AiPT "Revisiting what never was with the “Superman 2000” proposal", good read

[Vordan]

The way they would have gotten rid of the marriage reminds me too much of the One More Day disaster.

That’s because Millar gave that basic plot to Quesada for OMD when he made the jump to Marvel. OMD very much has its ideological roots in what they were planning with the initial pitch, although the final version, Superman Now would’ve kept the marriage.

[manwhohaseverything]

Ok. Why does it matter whether superman is married or not? It's soap opera with same characters that's going on and on since ac#1. Sooner or later supes would get married and it will get dissolved as well. Personally, unless they try something totally new like superman marries swampthing with alan moore giving them blessings. It's a trivial detail. Nothing to talk about

[Gaius]

The way they would have gotten rid of the marriage reminds me too much of the One More Day disaster.

In fairness, while it comes off as rather contrived here like in OMD I'd say working Mxyzptlk to save Lois is a bit less egregious than making a deal with the devil.

[superduperman]

I think the problems started once Mike Carlin's tenure as the main editor was winding down. Everything following the Death and Return of Superman was diminishing returns. The whole arc of the Post-Crisis Superman was great, if unnecessarily convoluted in regards to Pre-Crisis elements, but it didn't seem like they had any idea what to do with the character once he'd gotten married. It was kind of the logical end point for that incarnation of Superman.

Had Morrison, Waid, & Millar taken over the reigns of the character and spun him off into a new creative direction, it might have been another story, but DC's editorial indecision of what to do with him is the defining failing of Eddie Beganza's overly long stewardship of the character.

Most of the problems with the Superman books can be directly traced back to editorial simply not knowing what to do. However, I suspect that the legal wrangling going on between the Seigel family and Warner Bros. also had a negative impact on many of the creative decisions being made.

I would point to the late 90s as the ultimate argument that Superman might be "OP". Because here you had a more "realistic" version of Superman that had existed for a decade now and they were already out of ideas for him. With the secondary characters more or less taking over the books. Imagine being a new reader in 1997 and opening a Superman comic only to find some big blue monster wearing his suit. This is at a time when he had something like five books a month. So you had all these extra characters nobody ever heard of being filler material for five books. The biggest problem I see with the proposal was undoing the marriage. Fans had waited years for them to finally get hitched and then to just undo it three years in just seemed like a giant FU to the fans. They were clearly out of ideas but they couldn't just keep going back to the reboot well. There were no good options at the time.

[Sacred Knight]

The way they would have gotten rid of the marriage reminds me too much of the One More Day disaster.

The prevailing thought is that OMD was inspired straight from the Mxy angle of this pitch. I don't know if Quesada has actually ever spoken on it, but most believe there's some inspiration there. And really OMD was only a disaster because of the ending; the why. It was monumentally stupid. If there was a REALLY good reason for doing what they did, I would have felt much differently about the final product. But giving everything up so Peter's very elderly grandmother could live a little longer was just a bad motivating factor. Also purely subjective, but I think they missed out on the opportunity to bring back the real Gwen here. I mean if you're going to do something that big, why not go all out on one more thing? But I digress, I think this pitch had a much better reason for Superman and Lois to make the decision that they do.

[Flash Gordon]

The prevailing thought is that OMD was inspired straight from the Mxy angle of this pitch. I don't know if Quesada has actually ever spoken on it, but most believe there's some inspiration there. And really OMD was only a disaster because of the ending; the why. It was monumentally stupid. If there was a REALLY good reason for doing what they did, I would have felt much differently about the final product. But giving everything up so Peter's very elderly grandmother could live a little longer was just a bad motivating factor. Also purely objective, but I think they missed out on the opportunity to bring back the real Gwen here. I mean if you're going to do something that big, why not go all out on one more thing? But I digress, I think this pitch had a much better reason for Superman and Lois to make the decision that they do.

I had forgotten that Spider-man's entire motivation in OMD was to save his 95 year old aunt, that's ALMOST so-terrible-it's-good.

[Myskin]

I think the problems started once Mike Carlin's tenure as the main editor was winding down.

A funny fact that people tend to overlook is that the Silver Age revival had already started way before Loeb and - later - Johns came on board. Besides the revival of Superman Blue/Red in 1998 we had the Dominus Effect storyline, which lasted for 4 months and was basically a nostalgic operation focused on the classic Superman eras.

[JAK]

Everything I've seen suggests the Leviathan sequel has been cancelled. And no sign of anything Generations related. Looks like anything Didio related might be out the door. Bendis seems to have at least lost his influence.

Overall, that's a good thing. Though, I'm really enjoying Bendis's voice for Clark/Superman, himself. That, I'll definitely miss.

The problems with Superman began in 2000 prior to Didio .

They did, that's true - but it was exacerbated under him. I could stomach most of what was going on before him.

I think the problems started once Mike Carlin's tenure as the main editor was winding down. Everything following the Death and Return of Superman was diminishing returns. The whole arc of the Post-Crisis Superman was great, if unnecessarily convoluted in regards to Pre-Crisis elements, but it didn't seem like they had any idea what to do with the character once he'd gotten married. It was kind of the logical end point for that incarnation of Superman.

Had Morrison, Waid, & Millar taken over the reigns of the character and spun him off into a new creative direction, it might have been another story, but DC's editorial indecision of what to do with him is the defining failing of Eddie Beganza's overly long stewardship of the character.

Most of the problems with the Superman books can be directly traced back to editorial simply not knowing what to do. However, I suspect that the legal wrangling going on between the Seigel family and Warner Bros. also had a negative impact on many of the creative decisions being made.

True, and I think that might have to do with more than the editor - after D/RoS, the whole company was pressured into doing "more like that" for sales, and that's not how solid storytelling works. I will say though, that the Triangle-Era team did a really solid job (overall) given those guides being forced on them. And if they'd been allowed to do what they'd been doing since they all stared on those books, it would have been (imo) spectacular. Even the Superman Blue/Red story (which I hated at the time) isn't so bad on re-read.

I'd give damn near anything for that whole team to come back and have editorial say "do whatever you want to do." Because when they were left to do their own thing, it was (imo) the longest solid period of stories Superman has had.

I agree. And I'd like to add something more, even if it may concern only my personal experience. I read more or less everything I can afford or come into my hands and IMHO once you have enough experience you come to enjoy good stuff - that is, quality stuff - no matter when, where or for what target it was created. Even when you understand that something is clearly not aimed at you, if you keep an open mind there are always things you can enjoy, or even just recognize that quality is there even if it isn't for your personal tastes. Even when some details are dated. And - on a scale of 1 to 100 - superhero comic books in the latest 30 years are in a very low position. Not all of them and personally speaking I still find many of the classics which came before noteworthy (it's hard not to be amazed at Kirby's works). But if I had to find the best comparison for Superman comics, well, let's say that if they were a meal they would be some greasy, moldy, tasteless and partially chewed hamburgers from a very cheap and not particularly clean fast food which advertised them as the tastiest and most yummylicious snack ever. If you are really, really hungry and you don't know that there are other types of food you can eat them and even enjoy them. But it's hard to get back to shitty hamburgers after having eaten them for many years, especially when you know that there are different meals out there.

I don't know about 30.. I'd say the last 20 were like that, at least for Superman - with a few decent meals in there every now and again, but otherwise I agree.

[phonogram12]

He can be. At Marvel he would turn in his X-Men scripts the day they were due so the editors couldn’t make any changes, because he hated all of their suggestions.

As much as I didn't enjoy Morrison's X-Men run, as a huge proponent of creative freedom, I have a newfound respect for the guy.

And for the record, All-Star Superman is one of my favorite superhero stories.

[witchboy]

I'm a big fan of the Super-marriage. I enjoyed seeing the relationship grow and build, and I was really uphappy with the New 52 change. Like I stayed away from the series for awhile and seriously nearly gave up on DC. Cut back seriously on the books I got, stuck to the ones that had stronger pre New 52 ties. Over time I got drawn back in, and Rebirth and restoring so much pre New 52 elements went a long way to winning me back.
There's been decades of stories told with a single Superman, and there's plenty of swinging single characters that can have those stories.
Superman as a husband and father is a lot more exciting situation to tell stories from.

[Timothy Hunter]

Who of the writers do you think pushed for Clark and Lois's marriage to be erased?

[Sacred Knight]

Waid and Millar were the strongest proponents of ending it. Morrison was fine with working within it.

[Nelliebly]

It’s worth noting that in recent years Mark Waid has changed the way he views the marriage. He’s an older man who grew up in a different time and like many men of that age bracket, he was partial to the triangle for 2. However, he openly stated on Twitter only a few years ago (before all of the conflict arose) that he believed Superman would only ever marry Lois and no one else even if he outlived her. He was asked specifically if he felt Superman would ever “remarry” after Lois died and he said no. That Clark would marry one time and one woman. When asked directly about his choices in KC, he said he never said Clark married Diana. He was also a participant in a women’s workshop some years ago alongside Greg Rucka (this is going back to like 2010??) and he expressed regret during that dialogue for ever insinuating that Lois should die so that Superman could end up with Wonder Woman. He expressed regret for choices he had made in Kingdom Come. So whatever his feelings are about the triangle for 2, Waid is a ride or die Lois and Clark supporter and had he undone the marriage Lois still would have remained as the focus. And, as shared, in recent years he actually got a bit defiant about the marriage literally saying that Clark would only ever marry Lois and that was it. Whether that was a result of his own displeasure with the new 52 or just years of reflection, who knows but he went from focusing a lot on the triangle for 2 years ago to openly taking a strong stance on the idea that Clark would only marry one woman ever no matter how long he lived.

Mark Millar has openly compared Lois to a prostitute so I don’t really care what he thinks about the super marriage in any capacity. He’s a problematic guy.

[Nelliebly]

Oh another random fun bit is that Gail Simone shared around 2011(?) (whenever the new 52 hit that she and Grant Morrison sat together at a bar at comic con and “mourned” the loss of the super marriage together. She tweeted this account after everything was announced at comic con that year. Basically reaffirming from Simone that Morrison was not for losing the marriage.

[Timothy Hunter]

It’s worth noting that in recent years Mark Waid has changed the way he views the marriage. He’s an older man who grew up in a different time and like many men of that age bracket, he was partial to the triangle for 2. However, he openly stated on Twitter only a few years ago (before all of the conflict arose) that he believed Superman would only ever marry Lois and no one else even if he outlived her. He was asked specifically if he felt Superman would ever “remarry” after Lois died and he said no. That Clark would marry one time and one woman. When asked directly about his choices in KC, he said he never said Clark married Diana. He was also a participant in a women’s workshop some years ago alongside Greg Rucka (this is going back to like 2010??) and he expressed regret during that dialogue for ever insinuating that Lois should die so that Superman could end up with Wonder Woman. He expressed regret for choices he had made in Kingdom Come. So whatever his feelings are about the triangle for 2, Waid is a ride or die Lois and Clark supporter and had he undone the marriage Lois still would have remained as the focus. And, as shared, in recent years he actually got a bit defiant about the marriage literally saying that Clark would only ever marry Lois and that was it. Whether that was a result of his own displeasure with the new 52 or just years of reflection, who knows but he went from focusing a lot on the triangle for 2 years ago to openly taking a strong stance on the idea that Clark would only marry one woman ever no matter how long he lived.

Mark Millar has openly compared Lois to a prostitute so I don’t really care what he thinks about the super marriage in any capacity. He’s a problematic guy.

That's Chuck Austen era Superman levels of stupidity. Source?