Was the New 52 an objective mistake in regards to Superman?

[Vordan]

Taylor has never said Lois Lane makes Superman a hero. And even in Injustice Superman doesn't turn evil because Lois isn't around. He starts a slow slide into it because a villain Batman has repeatedly let go tricks him into murdering Lois, their child, and the entire city of Metropolis. I don't recall there ever being any statement that she is what makes him a hero. Nor is that what the Injustice 2 Annual says.

And blaming Lois Lane for the decline in Superman's popularity is like blaming Wonder Woman for making him a despot. It also ignores that the most popular, well known, and financially successful interpretations of the character all feature her prominently as a co-star, co-lead, and in a relationship with him or the start of one. And if the New 52 tells us anything, it's that you don't need Lois Lane to tell terrible Superman stories as we had 5 years of declining story quality where her role was reduced or absent from entire runs.



It is BS. Ending Battle is the way any story where Lois was killed would go. Just because some people take the wrong message away from a story doesn't make it the right one.

Oh I don’t hate Lois. I hate how she’s been used at the hand of hacks. I hate how fridging her is the go-to method for hacks looking to jack off to another Batgod vs. Superhitler story. I hate that the average person now thinks that she IS the source of his heroism because Injustice and the Snyderverse pounded that into people’s heads. I know that’s not “canon”, but if adaptions keep using it, it’s not going to matter what comic book writers do. That will be the general audiences perception of the character. In an era where every idiot complains that Superman isn’t “relatable” despite all the cartoons, movies, and tv shows he’s appeared in, continuously reusing the Dead Lois = Evil Superman crap will not help him at all.

I also hate how badly Injustice wanks off the Joker. Supes is an utter moron in it and the second issue beats you over the head with how stupid Supes is compared to Batman with Joker going on about how “easy” it was. I hate Supes being characterized as an idiot. I hate Joker just in general, it should’ve been Lex who breaks Supes, like in Justice Lords.

[sunofdarkchild]

Kingdome Come has Joker murder Lois as well, but it doesn't turn Superman into a villain. He goes away when he sees the public side with heroes who kill, but his personal morals never change.

In the Death of Clark Kent storyline he thinks that Conduit murdered Lois for half the arc and also doesn't change. He is briefly suicidal and for a long time thinks he should drop the secret identity, but he doesn't ever lose it except when he takes his anger out on a bunch of robots.

To me the best 'Superman becomes a villain' story was King of the World, where he tries to take a more proactive approach but again takes great care not to kill anyone despite the world seemingly turning against him. Rather than a personality shift, it was a rather subtle change.

In the comics - at least since post-Crisis, it was the Kents who made Clark a hero and the lessons they taught him. Those stay whether or not Lois is around. Lois is what keeps him tethered to humanity and not eventually just being Superman full-time while take an hour-long nap in the fortress of solitude every couple of months. He'd be the same superhero with the same moral code without her, but he wouldn't continue to be Clark Kent, investigative journalist and man of the people, without her.

[Yoda]

Oh I don’t hate Lois. I hate how she’s been used at the hand of hacks. I hate how fridging her is the go-to method for hacks looking to jack off to another Batgod vs. Superhitler story. I hate that the average person now thinks that she IS the source of his heroism because Injustice and the Snyderverse pounded that into people’s heads. I know that’s not “canon”, but if adaptions keep using it, it’s not going to matter what comic book writers do. That will be the general audiences perception of the character. In an era where every idiot complains that Superman isn’t “relatable” despite all the cartoons, movies, and tv shows he’s appeared in, continuously reusing the Dead Lois = Evil Superman crap will not help him at all.

I also hate how badly Injustice wanks off the Joker. Supes is an utter moron in it and the second issue beats you over the head with how stupid Supes is compared to Batman with Joker going on about how “easy” it was. I hate Supes being characterized as an idiot. I hate Joker just in general, it should’ve been Lex who breaks Supes, like in Justice Lords.

Sorry, I didn't mean to jump all over what you were saying. I loathe the argument that Lois is some sort of weight or anchor on Superman's popularity when its garbage stories and hack writers. I agree with your points here completely.

[Yoda]

Kingdome Come has Joker murder Lois as well, but it doesn't turn Superman into a villain. He goes away when he sees the public side with heroes who kill, but his personal morals never change.

In the Death of Clark Kent storyline he thinks that Conduit murdered Lois for half the arc and also doesn't change. He is briefly suicidal and for a long time thinks he should drop the secret identity, but he doesn't ever lose it except when he takes his anger out on a bunch of robots.

To me the best 'Superman becomes a villain' story was King of the World, where he tries to take a more proactive approach but again takes great care not to kill anyone despite the world seemingly turning against him. Rather than a personality shift, it was a rather subtle change.

And yeah, even Kingdom Come is misinterpreted by a lot of fans. Lois' death didn't turn him into a hermit. It was Magog's 90's kill them all mentality and the public's acceptance of it.

Ending Battle probably handles this type of storyline the best. Manchester Black makes him think he killed Lois in the hopes Superman will snap and kill him only for Superman to say outright he won't dishonor Lois's memory by doing that. Vordon is right, it's hack writing.

[Vordan]

Sorry, I didn't mean to jump all over what you were saying. I loathe the argument that Lois is some sort of weight or anchor on Superman's popularity when its garbage stories and hack writers. I agree with your points here completely.

No problem dude. I welcome someone challenging me if they feel different, that’s what the forums are for after all.

[OpaqueGiraffe17]

No one ever brings up Metropolis though.

I only play the games, not read the tie-in comics, but in the games, that’s not the case at all. Again totally get why people hate the evil Superman, fridged Lois angle. But I don’t think your point here holds up to scrutiny.

[HeroVladimir93]

If New 52 and Injustice have in common is that their characterizations of Superman were controversial. New 52 has a Superman has wildly different portrayals across comic books, thanks to the editorial conflicts within DC; while the evil Superman from Injustice is far removed from the noble and heroic Superman we all know and love. To their credit, Warner and DC did deliver versions of Superman that were more in line with people's expectations of the Man of Steel. The pre-Flashpoint Superman and his family had their own miniseries while the first Injustice game allowed players to take control of the noble and heroic Superman for the final part of the story mode.

[Ascended]

IDK, I think it's right that the superhero community looks to Clark as their leader, but not to the point that they blindly follow his lead even if some of his decisions may clash with their own morals.

I agree, someone who decides to go outside the law and fight "evil" under their own perceptions and moral judgement probably wouldn't be the kind of person to fall to groupthink. But on the other hand, these heroes were rattled by Metropolis' nuking as well, and taking a more proactive, hands-on, zero tolerance approach probably sounded good to a lot of them....in theory. And by the time they realize how far off the path they've gone.....they're in too deep. We saw that with Barry, and with Hal to a slightly lesser extent (at least in the games). I can only imagine that other heroes ended up feeling the same way, but didn't dare say anything because by that point Clark was ready to melt any dissenters.

I have little knowledge of Injustice beyond the broad strokes because there's nothing about it that appeals to me, but Diana seems to slide into some ridiculous Lady Macbeth type role really easily, and I don't think Clark would get her to do that if she was in character, no matter what he did or said. I also know that Harley Quinn needs to convince her to spare Cheetah's life or something, which sounds absolutely bonkers.

From what I understand, Harley had a moment of clarity when Joker nuked Metropolis and realized just how sick her entire life was. I think it was largely Lois' unborn child that did it for her, as in this universe Harley also has a kid. The character arc Harley has been on over the last twenty years in the regular comics, she went through in a much shorter time in Injustice.

And Diana is completely out of her mind in that game. Honestly, I feel like her characterization is by far the worst out of everyone in the roster, including Clark. I can see Diana agreeing with Clark's decision to take matters into his own hands. Di is a ruler, she's going to understand Clark's idea of protecting people from themselves. But she ends up being one of the major forces pushing Clark further and further into tyranny, without a single shred of compassion in her. It's not Diana at all. Even with Clark, you can see a tiny little ember of who he is supposed to be in there.....but Diana? Not even that.

[Jackalope89]

The only thing I liked about Injustice? Lobo becoming a Green Lantern (and being immortal, no worries about him getting killed off either).

[superduperman]

I think the term "objective" gets thrown around a little too causally. Keep something in mind: Warners more or less had a gun to DC's head. Either turn your numbers around or we'll get someone else in there. New 52 was essentially a last minute decision to keep jobs. I liked it. But I can't pretend that it wasn't without it's problems.

[DochaDocha]

I still think it's somewhat funny to think that a Superman that was raised and groomed by Stalin himself turns out to be a better dude than many versions of Superman who grow up happy but then come across tragedy.

[JAK]

I enjoy the hell out of the games, but that's because this isn't Superman. It's an alternate reality version of Superman. We might as well get upset because Ultraman is evil. I am not bothered by evil Injustice Superman any more than I'm bothered by Marvel's evil Hyperion; neither are the "true" Superman, but just shadows of him seen through a different lens.

I'd be all fine with looking at it like that, except this:

According to the Injustice Annual it's Lois that makes Superman Superman.

As others have said, that's a garbage take. And just like TDK damaged Superman in ways that we feel even today, I see Injustice leading people down another damaged path. I can see it as an alternate Superman, but if this actually sticks with the average "general audience" idiot (and to some, it has started to), we're going to have another crappy trope hung around the character's neck to drag him down. And that just frustrates the crap outta me. He absolutely should be seen as an alternate Ultraman, but that's not how he's being advertised and so it has a chance to stick to the main Superman. Hopefully it never does, though Snyder hinting at it in BvS won't help.

I don't believe any Superman fan actually takes Injustice seriously. I know I don't. As long they chose to depict Superman as a villain I will choose to ignore its existence.

Same.

What is a villain? The only thing the seperates a Hero from a Villain is who's telling the story.

When he kills Billy and a bunch of other people, he doesn't get to be the hero anymore. He's a villain.

My favorite Injustice game was the first one, and that's mostly because it featured the noble and heroic Superman we all know and love. Don't judge me.

Ending Battle is the way any story where Lois was killed would go. Just because some people take the wrong message away from a story doesn't make it the right one.

Kingdome Come has Joker murder Lois as well, but it doesn't turn Superman into a villain. He goes away when he sees the public side with heroes who kill, but his personal morals never change.

In the Death of Clark Kent storyline he thinks that Conduit murdered Lois for half the arc and also doesn't change. He is briefly suicidal and for a long time thinks he should drop the secret identity, but he doesn't ever lose it except when he takes his anger out on a bunch of robots.

To me the best 'Superman becomes a villain' story was King of the World, where he tries to take a more proactive approach but again takes great care not to kill anyone despite the world seemingly turning against him. Rather than a personality shift, it was a rather subtle change.

All of this is truth to me, right there.

I still think it's somewhat funny to think that a Superman that was raised and groomed by Stalin himself turns out to be a better dude than many versions of Superman who grow up happy but then come across tragedy.

Wow. Good point, I didn't think of that.

[DochaDocha]

Having given the topic (which is really off-topic...) some thought, I think I can only accept "EVIL SUPERMAN!" stories under the various contexts:

1) Alt universe, such as Ultraman
2) Related to alt universe, but something like Red Son in which he was raised by the wrong guys
3) I think if you did something kind of science-y and had a story in which somehow, Superman underwent some sort of neurological transformation that drove him to madness. I think this would be a more interesting spin on the effects of Kryptonite, if we saw somehow his neurochemical makeup was completely altered. Of course, this wouldn't be an in-universe take on the character, but I think it has greater potential than OMG-Lois-Died-Now-He's-Evil. Plus, I'm a sucker for proper application of science principles in Superman stories.
4) If he's going to be the bad guy, at least not be such a moustache-twirling type. At the very least, if he's going to conflict with other heroes, make it so that Superman's not so obviously in the wrong while the other guy (and let's be honest, Batman...) is clearly on the side of angels. Whatever happened to nuance? It's sort of insulting, not just to Superman fans, but with readers who don't want something so formulaic. It reminds me of this joke from the Simpsons where they're watching a movie and Julia Roberts' character is asked if she'd rather marry some unlikable guy, or marry Richard Gere. I swear, these stories really treat us non-first-time comic readers as if we're that stupid.

I think what needs to be present in a Superman story, for it to be a legit representation of the character, is the ability to overcome. #3 above probably would be an exception/exemption, like if the damage were so far gone that he could no longer be the guy he once was, but since it's Superman I'd rather that he still found a way that wasn't OMG-Lois-Is-OK-Now-He's-Good-Again. I know that having his wife and unborn child killed, as well as his home city, completely obliterated is a lot for anyone to handle, but in comic book terms it seems like it's something a lot of heroes would be able to manage eventually.

[SiegePerilous02]

Some alternate universes where Batman and his army of brats are the evil ones and Clark and Diana and others are the heroes would be refreshing.

Not nearly as much as just not doing these stupid "heroes go evil and fight each other" plots, but refreshing nonetheless compared to yet another evil/mind controlled minion Superman story and Wonder Woman becoming Evil Bitch Queen

[Shriveling_memo]

Injustice Superman is not meant to be a definitive blueprint of anything resembling Superman. The game and concept is enjoyed largely by those who are at that age to be deconstructive about everything, but I've been around here long enough to know it's not a well regarded entry point into the lore by a lot of this community. You'll notice not a lot of Injustice discussion actively goes on here either.



And that right there is the whole problem. You can't hang on to a short-term experiment as the definitive blueprint of the character all your life and dismiss the other takes as being irrelevant because it doesn't fit your view of what a good hero should be. Because he is a good man, and Lois is an equal to him on a moral level, just as important to his story. These interpretations have withstood the test of time and ones DC constantly go back to them for a reason, because they resonate with the majority. Turning your nose up at those interpretations means you only have a finite interest in the characters, which is amusing when N52 is in itself very much a finite concept.



Plenty disagree.



And if that version had inevitably become the one with the kid and Lois, would you have supported it?

Yes. Accept he was going in a whole new direction. New52 was meant to be a new direction not the same old direction. When they rebooted the universe, they said they were going in a new direction.

It may have took to get with Lois but at least see out the wonder woman situation