Thread Drift: What is your problem with Post-Crisis Superman?

[sunofdarkchild]

Í think that if the fans of pc had this same mentality n52 would still be the main superman. Calling whomever criticizes the problems in the era detractors seems a bit too much

That's why I wrote 'some of.'

If they had maintained the level of quality the Nu52 Superman had during his first year then he likely would still be the main Superman and I'd be fine with that. I thought the reboot was a good thing for Superman at first since the line had been so bad for so long, and there was an immediate jump in quality, at least in Morrison's Action run. Unfortunately, editorial mismanagement and a series of blunders squandered the potential Nu52 Superman had at the start, but the potential was definitely there.

[Agniwolf]

That's why I wrote 'some of.'

If they had maintained the level of quality the Nu52 Superman had during his first year then he likely would still be the main Superman and I'd be fine with that. I thought the reboot was a good thing for Superman at first since the line had been so bad for so long, and there was an immediate jump in quality, at least in Morrison's Action run. Unfortunately, editorial mismanagement and a series of blunders squandered the potential Nu52 Superman had at the start, but the potential was definitely there.

I stand corrected

[Kuwagaton]

If I knock down his power level or have him not be a founding member, how will this affect the Justice League?

- The League continuity was tricky in a way that was outside of Superman. I believe they still had Barry, and the team line-up going into the new DC universe was actually the Detroit team. In Legends, the 1987 League formed and Superman merely stated that he would assist them as needed. An earlier account played out in the Year One annuals and ended the same way.

- When they answered his call in 1991, he not only decided to join but lead them. To my knowledge this "nerfed era" has been the only period with Superman as leader.

- He received a slight power bump after his death and joined the Big 7 team. The first story... saw him beaten and kidnapped, then saved by Batman. But that's cool, haha. He gets some good scenes here and there later.

- Don't remember much of the volume Meltzer started. Superman had absurd power by then, but somehow I don't think it helped his standing.

- Morrison's Action run featured the weakest Superman ever which... a lot of people liked? He was at a basic power level under Johns in the "slightly later" period that ran concurrently. He was a bit of a jerk at first in JL, and I didn't read much of what Johns wrote but as his power got back to post IC levels it didn't seem like his relevance to the team changed much from where he started.

[Jon Clark]

- The League continuity was tricky in a way that was outside of Superman. I believe they still had Barry, and the team line-up going into the new DC universe was actually the Detroit team. In Legends, the 1987 League formed and Superman merely stated that he would assist them as needed. An earlier account played out in the Year One annuals and ended the same way.

- When they answered his call in 1991, he not only decided to join but lead them. To my knowledge this "nerfed era" has been the only period with Superman as leader.

- He received a slight power bump after his death and joined the Big 7 team. The first story... saw him beaten and kidnapped, then saved by Batman. But that's cool, haha. He gets some good scenes here and there later.

- Don't remember much of the volume Meltzer started. Superman had absurd power by then, but somehow I don't think it helped his standing.

- Morrison's Action run featured the weakest Superman ever which... a lot of people liked? He was at a basic power level under Johns in the "slightly later" period that ran concurrently. He was a bit of a jerk at first in JL, and I didn't read much of what Johns wrote but as his power got back to post IC levels it didn't seem like his relevance to the team changed much from where he started.

I think superduper's point was more that if Superman's role in certain prior JLA stories had hinged on his ability to fly faster than light or going hand-to-hand with a cosmic foe- then just how did those stories still play out if Byrne's Superman with his lesser power levels was now the only Superman around? Sure the Post-Crisis guy could still have a role in stories, but changing his power levels and history required rethinking just how he fit in,

[JAK]

That's why I wrote 'some of.'

If they had maintained the level of quality the Nu52 Superman had during his first year then he likely would still be the main Superman and I'd be fine with that. I thought the reboot was a good thing for Superman at first since the line had been so bad for so long, and there was an immediate jump in quality, at least in Morrison's Action run. Unfortunately, editorial mismanagement and a series of blunders squandered the potential Nu52 Superman had at the start, but the potential was definitely there.

Honestly, it has as much to do with marketing and how they answered questions from fans as anything. Much like how I've heard they handled the Byrne reboot. It's like they didn't learn anything from the first time around - or maybe it was that there weren't enough people in high places from COIE still around to say "don't do "x", the reaction wasn't good" to Didio and the new guys.

ManofSteel1979 hits it on the head when he explains things, as what he describes is exactly what made me go from "oh, a reboot might be a good idea" to "screw DC, I'm out" in 2011. lol

As for what's wrong with the Post-Crisis Superman? For me, very little. My least favorite moment was Superman #22, but thankfully the teams took a giant lemon pile and made some VERY good lemonade - also didn't hurt that, by the time I started reading full-time in '92, all of this was backstory to a version of the character I was enjoying currently. Which certainly made it easier. While definitely the same character, he'd also grown enough by '92 that some of the traits that might have bothered me if I'd been reading as they were happening in the early Byrne era were softened considerably. Krypton may not have been what it was Pre-Crisis, but it was certainly a bigger piece of the picture then before.

I loved the fact that things were so interwoven. It gave his whole world a great sense of weight and meaning. Clark being (at least for the most part) the "main" identity made sense to me, given that he'd spent most of his time by that name growing up. The Kal-Clark/Clark/Superman idea is best, but this was the first step toward that, in a way.

If I had problems, it would be them underestimating his powers and intelligence. Under some writers, he seemed to only get smart when he had no powers, which makes sense on some levels but is frustrating on others... and it was really bad with some writers and all fine with others. That inconsistency didn't help - but that's been an issue for a lot longer than Post-Crisis.

I've enjoyed every incarnation of Superman before 2006-ish, and some after, but THIS is the Superman I identified with as a young almost-teen and into my 20's. THIS was the Superman I looked up to. I won't say he's the best for everyone, but definitely the best for me.

[Sacred Knight]

We'll have to agree to disagree. One of the main purposes of editorial is to say no and establish limits, and to ensure consistency in vision, direction, and quality. We've seen many times throughout comics history that editorial limits, if done for a compelling reason, enhance stories - like in the Dark Pheonix saga - while there are also many times when the editor should have said no and didn't, like the return of Jean Grey. With both DC and Marvel a certain kind of dark ages was ushered in which bad editors like Bob Harras and Dan Didio. It wasn't only Superman where the quality declined in the 2000s. The Batman comics from that era were also painful to read. While not having any limits can seem liberating, having these limits forces writers to get creative. Can't use Kryptonian characters? Then develop the human characters. Can't have Superman make up a new power all the time? Better show him thinking and outsmarting the enemy. Can't make Supergirl Superman's cousin? Use it as an opportunity to finally make a character who isn't Superman-lite, has a different powerset and her own supporting cast for once.

And I never said the last year was so great. I said that the last year, meaning the last time, the comics were consistently great was 1999. Rebirth is merely better than what came immediately before it.

Agreeing to disagree works for me. Respect your thoughts, even though I don't entirely agree with the conclusions same as you feel with mine. And apologies for misinterpreting that last part.. I agree the last time the comics were all consistently great was the end of the 90s. I don't like Rebirth as much as what came immediately before, at least not for Superman, but everyone who's read anything by me in the past year or so knows my feelings there by now.

[Stardust]

I don't hate Post-Crisis Superman. He's paper an ink, plus he's Superman and he's got stories and moments I like. He's just overrated by his fanblock and for anyone to call a Superman created in 1986 the real or classic Superman is laughable.

His fanbase just irks the hell out of me more than anything. I hate some of the reputations he's permeated around the character (pushover, naive, bland, undedicated) and he's not my favorite (19-38-mid 1950's or the 70's) but I don't hate him.

Also Linda Danvers is fine but she isn't Supergirl. She's a character DC trotted out and called Supergirl because of a pre established rule.

I don't hate Pre-Crisis Superman.

His fanbase just irks the hell out of me more than anything. I hate some of the reputations they permeat around the Post-Crisis Superman (pushover, naive, bland, undedicated) and he's not my favorite (-mid 1950's is terribly sexist) but I don't hate him.Pop p k.o. j

[SiegePerilous02]

Which stories represent the difference in pre crisis vs post crisis exaltation well in your opinion?

I'm sure some that are more versed in pre-Crisis DC lore will come of with some examples that **** on other heroes to make Superman look great, but some of the ones I'm thinking of don't do anything of the sort. There was the first Mongul story where he and J'onn get into a conflict that leads to a fight. Superman wins of course, but J'onn puts in an imprssive showing, and his unwillingness to back down makes it hard not to consider him a hero, and even Superman himself notes this. And the narrative even supports the idea that he's right and Clark screws the pooch, which he later has to fix with Kara's help. And in Gerber's great Phantom Zone mini, Supergirl, Batman, Wonder Woman and Green Lantern all guest star and get moments to shine. The rest of the JL gets hurled out of the solar system by the Kryptonians in the Satellite, but there's not much any of them with their power sets could have realistically done anyway, so Clark and Kara going off to retrieve them at the end doesn't feel like an insult.

In other instances, Superman is no different than the rest of the League in being unable to do anything to prevent Woodrue's genocide plan in Swamp Thing, and he gets petrified along with the whole planet by Trigon and Raven. Swamp Thing had to save his life in that one DC Comics presents issue by Moore. So pre-Crisis Superman wasn't immune to being unable to save the day in other people's books, it was just rarer and done more sensibly. His pre-Crisis reputation makes those moments more impactful too; post-Crisis Clark wouldn't have the same impact, because he's more often than not just one more in the crowd.

[Kuwagaton]

I think superduper's point was more that if Superman's role in certain prior JLA stories had hinged on his ability to fly faster than light or going hand-to-hand with a cosmic foe- then just how did those stories still play out if Byrne's Superman with his lesser power levels was now the only Superman around? Sure the Post-Crisis guy could still have a role in stories, but changing his power levels and history required rethinking just how he fit in,

If a creator back then thought up the questions superduper posted, they'd omit the powers within JL question because Superman wasn't scheduled to be in the league. How he stacked up in that regard was kinda moot, especially since the JL writing of that time did not include those sort of pre-crisis scenarios.

As for what's wrong with the Post-Crisis Superman? For me, very little. My least favorite moment was Superman #22, but thankfully the teams took a giant lemon pile and made some VERY good lemonade -

This is like the main thing for me. Frankly, the first two years were quite average, but when Byrne left is when it really started. I didn't mind Superman #22 but I think the work Stern, Ordway, and Jurgens put in immediately after smoothed out those bumps in general.

If I had problems, it would be them underestimating his powers and intelligence. Under some writers, he seemed to only get smart when he had no powers, which makes sense on some levels but is frustrating on others... and it was really bad with some writers and all fine with others. That inconsistency didn't help - but that's been an issue for a lot longer than Post-Crisis.

In other instances, Superman is no different than the rest of the League in being unable to do anything to prevent Woodrue's genocide plan in Swamp Thing, and he gets petrified along with the whole planet by Trigon and Raven. Swamp Thing had to save his life in that one DC Comics presents issue by Moore. So pre-Crisis Superman wasn't immune to being unable to save the day in other people's books, it was just rarer and done more sensibly. His pre-Crisis reputation makes those moments more impactful too; post-Crisis Clark wouldn't have the same impact, because he's more often than not just one more in the crowd.

Very cool insights all around. These two kinda line up for me. Post crisis, he would frequently lose his powers or lose an actual fight. It was like the old Stan Lee comics from Marvel where the story starts with meeting and getting shaken off by the villain, for a later rematch. Superman was very resourceful but we'd have to watch his powers get shrugged off first. That's not always fun.

But on the flipside of pre-crisis where people would be shocked to see Superman get knocked down, post crisis they would only be shocked if he didn't get back up afterwards. It was like the golden age where he'd fall off a boat and have to swim somewhere, or lose his balance up high.

Siege, you did mention Mongul, and I think he at least helps clarify that difference. As well as what others have said that Superman was starting to change by then anyway in depiction, they fought in single combat and Superman caved (from now on I'll try to just link instead of posting huge images all the time). Superman is shocked that didn't have enough power. I like that he's mighty enough to have that sort of experience, where he never gets kicked around really, but I also like when he's super tenacious.

[JAK]

If a creator back then thought up the questions superduper posted, they'd omit the powers within JL question because Superman wasn't scheduled to be in the league. How he stacked up in that regard was kinda moot, especially since the JL writing of that time did not include those sort of pre-crisis scenarios.


This is like the main thing for me. Frankly, the first two years were quite average, but when Byrne left is when it really started. I didn't mind Superman #22 but I think the work Stern, Ordway, and Jurgens put in immediately after smoothed out those bumps in general.

It's kind of a fascinating thing for me, because it's hard to get to "Exile" without Superman #22. So no matter how much I dislike the idea of Superman killing, it led to that story (one of my favorites ever). So it's an interesting conundrum. lol

Very cool insights all around. These two kinda line up for me. Post crisis, he would frequently lose his powers or lose an actual fight. It was like the old Stan Lee comics from Marvel where the story starts with meeting and getting shaken off by the villain, for a later rematch. Superman was very resourceful but we'd have to watch his powers get shrugged off first. That's not always fun.

But on the flipside of pre-crisis where people would be shocked to see Superman get knocked down, post crisis they would only be shocked if he didn't get back up afterwards. It was like the golden age where he'd fall off a boat and have to swim somewhere, or lose his balance up high.

Siege, you did mention Mongul, and I think he at least helps clarify that difference. As well as what others have said that Superman was starting to change by then anyway in depiction, they fought in single combat and Superman caved (from now on I'll try to just link instead of posting huge images all the time). Superman is shocked that didn't have enough power. I like that he's mighty enough to have that sort of experience, where he never gets kicked around really, but I also like when he's super tenacious.

I agree with this on all counts. One thing that started to get on my nerves started in the 2000's.. where it seemed to take a lot more for him to build up his willpower. The whole "navel gazing" thing that others have mentioned. I think it's part of why I have little patience for Cavill's Superman so far. Superman being "super tenacious" or "an obstacle of sheer will" is definitely a big draw for me.

[RedWhiteAndBlueSupes]

This is like the main thing for me. Frankly, the first two years were quite average, but when Byrne left is when it really started. I didn't mind Superman #22 but I think the work Stern, Ordway, and Jurgens put in immediately after smoothed out those bumps in general.

Yeah it's funny you say that, cause as a kid I really started reading post Zero Hour, and for a long time I never realized how different those first years were.

I mean from fighting Brianiac at the circus to getting turned into a robot and the Big Barda thing?!? It definitely picked up after that

The ONLY thing I don't like about Post Crisis Superman is that his creation and changes made to his history were done for reasons that are no longer relevant and DC stuck to their guns WAY to long about things like him being in the Legion and Lex's history etc.

[TruthAndJustice]

Kurt Busiek's run on Superman made it clear that Clark wasn't a super-genius but he could think much faster and more clearly than Earth people. There wasn't much of that before 2006 or so. So that was a change I appreciated. I never liked the Silver/Bronze Age Superman being almost the genius that Luthor was/is but Clark's brain should work better in some way than that of Earth humans.

[magha_regulus]

1. Erased the beginning of his career as Superboy and his relationship with the Legion
2. Clark Kent was a yuppie jock and was who Superman identified as
3. Ma and Pa Kent stayed alive
4. Cold sterile Krypton
5. No Cousin Supergirl
6. No Super Intelligence
7. Born on Earth (WTF@#$%#$%^!!!!)
8. They rarely showed him inspiring the other Superheroes

[Jon Clark]

If a creator back then thought up the questions superduper posted, they'd omit the powers within JL question because Superman wasn't scheduled to be in the league. How he stacked up in that regard was kinda moot, especially since the JL writing of that time did not include those sort of pre-crisis scenarios.

I think we are not quite talking about the same thing.

The point that I was trying to make isn't how does the 1986 Superman fit in with the 1986 League. It's that since the 1986 Superman was now supposedly the Superman who had involved in every in continuity story published BEFORE 1986, his lesser power levels raise a question about things like past JLA stories where Superman played a part. Just how much of the JLA's history in 1986 was still valid if Superman was never a member (nor were Batman or Wonder Woman)? And even in those stories where Superman was said to have participated like the meeting with the New Gods, just how was the story changed by having a weaker Superman?

The original point by super-duper is that some characters like Superman or Batman are involved in so much of the DCU backstory that if you radically alter those characters' history you also create a ripple effect through the whole DCU. Stating that Batman was considered an urban myth for his whole career might be workable in the Bat-titles, but it also impacts the Titans (if there is no "real" Batman what did people think of the Robin who led the public Titans in New York), the JLA (how does Batman's JLA adventures jibe with him not being seen in public), Superman (any World's Finest story that had Batman making a public appearance) ... And changing Superman from his Pre-Crisis self to his Post-Crisis self does the same thing- Dick Grayson's Nightwing ID no longer has any Kandorian inspiration, without a Golden Age Superman what made the JSA recruit Power Girl, who sponsored Firestorm for JLA membership if Superman wasn't a member himself, did any of the Flash/Superman races still happen (and if so was Barry that much slower since Superman now wasn't much faster than the de-powered Wally) ...

[DJ1107]

I'm currently doing a massive read through of the character & so far I'm not a fan of how he basically dismisses Jor-El's message & history as "useless" since Earth was his home & made him who he was. Now I'm all for Superman being Clark Kent rather than Kal-El since let's face it Earth was more of a home than the Planet he spent a total of 2 days on before it died but come on, you can at least respect the memory of entire civilization that's been dead for years man.