Do people see captain america more as symbol of freedom than Superman today?

[manwhohaseverything]

You are not wrong. The Donner movie started it though I do think MoS took it much further.

Well, trends more than likely escalate. Batman used to have other emotions and he wasn't just batgod. They usd to actually tried to make good detective stories with the character . Now, he is manhattan.Even the jesus parallel and superman being "hufflepuff"(just kind, caring, nice and complacent) is the perception of those movies. But, the truth ofcourse Superman should be treated like gryffindor or slytherine.donner never meant for the superman to be some angel. The guy went back and beat up bullies.As protagonist, superman needs more than that.

[Laufeyson]

Well, trends more than likely escalate. Batman used to have other emotions and he wasn't just batgod. They usd to actually tried to make good detective stories with the character . Now, he is manhattan.Even the jesus parallel and superman being "hufflepuff"(just kind, caring, nice and complacent) is the perception of those movies. But, the truth ofcourse Superman should be treated like gryffindor or slytherine.donner never meant for the superman to be some angel. The guy went back and beat up bullies.As protagonist, superman needs more than that.

Wait, why is Superman considered as Hufflepuff? Isn't he supposed to be Gryffindor? Sorry, I do not really know Harry Potter's classification. It's been a long time since I read HP-verse Novels.

[Steel Inquisitor]

Wait, why is Superman considered as Hufflepuff? Isn't he supposed to be Gryffindor? Sorry, I do not really know Harry Potter's classification. It's been a long time since I read HP-verse Novels.

Hugglepuff are the oddballs who don't fit anywhere, Gryffindors are the jocks who go by willpower and being right. Superman's totally a Gryffindor. Hermione should have been a Ravenclaw.

[manwhohaseverything]

Wait, why is Superman considered as Hufflepuff? Isn't he supposed to be Gryffindor? Sorry, I do not really know Harry Potter's classification. It's been a long time since I read HP-verse Novels.

I think,It's because of postcrisis portrayal where the character has no roughness in him. He is generally seen as support for batman. You know just batman's yang/light half.

Hugglepuff are the oddballs who don't fit anywhere, Gryffindors are the jocks who go by willpower and being right. Superman's totally a Gryffindor. Hermione should have been a Ravenclaw.

On the contrary, hermoine doesn't have the flexibility of mind or the creativity of thought of a ravenclaw.Getting good grades means, you are good at academics. That's generally it. Moreover, it's the traits and more importantly choices that decide where you belong. By your logic ron and Neville shouldn't be in gryffindor.It's not gryffindor =/= jocks. Superman has the solitude and outsider mentality , intelligence, ambition(going to the big city to Make name for himself. Wanting to be accepted. Breaking the limits of his abilities and potential ) , strong leadership skills of a slytherine. He also has bravery, love, ability to withstand adversity through will power that makeup gryffindor. Hufflepuff characteristics include a strong sense of justice, loyalty, patience, a propensity for hard work and being nice to a fault. Sure enough, superman is nice. But, is he that nice like say billy batson? I don't think so. Superman was never meant to be a flying paragon like captain marvel. Superman is a champion . He is a dick sometimes too.Superman always bullies back his bullies.

Smashing cars, trucks,.. Etc of bullies is kindof his hobby.
But i guess, superman would be placed either of any of these houses.He is definitely in that wierd spot. He is both the dragon and the knight.hufflepuffs are purest of the knights in their ethics. Goku or billy batson would be it.

[Steel Inquisitor]

I think,It's because of postcrisis portrayal where the character has no roughness in him. He is generally seen as support for batman. You know just batman's yang/light half.

I don't see that as a weakness in itself, since it occupies a niche Wonder Woman and Batman don't fill. Wonder Woman's the grey between Batman's black and Superman's white. That's not "supporting," that's being his equal yet opposite. Batman being more popular is a seperate subject.

On the contrary, hermoine doesn't have the flexibility of mind or the creativity of thought of a ravenclaw.Getting good grades means, you are good at academics. That's generally it. Moreover, it's the traits and more importantly choices that decide where you belong. By your logic ron and Neville shouldn't be in gryffindor.It's not gryffindor =/= jocks. Superman has the solitude and outsider mentality , intelligence, ambition(going to the big city to Make name for himself. Wanting to be accepted. Breaking the limits of his abilities and potential ) , strong leadership skills of a slytherine. He also has bravery, love, ability to withstand adversity through will power that makeup gryffindor. Hufflepuff characteristics include a strong sense of justice, loyalty, patience, a propensity for hard work and being nice to a fault. Sure enough, superman is nice. But, is he that nice like say billy batson? I don't think so. Superman was never meant to be a flying paragon like captain marvel.

The main niche for Ravenclaws were being the intellectuals, and it's not like Harry or Ron were brimming with creativity. The characters choices overrode what houses their personalities belonged to, but to have the story to be told Rowling needed Harry, Hermione and Ron together so that's that. Ron didn't suit Gryffindor, the was a family tradition IIRC. Nevilla began more of a Hugglepuff but grew into a Gryffindor. Gryffindor were definitely riding on the jock mentality, they got by on willpower not brains - with exceptions, like Hermione. Without her Voldemorte would have snagged Harry long before he reached puberty.

Superman's not an outsider, he's everyone's best friend. He has allies everywhere. Superman's smart but I don't like him being super intelligent, that makes him too invincible. Batman needs that to run in the big leagues or he's just Wildcat in a bat costume in the Justice League. Every super-hero has ambition and being accepted, that in itself is not special. He's more of an explorer, breaking limits is what Batman does.

Again, typical traits in your average super-hero.

Superman is that, Billy Batson is that up to 11.

Superman's more of a figurehead or face to the public than a great leader of men. He's ok at it, Wonder Woman and Batman outshine him there.

Slythrine don't have strong leadership skills on average. They're mostly cowards and lackeys.

Superman is a champion . He is a dick sometimes too.Superman always bullies back his bullies.

Smashing cars, trucks,.. Etc of bullies is kindof his hobby.
But i guess, superman would be placed either of any of these houses.He is definitely in that wierd spot. He is both the dragon and the knight.

Smallville Superman was my least favourite Superman until Snyder came along. He's the definition of a brainless jock super-hero there. And no, Smallville Clark didn't do this as a hobby, he only did things when he was pulled into the orbit of super-villainy. That Clark was very passive until pushed by an outside influence, which is why he needed Lois, Lana, Lex, the Kents and Chloe.

[The World]

I don't see that as a weakness in itself, since it occupies a niche Wonder Woman and Batman don't fill. Wonder Woman's the grey between Batman's black and Superman's white. That's not "supporting," that's being his equal yet opposite. Batman being more popular is a seperate subject.

Superman predates Batman. Batman only exist because Superman proved the avenue Batman currently walks in proved to be lucrative and successful. Superman doesn't exist to be Batman's yin, or light or whatever. Superman is Superman and his characteristics should be what his writers endowed him with not what works best for some other character.

Superman's not an outsider,

When the character had some sense of complexity to him back in the bronze age he had conflicting feelings over his place in the world. Both feeling like he did and didn't belong. It's was an attempt to give the character some honest to goodness complexity and helped bring a sense of depth to him.

he's everyone's best friend. He has allies everywhere.

So you're saying he'd be best buds with Hitler or Pol Pot?

Superman's smart but I don't like him being super intelligent, that makes him too invincible. Batman needs that to run in the big leagues or he's just Wildcat in a bat costume in the Justice League. Every super-hero has ambition and being accepted, that in itself is not special. He's more of an explorer, breaking limits is what Batman does.

Why do you think these other characters should be dictating what Superman can or cannot do? Do you want to read about Superman or do you want to read about Superman writers trying to appease Batman writers? Superman's intelligence shouldn't be dictated by where Batman sits on the brain power barometer. It doesn't even make sense, why would we be deciding what Superman's capabilities are based on a character from a different set of books

Why do Post-Crisis Superman fans want Superman to serve the whims of other characters? This is how we ended up with that completely garbage first arc in Batman/Superman where Superman was behaving like Batman's robin.

Superman's more of a figurehead or face to the public than a great leader of men. He's ok at it, Wonder Woman and Batman outshine him there.

No offense but I think you're in the wrong forum. You seem obsessed with Batman and are just concerned that Superman might be absorbing the characteristics you like about Batman. Literally and I do mean LITERALLY the only reason Batman and Wonder Woman are here is because Superman was the type of person (at one point) that people wanted to be like. These characteristics you seem to love in Batman all existed in Superman, it's only been the sheer incompetency of the Post-Crisis writers that turned Superman into the bland, dry, figure head character that we know him to be today with the intelligence of a fruit fly.

[SiegePerilous02]

Why do you think these other characters should be dictating what Superman can or cannot do? Do you want to read about Superman or do you want to read about Superman writers trying to appease Batman writers? Superman's intelligence shouldn't be dictated by where Batman sits on the brain power barometer. It doesn't even make sense, why would we be deciding what Superman's capabilities are based on a character from a different set of books

Why do Post-Crisis Superman fans want Superman to serve the whims of other characters? This is how we ended up with that completely garbage first arc in Batman/Superman where Superman was behaving like Batman's robin..

This kind of relates to the debate on how important it is Superman's status as the first superhero (or among the very early public ones) be reflected in-universe once again. Superman being the inspirational, all powerful big brother figure that the whole superhero community looks to and makes everyone feel safe is not really earned as much if he isn't the first. Like if he's just this really powerful (but not too powerful) good guy doing the best he can, showed up after an entire generation came and went and doesn't really stand out from the pack in terms of power or history...why the hell is he looked to as the figurehead again? It's just a shallow echo of what he used to be.

It's for the benefit of other characters, specifically the JSA in this case. Superman lost his status as first superhero to prop them up even though actual history (and general in-universe continuity for the first 50 years or so) says otherwise and everyone knows it. So why waste our time with it? They're a niche property anyway. Other big names like Wonder Woman and Batman don't need to justify their existence by predating Superman, so him having that status doesn't impact them in-universe or out at all.

[manwhohaseverything]

Smallville Superman was my least favourite Superman until Snyder came along. He's the definition of a brainless jock super-hero there. And no, Smallville Clark didn't do this as a hobby, he only did things when he was pulled into the orbit of super-villainy. That Clark was very passive until pushed by an outside influence, which is why he needed Lois, Lana, Lex, the Kents and Chloe.

Superman isn't batman's yang. Batman exists because superman as an original idea exists.

Dude! Do you not have reading comprehension? Harry and ron were never meant for Ravenclaw. Did i say that? No. Hermoine isn't Ravenclaw material is what i said. She is gryffindor for a reason. Harry had two choices gryffindor and slytherine. Superman would have the same choices as harry. If you exert his goodness to messianic level like billy he can join hufflepuff also. So three choices. Moreover, slytherine don't have leadership skill? What????? Voldemort, snape, harry himself, salasar slytherine .... Etc there is a host of characters that are leaders in their own right.Batman would be clear cut slytherine. you do understand that right. You just destroyed your point. If batman is a leader and he is entirely a slytherine. Then your whole argument falls apart.

Rest of the it, don't require much of a reply because you aren't talking about what's actually part of the character's history. You are talking about your own ideal versions of him which isn't reality. Superman not being an outsider is lol worthy response. Superman's friends don't even know the real him. jimmy, lois, perry.. Etc all knew the facade with glasses and never kal el. His superhero friends could never understand the human in clark. People in general only knew superman the champion,not superman the person. Superman might be surrounded by people. But, none of them actually knew him. No, superhero generally don't have that much ambition. They are generally known for selflessness . Superman's need for acceptance comes from his orphan existence, being last of his kind, never truly fitting in.. Etc. Have you even read for the man who has everything? Sheesh! Moreover, actually read superman comics before you declare stuff.

Once again, reading comprehension. I said superman,i didn't say smallville superman. If you don't like smallville superman. What about donner superman or dcau superman? Every superman has his dick moments. Even the postcrisis version. But, the general perception of the character being a perfect white knight came from postcrisis for me.I have already shown you images of postcrisis superman shoving a guy in a trashcan. Donner superman has done similar things.and Yes, these hufflepuff traits are traits of a knight or heroes or samurais.Not just any knight the greatest of knights. Gryffindor are known for being noble knights. But, the greatest of knights? i don't think so. They generally fall short in that regards. For instance, cedric is white knight of hufflepuff. Harry isn't as noble, kind hearted as cedric.

It would be very hard for superman to be a hufflepuff. He isn't that pure of his own ethical core, like billy or goku. Superman does have times where he wants to show off and he does.Superman has prejudices . He has leanings. He takes sides.

Why? Billy would never showoff. Billy is always kind no matter who the person.Billy batson was a true savior.An orphan child down on his luck with a level of innocence, flexibility of mind and the power of gods that superman could only dream of.That's hufflepuff in a nutshell . Granted, i do believe superman does have some qualities of hufflepuff. Superman doesn't do this for either glory nor vengeance. That's hufflepuff quality. But, still superman is wayyyyy more flawed in general that it would be a big stretch.Superman would simply bully back any bully who picks on the weak. Yes, even donner superman.Billy would never do that. He is the bigger man.Finally, you seem to be more of billy batson fan than a Superman fan actually .Because you seem to want to make superman into captain marvel.Superman is more about individuals. Billy is more about institutions.

[manwhohaseverything]

Superman showing off in donner movie. There is a reason why pa kent needs to give that speech to superman. This is'nt a hufflepuff mentality. It's a Gryffindor mentality.

[NaVi]

Superman is a boy who has lost his world, he grew up in a strange world, a world in which we are all the same, but he is different, no matter how hard he tries and tries his mistakes will be worse than the mistakes of others. That means that Superman has to start as the champion of the weak, of the smallest, that his fight little by little makes him the champion of the world, but a nuisance for ALL the governments of the world. also superman is kryptonian, that means he is one of the most intelligent men in the universe, it would be nice to see superman use that intelligence to solve some problems.

[Steel Inquisitor]

Superman predates Batman. Batman only exist because Superman proved the avenue Batman currently walks in proved to be lucrative and successful. Superman doesn't exist to be Batman's yin, or light or whatever. Superman is Superman and his characteristics should be what his writers endowed him with not what works best for some other character.

Superman didn’t stop evolving in the 30’s, he grew. This is about how he’s written with other characters, not who influenced who. This isn’t about what defined him, it’s about how those characters are written around each other. It was a personal opinion, I like characters to have their own niches like in the League so everyone doesn’t become redundant when Superman’s around. A characters who’d had numerous ups and downs with his power levels. He’s not even the most powerful super-hero on the planet in many DCU’s.

When the character had some sense of complexity to him back in the bronze age he had conflicting feelings over his place in the world. Both feeling like he did and didn't belong. It's was an attempt to give the character some honest to goodness complexity and helped bring a sense of depth to him.

He can do that and not be an outsider. Complexity Is more than not having any friends.

So you're saying he'd be best buds with Hitler or Pol Pot?

No, I’m saying he’s not anti-social. He’s not a recluse staying in the Fortress of Solitude who is incapable of making friends and allies of people.

Why do you think these other characters should be dictating what Superman can or cannot do? Do you want to read about Superman or do you want to read about Superman writers trying to appease Batman writers? Superman's intelligence shouldn't be dictated by where Batman sits on the brain power barometer. It doesn't even make sense, why would we be deciding what Superman's capabilities are based on a character from a different set of books

That wasn’t what I said. This isn’t about which character and their writers need to be the strongest, smartest and best of everything like it’s competing football teams. They’re both characters who are in stories occasionally with each other and other characters, and the stories won’t make any sense if Superman’s able to do anything without breaking a sweat. Why would I fear for Superman’s life if he can solve everything in a picosecond? What does making Superman a god who can do anything bring any value to stories with his Super Family and any super-hero teams he joins if he can just show up and overshadow them? Batman does this, as well. Thee should be balance and for multiple characters to contribute to the plot.

Why do Post-Crisis Superman fans want Superman to serve the whims of other characters? This is how we ended up with that completely garbage first arc in Batman/Superman where Superman was behaving like Batman's robin.

This is about having a shared universe where Superman is a valued part of it, and that includes sharing the spotlight with others who have their own niches. This is about solving things together, even Lois contributes to Superman stories with her skills and knowledge. I didn’t like Loeb’s Superman/Batman series for reasons like that.

No offense but I think you're in the wrong forum. You seem obsessed with Batman and are just concerned that Superman might be absorbing the characteristics you like about Batman. Literally and I do mean LITERALLY the only reason Batman and Wonder Woman are here is because Superman was the type of person (at one point) that people wanted to be like. These characteristics you seem to love in Batman all existed in Superman, it's only been the sheer incompetency of the Post-Crisis writers that turned Superman into the bland, dry, figure head character that we know him to be today with the intelligence of a fruit fly.

Batman’s just an example everyone knows, and he’s the one who’s over taken Superman for DC’s No.1 super-hero for years. Because DC lets him do everything rather than sharing the spotlight properly with other super-heroes, I’d say the same for any super-hero at DC who would do this. Super-hero comics are more about than who was created before the other, this is about how they’re written in stories not who came first. Many people still want to be Superman, he’s still a big icon and merchandise machine for DC/WB. Post Crisis Superman wasn’t stupid, but he was more relatable and provided a template for Superman TAS and other versions. He just wasn’t a boring wizard who took the tension out of stories, that wasn’t even what the original version Shuster and Siegel created. That version couldn’t even fly, he leapt like the Hulk.

[Stanlos]

Superman's more of a figurehead or face to the public than a great leader of men. He's ok at it, Wonder Woman and Batman outshine him there.

How do you arrive at this? All three of these are leaders albeit for different reasons and different styles. Superman is a "natural leader".

[SiegePerilous02]

Batman’s just an example everyone knows, and he’s the one who’s over taken Superman for DC’s No.1 super-hero for years. Because DC lets him do everything rather than sharing the spotlight properly with other super-heroes, I’d say the same for any super-hero at DC who would do this. Super-hero comics are more about than who was created before the other, this is about how they’re written in stories not who came first. Many people still want to be Superman, he’s still a big icon and merchandise machine for DC/WB. Post Crisis Superman wasn’t stupid, but he was more relatable and provided a template for Superman TAS and other versions. He just wasn’t a boring wizard who took the tension out of stories, that wasn’t even what the original version Shuster and Siegel created. That version couldn’t even fly, he leapt like the Hulk.

I wouldn't say post-Crisis Superman was more relatable than what came before. In some ways he was less relatable. When written properly by the likes of Moore or Maggin, Clark in the Bronze Age could be very interesting and nuanced in ways the later version never quite managed. Post-Crisis Clark didn't really have a psychological identity crisis between his two personas so right away there is less of an internal struggle. He grew up as one of the most popular kids in school and was a big football jock hero. He didn't really feel like someone who struggles with being an outsider, which was key to pre-COIE Superman and something I imagine a lot of comic nerds can relate more easily than being a handsome popular jock who behaved almost the same way in both his identities.

It's not that he didn't have friends or was completely anti-social, just that he found them in unusual places (the Legion, Batman & Robin, his dog, all of which were scrapped by Crisis), had one friend in on the secret (Pete Ross) and wasn't great at maintaining inter personal relationships or letting his walls down (the Daily Planet staff). The character is innately weird in his lifestyle and psychology, something you can only get when he's of a certain mindset, backstory and power level. You're selling the pre-Crisis version short by just describing him as an all powerful wizard who could solve all problems easily (why did he always have trouble with the likes of Mxy or even Lex if he was so all powerful)?

Being the template for STAS isn't a glowing endorsement. That is the creative team that said he was inherently less interesting than Batman, had kids in-universe say he was kind of lame, really border on wanting to go the fascist route in JL/U and whose big "World of Cardboard" moment against Darkseid didn't even save the day. We could use way less templates like that for the character.

How do you arrive at this? All three of these are leaders albeit for different reasons and different styles. Superman is a "natural leader".

Yes all three of them perhaps should be looked at as the leaders, but I think Superman for a not insignificant amount of time was viewed as THE leader of the superhero community. Like if you read Alex Ross's Justice, that's a book that gives everyone time to shine but Superman is viewed as the leader everyone rallies behind. Look how the Fortress is their base of operations they retreat to when they are in their darkest hour. Because it's based on the Bronze age version, where it was pretty much a given.

Wonder Woman is up there with him, and if there were formal rankings I'd say she'd be second in command. Since there aren't any, they can probably swap depending on missions. But Batman shouldn't be a leader. Dick Grayson surpassed him in that capacity back in the 80s.