Wasn't it John Byrne who started the whole business about Smallville being in Kansas?
It was more the first Superman movie, actually...they had beautiful cinematography, giving Superman a sort of bucolic farm country look. It should also be noted that Superman in the comics did not really grow up on a farm. His parents sold it early on to buy a General Store.
Perhaps a moment can be taken here to point out something about the comics that are important: they're what every other version is based on and what they say ought to be given priority over television or film or radio versions as the definitive version.
At some level, there is some intuitive understanding of this. Let me give an example:
A woman in the library noticed my Captain America coffee mug, and asked if I was a comics lover. I said I was. She then asked this: "I really like the X-Men movies. About Wolverine and his past, though...how did it all REALLY happen?"
See the implication there?
Sure, movies and television can do good things, and understandable allowances can be made for them because you can't cram in 40+ years of history into 2 hours, but ultimately the comics are how it "really" happened, and the rest are "dramatizations," the story equivalent of the "re-enactments" on AMERICA'S MOST WANTED or UNSOLVED MYSTERIES.
So, if the comics strongly implied that Smallville was East Coast and very near Metropolis and did so for DECADES...well, that's it, then.
This was why Ostrander's HAWKWORLD pisses me off to no end, but the "Starcrossed" movie doesn't: in "Starcrossed," it wasn't "really" Hawkman (actually, go back and see they don't actually call that character "Hawkman"), however, HAWKWORLD is supposed to now be how it all "really" happened...but the thing is, it wasn't, was it? Where's the Absorbascon and the Gentleman Ghost?
Now, I know some people regard anything by Byrne on Superman as akin to the tablets Moses was handed on Mt. Sinai
Not holy enough, apparently, if MAN OF STEEL was recently retconned away in favor of the Waid version
Does anybody STILL think this?
My impression of Byrne's current reputation is that he is viewed as the comics industry's Michael Jackson: a has-been that did several good things in the seventies and eighties before he was totally taken over by eccentric and unsavory personal behavior and some really awful work in the 1990s, a reputation he escapes from by insane surroundings that border on alternate universe; Wacko Jacko had his Neverland Ranch, Byrne has his sycophantic Robotics Forums.
Yes, I know that SUPERMAN THROUGH THE AGES's whole
raison d'etre and fabricated group identity is as David in front of the Byrne/Carlin/Helfer unconquerable Goliath, but with MOS gone, Byrne's version is dead as a doornail and even mainstream comics fandom has turned against him.
Allow me to dramatize:
COMICS FANDOM: BOOOOOO!
BYRNE: What's this? They're booing me!
ROBOTICS FORUM: No, no sir, they're shouting...Boooo-yrne!
BYRNE (to fandom): Are you shouting Boo, or Booo-yrne?
COMICS FANDOM: BOOOOOOOO!
UNCLE MXY: ...I was shouting Booo-yrne. :wink: [/list]