Is Superman a hard character to write?

[The Overlord]

Is Superman a hard character to write? This video goes into whether Superman is hard to write or not:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VnfuftfaAdg

What do you think, is Superman hard to write for or not?

[Restingvoice]

My immediate thought is no if we're publishing him the way they did in the 40s. A monthly comic was available to everyone where the main purpose is to inspire or be cathartic. So I'll just take whatever current events happening and do a story involving Superman in it. The main attraction would be "What would Superman do in this situation"

I'm still a very casual reader so my thinking is more casual

Now if the goal is to satisfy LCS preorder crowd... I don't know where to begin on that, because hardcore fans already saw everything. I guess the easy part is the collectors will buy everything, so even if I write to the casuals they're still buying it anyway, but to get people actually enthusiastic, I have to ask first, which story recently that gets you hyped followed by when's the last time you get this hyped for a Superman story.

I'm guessing the reason why Bendis goes almost immediately to status quo changes in his stories is because that's what he knows will generate interest. People want to know what will happen.

[Vordan]

Let me guess that video complains about him being “overpowered” and “too perfect”? Not going to bother watching it if so.

Supes isn’t that hard to write given most of his “bad” stories aren’t “holy hell this is ****” but more so “this is dull and boring and I don’t care”. Despite being a more popular and successful character, I’d argue Spider-Man has had much longer stretches of just flat out AWFUL stories with a lot of the worst stories in comicdom coming from him. Supes doesn’t have anything near as bad as the Clone Saga, Sins Past, or One More Day. I can’t think of an entire decade where Supes was terrible, like how Spidey was during the 90s until JMS came on.

[The Overlord]

Let me guess that video complains about him being “overpowered” and “too perfect”? Not going to bother watching it if so.

Supes isn’t that hard to write given most of his “bad” stories aren’t “holy hell this is ****” but more so “this is dull and boring and I don’t care”. Despite being a more popular and successful character, I’d argue Spider-Man has had much longer stretches of just flat out AWFUL stories with a lot of the worst stories in comicdom coming from him. Supes doesn’t have anything near as bad as the Clone Saga, Sins Past, or One More Day. I can’t think of an entire decade where Supes was terrible, like how Spidey was during the 90s until JMS came on.

Why don't you watch the video, instead of making assumptions. The video discusses those points and debates as to whether they are real problems or not in regards to writing Superman well, it's not as cut and dry as you are assuming, its more of a discussion rather than a condemnation like you are assuming.

[Kuwagaton]

I like the way he spoke on it. So my thoughts:

- unfortunately a massive issue is acknowledged early and often without a constructive solution: poorly oriented writers. Everyone has an idea, mostly the same as Logan, but those ideas for what can be good themselves are from a few pages to one year in length typically. Superman is a serial character. As much as I try to praise All Star, it probably seems like I'm just being contrary on it but it's had the worst effect. Everyone wants a big, warm commercial story with nice art for a best selling trade... but Superman would have died out years ago if that was really a representative of all the ideas a writer can usually muster. Even if a story is twice as popular and sells twice as well, that doesn't keep up with the likes of Spider-Man or Batman. How often does a 50 issue Batman guy come over for like... a Superman mini series or special issue? To name just one group. Bendis unfortunately is just all over the place with one shock after another, to get into a second group...

- editorial. I would like to say 2004 was a particular drop off even if the likes of Busiek held it down with particularly good storytelling. Big, sometimes ostentatious and apparently desperate ideas to sell or relaunch or whatever never met with adequate follow through and popular writers just allowed to have their way. Bendis and Johns have considerable power and they don't even line up if you give it any thought. Rebirth, Reborn, Oz Effect, etc. Not to knock the actual efforts but for what DC would logically and clearly want would have required a Julie, a Carlin, or a Cavalieri. Someone who respects creativity but not to a degree exceptional by comparison. Someone who consistently says, "okay good, what happens next?" You can't let people put the rental car in a ditch, which they are pretty likely to do unintentionally if they can just go drive something else afterward. There were times in the past where writers had editorial experience themselves and I think that sort of thing is undervalued.

- powers. Oh boy. I think most people miss what Byrne really did, and to point directly notice that Logan brings up vulnerability over not using a cop out plot device. Byrne's virtually unstoppable Superman in the first TWO issues gets his most memorable spankings in those years due to kryptonite. His other toughest challenges are magic or beings operating at pre crisis power levels. Superman was able to lose, but no more than before and no less than pretty much any Batman if we're not counting a bronze age knock on the head. Byrne's idea was that power wasn't a solution. His stories didn't really leave the superhero genre but he was able to sustain good stories because he didn't lay out so much of that stuff that he got stuck in the corner with plot breaking powers.

- coolness and the ability to relate: these things entirely depend on Superman and not how Superman compares. If you say Wolverine is cool, then use a different word for Superman because they aren't the same and should never be.

- so is Superman hard to write? I think a writer has to really ask that of themselves. Why do they want to write Superman? Why would someone want to read Superman? I think all you can do is iron everything out for yourself going in, and to me that isn't hard. I'd write him for free if DC was into it, but they don't take randos and I have no desire to work on other comics.

[Celgress]

The fundamental problem with a morally perfect character like Clark is that (as with Goku in Dragon Ball) after he comes to Metropolis and deals with the culture shock (growing accordingly as a character) his character arc becomes a flat one. Unlike characters such as Batman and Spider-Man who each have flaws, they can never completely overcome (Batman's obsession with justice and Spider-Man's burden of responsibility which come into conflict often with their civilian identities) Superman has no such shortcomings to constantly struggle against. A flat character arc is centered around a character who does not change much if at all (unlike a positive, negative or infinite struggle character arc) but rather his/her actions change those around him/her and/or the world, for better or worse (usually for the better). The biggest problem for a flat character arc in an action setting is said character must constantly face external obstacles to overcome. As the character becomes more skilled/stronger and thus more easily able to overcome such external obstacles the threat those obstacles represent must be scaled ever upward accordingly.

[OpaqueGiraffe17]

Let me guess that video complains about him being “overpowered” and “too perfect”? Not going to bother watching it if so.

Supes isn’t that hard to write given most of his “bad” stories aren’t “holy hell this is ****” but more so “this is dull and boring and I don’t care”. Despite being a more popular and successful character, I’d argue Spider-Man has had much longer stretches of just flat out AWFUL stories with a lot of the worst stories in comicdom coming from him. Supes doesn’t have anything near as bad as the Clone Saga, Sins Past, or One More Day. I can’t think of an entire decade where Supes was terrible, like how Spidey was during the 90s until JMS came on.

I SO agree with this. People use Spider-man, the flawed nonoverpowered hero, as an example of a character that is easier to write than Superman. But for my money, Clark has Pete beat in the comics department. Superman has higher highs while poor Spidey has lower lows.
When people talk about Superman comics, most discussions go to his highlights. Fans talk about All Star, Red Son and Death/Reign of Superman. I feel like fans talk more about bad Spider-Man stories (Sins Past, One More Day) than the good ones.
I like Spidey, he was my fave as a kid. But he has a lot of bad stories.

[LifeIsILL]

Let me guess that video complains about him being “overpowered” and “too perfect”? Not going to bother watching it if so.

Supes isn’t that hard to write given most of his “bad” stories aren’t “holy hell this is ****” but more so “this is dull and boring and I don’t care”. Despite being a more popular and successful character, I’d argue Spider-Man has had much longer stretches of just flat out AWFUL stories with a lot of the worst stories in comicdom coming from him. Supes doesn’t have anything near as bad as the Clone Saga, Sins Past, or One More Day. I can’t think of an entire decade where Supes was terrible, like how Spidey was during the 90s until JMS came on.

This. And don't forget Wolverine, he has to be up there with nonstop ridiculous nonsensical stories, and shouldn't he be one of the easiest characters to write?

What about Luke Cage? Nightwing? Green Arrow? Catwoman? Spider-Woman? Iron-Man for the past few years....nonstop crappy stories. And none of those guys have ridiculous powers.

And no I haven't watched OP's video yet, but I thought it was another video at first.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2y9RAXWQG1E

This one in particular pissed me off, the guy who made the video hasn't really read any Superman stories it seems (besides All-Star Superman).

[Johnny Thunders!]

I would argue that the so called overpowered 60's Superman is actually the first version of the character to regularly face physical challenges. He begins to lose his powers, face foes of equal or greater force, and he even out right begins to have 'Death of Superman" stories even enter the iconography. The Golden Age Superman is the most fantastic character in his early universe. Everyone else is basically human and despite occasionally losing consciousness or having the wind knocked out of him, Golden Age Superman has no physical challenges. The importance of surpassing limitations is essential in those issues. He chooses to operate on a human level but he gleefully overpowers the world around him. Superman in the Golden Age is essentially Bugs Bunny and everyone else is Elmer Fudd, minus the physical threat. Anyhow, I think Superman is hard to right because he works better as a fable. The weird fantastic stories actually carry more symbolic weight and meaning for me than many of those old mobster stories. I think with Superman, since the physical limitations are not a question, the moral and personal decisions become more important.

[manwhohaseverything]

I would argue that the so called overpowered 60's Superman is actually the first version of the character to regularly face physical challenges. He begins to lose his powers, face foes of equal or greater force, and he even out right begins to have 'Death of Superman" stories even enter the iconography. The Golden Age Superman is the most fantastic character in his early universe. Everyone else is basically human and despite occasionally losing consciousness or having the wind knocked out of him, Golden Age Superman has no physical challenges. The importance of surpassing limitations is essential in those issues. He chooses to operate on a human level but he gleefully overpowers the world around him. Superman in the Golden Age is essentially Bugs Bunny and everyone else is Elmer Fudd, minus the physical threat. Anyhow, I think Superman is hard to right because he works better as a fable. The weird fantastic stories actually carry more symbolic weight and meaning for me than many of those old mobster stories. I think with Superman, since the physical limitations are not a question, the moral and personal decisions become more important.

What about all the giant robots, monsters, not to mention hand full of villains goldenage guy fought? Not really, physical limitations can be as exciting. They just need to make it look interesting and build it up emotionally. The problem with superman is that his opponents don't get built up as much. They don't have pose the ideological challenges to superman.

[gregpersons]

My immediate thought is no if we're publishing him the way they did in the 40s. A monthly comic was available to everyone where the main purpose is to inspire or be cathartic. So I'll just take whatever current events happening and do a story involving Superman in it. The main attraction would be "What would Superman do in this situation"

This is a fantastic idea for an ongoing.

Superman comics should be almost like newspaper strips, or like the old radio serials. Shorter stories. Collected into trade/annual collections. It should be in it's own pocket universe. Golden Age Superman meets Present Day 'ripped from the headlines' type things. I love it.

I've been reading Bendis' Superman and haven't been feeling it for the most part, but I love Superman Smashes The Klan in a way I haven't loved a Superman story since All Star... that type of prestige comic at that quality can't be done monthly, but that direction of "Superman as a living myth in the real world" feels very right. That's a little bit of what Morrison started to do a little bit in the New 52 Action Comics reboot, but it didn't get a chance to really breathe.


Edit: The only problem with this idea is it requires editors and writers who know how to write satire, basically, because this is essentially an adventure story with satirical elements. You'd have to find someone like Charlie Brooker... not him exactly but you need a writer with something to say and the freedom to do it.