It's irrelevant whether or not Superman is a good dad or husband.

[Yoda]

What? Action is currently at 35k range. New52 never, ever sank that low in its worst phase as far as i am aware.

Action Comics #28 by Greg Pak sold 35,000 copies in February 2014. #27 sold 37,000. It was in that range until DOOMED boosted sales and then trended down again. Morrison's Action Comics sold well. Beyond that it didn't unless it was a crossover.

You said, irrelevant aspects by that i thought you meant romance and drama.There wasn't much of that. Jimmy and the girl were the central characters to begin with, as well as clark. Where is the moving goal post in that?

I honestly don't know what criteria you use to determine something is about drama and romance. It's mostly drama and character work in that story. Superman's central conflict is entirely within his head.

Last time i checked, superman hasn't got a star in Hollywood walk of fame because of all these amazing iconic series. Am i wrong in that? max fleischer superman cartoons inspired a goldenage for animation. That guy has even inspired the great miyazaki who has won oscars. Tell me one good thing that these mediocre dated superman series has inspired ? Donner movie was pretty damn great, though for its time.40 years ago and can't be replicated.

Christopher Reeve has a Star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame. The Donner movies are the prototype for even modern superhero movies. Fleischer Superman cartoons revolutionized technological aspects of animation. They are fun, but even they were in no small part responsible for moving away from the basic formula of the Golden Age Superman. That's where he first flew. And I think it might be one of, if not the, first time Lois & Superman kissed.

Again, you write them off a "mediocre and dated" when Smallville ran for a decade and after that was one of the most streamed shows on Hulu. And for mediocre and dated they still have a pretty solid footing in pop culture. I don't know what they've "inspired" but they remain relevant to pop culture in the sense they still have plenty of fans and are popular and watched.

[manwhohaseverything]

Action Comics #28 by Greg Pak sold 35,000 copies in February 2014. #27 sold 37,000. It was in that range until DOOMED boosted sales and then trended down again. Morrison's Action Comics sold well. Beyond that it didn't unless it was a crossover.



I honestly don't know what criteria you use to determine something is about drama and romance. It's mostly drama and character work in that story. Superman's central conflict is entirely within his head.



Christopher Reeve has a Star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame. The Donner movies are the prototype for even modern superhero movies. Fleischer Superman cartoons revolutionized technological aspects of animation. They are fun, but even they were in no small part responsible for moving away from the basic formula of the Golden Age Superman. That's where he first flew. And I think it might be one of, if not the, first time Lois & Superman kissed.

Again, you write them off a "mediocre and dated" when Smallville ran for a decade and after that was one of the most streamed shows on Hulu. And for mediocre and dated they still have a pretty solid footing in pop culture. I don't know what they've "inspired" but they remain relevant to pop culture in the sense they still have plenty of fans and are popular and watched.

Ok, i stand corrected. But, that only means Bendis's action is in a similar boat as new52.

Drama is when the dramatic aspects like emotions,feelings...etc are more in forefront like soap operas or lois and clark.in superman smashes the klan, that wasn't the case.The mystery, action and adventure was. There wasn't much romance either.

Christopher reeve having a walk of fame is different from the character having one. Mickey mouse, woody woodpecker, shrek, batman.. Etc all have it. Yes, but was the clark and lois romance in those shorts main focus? Nope! Even flight was handled differently and goldenage guy in the books themselves had taken to more outrageous style even before fleischer cartoons.Furthermore, its nothing like the current flight which doesn't feel agile at all. It's like a flying brick.There hasn't been anything that portrays superman's flight in other media like the Fleischer cartoons.

Yes,smallville did on cw network. That's not good enough for superman in my eyes. Superman needs that series which is outrageous in quality. Do you have data to suggest it wasn't smallville fans that streamed it? Just because there is a loyal fanbase to the series doesn't mean it's all that. I grew up on smallville myself.I still watch it now and then.But, it isn't that influential. You could say arrowverse. But, i view cw shows as basically not for me and have less quality.

[Sacred Knight]

No disputing that it was a sales success at the time, and what they thought the character needed. In the short term, I think it worked. But IMO, it not only doesn't hold up to YO, it also falls short of even Perez's Wonder Woman. Which sort of feels like a cross between an 80s superhero book and a Vertigo book (must be the Karen Berger influence).

I knew that issue was in the regular series (and it's kind of a joke that it's in a trade about the "greatest stories."), but the whole thing is just unimpressive to me. I made it three trades in before I had to tap out because they were just so boring, but then I don't think I've liked anything by Byrne save his X-Men run with Claremont. I didn't even get to the Barda porn lol because...yeah.

I won't bash the Triangle era because I've read so little of it. I've made it deeper into Byrne and the early 2000s and post-Infinite Crisis, all of which are low points for me. Triangle at least seemed to backtrack on some Byrne's ideas ("f*** Krypton, I'm an American!") so there's that.

The triangle era did eventually loosen up some of Byrne's hardline ideas. His powers eventually grew, he was indeed a little less hard on Krypton (though he did seem to take offense still when referred to as Kryptonian; he'd always interject that he's an Earthling), but it did start to trend back up out of some of the restrictions. Only thing I can think of that the triangle era ever actually did that was worse is go even further on the origin change by having Clark have no powers at all till 18. That was the one bad change that never worked well, as Byrne at least had him have some power young. But beyond that the triangle era fixed almost everything else to the ability it could be fixed at the time, considering there still were some edicts in place that wouldn't see complete lifting until the aughts.

[Celgress]

It's not what the character is about. Modern Superman's biggest flaw is that the focus is on irrelevant side elements and the central stuff this character is about is in total disregard and disrepair.

I agree with you, to an extent. Take Goku from Dragon Ball for example (a character heavily inspired by Superman in certain respects). Goku is the premiere hero of the franchise but he is also a terrible neglectful father and an absentee husband, yet he is admired by everyone. Heck, even the franchise itself pokes fun at how Piccolo is more of a father to Gohan than Goku is. So yes, being a good husband and a good father is not necessary to be an effective hero. That said, I feel Superman having a family adds a flavor of authenticity to the narrative and his character. These aspects make him more relatable. He has the same desire for hearth and home we "normal" people do. He faces similar struggles to us balancing his "work" with his family life.

[Kuwagaton]

Even before making him relatable (which is rightly questionable I admit, because it requires such balance) I think if Batman, Popeye, and Dick Tracy could do it, was inevitably gonna be a thing with Superman.

No disputing that it was a sales success at the time, and what they thought the character needed. In the short term, I think it worked. But IMO, it not only doesn't hold up to YO, it also falls short of even Perez's Wonder Woman. Which sort of feels like a cross between an 80s superhero book and a Vertigo book (must be the Karen Berger influence).

Although I usually just mention how it's subjective, I do think YO is phenomenal. But then it's like... Batman spends a lot of time trying to live up to that himself and it proves pretty difficult.

That feasting scene you mention is probably the best Batman moment in comics. Besides modern stuff like All Star and Birthright I think there's a lot of cool definitive moments lost to time, but probably nothing makes someone feel like that one scene does in its proper context.

who slapped him?
If it was Lois, does it count and was it undeserved (probably not)?

In world's finest #143, Batman lashes out and decks him out of his frustration from botching an earlier case and Superman not letting him be. Not the golden age but I think it's pretty easy to see how it's not so far from the golden age Superman throwing fights to essentially give us more of a story.

Spidey seems to do decntly. Batman stories and live action does as well. That fight with batman and shredder was pretty damn good. Its not like superman is less agile than these guys.He is more, yet his movements are nowhere near as impressive as goldenage guy. The best he has did was pull of some kicks, which even looked wierd.That's another thing i wonder. I had no problem with goldenage guy clinging on walls, running on electric lines, running up a building , doing flips, dives and kicks..etc.yet,when postcrisis superman does it in modern stories, it feels wierd. Its like someone is doing something that he isn't supposed to. I don't particularly know why that is.

Live action? I hadn't thought of that. For all I like about Begins and TDK, I think they made Batman look slow as dirt in the fight scenes. Spider-Man though, I can agree plays out pretty perfectly.

[manwhohaseverything]

Batman fight was pretty damn good in bvs. The hand to hand was lit. Every bit the arkham games batman,only more brutal.Superman rarely has that level of hand to hand. Man of steel had decent hand to hand choreography, but the problem was fights dragged on. There was no reprieve. Hammering in a fight of that magnitude for that long can be tiring for the audiences . Furthermore, clark was still not much of fighter. He had no skill.Which is another thing that differentiates him from goldenage guy. Goldenage guy was a boxer and had even trained couple of guys. He had also trained people in fitness and self defence as well. Clark knew his stuff.

I wonder, how much animation can be translated to live action. I mean, if something like fights in one punch man is picked and decently translated. Then i believe superman will been seen as the massive spectacle, that has never been seen before in live action.can you imagine a scene where superman is punched to the moon in live action? I can see people being genuinely shocked and clapping.

[BBally]

Action Comics #28 by Greg Pak sold 35,000 copies in February 2014. #27 sold 37,000. It was in that range until DOOMED boosted sales and then trended down again. Morrison's Action Comics sold well. Beyond that it didn't unless it was a crossover.

The sales of Bendis' run seems to be sinking a lot quicker that it did for the New52 run, which I think is a sign that comic readers aren't willing to a accept a comic without the Superman/Clark Kent trope.

[SiegePerilous02]

In world's finest #143, Batman lashes out and decks him out of his frustration from botching an earlier case and Superman not letting him be. Not the golden age but I think it's pretty easy to see how it's not so far from the golden age Superman throwing fights to essentially give us more of a story.

I think that's different than today's post-TDKR context. Because they had a much different dynamic back then, and Bruce getting so frustrated wasn't as common. Plus it's all some weird plot to get Bruce out of his depressive funk that somehow works, and it's made explicit to the readers.

These days, Bruce is unpleasant almost 24/7 so it's a wonder why Clark is more patient with him, he doesn't really warrant it like past versions of him did.

[Celgress]

The sales of Bendis' run seems to be sinking a lot quicker that it did for the New52 run, which I think is a sign that comic readers aren't willing to a accept a comic without the Superman/Clark Kent trope.

Exactly, I detest the Bendis apologists who spin numbers something fierce to justify his questionable storytelling choices, but I digress.

[Vordan]

For me ultimately whether or not he’s married to Lois or has Jon is secondary to whether Superman himself is written well. I like the marriage and I like Jon, but if someone like Hickman or Ewing were to want to come on and go in a different direction, I’d be totally cool with letting them. I want good stories with Clark at the center first and foremost.

I mean, the two modern versions of that concept, New 52 and the DCEU floundered. The most critically successful variation on that is Superman Smashes the Klan, and even there half the book is focused on “irrelevant” side characters.

And to add to that, I'm pretty far left myself, but superhero fans on average seem to be more conservative than general audiences. So if we are talking about comics, a socialist woke Superman likely would play even worse.



Well comics are themselves pretty irrelevant as we’ve seen in the last few weeks. WB’s and Disney aren’t doing anything to keep them afloat. Because even this idea that they are IP farms is probably not really a factor either. Batman isn’t as successful as he was years ago either, so there’s no magic formula that’s going to get anything selling 200,000 copies a month again. It’s just the comic market.

But I wasn’t talking about comics anyways. I was talking about the Donner movies, Lois & Clark, Smallville, and the CW Superman. All versions that are mocked by large factions of Superman “fans” but are by far the most successful adaptations in the last 4 decades.

Morrison’s run was successful, even if people don’t regard it on the same level as All-Star. What came after well, I’ll always argue Pak’s run is severely underrated.

And the DCEU? That was a merger of Snyder’s own terrible ideas with Byrne Post-Crisis Superman, not Golden Age/New 52, which probably mostly came from Goyer. Snyder even mocked t-shirt and jeans Superman as being “ashamed of the character” (oh the irony). Did you see that livestream of BvS where Snyder talks about Clark’s weird imaginary conversation with his father being his version of the Fortress of Solitude? That was very similar to Byrne’s take where the Clark Kent identity was the “updated” Fortress. Krypton being a crap hole where kids are made artificially? Byrne. Hell red head Lois Lane is from Byrne too. DCEU Superman is also not analogous to immigration at all (or rather he’s a very poor one) Dispenser of Truth did a good analysis of that aspect: http://davidmann95.tumblr.com/post/1...o-know-how-the
Basically DCEU Superman is feared for his power, not because of his alien nature. He’s Space Jesus with laser eyes.

And it sucks because when you’ve got Joker recreating the Joker as a class warrior who leads a revolution against the 1% while also still being an evil and insane monster and making over $1 billion? I totally think this guy:
unnamed.jpg
Could win some people over. At the very least it would be something we haven’t seen before that isn’t him turning evil. Especially considering that you’ve got other people like Ed Boon and NRS making him into a fascist who kills little boys for talking back. Like if we could let Lois & Clark be the Superdad for the people who want that while we go hard on Superman as an immigrant/social crusader in the movies, I’d feel a lot better about Superman’s ability to sustain himself in pop culture.

[Nelliebly]

It's not what the character is about. Modern Superman's biggest flaw is that the focus is on irrelevant side elements and the central stuff this character is about is in total disregard and disrepair.

Lois Lane is the ::most:: central and consistent element of the Superman mythology. She existed before he could do literally all of the things that Superman fans prize and obsess over —-including fly. Their relationship is part of the spine of this myth.

Furthermore, Lois Lane was created as a :artner:: not just in life and in romance but distinctly in the fight against injustice.

Lois Lane is not a “side element” and it’s disingenuous to imply that she is. She is part of the spine of the myth.

The bottom line is that Superman being a good husband and father AND Superman/Lois/Clark fighting daily against injustice are not competing concepts and it’s bizarre that you are implying that they are. Superman is not a cipher. He’s not an empty shell. He’s a complex, deep, wonderful, frustrating person who is capable of truly extraordinary feats AND also capable of great love. Love is not trivial. Love is not nothing. Love is not a “side plot.”

Frankly, given the near constant display of toxic masculinity in our culture where men are often portrayed as insensitive, aloof, not emotionally connected and incapable of ::faithfulness:: its revolutionary to have a character like Superman showing that it does not threaten ones masculinity to love deeply, to be faithful and to be present as a father. These things ::are:: often rarer than they should be and, certainly, do not detract from the very idea that Lois and Clark and Superman, are constantly focused on fighting injustice.

[Nelliebly]

Ok, i stand corrected. But, that only means Bendis's action is in a similar boat as new52.

Drama is when the dramatic aspects like emotions,feelings...etc are more in forefront like soap operas or lois and clark.in superman smashes the klan, that wasn't the case.The mystery, action and adventure was. There wasn't much romance either.

Christopher reeve having a walk of fame is different from the character having one. Mickey mouse, woody woodpecker, shrek, batman.. Etc all have it. Yes, but was the clark and lois romance in those shorts main focus? Nope! Even flight was handled differently and goldenage guy in the books themselves had taken to more outrageous style even before fleischer cartoons.Furthermore, its nothing like the current flight which doesn't feel agile at all. It's like a flying brick.There hasn't been anything that portrays superman's flight in other media like the Fleischer cartoons.

Yes,smallville did on cw network. That's not good enough for superman in my eyes. Superman needs that series which is outrageous in quality. Do you have data to suggest it wasn't smallville fans that streamed it? Just because there is a loyal fanbase to the series doesn't mean it's all that. I grew up on smallville myself.I still watch it now and then.But, it isn't that influential. You could say arrowverse. But, i view cw shows as basically not for me and have less quality.

Why would he need to provide “data” about WHO streamed Smallville? That’s no more relevant than who were the thousands of people who bought the DVD’s all those years making it such a huge cash cow for WB. The point being made is that Smallville resonated with a huge audience and still remains popular even years after it went off the air. To the point that Tom and Erica have a huge following now when they go to cons and got a huge amount of attention when they returned to the CW for 5 lousy minutes in December.

Also, it’s bizarre to define “drama” only in a way that applies to you. Relationships are drama. The fact that they don’t appeal to you doesn’t make them less serious or worthy. There’s actually a word that describes what you constantly do where you talk about the “romance” as if it’s lesser and unimportant and cast it off as “soap opera” while you care about the “real” stuff. I’ll let you guess what that word is. It starts with an S.

Three, not sure why this has to keep being said but the CW not appealing to YOU doesn’t actually mean that YOU are better than the people who do enjoy it or that it’s objectively “not good enough.”

You are not a more important or more “serious” or real Superman fan because you hate the focus on relationships. Those fans are just as valid as you are, just as real, just as important and you aren’t better than they are. You aren’t a higher level of Superman fan than the girls who fell in love with Superman in 1993 because of “Lois and Clark” or the girls who became fans in 2001 with Smallville. And when a whole new generation of younger people fall in love with Superman and Lois and, now, the kids, because of this new show ...they will also be equal and valid. Relationship driven drama is a perfectly valid way to come to Superman and a perfectly Valid way to prefer the narrative.

[Agent Z]

For me ultimately whether or not he’s married to Lois or has Jon is secondary to whether Superman himself is written well. I like the marriage and I like Jon, but if someone like Hickman or Ewing were to want to come on and go in a different direction, I’d be totally cool with letting them. I want good stories with Clark at the center first and foremost.

Morrison’s run was successful, even if people don’t regard it on the same level as All-Star. What came after well, I’ll always argue Pak’s run is severely underrated.

And the DCEU? That was a merger of Snyder’s own terrible ideas with Byrne Post-Crisis Superman, not Golden Age/New 52, which probably mostly came from Goyer. Snyder even mocked t-shirt and jeans Superman as being “ashamed of the character” (oh the irony). Did you see that livestream of BvS where Snyder talks about Clark’s weird imaginary conversation with his father being his version of the Fortress of Solitude? That was very similar to Byrne’s take where the Clark Kent identity was the “updated” Fortress. Krypton being a crap hole where kids are made artificially? Byrne. Hell red head Lois Lane is from Byrne too. DCEU Superman is also not analogous to immigration at all (or rather he’s a very poor one) Dispenser of Truth did a good analysis of that aspect: http://davidmann95.tumblr.com/post/1...o-know-how-the
Basically DCEU Superman is feared for his power, not because of his alien nature. He’s Space Jesus with laser eyes.

And it sucks because when you’ve got Joker recreating the Joker as a class warrior who leads a revolution against the 1% while also still being an evil and insane monster and making over $1 billion? I totally think this guy:
unnamed.jpg
Could win some people over. At the very least it would be something we haven’t seen before that isn’t him turning evil. Especially considering that you’ve got other people like Ed Boon and NRS making him into a fascist who kills little boys for talking back. Like if we could let Lois & Clark be the Superdad for the people who want that while we go hard on Superman as an immigrant/social crusader in the movies, I’d feel a lot better about Superman’s ability to sustain himself in pop culture.

Byrne is an immigrant. I'd say his take or one influenced by it is authentic.

[Kuwagaton]

Batman fight was pretty damn good in bvs. The hand to hand was lit. Every bit the arkham games batman,only more brutal.Superman rarely has that level of hand to hand. Man of steel had decent hand to hand choreography, but the problem was fights dragged on. There was no reprieve. Hammering in a fight of that magnitude for that long can be tiring for the audiences . Furthermore, clark was still not much of fighter. He had no skill.Which is another thing that differentiates him from goldenage guy. Goldenage guy was a boxer and had even trained couple of guys. He had also trained people in fitness and self defence as well. Clark knew his stuff.

I wonder, how much animation can be translated to live action. I mean, if something like fights in one punch man is picked and decently translated. Then i believe superman will been seen as the massive spectacle, that has never been seen before in live action.can you imagine a scene where superman is punched to the moon in live action? I can see people being genuinely shocked and clapping.

BvS Batman was, considering it was a Superman movie, oddly the best of his action to me. It looked different than the Batman movies stuck between the slick fighting of Casino Royale and the intense almost Power Rangers style action of the Marvel movies.

All of the focus on a rookie Superman or just generally having only about two hours for him doesn't allow for great hand to hand kinda stuff. It's not really the center of being Superman. I was very pleased with MoS in that regard, though. Frenetic and tremendous, but I don't think a golden age approach where they emphasize the all but jettisoned acrobatics and dexterity would really make it look like action manga. Maybe with enough episodes in animation (or digital comics, the Sook drawn fight from Man of Steel was so good digitally) but the protracted, serial fights descended from Popeye have pretty much always been replaced by all of the other story possibilities. Funny enough Superman is a "one punch" type in that the story usually builds up to action as a resolution and it's typically pretty quick win or lose.

For comics I think Swan was underrated in that drawing like a million stories, he drew all sorts of fights along the way and his storytelling made them effective and unique.



That being pretty different from the fight in Earth Stealers

I think that's different than today's post-TDKR context. Because they had a much different dynamic back then, and Bruce getting so frustrated wasn't as common. Plus it's all some weird plot to get Bruce out of his depressive funk that somehow works, and it's made explicit to the readers.

These days, Bruce is unpleasant almost 24/7 so it's a wonder why Clark is more patient with him, he doesn't really warrant it like past versions of him did.

I think it's the same then as in now in that people doing Superman generally don't care about trying to look cooler than Batman. If Batman is written as needing to hit someone to look or feel better, then Superman is already cooler in his way and it's just up to the reader to try understanding that.

For me ultimately whether or not he’s married to Lois or has Jon is secondary to whether Superman himself is written well. I like the marriage and I like Jon, but if someone like Hickman or Ewing were to want to come on and go in a different direction, I’d be totally cool with letting them. I want good stories with Clark at the center first and foremost.

Totally. I don't care so much that this is "supposed to happen" as the next chapter of his life or whatever, I just think it's an interesting thing that comes pretty naturally to his writers. If someone can write a better Superman as a single guy, they should.

And the DCEU? That was a merger of Snyder’s own terrible ideas with Byrne Post-Crisis Superman, not Golden Age/New 52, which probably mostly came from Goyer. Snyder even mocked t-shirt and jeans Superman as being “ashamed of the character” (oh the irony). Did you see that livestream of BvS where Snyder talks about Clark’s weird imaginary conversation with his father being his version of the Fortress of Solitude? That was very similar to Byrne’s take where the Clark Kent identity was the “updated” Fortress. Krypton being a crap hole where kids are made artificially? Byrne. Hell red head Lois Lane is from Byrne too. DCEU Superman is also not analogous to immigration at all (or rather he’s a very poor one) Dispenser of Truth did a good analysis of that aspect: http://davidmann95.tumblr.com/post/1...o-know-how-the
Basically DCEU Superman is feared for his power, not because of his alien nature. He’s Space Jesus with laser eyes.

If we're talking about Morrison's look, that's probably from not reading. But after the first movie, with Truth... I can't help but see it. As a fan before and after, seeing a buzzed head Superman riding a motorcycle with his cape shredded down to knuckle wraps is awkward. The Kuder and Syaf covers used for promotion give a try hard impression that I can definitely see leaving people feeling uninvited from the character.

Speaking of the first movie iirc the fear of Superman came from alien transmissions. Modern day origins make it more of a puberty thing and that's the case with MoS, but I'm not sure I'd say the immigrant/foreigner thing is too vital to not be emphasized. If I told a science fiction story with a decent immigration allegory, it really wouldn't look like Siegel's Superman, or Finger's.

Also, redhead Lois came from Joanne Siegel, Phyllis Coates, Noel Neill, and the occasional comic strips inspired by them.

And it sucks because when you’ve got Joker recreating the Joker as a class warrior who leads a revolution against the 1% while also still being an evil and insane monster and making over $1 billion? I totally think this guy:
unnamed.jpg
Could win some people over.

Totally but that's on the people who would rather do Joker. I think even if you have them Morrison's first arc before they set about the project, we'd end up with what we got anyway.

Lois Lane is the ::most:: central and consistent element of the Superman mythology. She existed before he could do literally all of the things that Superman fans prize and obsess over —-including fly. Their relationship is part of the spine of this myth.

I was looking at the OP with their relationship as it applied to being a husband or father in mind. But yeah, Lois is chiefly very important to the story and generally so is everyone else. If the idea of telling these stories is getting to know the characters involved in creating the plot, well, we already knew Superman. The story is so largely about learning of the world(s) around him. Looking at the golden age it's clear that they had so much fun and interest creating people for him to play off.

[manwhohaseverything]

Why would he need to provide “data” about WHO streamed Smallville? That’s no more relevant than who were the thousands of people who bought the DVD’s all those years making it such a huge cash cow for WB. The point being made is that Smallville resonated with a huge audience and still remains popular even years after it went off the air. To the point that Tom and Erica have a huge following now when they go to cons and got a huge amount of attention when they returned to the CW for 5 lousy minutes in December.

Also, it’s bizarre to define “drama” only in a way that applies to you. Relationships are drama. The fact that they don’t appeal to you doesn’t make them less serious or worthy. There’s actually a word that describes what you constantly do where you talk about the “romance” as if it’s lesser and unimportant and cast it off as “soap opera” while you care about the “real” stuff. I’ll let you guess what that word is. It starts with an S.

Three, not sure why this has to keep being said but the CW not appealing to YOU doesn’t actually mean that YOU are better than the people who do enjoy it or that it’s objectively “not good enough.”

You are not a more important or more “serious” or real Superman fan because you hate the focus on relationships. Those fans are just as valid as you are, just as real, just as important and you aren’t better than they are. You aren’t a higher level of Superman fan than the girls who fell in love with Superman in 1993 because of “Lois and Clark” or the girls who became fans in 2001 with Smallville. And when a whole new generation of younger people fall in love with Superman and Lois and, now, the kids, because of this new show ...they will also be equal and valid. Relationship driven drama is a perfectly valid way to come to Superman and a perfectly Valid way to prefer the narrative.

I would need data to show that whether it's audiences are people who grew up with it. Not the people who started watching it because the word of mouth was insane. Smallville as i like it, is very dated show. It resonated with standard cw audiences which miniscule in comparison. It wasn't xmen tas for superman.

Relationships aren't drama, it becomes drama when it take centre stage. There is a difference between drama centric and just drama. Everything is drama. Postcrisis is drama centric. Superman smashes the klan is about Superman and kids tackling the klan.It focuses on that conflict, the relationships are secondary and centered around that conflict. S stands for many other things as well. One of them is Strongman. Which was blatantly ignored by the people for years. Furthermore, superman is the man of action. Action comics made him a star. Not, soap opera comics.

I am talking about my perspective, mate. Always has been.If cw audiences were so massive wb wouldn't need the bigger markets. They aren't. superman is dumbed into cw drama because when they can't get him right on the big screen. Trying to recreate donner fairytale romance with extra drama didn't workout. Nor, did the grim world of zack snyder with an introverted clark.

Did i say any of that? All i am saying, this notion that superman is just a lame drama character is bullshit. this reputation is built only by superman being in these kinda drama centric shows only. When the character isn't about that. When the character single handedly revolutionised the action genre as pulpfiction strongman vigilante from space. Stop accusing me of trying to make myself more important. When i did no such things. I professed my own opinion. Furthermore, this idea that girls only like drama and romance is nonsensical. I could accuse you of putting girls in a box. But, that wouldn't be right. this idea that superman cannot work without these thing two ingredients is false. Why? Because man of action is incomplete without action and action comics. There is a beauty to relationships that are background noises, i have said so in the second post in this thread. It helps a character like superman to show change whether it's family, friends, colleagues, enemies ... Etc. The world is an important aspect of superman. It always has been. But, these loud and sometimes obnoxious shows rarely has it.And currently superman doesn't have it.i very much prefer that to this drama first, action second method. When the quality of action is treated as secondary insignificant part of the character. Its an insult to the action comics which housed the character. People say batman is cool as if it's a fact. bollocks! Well, i say superman is 10 times as much cool. I don't need to make him kewl either.The strongman from space itself is a cool concept.