Would you care if Superman was portrayed by a person of color?

[HeroVladimir93]

You should look at this at a case-by-case basis. Frankly, white Aquaman was already considered a joke. They figured they needed to give the character a big rehaul because they figured being true or true-ish to the character was going to fail miserably. He's a guy who needed image rehab, and changing him from looking like a dorky Swedish guy to being played by a guy who played a lot of cool and manly roles doesn't hurt.

Creating new characters is hit and miss. I'd argue it's mostly miss, but if you quit trying altogether, then you're guaranteeing future failures. They didn't make the Joker female in 1992, but they gave him a female companion, and the character is pretty damn successful. I think comics should take the shotgun approach about making new characters. Keep trying in creating a new ones who resonate with fans.

Anyway, back to Superman himself. Again, as a POC, I'd say this is not the character to tinker with. Superman's perceived whiteness never bothered my non-white self. In Superman's case, I think he'd benefit from having a wider array of supporting characters and allies. One of the biggest gripes I've read about the DCEU Superman is that among people he cares about, he has Lois, his mom, and... that's about it. How greatly could potential Superman sequels have benefited if there were interesting support characters?

There is also long-term effects this could have on the franchise. Doctor Who, Star Wars and Ghostbusters were all criticized for their perceived SJW agendas and leftist politics. People complained that those characters were no longer fictional characters that starred in fictional stories, they were appropriated symbols for political agendas. What makes you think that changing Superman's skin color won't cause a backlash or upset the fanbase? The moment you change a fundamental aspect of Superman, that means Superman stops feeling like a real person and just feels like a faceless, impersonal concept that can be changed at an author's whims and subjected to a political agenda. People want their fictional characters to feel like actual, human beings. That's why they are, to varying extents, opposed to change in their identities and attitudes.

[Joker Venom]

You should look at this at a case-by-case basis. Frankly, white Aquaman was already considered a joke. They figured they needed to give the character a big rehaul because they figured being true or true-ish to the character was going to fail miserably. He's a guy who needed image rehab, and changing him from looking like a dorky Swedish guy to being played by a guy who played a lot of cool and manly roles doesn't hurt.

Creating new characters is hit and miss. I'd argue it's mostly miss, but if you quit trying altogether, then you're guaranteeing future failures. They didn't make the Joker female in 1992, but they gave him a female companion, and the character is pretty damn successful. I think comics should take the shotgun approach about making new characters. Keep trying in creating a new ones who resonate with fans.

Anyway, back to Superman himself. Again, as a POC, I'd say this is not the character to tinker with. Superman's perceived whiteness never bothered my non-white self. In Superman's case, I think he'd benefit from having a wider array of supporting characters and allies. One of the biggest gripes I've read about the DCEU Superman is that among people he cares about, he has Lois, his mom, and... that's about it. How greatly could potential Superman sequels have benefited if there were interesting support characters?

Agreed. Besides, if they weren't constantly taking chances with new characters, the medium as a whole would not even exist. So saying that arguing for creating new characters is being disingenuous is total and utter rubbish. Th fact that superheroes exist at all nullifies it. Without that we'd never have had the Silver Age DC characters, who revived superhero comics when they were dying out. We'd never have had the first decade of the Marvel Universe, which took the superhero concept on its head and pushed it forward. All of that came from trying something new. Taking an 80 year old character and arbitrarily changing his ethnicity does NOT fall into the same category.

[HeroVladimir93]

Agreed. Besides, if they weren't constantly taking chances with new characters, the medium as a whole would not even exist. So saying that arguing for creating new characters is being disingenuous is total and utter rubbish. Th fact that superheroes exist at all nullifies it. Without that we'd never have had the Silver Age DC characters, who revived superhero comics when they were dying out. We'd never have had the first decade of the Marvel Universe, which took the superhero concept on its head and pushed it forward. All of that came from trying something new. Taking an 80 year old character and arbitrarily changing his ethnicity does NOT fall into the same category.

The people who opposed a change to Superman's race/gender/sexuality/political preference/whatever would be accused of being sexist/racist/homophobe/whatever. That is not true. We simply don't want Superman's history to be disrespected and his legacy to be tarnished by what reeks of a political agenda. Changing a fundamental aspect of Superman would not be a reference to Superman's long history or an attempt to further develop the character; it would be just be a publicity stunt, plain and simple.

[KingDragonlord]

He's my favorite character and I don't like it when they change anything about him. I didn't like it when they changed the shorts or when they made him wear that ridiculous armor or when they made him brooding and emo. I say keep characters the way they are. You want a person of color thats Superman, make a new character thats a person of color that's like Superman. Put him in his own setting where he's the big kahuna and everyone looks up to him. Do something interesting with it.

Lets get down to the heart of it. You're proposing this because on some level you think these characters are owed to minority populations. Otherwise this would be a completely arbitrary thing to propose. I don't think anybody is owed existing comic book characters. What they're owed if anything is better representation going forward.

[KingDragonlord]

He ripped down dilapidated housing to force a city to build more suitable ones for their less fortunate people. He terrorized businessmen government officials who made life a living hell for poor people. He threw wife beaters out of windows. Superman believes truth, justice, and the American way not as they are, but as they could and should be. I don't think this is even remotely a reason to say a person of color can't be Superman.

He hasn't been that Superman in a long time. The Superman of today would not be as brutal or as destructive and is certainly not as radical.

[Mistah K88]

Personally, I wouldn't care much for it...

While Superman's...skin tone isn't as important to the character as Old Money Bruce Wayne, he has reached that level of iconism that it'd feel rather forced...Hell I'm one of the few people who prefer the red trunk s as Superman was a template of that superhero outfit) However, because we rarely see his supporting cast used outside of Lois, the Kents, and possibly Jimmy, the rest of the cast can be played with easily. I didn't care about Perry White's actor in the recent outings. Hell, I preferred black Cat Grant in the recent animated Death of Superman movie (it definitely made me pay attention to her more than usual) but I'd say Superman is at the level where you can't even change his hair color. A blonde Clark Kent? Disgusting, a jet black haired Steve Lombard? who cares.

[KingDragonlord]

.

To make it simple everything goes back to golden and silver age and those characters were not made to reflect the real world. Those characters represent concepts and characters most fans want to see and back catalog books and products for company so putting out popular Superman book makes DC more money than Sideways book that is as popular. Companies have two choices mostly for character they want to stick

1. Create Legacy minority(or new character) and have them replace the original character for awhile which upsets fans
2. Make the original character a minority when the medium provides a chance for it ala New 52 or movies like Aquaman which also upset fans

Creating legacy character seems like good idea until you remember that everything goes back to gold and silver age.Superhero Comics are super nostalgia based so new or even legacy concepts are hard to stick. Why not create Kryptonian of color but Calvin Ellis and Val Zod exist are not around. Because Jessica Cruz and Simon Baz are already not around, It isn't just minority characters Wally West isn't around again. Which bring us to my point



If Justice League was created today it wouldn't look like this, If X-men or Avengers were created today it wouldn't look like its original version and despite everyone of those groups looking more diverse than before when books go back to their core (which they have to keep fresh) the teams all look at certain way. If you want real lasting impact you have change one of golden or silver age characters. If you are putting characters in modern setting you have chance to fix one of comics biggest mistakes and make characters reflect the real world. An Alien Immigrant from another planet doesn't have to be white nor does kid from Brooklyn New York. Aquaman can be Polynesian make a nearly billion dollars and prove his skin color doesn't matter but a good story does.

Comics are just going through a phase. In the 80's and 90's all kinds of new concepts thrived and some of the best of those have survived. This is not permanently a nostalgia business, and if it is, comic books will die and you won't want a piece of them anyway and turning the existing characters into minorities just as they're dying won't save them either. This will only last for so long then we'll have another creative age, or comics will be dead and you won't want to appropriate them anyway. Its during the next creative age that persons of color will really thrive. Trying to mess with the nostalgia isn't going to win fans.

[KingDragonlord]

We've already had Dean Cain play Superman for Four seasons on TV, if anyone minded him playing Clark it wasn't for him being 1/4 Japanese. Granted the other 3/4 is pretty White, but he most definitely falls into the POC umbrella.

Superman being caucasian isn't integral to the character. He was a baby from space found by Two kind farmers who raised him well. You change that too much, and you stop having Superman. But he (as well as the Kents) could be played by anyone without changing that formula.

Sorry to keep replying but this point keeps being made throughout the thread so I'm going to respond. Dean Cain basically looks white and he does a pretty good job of looking like Superman. If his asian heritage were more apparent I'm sure he wouldn't have gotten the part. He was cast because his asian heritage isn't apparent and it was probably further downplayed with makeup. They weren't trying to break new ground. They hired an actor who was a former football player so he was built to play Superman.

[Joker Venom]

Sorry to keep replying but this point keeps being made throughout the thread so I'm going to respond. Dean Cain basically looks white and he does a pretty good job of looking like Superman. If his asian heritage were more apparent I'm sure he wouldn't have gotten the part. He was cast because his asian heritage isn't apparent and it was probably further downplayed with makeup. They weren't trying to break new ground. They hired an actor who was a former football player so he was built to play Superman.

Exactly. I didn't even know Cain had any Asian heritage at all until he mentioned it in an interview during the first season of Lois & Clark. I'm sure it wasn't readily apparent to most people, so holding that up as an example is at best nebulous.

[Kuwagaton]

This is a complicated issue. The bigger the character, the harder to change, to me. Changing the colour of minor characters will not affect most people but doing that for major characters will cause chaos. I feel it is because of the environment we are today. I generally don't like it. If you are ok with a white character turning black then you have to be ok with a reversal or you are a hypocrite.

A black Steve Rogers is just as problematic as a white T'challa, sure.

If you want to write about a black superman, make your own or write about Steel.

Steel isn't really like Superman at all, though. The "make your own" thing, I think sometimes people miss that the problem with representation by way of separation is that having something separate and off to the side just makes it easier to be ignored and/or fail. "Oh they have a new character like Superman but black? Okay well, I'm just gonna go watch the real Superman." Not that I like imitations generally but I hope the example makes sense. People point to Miles now, how they used to point to Spawn. Where is Spawn? Who still cares? All of the popular characters now are decades older. Between 1987 and 2017, Superman had failed to meet expectations in four movies, with one cancelled project on top. How many times did they try anything fresher?

I thought he was cool and that was an alternate version. I never knew white Nike Fury but apparently, black Nick Fury is Nick Fury Jr.

Fury jr. was initially an extremely convoluted story to work the movie version into the mainline comics, who eventually became a much different and decent character in his own right. Yes, the movie version did come from the ultimate comics, but the MCU isn't based on ultimate Marvel. And Fury never would have taken off had they not decided to make that swap regardless.

There is also long-term effects this could have on the franchise. Doctor Who, Star Wars and Ghostbusters were all criticized for their perceived SJW agendas and leftist politics. People complained that those characters were no longer fictional characters that starred in fictional stories, they were appropriated symbols for political agendas. What makes you think that changing Superman's skin color won't cause a backlash or upset the fanbase?

There's nothing wrong with not wanting a race swapped Superman, but the people who launch death threats over black men in magical Asgard or Asians in a far off galaxy just aren't worth appeasing. Irrational doesn't produce rational and fickle doesn't produce loyal.

The moment you change a fundamental aspect of Superman, that means Superman stops feeling like a real person and just feels like a faceless, impersonal concept that can be changed at an author's whims and subjected to a political agenda. People want their fictional characters to feel like actual, human beings. That's why they are, to varying extents, opposed to change in their identities and attitudes.

Byrne's Superman had no indication of renouncing citizenship. Tom Welling was nothing like the character drawn by Shuster or the character from the original Superboy comics. Cavill wouldn't turn Amy Adams fat to teach her a lesson. None of them would conceivably turn electric blue, etc. The loyalty I mentioned can hold up through things like that though. People can get fed up and drop but that mostly is a quality issue.

A blonde Clark Kent? Disgusting, a jet black haired Steve Lombard? who cares.

I don't even like when they change a characters hair color for no reason. You want to make a Superman movie? Get a guy that looks like Superman.

George Reeves was blonde and out of shape. That's not how Superman looks. Val Kilmer was a blonde Batman. Arnold Schwarzenegger was the wrong skin tone, hair color, and accent, but he's still the most significant actor attributed to Conan the Cimmerian, a character older than Superman.

[KingDragonlord]

Steel isn't really like Superman at all, though. The "make your own" thing, I think sometimes people miss that the problem with representation by way of separation is that having something separate and off to the side just makes it easier to be ignored and/or fail. "Oh they have a new character like Superman but black? Okay well, I'm just gonna go watch the real Superman." Not that I like imitations generally but I hope the example makes sense. People point to Miles now, how they used to point to Spawn. Where is Spawn? Who still cares? All of the popular characters now are decades older. Between 1987 and 2017, Superman had failed to meet expectations in four movies, with one cancelled project on top. How many times did they try anything fresher?

Well I'm sorry if its not happening fast enough for you but you're not getting Superman. You're not owed Superman. You point to Spawn's failure. Spawn was a success in his time and only fell out of fashion when the Dark age ended. Other characters of color, Storm and Black Panther have been in the movies in this decade. Black Panther in particular had a really successful movie. I'm sorry if its a slow process but forcing it doesn't make things right. You can't just coopt our characters for a political agenda.

There's nothing wrong with not wanting a race swapped Superman, but the people who launch death threats over black men in magical Asgard or Asians in a far off galaxy just aren't worth appeasing. Irrational doesn't produce rational and fickle doesn't produce loyal.

There are extremists in all camps. SJWs do their fair share of getting people fired for the smallest infractions. And thats not counting the violence of Antifa. Lets stick to arguing the points rather than arguing who's more extreme.

Byrne's Superman had no indication of renouncing citizenship. Tom Welling was nothing like the character drawn by Shuster or the character from the original Superboy comics. Cavill wouldn't turn Amy Adams fat to teach her a lesson. None of them would conceivably turn electric blue, etc. The loyalty I mentioned can hold up through things like that though. People can get fed up and drop but that mostly is a quality issue.

The renouncing citizenship was a stupid political stunt by one writer.

Shuster and the fat Lois were both the early days of Superman when they were still figuring out the character. A big difference from the well defined 80 year old character that exists today. And the electric blue Superman was not popular with the fans. I know I was one of those fans. The electric blue Superman proves the rule about not tampering with the character.

George Reeves was blonde and out of shape. That's not how Superman looks. Val Kilmer was a blonde Batman. Arnold Schwarzenegger was the wrong skin tone, hair color, and accent, but he's still the most significant actor attributed to Conan the Cimmerian, a character older than Superman.

So? Hollywood is notorious for getting details wrong and pissing off fans? Whats your point? Batman Beyond isn't held up as some great movie. The old Superman TV show isn't revered. Im personally not a Conan fan.

So Hollywood does things wrong so it should be allowed to do something else wrong?

[Jackalope89]

It would depend on the Superman.

Clark Kent Supes? Nah. I don't like white washing characters, but I'm not a fan of color swapping either.

But Kalel, Calvin Ellis of Earth 23? Sure.

Hernan Guerra of Gods and Monsters? Nope.

Should I keep going?

[Johnny Thunders!]

For my entire life I have looked at the original Justice League and never seen anyone of my race, besides in that generic "human" sense. Still it didn't matter and I looked beyond and found what was essential in the character. I think it would be important to make Clark Kent Asian, Native, Indian, Black, Mestizo,,, whatever! I don't see it as a stunt I see it as challenging people to see the character for what the character is at it's core. What I hate more is when they change the race of everyone else but the main character. (CW Flash and the new Holland Spiderman) I think that is more insulting because it suggests that something essential would be lost if the color of the main character changed. White Panther would be different than Black Panther, it's not the same thing but Superman is just Superman. That can be anybody in my book. Plus, wasn't Superman supposed to be a swarthy rebuke to the Aryan Superman of the Nazi party?

[Kuwagaton]

Yeah, and I guess it's no secret though that idea has been somewhat buried in thousands of editions. Nazi Germany publicists even commented on it.

Well I'm sorry if its not happening fast enough for you but you're not getting Superman. You're not owed Superman.

Um... I already "have" Superman and separately speaking about changing him to appeal to different demographics in particular, it's been done. Val, Hernan, Calvin, etc. All we're really speaking about is a main line version. If it never happens I'm not botherered, as I've indicated.

You point to Spawn's failure. Spawn was a success in his time and only fell out of fashion when the Dark age ended. Other characters of color, Storm and Black Panther have been in the movies in this decade. Black Panther in particular had a really successful movie. I'm sorry if its a slow process but forcing it doesn't make things right. You can't just coopt our characters for a political agenda.

"Our" includes all fans. But also as indicated by many of us, there's an idea of not forcing Superman to be one thing or the other even if others can't help but feel that way.

Lets stick to arguing the points rather than arguing who's more extreme.

It's absolutely a factor in the collective public response to this particular topic. Ironically those examples you provided are not. But it's fair to discuss precedence related to presenting these characters.

The renouncing citizenship was a stupid political stunt by one writer.

There's never just one person to blame or praise in these decisions, but that's not the point.

So? Hollywood is notorious for getting details wrong and pissing off fans? Whats your point? Batman Beyond isn't held up as some great movie. The old Superman TV show isn't revered. Im personally not a Conan fan.

You say Batman Beyond and I assume you mean Forever. It was a popular movie that brought in a ton of money, and Kilmer's features were a non factor in most criticisms. Same with Conan. As for the tv show... I took a second to answer honestly, but I can't believe you're being honest in saying that show isn't revered.

So Hollywood does things wrong so it should be allowed to do something else wrong?

Because something being accepted and tolerated begs the questions of what is too far and why.

[Ascended]

Plus, wasn't Superman supposed to be a swarthy rebuke to the Aryan Superman of the Nazi party?

Well, he was created by a couple poor Jewish kids, so yeah there's definitely a rebuke in the character's DNA, though I think a bigger part of it might be a "revenge of the poor man" sort of thing. Clark is kind of a nazi rebuke just by being what and who he is, but I suspect S&S created him more through the lens of the economic classes; the champion of the oppressed going to bat against corrupt rich and powerful, standing up for the little guy who couldn't do it himself.

Captain America was also designed partially as a response to the nazi; Steve Rogers was a blue eyed blonde man, the nazi ideal, to insult them.