is was altered by MOS’s interpretation of Papa Kent. After watching the movie for a second time, I feel that view neglects what Johnathen Kent means to this reimagining of Superman.
The disgust I’m talking about is related to Jonathen Kent’s discouragement of Clark using his powers, even for the noblest of reasons. Part of the core of the Superman mythos is that he’s always gotten his morality and his need to help as many people as possible from his humble Smallville town upbringing. Consequently, Johnathan should’ve been pushing Clark to help people from day one, not telling him to keep his powers a secret. Furthermore, MOS seems to show Clark as getting his need to help people more from Jor-El than from Johnathen Kent, as it’s only when Clark learns of his Kryptonian heritage from the ghost program of Jor-El that he decides to become Superman. This has been interpreted as MOS dismissing the tradition of Superman’s value system originating from his Americana upbringing.
When I first heard this viewpoint it resonated with me, and when I nervously sat down for my second viewing, I was conscious of how it would impact my enjoyment. What I experienced instead was a pleasant surprise. I enjoyed the movie even more! I came to understand and appreciate what Johnathen Kent was really all about. I understood that his cautious guidance was paramount in shaping Clark into the Superman he becomes. One can only dread what kind of Superman would exist if Clark wasn’t raised by the Kents.
It is true that Jor-El reveals to Clark that his purpose is to become Superman, “an ideal for the people of Earth to strive for”. However, this doesn’t mean that Jor-El was more of an influence on the kind of Superman Clark decides to become than the Kents. In fact, that’s clearly inconsistent with the story.
Long before Clark meets Jor-El, he already has a fully developed moral code characterized by an overwhelming need to help people. It’s hard to imagine that this need wasn’t incited from his upbringing. There were just no scenes that explicitly conveyed that. That wasn’t the aspect of Superman that Goyer/Nolan/Snyder were exploring. Nolan stated very early on in the production of MOS that the theme of the movie was going to be about how the world would react if there were someone like Superman in it, and what that would mean for Superman. Jonathan Kent was a very important character for exploring that theme.
Jonathan knows that Clark’s existence is world changing, not only for the world, but for Clark. As a caring father would, he wants Clark to be prepared for the gravity of that realization. He states numerous times through the movie that when Clark is ready he will need to make a decision to either be a world changing force for good or not. It’s not that he doesn’t care if Clark decides to be good. It’s that he’s telling Clark that he needs to fully understand that choice, because only then will he be able to embrace the gravity of that commitment. He was sent to Earth for a reason, and Clark needs to find out what that reason is. Jonathan understands that it’s neither good for Clark or the rest of the world if Clark reveals himself before he fully understands why he should.
In this way, it misses the point to suggest that Clark doesn’t get his sense of morality from Jonathan. It was Jonathan more than anyone who guided Clark to becoming Superman. This is most powerfully conveyed in Clark’s final scene with his mother at Jonathan’s grave, where she assures Clark that Jonathan always knew Clark would become a force for good. That was the entire point of the flashback scene where Jonathan is admirably watching his child in a heroic pose with a red cape.
Jonathan knew he had a responsibility to carefully guide Clark to that point. Whether or not the filmmakers did a good job of translating that on screen is another issue. The point is that the intent wasn’t to change where Clark gets his value system. It was to show that becoming Superman in this age is more complicated than just being born with Superpowers and raised to be good. It would require a lot of self-assurance on top of those things. I missed that in my first viewing, but it definitely hit me in my second. As such, I think MOS is a great exploration of what Superman symbolizes to us as today. And let’s not forget that it had awesome action and that Faora chick was really evil sexy hot!