Worst versions of Superman?

[Flash Gordon]

I think Superman being so bent up about a mass murdering psychopath being executed, that he quits being Superman, is really dumb.

It's always killed KINGDOM COME for me.

I don't think Superman should be a killer, but if it was the Joker's life or 7 dozen innocent people being gunned down...I'd want Superman to make the adult decision. Sometimes being a hero is making a gut wrenching decision to save lives. Now simply executing the Joker after the crime, that's not really Superman at all...but I don't think he's going to lose any sleep over someone else being so upset that they kill the Joker.

If Zod is going to end all life on Earth, and there is no other way...you end the threat. There's literally no reason for a character like Superman to be put in situations where he can't "do the impossible" and save the world without killing Zod...but that's a different point.

[Ascended]

You missed the whole point. It was not Superman throwing a fit and sulking. It was society wanting him to become something he was not and rather than impose his will on the people he left them with the type of hero they choose who would do things he would not do. I hate the whole "he was buthurt and ran away" bull. He had a reason for leaving. Not only was he grieving the loss of everyone he cared about but the people themselves said we don't need or want you anymore.

No, I get what Waid was trying to say. And its bullsh*t.

Superman doesnt save lives because its what the people want. He does what he does because someone needs to do it. He wouldn't stop being a hero just because people suddenly wanted a different kind of hero. He'd keep on doing his job and saving the world and doing what he considered the right thing, regardless of what people thought.

[Adekis]

No, I get what Waid was trying to say. And its bullsh*t.

Superman doesnt save lives because its what the people want. He does what he does because someone needs to do it. He wouldn't stop being a hero just because people suddenly wanted a different kind of hero. He'd keep on doing his job and saving the world and doing what he considered the right thing, regardless of what people thought.

Yeah, you know what? I'm done trying to argue about how bad Kingdom Come's Superman is; you just summed up everything I was trying to say much more succinctly than I said it. Bravo!

He didn't turn the Earth backwards. I'm not sure why so many people think he did.

He flew in circles faster than light, which under Silver Age Superman rules sends him back in time. This was demonstrated by showing lots of things happening in reverse because they were being undone. One of those things was the Earth.

If we're talking about Silver Age rules, what about the fact that under Silver Age rules he is physically incapable of altering his own past? He can travel back in time if he wants to. He can watch Lois die all he wants! He cannot interfere. He certainly can't enter Reality Warper Mode and alter reality so that the Earthquake never happens to begin with with no apparent reason why that would happen.

I want to be clear, this shoddy time travel doesn't ruin the movie, not like mind-wiping Lois does in Superman II, but it does hurt the movie a lot, and the franchise as a whole too.

As for whether the mind wipe counts as retroactive sexual assault... I don't know whether it does or not, but I certainly see where people draw that conclusion from. Either way it's a horrible crime committed against an innocent woman.

[Dolores - The Worst Poster Ever]

The thing is, even if Superman didn't want to go after bad guys because the public wanted to him to kill supervillains, and he didn't want to become something he wasn't, he could have continued on as someone that saves people in other situations that have nothing to do with supervillains or conflicts.

This person is trapped in a burning building, better go save them.
This person is drowning, better go save them.
Etc.

Instead he just bails completely.

[GreatKungLao]

I think Superman being so bent up about a mass murdering psychopath being executed, that he quits being Superman, is really dumb.

It's always killed KINGDOM COME for me.

I don't think Superman should be a killer, but if it was the Joker's life or 7 dozen innocent people being gunned down...I'd want Superman to make the adult decision. Sometimes being a hero is making a gut wrenching decision to save lives. Now simply executing the Joker after the crime, that's not really Superman at all...but I don't think he's going to lose any sleep over someone else being so upset that they kill the Joker.

If Zod is going to end all life on Earth, and there is no other way...you end the threat. There's literally no reason for a character like Superman to be put in situations where he can't "do the impossible" and save the world without killing Zod...but that's a different point.

This is where I pretty much agree on what Zack Snyder said https://youtu.be/hNRnaOonvs8?t=70

[Jokerz79]

In Superman 4 Clark revealed the mindwipe to Lois and she wasn't angry at him and in Superman Returns Lois knew he was her son's father by the end of the movie and again wasn't angry so honestly if Lois felt there was no crime which we are talking about the mythical crime of erasing someone's memory so if the "victim" is fine with it as she was in both timelines I don't see the issue and it becomes moot.

[dancj]

Still though, they don't bother showing Superman changing the course of events that causes the crevace to open up to swallow Lois' car. They don't even have him just show up earlier and grab Lois' car from danger. They just show him reversing time, then restarting it and then showing him land by Lois who is still trying to start her car. The movie leads us to believe that the mere act of him reversing the spin of the Earth or going back in time about 20 minutes with no other intervention saved Lois. Yes it's implied that MAYBE he , say stopped the missile from hitting the fault at full force which lessened the earth quake, but they never showed him doing that. Which honestly would have been kinda cool and sorta made sense. As it is, he just hits the rewind button and magically Lois isn't dead anymore.

Yeah, it was a crappy deus ex machina device used fairly badly. My assumption was that he went back far enough to stop the missiles ever being launched in the first place, but they never make it clear.

[dancj]

Consent doesn't nullify rape by deception in every case.

What rape by deception? He only slept with her after he stopped deceiving her.

And again, she ends up pregnant in one sequel, and that's a very major problem.

It's a bit unclear in Superman Returns. They seem to make it clear there that she does remember sleeping with Superman, so I guess it was on some other occasion that she got pregnant - or it's not a true sequel, so not everything will match up.

[dancj]

If we're talking about Silver Age rules, what about the fact that under Silver Age rules he is physically incapable of altering his own past? He can travel back in time if he wants to. He can watch Lois die all he wants! He cannot interfere.

Well yeah, the film doesn't follow the full Silver Age rules - which is a big part of the problem. Those rules exist to stop him being able to use it to solve every problem.

He certainly can't enter Reality Warper Mode and alter reality so that the Earthquake never happens to begin with with no apparent reason why that would happen.

Like I said a couple of posts up, they don't make it clear, but I assume he went and caught Lex before he launched the missiles. Not really "Reality Warper Mode" as much as just sensible use of time travel.

[manofsteel1979]

Well yeah, the film doesn't follow the full Silver Age rules - which is a big part of the problem. Those rules exist to stop him being able to use it to solve every problem.


Like I said a couple of posts up, they don't make it clear, but I assume he went and caught Lex before he launched the missiles. Not really "Reality Warper Mode" as much as just sensible use of time travel.

Well obviously he didn't catch the missiles and Luthor before the launch Because it's clear from Lois frustrated response to Superman that the Earthquake still happened and we see Supes take Luthor to prison at the end of the movie both happened AFTER the time reversal.

[Adekis]

Well obviously he didn't catch the missiles and Luthor before the launch Because it's clear from Lois frustrated response to Superman that the Earthquake still happened and we see Supes take Luthor to prison at the end of the movie both happened AFTER the time reversal.

Good catch. So the Earthquake starts, but for no discernible reason just fails to get bad enough to cause real devastation. Why?

I don't know, and no matter how many times I've seen the movie, it doesn't seem to know either. I can only assume that Superman enters Reality Warper Mode. He's using hacks!

[Lightning Rider]

No, I get what Waid was trying to say. And its bullsh*t.

Superman doesnt save lives because its what the people want. He does what he does because someone needs to do it. He wouldn't stop being a hero just because people suddenly wanted a different kind of hero. He'd keep on doing his job and saving the world and doing what he considered the right thing, regardless of what people thought.

I think this ignores the fact he isn't just a "first responder" but a symbol of humanity's better qualities and he's meant to be the promise of a better tomorrow. I agree under ordinary circumstances Superman would still save people. But can you guarantee that combined with Lois's death, it wouldn't utterly depress him? I mean it's not just that society rejected him; they embraced a violent man who killed the psychopath that killed the love of his life, who crossed a line he wouldn't. It's hard to imagine scenarios that would make him feel so defeated.

(Also, I'm not sure Superman totally stopped saving people. He just stopped publicly being Superman. Not central to my argument but something I had to think about for a second.)

[marhawkman]

I think Superman being so bent up about a mass murdering psychopath being executed, that he quits being Superman, is really dumb.

It's always killed KINGDOM COME for me.

I don't think Superman should be a killer, but if it was the Joker's life or 7 dozen innocent people being gunned down...I'd want Superman to make the adult decision. Sometimes being a hero is making a gut wrenching decision to save lives. Now simply executing the Joker after the crime, that's not really Superman at all...but I don't think he's going to lose any sleep over someone else being so upset that they kill the Joker.

If Zod is going to end all life on Earth, and there is no other way...you end the threat. There's literally no reason for a character like Superman to be put in situations where he can't "do the impossible" and save the world without killing Zod...but that's a different point.

Heh, it's a very odd thing to see people in comics act like that. You wanna take hostages and threaten to kill them? Ok, that doesn't require you to kill the guy, if you have other options... if. Would Supes be upset if someone like Scorch, Livewire or Luminous got killed? Probably. Mainly because they're not known for killing people. Joker has killed hundreds and the body count goes up every time Batman refuses to kill him.

No, I get what Waid was trying to say. And its bullsh*t.

Superman doesnt save lives because its what the people want. He does what he does because someone needs to do it. He wouldn't stop being a hero just because people suddenly wanted a different kind of hero. He'd keep on doing his job and saving the world and doing what he considered the right thing, regardless of what people thought.

So much this. I could see Superman stepping aside to take a less active role, but total hermit while the world falls apart? no.....

[Ascended]

I think this ignores the fact he isn't just a "first responder" but a symbol of humanity's better qualities and he's meant to be the promise of a better tomorrow. I agree under ordinary circumstances Superman would still save people. But can you guarantee that combined with Lois's death, it wouldn't utterly depress him? I mean it's not just that society rejected him; they embraced a violent man who killed the psychopath that killed the love of his life, who crossed a line he wouldn't. It's hard to imagine scenarios that would make him feel so defeated.

(Also, I'm not sure Superman totally stopped saving people. He just stopped publicly being Superman. Not central to my argument but something I had to think about for a second.)

I'm sure it would depress him.

But humanity embraced and celebrated violent men long before Magog. And some of them were peers of Clark (Peacemaker and Red Hood comes to mind). The only difference between someone like Peacemaker and Magog is that Magog became more popular than Superman. And if humanity was losing sight of their better ideals, as embodied by Magog, then it was up to Clark to double down on his efforts, not abandon humanity.

As for whether he kept saving lives out of the public eye, nothing on the page indicates that he did.

Bottom line, for me, is that Clark gave up. That's not something Superman does. He does not surrender. He doesn't have it in him. No amount of reasons and circumstances will make that okay. Clark can be broken hearted and depressed and confused and doubt the rightness of his actions, but he does not give up.

And Im not trying to ruin Kingdom Come for you. I'm glad you enjoy it. I enjoy it quite a lot myself. I just think Waid missed the mark badly with Superman. But to each their own of course!

[Jokerz79]

The post crisis Superman took a big line in the sand when in came to murder in the 80's and 90's he left Earth after killing Zod, Farora, and Quex-Ul in the Pocket Universe leading to psychotic break. This influenced many interpretations of the characters at the time including Kingdom Come IMO. This is a Superman who lost everyone he loved his friends, Co-Workers, and Lois and then Humanity rejects him and his moral code for a new more lethal type hero and justice. He was disillusioned by it all and retired to his Fortress I don't see it as something he wouldn't had done especially given the events in the story and where the character was at the time in his interpretation in comics.