Wednesday, November 23, 2011

Cavill on the Cape

I spent some time a few weeks back engaging in a bit of armchair psychoanalysis vis-a-vis the Clark Kent-Superman dichotomy in a piece that appeared both here and at The Huffington Post, and it's a subject I expect to dig into a bit further when I take a look at the upcoming Smallville complete series set next week.

In the meantime though, Geoff Boucher at "Hero Complex" chatted up incoming big screen Superman Henry Cavill about that very subject while the actor was promoting his currently-in-theaters Immortals. Although Cavill understandably plays coy, he still manages to give some insight into how he views the character(s) and his approache to the material. Click past the jump for some highlights:

On whether it's easier to play Clark or Superman, and which of the two he relates to more:
Both are difficult and easy to play in their respective ways. Essentially, yes, one is a disguise but the one that’s not a disguise is so unreal that brings difficulties of its own with it. I mean, once the shroud is cast off, yeah, there’s that — but he can fly. [Laughs] Overall, there’s no one that’s easier or less easy than the other.
The differences between Superman and his Immortals character, demigod Theseus:
You can imagine how scary and angry Superman would be as a personality if he fell into a broken family where the father cheats or there’s abuse. You can imagine how he would develop as an emotional person. It’d be a bit like the story in “Red Son,” [which transplants Superman's origins from rural Kansas to Communist Russia] he’s not evil but he’s very different because of environment. The upbringing of Theseus is the polar opposite — the absolute negative of — the upbringing that the Kents gave Superman.
On the many different, equally valid interpretations of Superman in different media over the years:
I think it’s great that it does change. It should change and should evolve. I think “The New 52″ stuff is fantastic because it is an evolution of the character. Initially, people will just rail against it and others will love it and they debate it. They care, which is great, but all of it is part of this evolution and in 30 years they will forget. In three decades when someone dares to put a pair of red underpants on the outside [of Superman's costume] again, someone will go crazy and say, ‘What are you doing?! This isn’t Superman anymore!’ It’s all mythology and people take what they want from it …. 
You can read the rest of the interview here, including some tidbits on which comic stories Cavill has turned to for research. It all makes for an interesting read, and gives a sense -- perhaps -- of the level of seriousness the filmmakers have invested into reinvigorating the Man of Steel for Man of Steel.


The Four-Eyed Avenger said...

"Red underpants?" Really?

Pretty disappointing.

Zaki said...

I wouldn't read too much into that, anymore than I would into me referring to them as "red underoos" in my earlier post. The breadth of what he says and the references he cites tells me he did his homework and came to the game ready to play.