Was Rebirth just geared to get rid of New52 Wonder Woman and Superman?

[Yoda]

So the take away should be regardless of your preferred flavor of Superman, DC Editorial will inevitably decide it's the reason why he's not as popular as Batman and say mean things about it.

At least we aren't Wally West fans.

[SiegePerilous02]

I don't remember who but someone on these very message boards went to a comic convention not long after Rebirth happened and said the people at the DC booth were more or less gloating about how the "real" Superman was back. I think there were a lot of people at DC who hated New 52 and couldn't wait to get things back to the way they were. Hence why the transition between the two versions of Superman were so sloppy. New 52 Supes was thrown under the bus, no question. There was no "merger". No real elements of New 52 Superman still remain except maybe the death of his parents and by the time Doomsday Clock is done they may even undo that. I've stopped reading mainstream books both because I liked New 52 and hated the way he was treated but also because I just don't know what his history is anymore.

Man, they're (unsurprisingly) no better than us.
it takes quite a pair of stones to declare a version of Superman is more "real" than a version created by Morrison modeled after after the Siegel and Shuster original. Particularly if the one they are talking about is the post-Crisis Superman, who certainly can be argued as being a classic version, but definitely not the classic.

[HeroVladimir93]

Man, they're (unsurprisingly) no better than us.
it takes quite a pair of stones to declare a version of Superman is more "real" than a version created by Morrison modeled after after the Siegel and Shuster original. Particularly if the one they are talking about is the post-Crisis Superman, who certainly can be argued as being a classic version, but definitely not the classic.

Creators, much like fans, are bound to play favorites. They are only human, after all. They can take their favorite version of a character and prop them up or propel them forward. Ever since his introduction in the 1930s, Superman has been reimagined countless times and will continue being reimagined for the foreseeable future. As much I like the post-Crisis Superman and I'm glad he's back, I'm gonna rub my victory in the faces of fans who genuinely liked New 52 Superman, especially because there were good stories in that era, like Superman Unchained and The Final Days of Superman.

[Sacred Knight]

Hell I think that's the reason Morrison and Didio brought the early New 52 version back in Sideways. Just a little way to say "hey he's not dead, he exists and is out there somewhere concretely". Because they liked him. Sometimes its as simple as that with creators.

[superduperman]

Man, they're (unsurprisingly) no better than us.
it takes quite a pair of stones to declare a version of Superman is more "real" than a version created by Morrison modeled after after the Siegel and Shuster original. Particularly if the one they are talking about is the post-Crisis Superman, who certainly can be argued as being a classic version, but definitely not the classic.

I honestly think they are divided as we are about what his history should be. I also think the real reason Batman is more popular is simply because he is more simplified. His parents were killed as they left a movie theater and he dedicates his life to fighting crime after that. It's a pretty simple origin. Compare that to Superman who has to account for his entire childhood. Was he Superboy? What did Krypton look like? Does Krypto exist? Was he a member of the Legion? What age did his powers develop? Was Lex also from Smallville? I could put ten Superman fans in a room and get ten different answers to all of those questions. That's the problem. There's no agreement on what his history should be. Even the marriage question divides fans some 20 years after it was done. As New 52 proved.

[Osiris-Rex]

Cause I'm not seeing any other major changes to the existing characters. If that the case then that's the second or third time they've had major revisions whilst other characters stayed relatively the same so I ask: Why always them? Superman was killed a d merged with a doppelganger, Diana's whole history was made a lie. Again. Why the cycles of change and reversion?

Rebirth Supergirl is the same Supergirl as the New 52 Supergirl, other than changing her costume and calming her down some.

[_Beautiful_Temptress_]

The reason why DC erased smww is because this "couple" became the most disastrous. DC is very actively promoted and added them to almost all comics. And even drama and trick with break up Clark and Diana failed to attract attention. Their comic also had no success and sold worse, than all the other comics with and about Superman.

Justice League Action is one of the worst animated series. As most users wrote, the only thing that was good in this animated series is humor, everything else is terrible. Even if it were the second season, then it would show the relationship Superman and Lois Lane. It said the producer of this cartoon.

The success of DOS and ROTS only proved that people are not interested in the couple that DC imposed 5 years. DOS has a box office dispute more than all the cartoons featuring New 52 Superman. JL War in which Clark's relationship with Diana was not shown had a cash dispute more than the cartoons in which the relationship was shown.

And these" relationships " are not the only ones that have ceased to exist in Rebirth.

[DochaDocha]

Justice League Action is one of the worst animated series. As most users wrote, the only thing that was good in this animated series is humor, everything else is terrible. Even if it were the second season, then it would show the relationship Superman and Lois Lane. It said the producer of this cartoon.

Let's ignore the two (or however many) references to their relationship for a moment. JLA was a 10-minute kid's show, so it was never going to be very narrative- or drama-heavy. But as soon as you put it in that context, I think their Superman is pretty good. The two-minute short about knowing thine enemy pretty much captures Superman's awesomeness that narrative-driven shows like JLU and even Young Justice were largely unwilling to do. The episode when he beats Steppenwolf, and ends up with the higher enemy defeat tally than Barda or Batman without powers put a smile on my face that just hasn't happened often in TV animation. I don't think their Superman was perfect, but their take on Supes seemed far less apologetic than stuff that Alan Burnett, Bruce Timm, Dwayne McDuffie (RIP) had put out.

Considering that my other favorite Supes stories from the time seemed to come from the Lego games, I wonder if humor is just a better contextual setting for Superman than many Superman writers realize.

EDIT: Sorry for going off topic a bit. I just really liked JLA's Supes, in general, because whereas some of the names I listed above actually went out of their way to explain that they wrote Supes from an angle of showing him to be lesser than whatever perceived notion they think people have of Superman, I feel like JLA rolled with the punches and tried to give us the Supes they thought people expected: top notch, second to none. Also, while Supes wasn't really the star of JLA, I felt like it was just easier to make an uncompromised version of Superman, for many writers, by not making him "the guy." Some of my favorite takes on Supes in JLU, for instance, was when he was off-screen or not prominently featured.

[Sacred Knight]

The reason why DC erased smww is because this "couple" became the most disastrous. DC is very actively promoted and added them to almost all comics. And even drama and trick with break up Clark and Diana failed to attract attention. Their comic also had no success and sold worse, than all the other comics with and about Superman.

Justice League Action is one of the worst animated series. As most users wrote, the only thing that was good in this animated series is humor, everything else is terrible. Even if it were the second season, then it would show the relationship Superman and Lois Lane. It said the producer of this cartoon.

The success of DOS and ROTS only proved that people are not interested in the couple that DC imposed 5 years. DOS has a box office dispute more than all the cartoons featuring New 52 Superman. JL War in which Clark's relationship with Diana was not shown had a cash dispute more than the cartoons in which the relationship was shown.

And these" relationships " are not the only ones that have ceased to exist in Rebirth.

Virtually none of these statements are true. 3 years after its done, the hyperbole and outright falsehoods are still going strong. It did attract attention, and the comic did sell well.

[Adekis]

I honestly think they are divided as we are about what his history should be. I also think the real reason Batman is more popular is simply because he is more simplified. His parents were killed as they left a movie theater and he dedicates his life to fighting crime after that. It's a pretty simple origin. Compare that to Superman who has to account for his entire childhood. Was he Superboy? What did Krypton look like? Does Krypto exist? Was he a member of the Legion? What age did his powers develop? Was Lex also from Smallville? I could put ten Superman fans in a room and get ten different answers to all of those questions. That's the problem. There's no agreement on what his history should be. Even the marriage question divides fans some 20 years after it was done. As New 52 proved.

Yeah, I think that's pretty accurate. Batman's permutations are basically all accounted for in the character's development. It's easy to say "well, at first Bruce was kind of a reckless gentleman adventurer, then he became more mature when Dick came along, then many years later he started to get more serious since crime got more intense and Dick wasn't around as much to lighten the mood, got even more serious upon losing Jason, regains a balanced professionalism alongside Tim, and now occasionally flits into being a jerk for a while before snapping out of it." There's no giant continuity issues there.

Superman's changes through the ages aren't marked by different sidekicks or visual elements of his appearance so much as through continuity changes, which is a really major problem. Like Yoda said, sooner or later, any given element of the character could become "the thing we need to change about Superman," as if there's some magical formula for Superman that DC has somehow just never hit, unlike Batman, who's flexible enough to be successful in a dozen very distinct ways. It's totally bunk of course.

Both Superman and Wonder Woman during the post-Flashpoint era were phenomenal. Neither needed to or should have gone away. Of course, while both pre-Flashpoint Superman was... in trouble, no doubt in my mind, he definitely wasn't hurting so bad that the only solution was a reboot. At the same time of course, the reboot provided stability for a longer period of time than the very ephemeral and changing backstory of pre-Flashpoint Superman ever had, so there's that I guess.

I think at this point, Superman's backstory changing all the time is the norm. That's definitely part of the problem too. I don't know how DC should solve it, except maybe to just stop rebooting or retconning Superman - but they missed their big chance to stop it with the New 52 Superman they totally discarded. It's not great.

[Miles To Go]

Both Superman and Wonder Woman during the post-Flashpoint era were phenomenal. Neither needed to or should have gone away.

Subjective.

[superduperman]

I think at this point, Superman's backstory changing all the time is the norm. That's definitely part of the problem too. I don't know how DC should solve it, except maybe to just stop rebooting or retconning Superman - but they missed their big chance to stop it with the New 52 Superman they totally discarded. It's not great.

I've stopped trying to convince myself that he's ever going to have a carved in stone origin that lasts for all time. I think we're past the point where that's possible now. New 52 was kind of it and they blew it. But I also think that's one of the main reasons he has a hard time finding a new audience. Nobody wants to read about a character who will have a different history in a decade or less. So they focus all the attention on Batman. I was actually surprised they got rid of Year One with him because it's the first major change they've made in over 20 years that actually stuck. Things like the marriage and the death are probably the only things that will be forever stable with Superman. Everything else, from his power development, to his time with the Legion, to even whether or not his parents are still alive into his career, will be up for revision in the future.

[Digifiend]

Rebirth Supergirl is the same Supergirl as the New 52 Supergirl, other than changing her costume and calming her down some.

That's mainly because there wasn't previously a post-Crisis Kara Zor-El. The 90s Supergirl used the pre-Crisis version's civilian name Linda Danvers but was actually not Kara, but something called Matrix.

[Vordan]

That's mainly because there wasn't previously a post-Crisis Kara Zor-El. The 90s Supergirl used the pre-Crisis version's civilian name Linda Danvers but was actually not Kara, but something called Matrix.

Oh there was. Loeb reintroduced her with The Girl from Krypton in his Superman/Batman run.

I've stopped trying to convince myself that he's ever going to have a carved in stone origin that lasts for all time. I think we're past the point where that's possible now. New 52 was kind of it and they blew it. But I also think that's one of the main reasons he has a hard time finding a new audience. Nobody wants to read about a character who will have a different history in a decade or less. So they focus all the attention on Batman. I was actually surprised they got rid of Year One with him because it's the first major change they've made in over 20 years that actually stuck. Things like the marriage and the death are probably the only things that will be forever stable with Superman. Everything else, from his power development, to his time with the Legion, to even whether or not his parents are still alive into his career, will be up for revision in the future.

Even though I enjoyed the Wolfman Man and Superman and am moderately curious about Miller’s upcoming Year One the fact that both were origins again really irritates me. Why the **** do we get so many origin stories? Is no one interested in telling a standalone story about a Superman that isn’t just starting out? I’m so sick of seeing Smallville and the Kents over and over and OVER again. Can we PLEASE get some focus on Metropolis for once? On a villain other than Lex Luthor?

[superduperman]

Oh there was. Loeb reintroduced her with The Girl from Krypton in his Superman/Batman run.

Even though I enjoyed the Wolfman Man and Superman and am moderately curious about Miller’s upcoming Year One the fact that both were origins again really irritates me. Why the **** do we get so many origin stories? Is no one interested in telling a standalone story about a Superman that isn’t just starting out? I’m so sick of seeing Smallville and the Kents over and over and OVER again. Can we PLEASE get some focus on Metropolis for once? On a villain other than Lex Luthor?

To top it all off, I don't think Year One is even canon!