The Importance of Kent's Teachings in Superman's Development: A Critical Analysis

When the discussion arises around whether Zack Snyder's portrayal of Superman in the DCEU (DC Extended Universe) is the most comic accurate, opinions often diverge. While some may argue the intricacies of the backstory and the elements influenced by the comics, one crucial aspect that significantly impacts Superman's character is the role of Jonathan Kent in shaping his morals and values. In this article, we will delve into why Jonathan Kent's teachings are essential to Superman's development and how their omission in certain portrayals can alter his core identity.

The Role of Jonathan Kent in Superman's Origins

One of the most fundamental teachings Jonathan Kent was supposed to impart to his son Clark was the moral compass that defines Superman. In the comics, Jonathan Kent serves as the moral guide, instilling in his son the importance of right from wrong, responsibility, and the other phase of being one of us on Earth. His teachings are central to Superman's character, as they establish a foundation for the way he interacts with the world and makes decisions that ultimately define his identity as a hero.

The Discrepancy in the Snyder Cut

The portrayal of Jonathan Kent in the Snyder Cut of Man of Steel deviates significantly from the original comics, leading to a distorted version of the character's role. In this version, Jonathan Kent's teachings are not only downplayed but also arguably reframed in a manner that omits their crucial influence on Clark's development. The story shows Jonathan Kent placing more importance on hiding all costs, even at the expense of the lives of children and ultimately his own life. This approach is a far cry from the original comic books, where Jonathan's teachings serve to highlight the importance of Chris Kent's upbringing by the Kents and the potential chaos that could have ensued if other less scrupulous individuals had found him.

The Importance of Character Integrity

Clark Kent and Superman are two distinct aspects of the same character, and this duality is essentially what makes Superman himself. In the comics, this duality is emphasized by how Clark Kent is the real person behind the mask, with his actions as Superman only reinforcing his character's integrity. However, removing the significant role of Jonathan Kent's teachings in this portrayal blurs this distinction, leading to a character who is less relatable and less true to the source material. The integrity of Superman's character depends on these teachings, as they are part of the moral framework that defines his actions and decisions as both Clark Kent and Superman.

Conclusion

While Henry Cavill's performance as Superman is undoubtedly accurate in terms of the character's physical portrayal and the way he presents himself, the omission of Jonathan Kent's teachings significantly impacts his on-screen character. For a portrayal to be considered comic accurate, it is not sufficient to simply match the physical appearance or the general storyline; it must also capture the essence of the character's moral journey and his internal character development. Without Jonathan Kent's teachings, the character of Superman is incomplete, and the core elements that define his identity as a hero are lost.

Ultimately, the storyline and the portrayal of Superman cannot be divorced from the influence of his Jonathan Kent. These teachings provide the moral and ethical framework that makes Superman who he is, and removing them alters the character's core essence. While no version of Superman can be entirely comic accurate due to the ongoing evolution of both the character and the stories, the importance of these elements cannot be overstated.

Keywords: Superman, DCEU, Snyder Cut, Jonathan Kent, Comic Accuracy