What would be Superman's own personal favorite movie/show about himself?

[DrNewGod]

Provided that Myxlpltk returns Superman to his own world at the precise moment that he was taken away from it (meaning he didn't lose any time and failed to save any lives as a result), I think Superman would actually be grateful to Myx for this interesting and enjoyable experience.

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

You nailed that one Buried.

[Jim Kelly]

In which books can we read about this, Jim? Sounds fascinating.

On account of his resemblance to Superman, Kent is cast as the Man of Tomorrow in a new Hollywood picture, in the newspaper strip continuty---November 17, 1941 to February 14, 1942, collected in the first volume of SUPERMAN: THE DAILIES (the last stoy in the collection).

The same thing happens in SUPERMAN 196 (May 1967),"The Star of Steel," but this time Clark falls in love with his co-star, Lyrica Lloyd. I've remarked on this story a few times, because it was the first issue of the SUPERMAN title that I bought and it made a big impression on me. It hasn't yet been reprinted.

I'm sure there were other stories like this, because heroes going Hollywood seems to be one of the repeated plots in a lot of comics (and not just DC).

Superman himself, or rather Kal-El, got cast in a movie but not as Superman, when he returned to Krypton and met the stunning actress, Lyla Lerrol. That was in SUPERMAN 141 (November 1960), "Superman's Return to Krypton." I guess, the way that story turns out, Superman had no chance to see the finished project (unless Jor-El copied the video onto the hard drive of baby Kal-El's rocketship computer). He might have watched it with Lyla in the fantasy life he had in "For the Man Who has Everything"--SUPERMAN ANNUAL 11 (1985).

[The World]

I remember a Golden Age story where Superman found out some people were using his image for merchandising and what not and went berserk on the guys that were running the operation, but on the other hand you had him showing up for Superman parades in the silver age. I assume he'd be somewhere in the middle and not really care one way or the other about who's making an adaptation on him, though I'm pretty sure he'd scoff at the idea of him quitting as Superman to be with Lois.

[OpaqueGiraffe17]

Great thread. I agree that any adaptation where Doomsday kills him he’d probably not find much enjoyment in as much as I thought the recent animated two parter was great.
I think he’d be most fascinated by Syfy’s Krypton. That’s about his family’s past, stuff he likely doesn’t know. Only then he’d probably freak out when he learns Zod is his uncle.
He’d like the Donner movies but not love them. He’d probably think he was ooc at times.
The DCEU movies would be an unpleasant watch for him. The tornado scene would probably piss him off. BvS would open with his best friend being shot in the head, then his other best friend trying to kill him, and end with him getting Doomsday’d.
I think Smallville would also not be enjoyable, the teeny melodrama, seeing his dad die as a result of his own mistakes and seeing his toxic friendship with Lex fall apart.
He’d probably really enjoy the Dean Cain Lois and Clark show.
He’d probably like TAS well enough, .....well besides the bit with Bruce and Lois, lol.

But of course we can all agree he’d love Injustice games the most. The story, the violence, his character, he’d consider it all spot-on. He’d probably enjoy it best when playing the story mode it in the company of Billy Batson.

[Jim Kelly]

I remember a Golden Age story where Superman found out some people were using his image for merchandising and what not and went berserk on the guys that were running the operation, but on the other hand you had him showing up for Superman parades in the silver age. I assume he'd be somewhere in the middle and not really care one way or the other about who's making an adaptation on him, though I'm pretty sure he'd scoff at the idea of him quitting as Superman to be with Lois.

I don't know if this is the story you're thinking of, but the Superman adventure in ACTION COMICS No. 6 (November 1938) is a great satire, where a grifter tries to make money off Superman's image. I can see where this kind of lesson would have motivated Superman to protect himself legally against trademark infringement, since anyone could dress up as him and con people out of their money. Superman wouldn't want that. And maybe this is why he and Batman (who went through similar experiences) appeared at all those parades and charity events, to establish their brand and maintain their trademark through lawful use.

[Ascended]

On account of his resemblance to Superman, Kent is cast as the Man of Tomorrow in a new Hollywood picture, in the newspaper strip continuty---November 17, 1941 to February 14, 1942, collected in the first volume of SUPERMAN: THE DAILIES (the last stoy in the collection).

The same thing happens in SUPERMAN 196 (May 1967),"The Star of Steel," but this time Clark falls in love with his co-star, Lyrica Lloyd. I've remarked on this story a few times, because it was the first issue of the SUPERMAN title that I bought and it made a big impression on me. It hasn't yet been reprinted.

Man I straight up love it when you drop some knowledge, Jim.

Fleischer (its late, midterm weeks, screw spelling!) cartoons at the top. I think he'd enjoy L&C just as much, too (I usually dont), and the 90's cartoon would probably work for him also. Particularly good episodes, at least. I agree that the DCEU would be rough on him. Those films are far closer to the brutal reality he lives (as far as destruction and loss of life goes) and I doubt he'd appreciate the reminder of any of it. I can see him watching the end fight of MoS and thinking it's too close to home. And while this Superman has likely taken lives, it's not something he wants to be reminded of either.

But I think he'd feel uncomfortable, both with all the attention and with how each adaptation misses something important and crucial or changes his personal story.

Im reminded of Morrison's Superdoom.....I dont recall how Clark felt about that thing, but I imagine he'd feel similar, looking at our movies and shows. Just sort of grossed out by how we elevate and twist and celebrate the man's life (and death).

[DCStu]

I reckon he'd look at the old Christopher Reeve movie. Watch the scene where he turns back time and think to himself "Sigh, if only my life were that easy".

[DrNewGod]

I remember a Golden Age story where Superman found out some people were using his image for merchandising and what not and went berserk on the guys that were running the operation, but on the other hand you had him showing up for Superman parades in the silver age. I assume he'd be somewhere in the middle and not really care one way or the other about who's making an adaptation on him, though I'm pretty sure he'd scoff at the idea of him quitting as Superman to be with Lois.

He got rough with them because they tried to murder Lois when they thought she was about to expose her.

[Alan2099]

Superman's an old fashioned guy that likes happy endings, so any of the more recent negative adaptions he'd be against.

Also, I think he'd be a bit embarrassed by the Adventures of Superpup either that or he'd think Mxyzptlk was messing with him.

[stargazer01]

Speaking just for myself? I'm not put off by the destruction at all. I'm disappointed by it. I think it could've been more impactful and better applied in the film it was started in. More Miracle Man vs Kid Miracle Man and less Transformers The Movie. I personally thought it was a novel idea to explore a Superman level fight as two adults walking through a city made of Legos. I would've even appreciated seeing smaller, more quite moments of that sort of thing building towards the climax.

That said, it should be treated as a brush stroke rather than laying base coat with a roller because the fact of the matter is, it wasn't animation. And the closer true to life something is, the more uncomfortable most people get when stuff happens on screen that would make them uncomfortable in real life.

That's just how people work. We are sympathetic the more true to life a thing is. That's why most cartoon destruction doesn't bother us/we don't even clock it as happening. So, when you use that level of destruction in live action you have to be mindful of things like tone, color, and framing to get across whatever feeling you want. MOS sort of goes from impactful to desensitizing all in the same hour. I'd have like to see more anticipation built for it, and then have it be more focused and all around quicker. Use the brush for its intended reason.

I bothers me. Because I try to be fair to the portrayal of the character in all media. I try to not have double-standards, especially because kids are watching and they are smart. What kind of message are they going to get when they see Superman destroying a city so irresponsibly?




At least in Man of Steel, he was new to the job. He was Inexperienced and was trying to save everybody just like he also did in Death of Superman animated movie.

I think 'DoS' did it much better because it had more heart than MOS during that big Supes VS Zod fight. Yes, the devil is in the details.

[stargazer01]

Never in a million years, when I first saw the movie, did I imagine there would be so much controversy over the end. I mean maybe the neck break but I think the direction was blatant enough that Superman would endure criticisms about his actions.

But from the view of someone watching it as their own autobiography, I would imagine it's quite unflattering. Meeting the on screen Supermen would be a different thing though. I think he'd congratulate Cav El for his bravery and try to find some non judgmental way to take him through an operation seminar, since it's one guy with maybe 10 years and another who just finished his first week or so.

That's the thing some forget.. Superman was a total rookie superhero in MOS, so I can understand him not knowing exactly what to do.

I am not put off by the amount of destruction, but I was bored during parts of the final act because it felt like I was watching someone play a video game. If anything bothered me, it's mostly that it was bleak (not bad in itself), but then they would throw in inappropriate lighthearted scenes and not address the fact that half the city was smashed and thousands of people died. I guess the word I'm looking for, besides "boring," is "callous."

That said, the complaints that Superman was responsible for the destruction rings so hollow to me. I mean, there was literally a machine that was destroying the city that was causing most of the damage, and obviously Superman and the army were trying to stop it.

I think Superman would like the DC Lego movies, even though it's a caricature of Superman.

I think Snyder focused too much on the fight itself. He made sure Superman punched a lot.. probably due to criticisms that he didn't punch at all in Superman Returns.. And Snyder made sure to show so much destruction and maybe that was too much for some. He didn't have to show so much. He also didn't show Superman saving people other than Lois Lane.. People missed that because it shows a Superman that cares for individuals too not just the big stuff. Like Superman in the 'DoS' movie when he saved that kid while fighting Doomsday. He made sure to tell him everything was going to be ok. That's the Superman people want to see. yes the super fights are great (to me), but Superman also needs a lot of heart and moments of heroism to show how much he cares for everyone. It helps us to emotionally connect to him. Snyder totally missed that in his Superman movies. He thought showing Superman very depressed and alienated was the key..

[Superlad93]

Edit: never mind.

[stargazer01]

Again, it's just how the human brain tends to work. Destruction or violence in cartoons is easier to categorize as not real. This becomes harder when you're watching real people on screen. There's a greater chance for feeling uncomfortable with the level of violence or destruction.

In live action and almost nowhere else (at least not in quite the same way), this is something a filmmaker can use to generate a specific reaction from the audience, but they have to be careful and very deliberate in how they do it.

Check out this scene from the 1992 film, Reservoir Dogs, by Quentin Tarantino. He's a master of directing how the audience should react to violence movie to movie, and even scene to scene. In the original screening for Reservoir Dogs, when this scene below came on it was reported that people walked out of the theater feeling ill or too uncomfortable. But the funny thing Tarantino doesn't even show the act of violence on screen. His direction was so effective, and his understanding of how people understand and react to violence between real people that he only needed to imply an act to get a stronger reaction than most gore movies. He's very proud of this scene for the reaction it got.

My discussion is about the Superman portrayal in media, though. I personally found the violence is Death of Superman pretty graphic. A lot more than in MOS and BvS, I was shocked in a good way because it had a lot of realism and that sent the message that Doomsday was a real threat to the world. He was also a threat in BvS but lesser because we didn't see him killing people like he did in DoS. The action was more cartoon-ish, imo. So yes, depends how you show the violence. And I don't like very violent movies or gore. It's one of the reasons why I don't like the Tarantino movies. But I appreciated the more graphic violence in DoS because it showed how heroic and selfless Superman was.

[Superlad93]

Edit: Never mind. I'd rather not continue to derail the thread. So for the bit I've already derailed it.