Page 1 of 11 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 153
  1. #1
    Spectacular Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    146

    Default Either getting Pre Crisis or Post Crisis settled is the key to fixing Superman.

    The Superman fans are divided. Some like the Silver age pre Crisis Superman, think Chris Reeves. Philosophically, he's Siperman disguised as Clark Kent. Clark Kent doesn't exist. So he's a bumbling idiot who trips over his shoelaces.

    Where as you have Post Crisis Superman where Clark Kent is disguised as Superman. He's Clark Kent, raised on Kent values. Superman is the disguise. Think Superman animated series and Smallville.

    There have been attempts to mix the two i.e. Bendis with Silver age mixed with Post Crisis style. But it isn't necessarily working. So, if you were in charge of getting Superman character off the ground again, which version of him would be best going forward, Silvervage Pre Crisis or Post Crisis. Side note, please get rid of the trunks lol.

  2. #2
    Ultimate Member Sacred Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    16,418

    Default

    This is why I think they should create/use another Superman. Embrace that these--despite them being often times subtle--differences indeed split the fandom and instead of trying to combine them, separate them entirely. For the main line stick with the post-Crisis flavor. Take more pre-Crisis themes as the other one. I know that brings about the question: Why Superman? Why does he get this treatment and not others? Well one, Superman's a bit unique in this regard. No other fandom is really divided like this outside of mythoi with actual different people in the main role (Barry/Wally). Two, Superman can support it. He's not AS popular as he used to be by any stretch, but the concept and mythos can carry quite a few books still, this much is proven. Three, well, by all means do branch out and do it with other characters. In the end ideally you actually end up with a situation where all of fandom checks out both worlds. And indeed best of both worlds there.
    "They can be a great people Kal-El, they wish to be. They only lack the light to show the way. For this reason above all, their capacity for good, I have sent them you. My only son." - Jor-El

    "Now why don't we step up here and everybody get stepped up, and let's get some stepped up personal space up in this place." - Phillip Jacobs

  3. #3
    Spectacular Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    146

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sacred Knight View Post
    This is why I think they should create/use another Superman. Embrace that these--despite them being often times subtle--differences indeed split the fandom and instead of trying to combine them, separate them entirely. For the main line stick with the post-Crisis flavor. Take more pre-Crisis themes as the other one. I know that brings about the question: Why Superman? Why does he get this treatment and not others? Well one, Superman's a bit unique in this regard. No other fandom is really divided like this outside of mythoi with actual different people in the main role (Barry/Wally). Two, Superman can support it. He's not AS popular as he used to be by any stretch, but the concept and mythos can carry quite a few books still, this much is proven. Three, well, by all means do branch out and do it with other characters. In the end ideally you actually end up with a situation where all of fandom checks out both worlds. And indeed best of both worlds there.
    Why does Superman get this treatment? Simple answer. You had a successful silver age on screen translation in Chris Reeves Superman, but unfortunately, we've yet to have a successful post Crisis Superman on screen. All have short. Superman Returns, nope. Man of Steel, nice try, but still not it, btw, I think Henry Cavill should be kept and a soft reboot be done, but I digress, we've yet to have a successful live incarnation of a post Crisis Superman on screen.

  4. #4
    Astonishing Member Vordan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    2,802

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by objectivewatcher2013 View Post
    Why does Superman get this treatment? Simple answer. You had a successful silver age on screen translation in Chris Reeves Superman, but unfortunately, we've yet to have a successful post Crisis Superman on screen. All have short. Superman Returns, nope. Man of Steel, nice try, but still not it, btw, I think Henry Cavill should be kept and a soft reboot be done, but I digress, we've yet to have a successful live incarnation of a post Crisis Superman on screen.
    It’s weird because in some ways, the Donner Superman IS Post-Crisis Superman. I’ve been reading about Pre-Crisis Superman, and one of the main differences between Pre and Post is that Pre-Crisis has a pretty innate sense of right and wrong straight from the get go. The Kents do little to no moralizing with Clark in the issues I’ve read, Clark simply knows he has to do the right thing. One weird fact: Pre-Crisis Kents in the issues I've read weren’t farmers, they were shopkeepers, and I’m pretty sure the iconic Kent farmers aspect comes from the Reeves film.

    Byrne took a lot from the film for his reboot, (makes sense given how popular it was), so in a weird way the Reeves Superman feels more like Post Crisis Supes to me even though he predates Post Crisis Supes!

    The big fight between the versions of Superman is “how alien should he be?”. How much of the “weirdness” are they going to give Superman? Is he super smart as well as strong? Are all the varieties of Kryptonite present? Does he think of himself as Kal-El or Clark Kent? There’s a tug of war back and forth between whether those weird factors make him too unrelatable, and whether the weird factors are needed to keep him interesting. It’s a tough balancing act because I don’t think the Pre-Crisis Superman is of interest to people today, but the struggles Supes has had in the modern era shows that maybe the Post-Crisis Superman was TOO grounded to keep things exciting.

  5. #5
    Extraordinary Member SiegePerilous02's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    8,159

    Default

    Is Reeves really a pure Silver Age adaptation? it seems like some of the stuff that creeped into the post-Crisis incarnation (distilling things down to get rid of all other Kryptonian survivors and the Legion, the S-logo being the El family crest, Lois giving him the Superman name, businessman Lex, etc) have their roots in the movie. i think Byrne was pretty vocal about drawing inspiration from it, among other things. A.I. Jor-El and us being unable to get rid of him may have started there too.

    So we might have yet to have a pure pre-Crisis Superman on screen. For the movie I'd embrace Morrison's New 52 Superman, as the Golden age roots are just as relevant today as they were before, and gradually have him get more powerful and wiser. He shows more restraint, but "don't tug on Superman's cape" is still very much a thing. Do Supergirl and Legion spin offs. The only post-Crisis development I'd keep is Lois eventually learning the secret and them getting married, but they've been ship teased since like Day 1 and isn't a pure post-Crisis idea.

  6. #6
    Ultimate Member MajorHoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    19,827

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vordan View Post
    Itís weird because in some ways, the Donner Superman IS Post-Crisis Superman. Iíve been reading about Pre-Crisis Superman, and one of the main differences between Pre and Post is that Pre-Crisis has a pretty innate sense of right and wrong straight from the get go. The Kents do little to no moralizing with Clark in the issues Iíve read, Clark simply knows he has to do the right thing. One weird fact: Pre-Crisis Kents in the issues I've read werenít farmers, they were shopkeepers, and Iím pretty sure the iconic Kent farmers aspect comes from the Reeves film.
    I believe the Kents were originally farmers and may have become shop keepers as they got older.

  7. #7
    Mighty Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    1,199

    Default

    I used to read Superman back in the Silver Age from time to time, and I didn't much care for it, especially how much of it was devoting to his trying to maintain a secret identity. (The very fact that he actually had one wasn't a secret, which as Byrne pointed out, is pretty dumb.) If you want to see live-action Silver Age Superman, watch the TV show with George Reeves (which I also didn't much care for). Donner re-invented much of the character for the first movie, and it really took off from there.

  8. #8
    Spectacular Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    146

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vordan View Post
    Itís weird because in some ways, the Donner Superman IS Post-Crisis Superman. Iíve been reading about Pre-Crisis Superman, and one of the main differences between Pre and Post is that Pre-Crisis has a pretty innate sense of right and wrong straight from the get go. The Kents do little to no moralizing with Clark in the issues Iíve read, Clark simply knows he has to do the right thing. One weird fact: Pre-Crisis Kents in the issues I've read werenít farmers, they were shopkeepers, and Iím pretty sure the iconic Kent farmers aspect comes from the Reeves film.

    Byrne took a lot from the film for his reboot, (makes sense given how popular it was), so in a weird way the Reeves Superman feels more like Post Crisis Supes to me even though he predates Post Crisis Supes!

    The big fight between the versions of Superman is ďhow alien should he be?Ē. How much of the ďweirdnessĒ are they going to give Superman? Is he super smart as well as strong? Are all the varieties of Kryptonite present? Does he think of himself as Kal-El or Clark Kent? Thereís a tug of war back and forth between whether those weird factors make him too unrelatable, and whether the weird factors are needed to keep him interesting. Itís a tough balancing act because I donít think the Pre-Crisis Superman is of interest to people today, but the struggles Supes has had in the modern era shows that maybe the Post-Crisis Superman was TOO grounded to keep things exciting.
    The ultimate paradox.

  9. #9
    Spectacular Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    146

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SiegePerilous02 View Post
    Is Reeves really a pure Silver Age adaptation? it seems like some of the stuff that creeped into the post-Crisis incarnation (distilling things down to get rid of all other Kryptonian survivors and the Legion, the S-logo being the El family crest, Lois giving him the Superman name, businessman Lex, etc) have their roots in the movie. i think Byrne was pretty vocal about drawing inspiration from it, among other things. A.I. Jor-El and us being unable to get rid of him may have started there too.

    So we might have yet to have a pure pre-Crisis Superman on screen. For the movie I'd embrace Morrison's New 52 Superman, as the Golden age roots are just as relevant today as they were before, and gradually have him get more powerful and wiser. He shows more restraint, but "don't tug on Superman's cape" is still very much a thing. Do Supergirl and Legion spin offs. The only post-Crisis development I'd keep is Lois eventually learning the secret and them getting married, but they've been ship teased since like Day 1 and isn't a pure post-Crisis idea.
    But you see, Man of Steel kinda was New 52 Superman. Not a terrible movie by any stretch, but there was never a "Superman" moment in the movie. You know where he catches Lois in one arm and a helicopter in the other. That's where that rush of feels comes in, that never happened in Man of Steel . Btw, Hans Zimmer soundtrack was legendary. Hope they bring him back. I like the suit also, get rid of the trunks.

  10. #10
    Extraordinary Member SiegePerilous02's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    8,159

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by objectivewatcher2013 View Post
    But you see, Man of Steel kinda was New 52 Superman. Not a terrible movie by any stretch, but there was never a "Superman" moment in the movie. You know where he catches Lois in one arm and a helicopter in the other. That's where that rush of feels comes in, that never happened in Man of Steel . Btw, Hans Zimmer soundtrack was legendary. Hope they bring him back. I like the suit also, get rid of the trunks.
    It really wasn't a New 52 movie though. Clark was going through a more personal journey to discover his roots in the movie, there was nothing on his journalism or "champion of the oppressed" stuff in there, nor any of the Golden Age swagger. Cavill probably could have killed it if he was given that material, but he wasn't and some have accused the film of not letting him emote at all.

    Movie audiences haven't really gotten a fun Superman who kicks ass and has balls of steel but is still a super nice, charismatic guy who does the right thing because it's right. It might help restore his popularity if we got one. If it was presented in a well done, fun, (god help us) Marvel style tone people would eat that shit up.

  11. #11
    Astonishing Member Doctor Know's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,881

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by objectivewatcher2013 View Post
    But you see, Man of Steel kinda was New 52 Superman. Not a terrible movie by any stretch, but there was never a "Superman" moment in the movie. You know where he catches Lois in one arm and a helicopter in the other. That's where that rush of feels comes in, that never happened in Man of Steel . Btw, Hans Zimmer soundtrack was legendary. Hope they bring him back. I like the suit also, get rid of the trunks.
    The very first thing we see Superman do in MOS is save a bunch of trapped oil rig workers and hold up the rig to allow the helicopter escape. That's a Superman moment.

  12. #12
    Spectacular Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    146

    Default

    Most importantly, keep the Kents alive. There's no value in killong them off. You only kill them off unless you're killing off his Clark Kent persona , and he's full Kal El disguised as Clark Kent.

  13. #13
    Spectacular Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    146

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SiegePerilous02 View Post
    It really wasn't a New 52 movie though. Clark was going through a more personal journey to discover his roots in the movie, there was nothing on his journalism or "champion of the oppressed" stuff in there, nor any of the Golden Age swagger. Cavill probably could have killed it if he was given that material, but he wasn't and some have accused the film of not letting him emote at all.

    Movie audiences haven't really gotten a fun Superman who kicks ass and has balls of steel but is still a super nice, charismatic guy who does the right thing because it's right. It might help restore his popularity if we got one. If it was presented in a well done, fun, (god help us) Marvel style tone people would eat that shit up.
    Well, not to say go Marvel style per se, but keep in mind, you don't get any cornier than Captain America, and yet somehow he's cool, how? That's the key.

  14. #14
    Spectacular Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    146

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Doctor Know View Post
    The very first thing we see Superman do in MOS is save a bunch of trapped oil rig workers and hold up the rig to allow the helicopter escape. That's a Superman moment.
    When he rescued Lois from the burning escape pod was his best moment, but still not THE moment.

  15. #15
    Extraordinary Member SiegePerilous02's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    8,159

    Default

    I think, much like the Bruce Wayne/Batman dichotomy, the truth with Clark is somewhere in the middle. Both Superman and the Clark Kent who his co-workers see are aspects of himself, but they are not the full person. And even more interesting, he's even less likely to show people that full person than Bruce is, who at the very least shows it to Dick and Alfred. Clark is barely comfortable in letting Kara get too close, and it takes him a while to let his walls down around Lois. I think the "Clark is who I am, Superman is what I do" stuff gets rid of some of his interesting neurotic flaws.

    He has a lot of inherent loneliness, some of which is self imposed. I don't think the Kents need to be around for him to use "Clark Kent" that way. He's naturally inclined to do that. But Superman isn't 100% him either, because he's still keeping people at arm's length.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •