Earth 1985 - what would you like to see?

[SiegePerilous02]

My point is that the pre-Crisis Superman was an horrible person that would be quite problematic for a modern author.

Pretty much all superheroes from the 40s-60s and even now can be horrible people at times because they are written by fallible human beings with sometimes weird and very problematic ideas. Spider-Man once hit his pregnant wife and that was in the 90s long after a writer should know better (they should have ALWAYS known better, but you'd expect a better look in the 90s than what you'd get earlier on).

So it's very easy to look back into the past of almost any character and find a story that elicits a "oh what the ****" reaction like that Superboy-robot story. Trust me when I say that nobody who wants pre-Crisis elements back wants stuff like that story to come back along with them. And those stories were written before DC continuity became more strict like Marvel's. Once they sort of started to adopt a Marvel like writing style in the transition to the Bronze age, they abandoned the fable-like one shots of the past and just quietly transitioned away from the more problematic stories of the past. They of course stumbled their way into writing new mistakes, but they do that even now.

So a series set on Earth-1985 wouldn't address these Superman stories any more than they would address the problematic stuff of other characters (like Wonder Woman slinging racial slurs against the Japanese). Because nobody in their right mind wants to see them seriously come back and be applied to these characters, who are not at fault for the weird and sometimes very wrong headed decisions of their authors.

[manwhohaseverything]

The problem is that Kal was supposed to turn the robot into a hunk of junk and feel like a monster because he had had sex with a girl without his consent, not just shrug his shoulders and say "oh well, too bad".

If I had gone to bed with a woman under the effect of Roipnol without knowing it, after discovering it I would not just think "No problem, I didn't know this", but I would feel awful and try bring the culprit to justice. And even if we want to ignore the date rape thing (your typical 70's white dude dc staffer "Ehi, The women mean yes even if the say no, right?") , the robot had kidnapped her. And Superboy hasn't blinked at all. The real victim in this story was the poor girl but the authors made the whole thing a bizarre rite of passage for Superboy.

But my point it isn't nitpicking if this or that particular story was in continuity (to me they are all unless they have been explicitly contradicted - like when Superboy found his real parents hibernated in the space).

My point is that the pre-Crisis Superman was an horrible person that would be quite problematic for a modern author. Like is relationship with Lois Lane. In order to hide his true identity from her, he lied to her, deceived her, made her doubt her sanity, humiliated her, gaslighted her, all while he kept telling her that he loved her. Meanwhile, every d-listener in the Justice League knew his true identity. This is a toxic relationship straight from a text book.

Or his relationship with Steve Lombard, when Clark was the subject of his pranks.

As an adult, seeing someone in a corporate environment pulling pranks on a timid coworker who apparently will never fight back or complain is simply infuriating. You are paid to work, not to be a clown. Really, what he was doing is close to mobbing.

As a kid, what is exactly the message here? You can defend yourself from bullies only if you are Superman? If someone pull a prank on you, give him a concussion?

As a reader, seeing the supposedly noblest hero on earth engaging in some kind of prank-arms race is frustrating.

These are the ways one of the most intelligent man on earth should react:

• Simply, confront him, explaining that no one is laughing at his pranks, some of which are also dangerous to others.
  
• if this don't work, report him to HR because a person like this can create a toxic workplace
  
• Just endure his pranks. You are Superman. You can survive inside a nova. So you can survive to a water bucket. If you have chosen the facade of an amoeba unable to react, well, live with the consequences of this choice. And really, what is the rationale behind this choice? "Oh, Clark has grown a spine, this means that... HE'S SUPERMAN!!!". Come on....

The worst thing you can do is pulling pranks back, because it's absolutely USELESS.

And his colleagues are equally infuriating. They see someone mistreating a co-worker who apparently can't react and they do absolutely NOTHING, except some unconvincing mild criticism like "Oh Steve, sometimes you are so childish...".

And, by the way, why Perry White & Co. call Superman their "friend"? In every interaction that I read in these issues Superman treats them with a mix of paternalism, arrogance and a little bit of annoyance. And, except when he is saving their lives, it's not like he hangs out with them in their spare time or similar. "Perry, are you ok? Now I have to go, there is an earthquake in China". They are friends only because the writers said so. The only in-universe explanation is that if a man who could move planets says you are his friend, well, it's better you humor him.

I know that their friendship is a Silver age legacy, but that was even more inexplicable then, because, well,

Dude, the character literally thought the girl died and was about to kill a creature in violent fit but refrained due to his morality . I don't think the boy would go for violence again in that mindset. His selfpity will be more overpowering at the moment than need to punch stuff. My main point was clark was as much a victim. So, asking victim to fight when he is in a vulnerable state is little too much.

No, he isn't. Is bugs bunny or deadpool horrible? Yes, they are. The tone of the stories need to be addressed. If a more serious approach is taken then an alien orphan who is different and sees the world differently decides to hide a part of himself from the average girl, he loved.it happens. The guy had been an outcast most his life except for the legion. He lost his adopted parents was on his own since then. Ofcourse he would have trouble opening up. The justice league is full of people like him, ofcourse he would be able to share his identity with them.

Again, steve lombard is essentially elmer fudd. He is a jerk and a bully. Clark bullys back. That's their relationship. Again, clark isn't some moral paragon. He was always a bully, he's just a bully on your side. I am sorry, if it doesn't appeal to you. But, jokes especially slapstick are run by pain.for example, tom and jerry. The more painful and elastic it looks more funny. The comic isn't trying to send a message . As for the covers, you do know they are click-bait. Superdickery is a thing. Lois is also superficial many a times. Jimmy has his own set of problems. He hero-worships superman.he can't see superman's flaws.


Lois was being black mailed by an extortonist for something superman did inadvertently .


Now, a days superman isn't funny at all. Take for instance his secret id, Which was just a joke. Nowadays it is taken too seriously and with same setting. In which world is wearing a pair of glasses a viable disguise? Well, guess what? it isn't. It wasn't meant to be. It was just a joke. In a more serious setting, clark would need more than glasses, a clumsy act and slouching.but, same setting is taken and people are expected to take it seriously and stories themselves are wayyy too serious. How is that gonna work?Either make the secret id serious . Have superman be like allmight or something. Or treat it like the 4th wall joke, it was meant to be. I mean, winking at the camera is essentially iconic.

He grew up with ma and pa who could never understand or keep up with him. He was an outcast and had caused someone like him who was said to be family(mon el) , harm. Aside from the legion, clark was essentially alone in an alien world. This guy had memories of his home world. He was kal el. On top of all that, he was only getting his life in order in a big city after the lose of his parents. I don't think a guy like that suddenly taking in a strange girl would essentially be stable. It would have been scary. Think about it all this time he thought he was alone suddenly he has a sister. That's gotta be shocking and hard. Not only that, He would have to face the questions of people around him and keep his secret. His secret that, he is practically a vigilante strongman that essentially takes law into his own hand. He wouldn't be in the mindset to take care of a teen girl. Family and relationships were hard for him and was no good at.it was something he had to work towards and wanted to as well. "For the man who has everything" works because clark is a screw up. He longs to fit in that's why he imagines krypton, not earth. That story work perfectly for the silverage kal el.

I won't deny these stories are old. But, malice is something i won't be attributing to it. They are just a work of their time.Your charges of paternalism had been lodged, several times by several people for precrisis silverage interpretations, including modern tales like allstar superman. But, i need specific instances to judge for myself regarding perry and co.
Dude, what? The bigbarda storyline is as problematic as any of these stories. You can't justify that and tell me these are bad. That's just double standard. They are both outdated.

[manwhohaseverything]

This is an image i wanted to post above

As you can see, clark almost killed this creature. He didn't. I can very well understand why he would refrain from violence just after it.he was crying. He didn't even attack the robot who from his perspective caused the death of the girl

[Zaku]

This is an image i wanted to post above

As you can see, clark almost killed this creature. He didn't. I can very well understand why he would refrain from violence just after it.he was crying. He didn't even attack the robot who from his perspective caused the death of the girl

Yes, but as soon as he calmed down the first thing he should have done was to look for this robot and throw it into the sun so that he could no longer endanger innocent people for its idiotic tests.

But let's see Clark's reaction after he met this poor girl after so many years. He was not ashamed, he was not sorry for her used as a prop for some nebulous "lesson". It is evident that he was experiencing something like a sweet regret.

Really Clark?



Try to understand her. After losing her home and her family and being abandoned in an orphanage (after asking in tears to the only her relative in the universe if she could live with him), he was being ordered to cultivate her powers in private and only come out to fight crime when he requested her presence as his "secret weapon" (his personal super-slave). The rest of the time she was forbidden from having a family, and spent her time spying on the other orphans through the walls.

But maybe I didn't explain myself well. The matter is not whether this or that story should be considered in continuity. The fact is that (for example) no other dc pre-Crisis hero has behaved so badly towards people that he said he "loved". No other hero has spent so much time and energy hiding his secret identity. Actually, I think a third of the pages of his stories were devoted to some complicated method of not letting Lois (or someone else) find out who he really was.

There is a reason why all the secret identity thing is almost not-existent in the MCU and incredibly downplayed in the CW shows and in the modern comics, and why in any modern retelling of Superman's stories he reveals the truth to Lois Lane almost immediately.

But in this version, he tried to preserve his secret in an almost fanatic way, not caring about the pain he caused to those around him and he loved him. No other character of that era gone this far. Iris eventually discovered Barry's secret. Wonder Woman married Steve Trevor.

So, as I said, it's not about ignoring this or that story. This fanaticism and selfishness is deeply embedded in the character and one cannot simply pretend that it does not exist.

Yep, this guy is a dick.

But let his cousin (who is surely is the person who knows him best) express her opinion.



Try to understand her. After losing her home and her family and being abandoned in an orphanage (after asking in tears to the only her relative in the universe if she could live with him), he was being ordered to cultivate her powers in private and only come out to fight crime when he requested her presence as his "secret weapon" (his personal super-slave). The rest of the time she was forbidden from having a family, and spent her time spying on the other orphans through the walls.

[Thor-Ul]

The problem is that Kal was supposed to turn the robot into a hunk of junk and feel like a monster because he had had sex with a girl without his consent, not just shrug his shoulders and say "oh well, too bad".

If I had gone to bed with a woman under the effect of Roipnol without knowing it, after discovering it I would not just think "No problem, I didn't know this", but I would feel awful and try bring the culprit to justice. And even if we want to ignore the date rape thing (your typical 70's white dude dc staffer "Ehi, The women mean yes even if the say no, right?") , the robot had kidnapped her. And Superboy hasn't blinked at all. The real victim in this story was the poor girl but the authors made the whole thing a bizarre rite of passage for Superboy.

But my point it isn't nitpicking if this or that particular story was in continuity (to me they are all unless they have been explicitly contradicted - like when Superboy found his real parents hibernated in the space).

My point is that the pre-Crisis Superman was an horrible person that would be quite problematic for a modern author. Like is relationship with Lois Lane. In order to hide his true identity from her, he lied to her, deceived her, made her doubt her sanity, humiliated her, gaslighted her, all while he kept telling her that he loved her. Meanwhile, every d-listener in the Justice League knew his true identity. This is a toxic relationship straight from a text book.

Or his relationship with Steve Lombard, when Clark was the subject of his pranks.

As an adult, seeing someone in a corporate environment pulling pranks on a timid coworker who apparently will never fight back or complain is simply infuriating. You are paid to work, not to be a clown. Really, what he was doing is close to mobbing.

As a kid, what is exactly the message here? You can defend yourself from bullies only if you are Superman? If someone pull a prank on you, give him a concussion?

As a reader, seeing the supposedly noblest hero on earth engaging in some kind of prank-arms race is frustrating.

These are the ways one of the most intelligent man on earth should react:

• Simply, confront him, explaining that no one is laughing at his pranks, some of which are also dangerous to others.
  
• if this don't work, report him to HR because a person like this can create a toxic workplace
  
• Just endure his pranks. You are Superman. You can survive inside a nova. So you can survive to a water bucket. If you have chosen the facade of an amoeba unable to react, well, live with the consequences of this choice. And really, what is the rationale behind this choice? "Oh, Clark has grown a spine, this means that... HE'S SUPERMAN!!!". Come on....

The worst thing you can do is pulling pranks back, because it's absolutely USELESS.

And his colleagues are equally infuriating. They see someone mistreating a co-worker who apparently can't react and they do absolutely NOTHING, except some unconvincing mild criticism like "Oh Steve, sometimes you are so childish...".

And, by the way, why Perry White & Co. call Superman their "friend"? In every interaction that I read in these issues Superman treats them with a mix of paternalism, arrogance and a little bit of annoyance. And, except when he is saving their lives, it's not like he hangs out with them in their spare time or similar. "Perry, are you ok? Now I have to go, there is an earthquake in China". They are friends only because the writers said so. The only in-universe explanation is that if a man who could move planets says you are his friend, well, it's better you humor him.

I know that their friendship is a Silver age legacy, but that was even more inexplicable then, because, well,




Clark grew up with loving foster parents from an early age. He should be the first to know what to do with someone who has lost his natural parents. And he was mindcontrolled during the "almost pornoshot". And it wasn't depicted as a good thing.

I want to understand the posture of Zaku. Zaku is right when he said the Superman from that period was a horrible person. As the rest of the superheroes of their time. By modern standars he was a horrible person. But for my understanding that is the key. Modern Standars.
Judging books and stories obviously aimed to an specific age group and from a different time period, with different social parameters under our perspective, our present, the values and codes from our time is unfair. We are in a position of advantage when we judge the past. The future will judge us too and maybe thing we consider normal or good now, could be seen as obcene in the future.
The Superman of that period was for a long time (50s, 60s) a weird thing, with sci-fi moments and a lot of sitcom moments. 50s sitcoms, not always with the best ideas, but product of their time. Judging them by modern standards is showing a lack of empathy and perspective.

Let me give a personal example: One of the stories I like more is the original Superman Red Superman Blue, that imaginary story. Wrote long before my time. But I liked, even if I understand than several of the solutions from that tale would be seen today as morally problematic (mind control and moving native inhabitants to other planets come to my mind, among others). I understand that such story wrote today would and should end very differently, because the perception of what is correct and good is not exactly the same as fifty years ago. And we should judge strongly similar solutions proposed by authors if they were proposed today.

But If I look to that story and said how horrible it was without understand the circunstances and judge it as a horrible solution, I would act in a very short sighted way. But I understand than that was what the people in those time believed it could be the best solution to such problems.

We can saw those tales with nostalgia and laugh about the superdickery, but we must understand that is from a past time, of what the authors thinked about. (And thanks the existence of retcons and reboots.). Other people would like it because represent the nostalgia and the innocence of searching simple solutions to problems than it don't have it and if applied to real life would be less than ideal.

[Zaku]

I want to understand the posture of Zaku. Zaku is right when he said the Superman from that period was a horrible person. As the rest of the superheroes of their time. By modern standars he was a horrible person. But for my understanding that is the key. Modern Standars.

Well, obviously I give a pass to Silver Age stories. My major criticism is toward Bronze Age stories, who are supposed to be more "realistic". Really, some of these stories are contemporary with Avengers Annual Vol 1 10, where Claremont had to explain that it isn't ok to abandon a raped woman to her rapist, so it isn't like the authors of this era lived in a moral vacuum.

I recently read a lot of Superman's stories immediately before the reboot (so, 85-86) and he was still an insufferable dick.

I just wish that in a new hypothetical series set in the pre-Crisis universe someone would finally say to Superman "you know you've always been a hypocrite a**hole, right?".

ETA And he was way worse than other heroes of his time...

[Dataweaver]

I would add that many (not all) of the problematic stories are ones that I'd put on Earth-1970. I'm not just being pedantic here; a major reason why there's talk of Silver Age and Bronze Age being separate things is precisely because right around 1970, DC started to take itself a lot more seriously and largely stopped publishing the sorts of juvenile stories that Zaku is referring to. Thus, I don't see it as an Earth-1985 thing: stories published before 1970 would only be guaranteed to be part of Earth-1985's timeline if they're consequential; and even then, they'd only be guaranteed to be true in the broad strokes.

[Zaku]

And by the way, a lot of his most problematic Bronze Age stories were written by Cary Bates.

Just saying.

[superduperman]

Well, obviously I give a pass to Silver Age stories. My major criticism is toward Bronze Age stories, who are supposed to be more "realistic". Really, some of these stories are contemporary with Avengers Annual Vol 1 10, where Claremont had to explain that it isn't ok to abandon a raped woman to her rapist, so it isn't like the authors of this era lived in a moral vacuum.

I recently read a lot of Superman's stories immediately before the reboot (so, 85-86) and he was still an insufferable dick.

I just wish that in a new hypothetical series set in the pre-Crisis universe someone would finally say to Superman "you know you've always been a hypocrite a**hole, right?".

ETA And he was way worse than other heroes of his time...

We don't have a time machine. We can't go back and make dead writers justify their choices by modern standards. All we can do is move forward. I suppose we could ask Elliot S! Maggin or Cary Bates to justify what they've written 40+ years later but then what? Marvel has a lot of things it hasn't answered for as well. But no one seems to keep giving them grief over it. Hypno Hustler is still canon too. If you're suggesting that any future books set in Earth 1985 use those kinds of tactics, I would say no. As would anyone at DC. It sounds like what you really want is for Earth 1985 to not exist. Given the fact that it's a wholly separate Earth now, those particular stories don't have to "count" if you don't want them to. Any writer moving forward can do whatever they want with them. I don't think anyone would lose any sleep if they removed "date rape Superboy" from canon. By this same standard, Earth 2 shouldn't exist either for the racism portrayed.

[manwhohaseverything]

Yes, but as soon as he calmed down the first thing he should have done was to look for this robot and throw it into the sun so that he could no longer endanger innocent people for its idiotic tests.

But let's see Clark's reaction after he met this poor girl after so many years. He was not ashamed, he was not sorry for her used as a prop for some nebulous "lesson". It is evident that he was experiencing something like a sweet regret.

Really Clark?



Try to understand her. After losing her home and her family and being abandoned in an orphanage (after asking in tears to the only her relative in the universe if she could live with him), he was being ordered to cultivate her powers in private and only come out to fight crime when he requested her presence as his "secret weapon" (his personal super-slave). The rest of the time she was forbidden from having a family, and spent her time spying on the other orphans through the walls.

But maybe I didn't explain myself well. The matter is not whether this or that story should be considered in continuity. The fact is that (for example) no other dc pre-Crisis hero has behaved so badly towards people that he said he "loved". No other hero has spent so much time and energy hiding his secret identity. Actually, I think a third of the pages of his stories were devoted to some complicated method of not letting Lois (or someone else) find out who he really was.

There is a reason why all the secret identity thing is almost not-existent in the MCU and incredibly downplayed in the CW shows and in the modern comics, and why in any modern retelling of Superman's stories he reveals the truth to Lois Lane almost immediately.

But in this version, he tried to preserve his secret in an almost fanatic way, not caring about the pain he caused to those around him and he loved him. No other character of that era gone this far. Iris eventually discovered Barry's secret. Wonder Woman married Steve Trevor.

So, as I said, it's not about ignoring this or that story. This fanaticism and selfishness is deeply embedded in the character and one cannot simply pretend that it does not exist.

Yep, this guy is a dick.

But let his cousin (who is surely is the person who knows him best) express her opinion.



Try to understand her. After losing her home and her family and being abandoned in an orphanage (after asking in tears to the only her relative in the universe if she could live with him), he was being ordered to cultivate her powers in private and only come out to fight crime when he requested her presence as his "secret weapon" (his personal super-slave). The rest of the time she was forbidden from having a family, and spent her time spying on the other orphans through the walls.

I don't think emotions work that way. He was barely registering the girl being alive at all and he was crying his heart out. He is essentially a boy. Even though the claim is that he became a "man" . Why should he be sorry for something he had no control over? Can't a man be victim? What was he supposed to say to her, she is blissfully ignorant? He feels regret because he lost something and it turns out it didn't exist.I don't think he feels its sweet. His first reaction during transition from past to present is frustration and anger. Which turns into longing. Last line, is meant cap it of. Comics were episodic. So, last line would have taken by her as one-liner. For clark it's a painful memory.Already adding to his loneliness as alien.

I do, understand kara. But, that doesn’t mean clark was anywhere near ready for family. Kara would not have had a good life with clark. He had been on his own for at the very least 10 years. No, he didn't ask kara to be superslave. You are forgetting clark never had a sidekick other than jimmy and jon(present continuity) . Superman let her choose.but, he hoped she would turn out into someone who can help others. Not to mention, He went through the orphanage bit himself. He could not take her in and give her a normal life. He didn't have ma and pa to give kara to.So,he sent her to a place where she will be safe. Bare in mind, it's bottom of the barrel. But, orphans do go through this stuff. Clark hoped, she can make a life for herself.She did and she found adopted parents, like clark did.

Well, that's the cat and mouse game. isn't it? It is meant to be complicated. I mean, if it was simple where will be the comedy and fun. It's a dog trying to catch his tail . See, unless lois sees the glasses there is no point in seeing what is behind it. It's a knock at prejudice in a joke manner. Next time, you see a timid guy wearing glasses next to you. Don't count him out. He might just turn out to be superman. Lois knows it unconsciously. She even suspects it. But she needs to see it. See that kal el is the guy that people called superman, the guy wearing glasses and tripping up. The secret identity is core part of the character dynamic. Siegel and shuster specifically combined herculean/john carter -scifi strong man and Harold lloyd's comedy. In universe, its hard for superman to trust people. Even, the league member don't know clark kent the man, except for bruce. The planet staff don't know the truth. It is one of his many flaws. So, much for being perfect aye!!

There isn't. MCU just chose to. Superman is a strongman vigilante. Everything he did, though good had moral ambiguity. He wasn't designed to be a superhero. He is a pulp character like the phantom, tintin.. Etc. His secret id had a specific sarcastic humour. If you don't get the joke you will ask why. See, over time the joke became serious. People started asking why? There was no answer.they needed to come up with serious answers. They failed. Now, they given up (atleast for a while). Superman is a character that becomes boring when overexplained. Just like a good joke. If it needs to be explained then what's the point?nobody is laughing. btw,allmight does the secret id thing to a perfection.

I never said anything about ignoring stories. Did i?

Barry isn't an alien. Infact, he is the everyman the opposite of superman . Wonderwoman has never been orphan(immortal mother made her out clay) and was always surrounded by people like her, until she embarked to man's world. Then she became fish out of water. Clark grew up as a freak. He is an orphan. His adopted parents told him to hide his powers for there will be repercussions. They were right. And rightfully, clark has serious trust issues and created a thick shell. Its tragic. You see being afraid of clark is people's natural reaction. Lois was afraid of him as superman the first time he showed himself . It requires Clark's empathy to turn that into a postive. Superman doesn't wear a mask. But, he is very much afraid of rejection. Especially, from the people he loves. That fear inturn gives him nothing but solitude and loneliness.Bruce gets in, cause he is batman. Superman might seem like the extrovert. But, the truth is he is alone. Bruce wayne might seem like the introvert. But, he is never alone. He has a family.atleast for the precrisis version this was true. Now, clark has everything.
Ofcourse, these are mere interpretations. It doesn't mean anything. As i said the stories are outdated and problematic. But, malicious? i don't think so.

[SiegePerilous02]

We don't have a time machine. We can't go back and make dead writers justify their choices by modern standards. All we can do is move forward. I suppose we could ask Elliot S! Maggin or Cary Bates to justify what they've written 40+ years later but then what? Marvel has a lot of things it hasn't answered for as well. But no one seems to keep giving them grief over it. Hypno Hustler is still canon too. If you're suggesting that any future books set in Earth 1985 use those kinds of tactics, I would say no. As would anyone at DC. It sounds like what you really want is for Earth 1985 to not exist. Given the fact that it's a wholly separate Earth now, those particular stories don't have to "count" if you don't want them to. Any writer moving forward can do whatever they want with them. I don't think anyone would lose any sleep if they removed "date rape Superboy" from canon. By this same standard, Earth 2 shouldn't exist either for the racism portrayed.

Yeah, if 1985 were to happen and if it was like anything, I hope it would be like All-Star, Morrison's Action run or the current Jimmy Olsen book: books that capture the essence of the pre-Crisis Superman/Supermen and utilize aspects of their mythos but with more modern sensibilities. And this one could use the broad strokes of the major beats of continuity and the lore, without dwelling on anything that doesn't hold up. Like have Kara be born after Krypton's destruction in Argo City and live the Danvers', but don't have Clark ditch her at an orphanage. Or just don't bring it up.

And that goes for pretty much everyone from this period.

[Dataweaver]

“Or just don't bring it up” strikes me as the right approach.

[Mr.B]

I like that precrisis superman is actually flawed in hindsight. Makes him match with Watchmen more.

[superduperman]

Or just don't bring it up.

And that goes for pretty much everyone from this period.

That would seem to be the most logical approach.

[Thor-Ul]

“Or just don't bring it up” strikes me as the right approach.

That is the best tactic. It works with Marvel.