The Superman Family animated series that recently almost was

[Sacred Knight]

New 52 wasn't edgelord, and I'd love to see an interpretation like that animated. Neither is a Silver Age, very light-hearted mindset in projects wrong. There's a Superman for everyone, the fandom still doesn't have a live and let live mindset. Not like WB/DC gives any side of Superman fandom much of anything at this point anymore anyway. And really that's the main thing fans of Superman all-around should be upset about. The larger mismanagment.

[cookies]

Superman fans:


DC:



Superman fans:


I was a freaking child when Superman had his own series(Superman the animated series) without 64325678 other characters from DC butt in into his show and now I'm in my adulthood and married but Superman still can't have his own show with his family? I fell in love with superman because of that cartoon series. This is the only way if DC want younger people to care about Superman. I'm glad people still talking about this on Twitter, hopefully we can pull a Deadpool on this show.

[Vordan]

Allow me to be the contrarian.

I've been reading Superman comics since the early 1970s, and I've read stuff from every era from the Golden Age forward.

I am so glad Warner Bros. passed on this. It does look cute and adorable as people in this thread have said.

That is exactly what Superman does NOT need.

I am tired of everyone either rehashing the Silver Age or the Donner movies or both. No more cheesy, corny, old-fashioned, cringy Silver Age junk that only serves to make the character a parody of himself.

Superman is my favorite character, but for some reason everyone who does an adaptation of him looks to the past and wants to trap him there.

I just wish someone could understand Superman, make him relevant for today, and point him toward the future.

Did Brave and the Bold ruin Batman? Or Aquaman? I sure as hell don’t think so. If this whimsical take on Supes doesn’t appeal to you that’s fine, there are plenty of more serious takes. But Superman DOES need some material that appeals to kids. Not everything needs to be stupid Jesus references or “realistic” takes on a superpowered alien who looks like a white guy. If this did well it would encourage WB to view Superman as a profitable and valuable IP. And it sure as hell would be better than what we have right now where we have nothing. No movie is coming any time soon. No TV show is coming at the moment. No cartoon. No video game. We’re in the Golden Age of Superheroes in outside media and Supes has been absolutely butchered in non-comic adaptions.

[Vampire Savior]

This is not what I would have wanted to see from a Superman cartoon, even if I was a child. I tend to prefer action cartoons. For me, they would need to change the art style and lose the children, and I'm even considering this from the view of my 8 year old self. I always leaned toward the shows that were action oriented and had accompanying action figure lines (Justice League, Mega Man, Spider-Man, Batman: TAS, Superman: TAS, Power Rangers, Sailor Moon(!), Exosquad, and so on. Stuff like what this looks to be like never interested me as much, so a part of me is kind of happy this didn't get green lit.

[Comic-Reader Lad]

Did Brave and the Bold ruin Batman? Or Aquaman? I sure as hell don’t think so. If this whimsical take on Supes doesn’t appeal to you that’s fine, there are plenty of more serious takes. But Superman DOES need some material that appeals to kids. Not everything needs to be stupid Jesus references or “realistic” takes on a superpowered alien who looks like a white guy. If this did well it would encourage WB to view Superman as a profitable and valuable IP. And it sure as hell would be better than what we have right now where we have nothing. No movie is coming any time soon. No TV show is coming at the moment. No cartoon. No video game. We’re in the Golden Age of Superheroes in outside media and Supes has been absolutely butchered in non-comic adaptions.

No, the Brave and the Bold show didn't ruin Batman, but it aired between 2008-2011, while The Dark Knight & DK Rises were 2008 & 2012, so there was definitely a "cool" Batman depiction that was in the public eye that I'm sure a lot of kids saw.

However, the Batman Adam West show absolutely DID ruin Batman for decades until the Tim Burton movie was able to get the public to take him somewhat seriously. Then, you know what happened with the Schumacher movies. So, yes, the wrong depiction can indeed ruin a character -- especially when it's the only interpretation out there.

With Superman, there's even a more uphill battle for him to be accepted as cool given that all of pop culture media has depicted him as the ultimate boy scout for decades. For a lot of people, Superman is already outdated and uncool. This Superman Family cartoon looks like a parody/sendup of the character rather than a respectful interpretation. The Fleisher cartoons were fun, but they weren't making fun of the character or his tropes.

For me, the best way to handle Superman is to do it in the Young Justice style where it's generally serious and the stakes are real, but there can be lighthearted character moments as well. Greg Weisman has shown he can handle this type of thing with Gargoyles, Spectacular Spider-Man, and Young Justice -- all of which have been exceptionally well received. I'd love to see his take on a Superman series.

[Robanker]

To be entirely frank, while I understand the frustration with adhering to the Donner influence, more than an update, Superman needs a positive portrayal that upholds his traditional values. Be it aimed at children, adults or all ages, he needs SOME other media outing where he's a tried-and-true Superman. Not Injustice, not Man of Steel. If you love those, wonderful, the problem is neither seems to be willing to position Superman in a healthy place for fans to grasp. They either want to subvert him or discuss his status as a pop culture icon and character.

Right now, Superman is all powers, no substance and willing to turn into a mopey fascist. Or he's a good man who has to die for there to be a reason to care. That's what WB is telling their customers outside of comics.

I don't care if I'm not the target audience, but for the IP to actually survive, it needs to be treated like it's not something to be ashamed of. Batman the Animated Series and Batman: The Brave and the Bold can exist in tandem because both celebrate the character. They're both designed to draw people in, tell stories and make you a fan. Something like The Batman didn't appeal to me at all, but I can respect that a lot of people enjoyed it and, for what it's worth, it really did seem to be trying its best to reach a young audience at the time. I can respect that. I've met a lot of people who enjoyed it and while I won't watch another episode in my lifetime unless I have a kid and they want to, I'm so glad it was around to reach new people. Superman needs that. His last animated outing focused on his corner of the universe was Superman the Animated Series back in '96. He headlined a Legion show, but even then, it hardly lasted.

This show looked like a fun way to bring Superman into homes with younger fans or people looking for a more wholesome Superman experience. Is that playing it safe with Superman? One hundred percent. After Injustice, Man of Steel, BvS and Death/Reign of the Superman, perhaps "safe" isn't a bad way to dial things back and try a more daring approach later.

DC Superhero Girls hasn't undermined Wonder Woman or the dramatic appeal of that movie. Batman the Brave and the Bold hasn't dampened the appeal of the Arkham games. I don't see why a Superman Family animated series would really "ruin" the public perception of Superman any more than Superman Returns, MoS, BvS or Justice League hasn't shaken how most fans seem to decry that everyone can only think of Donner. It has to go both ways. Especially when concurrently people are exposed to the more controversial DCEU and Injustice takes. There's no counter balance outside the two animated movies where, you guessed it, he was murdered and came back. I would absolutely love for there to be a television series or video game geared more towards adults while also having a show for kids, but right now I'm willing to take either. I'd like some quality Superman media, I don't care who it's for, but I want it to inspire new fans who will want to write and draw the guy in 5-15 years instead of a bunch of kids who grew up thinking he's lame or a villain and write him as sidekick to Batman or a bar to surpass for Supergirl as has been on TV and in video games for a long, long time.

[ngroove]

Parasite, if that would be how he would be designed on cartoon, looks terrible.

Unless, that's what he would look like, after absorbing Supergirl's or any Super Person's, energy-life-strength-force, becoming more monstrous the more he absorbs.

But, if that's him 24/7, he looks terrible.

[JAK]

This would have to be respective as the two parties are in conflict over the course of action. They're not necessarily the same, similar to how this article has two quotes that would be attributed to Chris Arrant and Vinton Hueck separately. Notice that the Arrant description mentions that Hueck recruited Cheeks, where Hueck makes it sound more like they were paired. It's not a detailed explanation but Hueck says WB animation liked it and helped take it to DC, a sister company under the same parent of Warner Bros. The parent company isn't mentioned by him. And so we can say DC, because Hueck does, but it's hard enough at that. No one was named.

True, and a good point - we don't know how far along it got. Regardless, it's a shame that they'll chase NetherRealm around for yet another "Evil Superman" take, yet pass on this. I know I'm jumping to conclusions a bit (as I am wont to do on this topic), but that pattern shows the mindset of a perpetual 13 year old (them, not you, of course).

No, the Brave and the Bold show didn't ruin Batman, but it aired between 2008-2011, while The Dark Knight & DK Rises were 2008 & 2012, so there was definitely a "cool" Batman depiction that was in the public eye that I'm sure a lot of kids saw.

However, the Batman Adam West show absolutely DID ruin Batman for decades until the Tim Burton movie was able to get the public to take him somewhat seriously. Then, you know what happened with the Schumacher movies. So, yes, the wrong depiction can indeed ruin a character -- especially when it's the only interpretation out there.

With Superman, there's even a more uphill battle for him to be accepted as cool given that all of pop culture media has depicted him as the ultimate boy scout for decades. For a lot of people, Superman is already outdated and uncool. This Superman Family cartoon looks like a parody/sendup of the character rather than a respectful interpretation. The Fleischer cartoons were fun, but they weren't making fun of the character or his tropes.

For me, the best way to handle Superman is to do it in the Young Justice style where it's generally serious and the stakes are real, but there can be lighthearted character moments as well. Greg Weisman has shown he can handle this type of thing with Gargoyles, Spectacular Spider-Man, and Young Justice -- all of which have been exceptionally well received. I'd love to see his take on a Superman series.

Honestly, I think we spend way too much time trying to push Superman into the "cool" camp. I prefer him to be cool in the "Johnny Cash" way - where he's so far out that he's in. Don't conform, and if someone doesn't like it, it's *their* problem. Superman is a lot of different things, but we've tried running for the cool kids, and that just feels like the property is trying to be something it isn't. And I don't want to see that again.

Most adults have their own concept of who/what Superman is, and two+ movies of purposefully trying to break that mold and flush it down the toilet didn't change that.

Superman started out being marketed to kids. And while he absolutely shouldn't be marketed *just* to kids, I think we need to go back to that well. Build the new generation VERY early.

Superman's multi-media perception is in roughly the place where his comics perception was when New52 was about over. And it seems like the Supergirl version is wearing thin now, too, given that the showrunners are seemingly out to make him look bad (even if it's just to make Kara look good, the result is the same). A Rebirth would be great.

[Kon93]

superman to me is a simple concept, which is just being a good man, and doing the right thing. idc if it's goofy or serious, that should be the foundation, all will be well if they stay to it

[Miles To Go]

This is not what I would have wanted to see from a Superman cartoon, even if I was a child. I tend to prefer action cartoons. For me, they would need to change the art style and lose the children, and I'm even considering this from the view of my 8 year old self. I always leaned toward the shows that were action oriented and had accompanying action figure lines (Justice League, Mega Man, Spider-Man, Batman: TAS, Superman: TAS, Power Rangers, Sailor Moon(!), Exosquad, and so on. Stuff like what this looks to be like never interested me as much, so a part of me is kind of happy this didn't get green lit.

Not every kid is like you.

[Vampire Savior]

Not every kid is like you.

You don't say...

But guess what? I bet a whole lot of them are!

And you know what I thought about Superman when I was a kid?
"He's cool, but for a guy this powerful, his fights aren't good enough." Around Justice League season 2 when he fought Darkseid and Justice Lord Superman fought Amazo, I changed my mind. Seriously, give this guy all these powers and stuff and I think a lot of kids are going to want to see him throw down in a good action cartoon.

What I will say is that cool action cartoons, sadly, aren't in vogue with executives right now for whatever reason. So I can understand the creators pitching something like they did.

[dietrich]

At the very least if this is truly not going to happen as a cartoon, it absolutely should be a book in the Zoom line up.

have you read any of the Zoom or Ink Titles?

[Vampire Savior]

Superman doesn't need that kid. That's something that will appeal to dads, not kids. Kids, boys at least, are going to want to fantasize THEMSELVES as being like Superman. When you introduce that kid into the line up, you will confuse them and ultimately disinterest them. Kids don't fantasize about being family men and raising little boys. That's actually something girls are more into. You know, being a bride, playing house, and having a family. That's why things like cabbage patch kids and various baby dolls and homemaking toys like easy-bake-oven have been so popular with that demographic. When have you seen stuff like that successfully geared toward boys? Boys just do not fantasize about child rearing and managing a home. They fantasize much more often about fighting and having adventures.

With that kid there, a DAD, however, can fantasize himself as being like Superman, with his wife, his son, and a dog and protecting them and the world. But this cartoon doesn't look to be aimed at dads going by the visuals.

[dietrich]

Wait...what happened, now?!?

Oh don't mind me I'm just venting on how DC at times turns down good ideas and used that incident as an example of how WB and DC don't always agree.

WB asked DC to update the look of Robin in the comics to match the upcoming Burton movie which initially was meant to have a role for Robin [Dick since the story boards had the Graysons death scene] but Dc refused planning to stick Tim in the classic Robin costume for his debut.

This forced WB to commission a new costume themselves from Neal Adams for the movie. Upon seeing Neals design DC changed their minds and finally asked various artists to come up with designs for Tim's debut. When Robin was cut from the Burton movie DC then put in an offer to buy the Neal Adams redesign from Neal and Warner Bros and that's how we got an upgraded Robin.

But that was just me ranting. This cartoon would have been right up my street.

[JAK]

Superman doesn't need that kid. That's something that will appeal to dads, not kids. Kids, boys at least, are going to want to fantasize THEMSELVES as being like Superman. When you introduce that kid into the line up, you will confuse them and ultimately disinterest them. Kids don't fantasize about being family men and raising little boys. That's actually something girls are more into. You know, being a bride, playing house, and having a family. That's why things like cabbage patch kids and various baby dolls and homemaking toys like easy-bake-oven have been so popular with that demographic. When have you seen stuff like that successfully geared toward boys? Boys just do not fantasize about child rearing and managing a home. They fantasize much more often about fighting and having adventures.

With that kid there, a DAD, however, can fantasize himself as being like Superman, with his wife, his son, and a dog and protecting them and the world. But this cartoon doesn't look to be aimed at dads going by the visuals.

There's a difference between ages, though. Younger boys would be more in for this (I would have), and that'd be fine. It doesn't all have to appeal to the 12-18 boys crowd. And by your own logic, this would have some cross appeal to boys and girls: parents would potentially enjoy the semi-Incredibles dynamic, kids would enjoy various aspects of all of it (both Superman *and* Jon). And why does a family dynamic mean there won't be any adventures or even some fighting? You think the cartoon would be nothing but child rearing and home management? C'mon, that's silly.

If "The Incredibles" can work, this can work, imo. Superman may not "need that kid," but Jon's not a detriment.