DC Clichés that need a looooong rest...

[Agent Z]

It’s funny because people still say Supes is perfect despite pretty much all of his stories for the last couple of decades being about how flawed he is.
Young Justice - Is a dick to Kon and takes an entire season to realize he needs to reach out to Kon

How many people do you know would be fine with a clone being created without their knowledge or consent? Hell, Clark's reaction in the show is actually better than in the comics where he left the boy in the care of a money-grubbing agent. Superman has always had a hands off approach when it comes to other members of the Super-family. The issue with the show is them not acknowledging the implications of Clark being violated but calling him a dick is ignoring a lot context and even then, it's just one season.

DCAU - He screws up spectacularly in the finale of STAS, and the Cadmus arc in JLU is all about him making mistake after mistake

How was the finale of STAS his fault? He was brainwashed. It's like blaming Bucky for what he did under Hydra's control. The Cadmus arc is also an exaggeration. Everyone made mistakes there and the situation is as much Waller's fault if not entirely.

Rocksteady SS - He’s evil (albeit under mind control)

See above. This one isn't even showing him as flawed because, again, he is not in control of himself.

DCEU - Is a colossal failure as a hero and is going to be evil until Batman saves the day

Did I miss the part in MoS were Superman fails to defeat Zod and Batman swoops in or when Batman kills Doomsday? I get you don't like this take but at least actually criticize what you've seen happening on screen.

Smallville - Oh boy does he have to be dragged kicking and screaming towards being Superman

Clark was saving people as early as the first episode without any pressure. His issues were the Jor-El A.I. trying to control his life and remove his empathy for human. You know, that thing Superman needs to actually care about people. This revisionist history about how Clark actually acted in Smallville seems to be based on people disliking the lack of Tom Welling in a Superman costume.

I don’t know how anyone can still view him as perfect since the last time he was portrayed in an unabashedly positive light was uh Donner maybe? At some point they need to let him actually be the “ultimate” hero because their deconstruction hard on has made him look pretty crappy.

Here's the thing - I'm not particularly fond of evil Superman either or at least how it is handled. But the perception of Superman being perfect likely has to do with fans reacting to any portrayal that shows any weakness or difficulty overcoming obstacles as an aberration worthy of total contempt. It isn't the only reason but it is definitely a major one. Just look at the versions you listed - the only one that outright counts as a bad portrayal of Superman is Injustice where he's a villain and even there they point out that this is not how he is supposed to act. Everything else is either him being victimized or making mistakes that have very, very extenuating circumstances.

The only reason the Donner movies portray him as a positive figure is by ignoring the implications of his actions.

[Sutekh]

I was not a fan of the expansion attempt after the success of Swamp Thing to describe everyone and their dog as an 'elemental.' Red Tornado is an elemental of air! Firestorm is an elemental of fire! Vixen channels 'the Red.' Ugh.

And then the Green Lantern corps expanded into an entire Emotional Spectrum that Sinestro and Star Sapphire are retroactively part of, and there's now a Sage Force and Still Force and whatever to go with the Speed Force. Not a fan.

What's next, an entire category of special metals like Nth metal, with different properties, and Promethium and Inertron or whatever are backfitted to be part of the 'Metal Spectrum?' A half-dozen other hidden islands of people from Greek myth (this is the island of minotaurs! This is the island of sirens! This is the island of myrmidons!)? It's like they have one cool idea for one character (he's an elemental!), and it has to spread out Borg-like and infect / incorporate all sorts of other aspects of the DCU.

[SiegePerilous02]

I'd say Barbara worked fine before as a deconstruction of the Indiana Jones archetype. The problem is the later writers never leaned into that.

I like Perez's Minerva a lot, but yes the main issue is other writers didn't do much with what he set up. Even Perez himself seems to lose interest in her after the Bana arc. But I think the deconstruction of Indiana Jones is still there currently, it's just that now there is a stronger emotional connection and motivation on her part towards Diana that strengthens the parallels Perez set up. I also think adding some elements of Priscilla Rich back into her made her stronger than either character was as an individual.

Here's the thing - I'm not particularly fond of evil Superman either or at least how it is handled. But the perception of Superman being perfect likely has to do with fans reacting to any portrayal that shows any weakness or difficulty overcoming obstacles as an aberration worthy of total contempt. It isn't the only reason but it is definitely a major one. Just look at the versions you listed - the only one that outright counts as a bad portrayal of Superman is Injustice where he's a villain and even there they point out that this is not how he is supposed to act. Everything else is either him being victimized or making mistakes that have very, very extenuating circumstances.

The only reason the Donner movies portray him as a positive figure is by ignoring the implications of his actions.

I don't think fans who dislike the portrayals Vordan listed are let down by them because Superman isn't perfect in them. Superman has never been perfect. I and a lot of other fans love the portrayals by Maggin, Moore and Morrison, and he isn't perfect in any of those. However, his contradictions, layers, quirks and flaws are a little more subtle in those, more so than what fans expect out of serialized soap opera superhero fiction (which isn't very complex or nuanced as a rule). And since those takes don't make it into adaptations or keep being buried/ignored by comic writers, what we get is a rather boring character who needs the extenuating circumstances as a crutch to seem "flawed and interesting." Because otherwise he doesn't have as much going on and is exactly as boring and perfect as the detractors perceive him as. By ignoring key aspects of his character, he's trapped in a no-win situation between different factions of fans.

Injustice aside, I think a lot of the circumstances in the adaptations may not be bad in isolation. It's just that there is an abundance of it and not much else. The Donner legacy and the inability to break away from it (Singer, and no not even Snyder broke away from it) isn't helping him either.

[phonogram12]

I disagree with most of those. I don't want characters killing willy-nilly, and it should never be a first solution or murder, but for most it should not be a hard-and-fast "absolutely never kill."

But for me, secret identities are a strong part of superheroes. Fundamental aspect of the genre that they exist. I kinda sill miss Diana having one. And there's nothing wrong with capes at all - they're impractical, but no more so than many capeless costumes.

I'd like to see more civilian life and truly civilian supporting characters. To see the life outside of superheroes and for heroes to have connections with "ordinary" people. But there's not really a cliche that needs to be eliminated there.

Agreed for the most part on all counts. That said, a writer who writes Superman into a corner where he's forced to kill truly lacks the sort of imagination it takes to write the character.

As for secret identities, I truly don't think all characters need them. Most of the Avengers don't. Wally West (at his best) didn't. And although I'm enjoying Bendis' Superman runs, I kinda miss his, TBH. But other characters I feel they're absolutely essential, like the Bat Family, Daredevil, and Spider-Man (basically most street level heroes). Ironically, the first time I was ever convinced WW was an entertaining character without her secret ID was during the incredibly divisive Azzarello/Chiang run, then later with Morrison's E1 books. Most every other writer's take on WW without the secret ID just left me cold.

For the most part, I also prefer it when a superhero's supporting cast mainly consisted of regular people. It gives them a connection to the common person that only being friends with superheroes never can.

[Tzigone]

Hell, Clark's reaction in the show is actually better than in the comics where he left the boy in the care of a money-grubbing agent. Superman has always had a hands off approach when it comes to other members of the Super-family.

I think there are a few significant differences.

#1 SB is not genetically related to Clark in the comics when he's introduced (that's retconned much later). It's the government that the obligation to the protect all kids. Clark doesn't have any actual connection to him that's any further than any other kid created by a lab experiment.
#2 SB had Dubbilex to look after his interests, and Supes trusts Dubbilex.
#3 SB became an emaciated minor, and made his own decisions. Some were bad decisions, but an emancipated minor is equal to an adult in that context, and that's what he was.
#4 No one to feel sorry for the comics, because SB had absolutely no interest at all in being Superman's son. He wasn't interested in pursuing a relationship with Superman. He wanted to be worthy to take the mantle one day, but that's all.

I don't think Clark had any obligation to Conner in the show, but many did. What I absolutely hated was having Bruce give him parenting instructions and be portrayed as the better of them in that regard. In the modern era, Bruce has been a terrible parent. I liked the idea of seeing old-fashioned good dad Bruce, but then they had to diminish Superman with it. Because even if I didn't think Superman had an obligation, it definitely made him look bad to fans.

[SiegePerilous02]

I don't think Clark had any obligation to Conner in the show, but many did. What I absolutely hated was having Bruce give him parenting instructions and be portrayed as the better of them in that regard. In the modern era, Bruce has been a terrible parent. I liked the idea of seeing old-fashioned good dad Bruce, but then they had to diminish Superman with it. Because even if I didn't think Superman had an obligation, it definitely made him look bad to fans.

I don't think there should be an issue with Bruce being the one to point out Clark is being a lousy father figure. What happens in the modern day comics is irrelevant since YJ isn't the comics. In the older comics, Bruce was overall the cool and loving dad/older sibling figure to Dick while Clark shunted Kara off to an orphanage. Clark putting on the front of an extrovert but actually being very introverted while Bruce is the opposite and better at letting people in is a more interesting take on them.

Where YJ went wrong was drawing it out so they could resolve it in the season finale. That subplot should have been resolved mid-season tops.

[Tzigone]

I don't think there should be an issue with Bruce being the one to point out Clark is being a lousy father figure. What happens in the modern day comics is irrelevant since YJ isn't the comics.

But it's not irrelevant to me. Moreover, it's just another way other heroes are diminished and made inferior to Batman in either competence or morality. This time in parenting. And Superman definitely gets a high-dose of that (being established as inferior to Batman), and not just in comics. I mean, it's the same thing with having Batman do so much of the mission giving/running of the YJ team at the time, too. And Batman the one to fund Conner - not as the League funding Conner, but Batman in particular. It is very definitely set up to make Batman better than Superman.

Like I said, I'd have loved to have seen a good Batdad, but not when it's a setup to make others look inferior. Sick of that.

[Agent Z]

Agreed for the most part on all counts. That said, a writer who writes Superman into a corner where he's forced to kill truly lacks the sort of imagination it takes to write the character.

I'd actually argue the opposite depending on the story and writer. Putting Superman in such a situation actually would require imagination. If anything, writers just frequently have him pull non-lethal solutions out of his ass or just act as if what he does wouldn't end up killing some of his villains anyway.

[Frontier]

Magic is dying! - I think every single DCU magic team has had this as their opening arc. I hope Ram V stays away from it after he wraps up the Upside Down Man arc, and I hope DC Mystic as a whole avoids this boring cliche.

It’s funny because people still say Supes is perfect despite pretty much all of his stories for the last couple of decades being about how flawed he is.
Young Justice - Is a dick to Kon and takes an entire season to realize he needs to reach out to Kon
DCAU - He screws up spectacularly in the finale of STAS, and the Cadmus arc in JLU is all about him making mistake after mistake
Injustice - He’s evil
Rocksteady SS - He’s evil (albeit under mind control)
DCEU - Is a colossal failure as a hero and is going to be evil until Batman saves the day
Smallville - Oh boy does he have to be dragged kicking and screaming towards being Superman
I don’t know how anyone can still view him as perfect since the last time he was portrayed in an unabashedly positive light was uh Donner maybe? At some point they need to let him actually be the “ultimate” hero because their deconstruction hard on has made him look pretty crappy.

He was brainwashed in the STAS finale.

How many people do you know would be fine with a clone being created without their knowledge or consent? Hell, Clark's reaction in the show is actually better than in the comics where he left the boy in the care of a money-grubbing agent. Superman has always had a hands off approach when it comes to other members of the Super-family. The issue with the show is them not acknowledging the implications of Clark being violated but calling him a dick is ignoring a lot context and even then, it's just one season.

The problem was they shouldn't have left his attempts at bonding with Conner be in a tie-in comic or off-screen.

[SiegePerilous02]

I'd actually argue the opposite depending on the story and writer. Putting Superman in such a situation actually would require imagination. If anything, writers just frequently have him pull non-lethal solutions out of his ass or just act as if what he does wouldn't end up killing some of his villains anyway.

How does it require imagination? Not all non-lethal solutions are pulled out of their ass, and actually putting in the work to show his skills, determination and cleverness to win the day without lethal solutions and having the story work actually requires more skill and imagination. Stuff like the most infamous recent example, Zod in MOS, actually isn't very imaginative because it didn't lead to any interesting fallout. And it was built on the contrivance of Zod not being sucked into the Phantom Zone with the rest of the villains when the movie could have ended a few minutes earlier. Doing stuff only for shock value isn't imaginative.

Acting as if the stuff he does wouldn't kill the villains anyway is also moot. The stuff he does doesn't kill them. Nothing any superheroes do is lethal even if it would realistically be, not unless the plot suddenly requires it to be. It's a fantasy story about an invincible human-looking alien who flies and shots lasers from his eyes.

The problem was they shouldn't have left his attempts at bonding with Conner be in a tie-in comic or off-screen.

Or exposition heavy dialogue explaining past events the characters shouldn't need to discuss because they were all there, but the audience wasn't.

This is an issue with the time skips in the show in general I feel.

But it's not irrelevant to me. Moreover, it's just another way other heroes are diminished and made inferior to Batman in either competence or morality. This time in parenting. And Superman definitely gets a high-dose of that (being established as inferior to Batman), and not just in comics. I mean, it's the same thing with having Batman do so much of the mission giving/running of the YJ team at the time, too. And Batman the one to fund Conner - not as the League funding Conner, but Batman in particular. It is very definitely set up to make Batman better than Superman.

Like I said, I'd have loved to have seen a good Batdad, but not when it's a setup to make others look inferior. Sick of that.

This I can agree with. But I guess it isn't as bothersome to me as other examples, because Batman is much less of a douche here than he otherwise might be in modern portrayals.

And I otherwise don't have much confidence in this take on Superman to believe he'd be much better even without the Batman comparisons

[Restingvoice]

cheap resurrection and fake retirements. you die or retire in the main-line, that's it, shift their stories going forward out of continuity. I'm tired off "nothing will be the same" just to quietly undo it. If Alfred comes back at all (at least in the next 5 years) I'm not reading any story with him in it

Not if the death is something mandated for a quick buck, not in the writer's vision, created to destroy a character, or just plain awful idea.

Barry wasn't supposed to die in Crisis, that wasn't in the writer's plan, DC top brass at that time demanded it. Jason died because someone rigged the phone call, and even without that, it's pretty awful of DC who promote his death as a trend. Hotshot was killed because King wanted a BLM reference. Roy was killed because it has to be a Titans since other characters have a book. Alfred's death is ordered by Didio. King's original version was just a Scarecrow gas vision of Damian. Stephanie Brown was killed because Didio didn't like her. Ted Kord was killed because his friend was retcon to be a villain for a story that retcons Crisis heroes to be villains. Then there's the whole thing with Identity Crisis.

Damian is the only one I can agree, because it's the creator who killed him, but even then, there's still his character development that other writers like Tomasi, Miller and Nguyen gave that makes him went from a hated brat to fan favorite. A lot of things that fans like about Damian came from those other writers, and it's like, nope, don't care.

I'll change no resurrection with no deaths. At the very least the ones that checked all the boxes above. Basically what I want is for them to stop and think if this decision is actually a good idea, and make a long term plan about it, instead of go with their impulse that YEAH! WE'RE GONNA GET A FORTUNE WITH THIS ISSUE! instead of thinking long term and then just bring them back once that fortune reach a low point again.

[phonogram12]

How does it require imagination? Not all non-lethal solutions are pulled out of their ass, and actually putting in the work to show his skills, determination and cleverness to win the day without lethal solutions and having the story work actually requires more skill and imagination.

Exactly this.

Stuff like the most infamous recent example, Zod in MOS, actually isn't very imaginative because it didn't lead to any interesting fallout. And it was built on the contrivance of Zod not being sucked into the Phantom Zone with the rest of the villains when the movie could have ended a few minutes earlier. Doing stuff only for shock value isn't imaginative.

Someone desperately needs to tell Snyder this.

Acting as if the stuff he does wouldn't kill the villains anyway is also moot. The stuff he does doesn't kill them. Nothing any superheroes do is lethal even if it would realistically be, not unless the plot suddenly requires it to be. It's a fantasy story about an invincible human-looking alien who flies and shots lasers from his eyes.

Pretty much.

[Frontier]

Or exposition heavy dialogue explaining past events the characters shouldn't need to discuss because they were all there, but the audience wasn't.

This is an issue with the time skips in the show in general I feel.

YJ is like the master of having important stuff happen off-screen because of the time-skips.

[Gaius]

YJ is like the master of having important stuff happen off-screen because of the time-skips.

I haven't watched the revival seasons but yeah felt like with the season 1 to 2 time-skip I was being punished for not watching a season that didn't exist.

[Ra-El]

A new version or replacement of a character showing up and being hailed as so much better, stronger or whatever for no other reason than trying to promote that character without having to do any heavy lifting establishing them.