"Classic superman"

[Thunder Agent]

@Ascended: Thank you! I will never understand why they didn't try to push that look in the comics and other media.

[Powerboy]

I recently ran into a thread. (https://community.cbr.com/showthread...e-about-Batman)
where the discussion was whether morrison's superman was superman at all.There i found insinuations that goldenage superman was too aggressive and too "man of action" to be superman. This made me rather uncomfortable. This is siegel and shuster's superman .That question lead to the discussion on dceu superman as well. My question is,
has the post crisis superman and donner superman left such an impact that we find anything different jarring, even the original golden age take?
How much of it is superficial ? For example the trunks debate.
Is the impact detrimental to the character?
If so, how much?
What version of the character do you think is the "classic superman" or you can say your favourite version ?
If you are a new or postcrisis fan, are you familiar with older takes and differences with superman you grew up with?
What is your opinion on the "classic" superman or the not my superman debate itself(i mean it's tiring) ?

I was once in an online discussion of what some of the greatest old shows and new shows were. The problem is that the discussion broke down over what counts as an old show and what counts as a new show. For people in a certain younger age group, Xena was an old show while I counted it as more in the new shows category compared to the style of older shows.

I think what counts as "classic" is going to be like that. For a lot of people, the Post-Crisis Superman is the classic Superman and anything that contradicts it is either Proto-Superman before he was properly developed or a throwback.

The Superman I grew up on was the Silver Age and then the Bronze Age although the Golden Age is my favorite now and I like a lot about the Post-Crisis era.

Although GA is my favorite, followed by Silver/ Bronze, I absolutely despise it when some of my fellows who grew up in that era go into a "Real Superman fans" tirade about how this or that version is not "Muh Superman" or doesn't count as a valid version.

I do think the Post-Crisis version has left an impact that is hard to go against because it's the version most readers today grew up on. I would personally prefer that DC had taken a Marvel approach only in the sense that it all happened in some sense. I know Marvel more recently may have finally done away with their older stuff. I don't follow new Marvel stuff so I really don't know. But, traditionally, the first appearance of Iron-Man in 1963 still happened, the first appearance of the Fantastic Four in 1961 still happened. They happened more recently and would have to have happened somewhat differently than originally told, but the history is relatively intact. I wish it was that way with DC, that everything, Golden, Silver/ Bronze, Post-Crisis and so on had all happened. But that bird had already flown the coup at DC back in the 1950s before I was even born and it's become a reboot and reboot within reboot nightmare for DC or at least for DC fans.

To give my answer to your question, for me, no the GA and Silver Age versions are not jarring or hard to accept because they are the ones I grew up on. But I can't answer for people who grew up on Post-Crisis and I don't know what age bracket your majority reader is in.

The tights debate is superficial. I think what is detrimental to the character is that he is such a icon. He's more than an icon. He's become a representation of deepest ideals for a lot of us. I think many people, when they say "That's not Superman" or "Not muh Superman" or "Superman would never do that", they mean that version or that act is going against a set of ideals they have of which he is a representation.

Also, a lot of it is nostalgia. When times change enough and the characters we read as children change enough, it becomes hard to even perceive the character as the same character we grew up on. Tony Stark as an overaged juvenile with the romantic skills of a twelve year old (but lots of money to compensate) is funny but a completely different character in a completely different universe than what he originally was. But, with Superman, it goes deeper because, for a lot of people, you can't even have a new version that deviates even a little from whatever version they have set in their minds as who he is, the one that is the representation of their ideals.

[Powerboy]

For me, while I really can't like (or even outright hate some of those depictions), it's clear that the "classic" Superman is the one molded around the old movies, All-Star Superman and the like. The original take, while really interesting as an actual Champion of the Oppressed instead of Defender of the Status-Quo that he has turned into (because, let's face it, even in Bendis's run, he isn't doing **** to change the world for the better by getting ride of the corrupt and inept trappings of our current Western society and culture - then again, he IS married to a journalist, and they rarely if ever want the world to change anyway, at least those as high profile as Lois Lane).

The only Superman I love and truly care about was the 2011-2016 Supes, warts and all. Then there is Bendis, because while the character is not really my cup of tea, the universe around him is fleshed out enough to be interesting. But the many controversies regarding his run make clear that his isn't the classic Superman either, despite his undies on the outside.

That's a good point. I prefer "Champion of the Weak and Oppressed" to "Defender of the Status Quo" and I think that is also a huge part of the problem. As much as I love the George Reeves show and the Christopher Reeve movies (the first one, anyway) and the Silver Age, they are largely about Superman posing with American flags and being buddies with presidents. I think that in a Post-Watergate world, Superman has never broken free of that image as the defender of the status quo no matter that some writers move him drastically away from that.

My favorite was the GA Superman who took profiteers into war zones, told corrupt politicians to resign or he'd personally take them into a third world country and leave them there and see how they like it when they had to live under those conditions, a Superman who tried to change things for the better. Now, I am well aware that the original "Squadron Supreme" confronted that issue with the fact that he wasn't changing people and any changes he made were meaningless because they would only last as long as he was personally enforcing them.
But trying to inspire people is well and good but not unless their is a direction to that inspiration rather than a vagueness.

I think one of the problems with Superman was defined nicely if unintentionally in "Superman Returns" They go out of their way about how mankind needs a savior and they have that scene where he's floating in orbit listening to the cries of humanity like he was a god. So he must be hearing the cries of starving children. But he just keeps floating. He must hear the cries of women being beaten and of corrupt businessmen and politicians saying things that are for their good to the detriment of the vast majority. He does nothing. Oh, but wait. A bank robbery. Yeah, to that, he responds. That's the big deal that the world is crying out to a savior for? Yup, defender of the status quo. He's unfortunately gotten so big and such an ideal that he can't live up to it, at least not in a shared universe.

[Crabble]

I've no idea on who exactly a "classic Superman" should be. We've all enjoyed the various adventures the big guy went through alongside his charming cast, no matter the decade or how old we were. I just look at this franchise with the same happiness/appreciation like I do with the Godzilla movies. Warts and all.

[Crabble]

What should an ideal Superman story be focused on anyways?

There's the triangle for two (Clark/Lois/Superman) and the potential to conclude it with a romantic relationship or staying platonic.
There's space adventures with Superman.
There's potential in him solving a problem (w/ wits or strength).
There's different ways for him to interact with an individual, depending on their age (civilian, villain, adoptive family, Superman family or Daily Planet cast), which means more problems to solve and sides of Superman or Clark to explore.
There's different types of conflict you could do, such as the classic Man against Man or Man against Self, Nature or Society.

[Vordan]

What should an ideal Superman story be focused on anyways?

There's the triangle for two (Clark/Lois/Superman) and the potential to conclude it with a romantic relationship or staying platonic.
There's space adventures with Superman.
There's potential in him solving a problem (w/ wits or strength).
There's different ways for him to interact with an individual, depending on their age (civilian, villain, adoptive family, Superman family or Daily Planet cast), which means more problems to solve and sides of Superman or Clark to explore.
There's different types of conflict you could do, such as the classic Man against Man or Man against Self, Nature or Society.

The cop out answer is “all of those things”. But right now I think would be a good time for Supes the revolutionary, Clark as the journalist who investigates corruption and oppression within Metropolis whole Superman tackles stuff like automated Lexcorp machines that aim to make human workers obsolete going rogue and murdering the hell out of everyone, or alien refugees fleeing Mongul being attacked by anti-alien humans.

[manwhohaseverything]

What should an ideal Superman story be focused on anyways?

There's the triangle for two (Clark/Lois/Superman) and the potential to conclude it with a romantic relationship or staying platonic.
There's space adventures with Superman.
There's potential in him solving a problem (w/ wits or strength).
There's different ways for him to interact with an individual, depending on their age (civilian, villain, adoptive family, Superman family or Daily Planet cast), which means more problems to solve and sides of Superman or Clark to explore.
There's different types of conflict you could do, such as the classic Man against Man or Man against Self, Nature or Society.

For me, superman stories should be something relevant to society whether as an allegory or direct. Call out bullshit in the society in sometimes humoures(classic wink to the camera) and sometimes serious way. I know that's rocking the boat. But, clark should rock the boat. I would also love it if it was more nuanced point of view.

[Last Son]

I feel like the closest thing to a classic would be somewhere between the late golden age and the silver age versions. And when I say golden age, I don't mean the version that's smashing slums, terrorizing bad drivers, and manhandling radio announcers and doormen. He wasn't like that throughout the entirety of the 40s.

And while I like the idea of Superman dealing with social justice and helping people even when it means breaking the law, honestly, that early Superman could be kind of a jerk and not every story was dealing with some profound social issue. It's not like he was out there fighting bigotry and political corruption every issue.

[Jim Kelly]

I like stories that begin "one day at the Daily Planet" or stories that begin "as Superman returns from a mission in space." These seem the classic openings for great adventures.