James Gunn’s latest Superman film, despite its strong cast and striking comic-inspired visuals, has drawn criticism for its treatment of Superman’s parents, both biological and adoptive. While the movie acknowledges Jonathan and Martha Kent as supportive figures, their portrayal lacks the depth that fans have come to appreciate in other adaptations, particularly in the television series Smallville. The show’s exploration of the Kents offers a nuanced look at raising a child from another world and instilling enduring Midwestern values, setting a standard James Gunn’s Superman falls short of.
Smallville’s portrayal over an extended timeline allowed audiences to see Jonathan and Martha Kent not just as background influences but as fully engaged, complex characters. The film’s brief runtime constrains this, resulting in a portrayal that feels incomplete. While the movie includes a tender scene of Clark Kent watching home movies of his family in the Fortress, it cannot replicate the layered relationship built through years of storytelling in Smallville.
The Kents as Living, Breathing Characters in Smallville
Jonathan and Martha Kent’s presence in Smallville was essential to Clark Kent’s development. The series revealed how deeply intertwined they were in Clark’s life, guiding him through the emotional and physical trials of discovering and managing his powers. Their hands-on approach and consistent support helped shape Clark’s moral compass, making them far more than just supportive parents—they were central pillars in his journey toward becoming Superman.
Unlike earlier shows or films, Smallville’s Kents are portrayed as real people with their own challenges. They balanced day-to-day struggles, such as Martha’s career ambitions and Jonathan’s anger issues, with their commitment to protecting their son’s secret. Their interactions with other characters, including the Luthor family, added layers of tension and complexity. Jonathan’s distrust of the Luthors contrasts with Clark’s initially trusting nature, emphasizing the protective role the Kents played.
The show also depicted Jonathan and Martha stepping into active roles to safeguard Clark, from political involvement to confronting threats directly. Their willingness to sacrifice and adapt continually underscored their importance in Clark’s life, a dynamic simply absent from Gunn’s Superman.
Smallville’s Kents Exhibit Authenticity and Flaws
Smallville distinguished the Kents by portraying them as well-rounded individuals facing genuine issues alongside their parental duties. They argued over financial decisions, wrestled with external pressures from powerful families like the Luthors, and dealt with internal conflicts. Jonathan’s struggle with anger, which plays a key part in his eventual death, adds emotional weight and realism to the character. Martha’s loyalty and denial about the Luthor family also introduce complications that enrich the narrative.
In contrast, James Gunn’s Superman gives only cursory treatment to the Kents’ emotional depth. Jonathan and Martha’s characters in the film are supportive but largely passive; Jonathan’s forgetfulness of Lois Lane’s name is a minor detail but signals a lack of genuine connection. Smallville’s Jonathan Kent, by contrast, would have held such fundamentals close, emphasizing respect and principle.
The series also explored extraordinary plotlines involving the Kents, such as granting them temporary powers, their interactions with the alien Jor-El, and their entanglement with LuthorCorp’s threats. These scenarios illustrated their active and multifaceted roles in Clark’s destiny, further distinguishing Smallville’s approach as rich and layered.
How Smallville’s Portrayal Set a New Standard for the Kents
Smallville’s depiction of the Kents influenced Superman lore beyond television. DC Comics writer Mark Waid explicitly modeled his Superman: Birthright origin story after Smallville’s Jonathan and Martha Kent, drawing from their psychological depth and physical portrayal. This adaptation became a touchstone for presenting the Kents not just as parents but as integral contributors to Clark’s identity and heroism.
The portrayal demonstrated that the Kents are far from idealized figures—they are flawed, human, and relatable. Their imperfections and struggles only deepen their role as Clark’s moral foundation, grounding his grand heroism in everyday values and challenges.
The Essential Influence of the Kents on Clark’s Heroic Path
Smallville’s strength lies in showing Clark’s parents as more than symbols of hope and decency; they are complex characters who grow alongside their son. Jonathan and Martha help Clark navigate the dilemmas of adolescence and the pressure of his alien heritage, providing guidance tempered with their own mistakes and learnings. This dynamic underlines why the Kents are central to Clark’s story and makes their absence in Gunn’s film so notable.
All of Clark’s kindness, courage, and sense of responsibility is cultivated by the lessons learned from his parents. Smallville spent years building this connection, portraying the Kents as indispensable to the hero Clark Kent ultimately becomes. It highlights the importance of not just the inheritance of powers but the nurturing of character and conscience through family.
In summary, Smallville gives Jonathan and Martha Kent a fully realized presence that remains unmatched in superhero media. James Gunn’s Superman, while ambitious and visually engaging, misses this crucial foundation by underdeveloping the Kents’ roles. Future portrayals of Superman would benefit greatly by embracing the depth and nuance that Smallville brought to these iconic characters.
Our Reader’s Queries
Q. What is James Gunn’s religion?
A. Gunn grew up in a Catholic household and has shared that praying is still significant to him. However, he also describes himself as somewhat against organized religion.
Q. What religion is James Gunn?
A. Ozu inspired the new CGI version of Krypto the Superdog in Gunn’s 2025 Superman film. Gunn grew up in a Catholic household. He says prayer remains important to him but has also expressed being, in certain respects, against religion.
