Superman and the Authority

[kryptonian]

No force on heaven and earth would ever force them to supplant the current Superman with new 52 Superman

[Sacred Knight]

No one's talking about supplanting. The thought is a co-existence via the multiverse. And I'm not even necessarily thinking verbatim New 52. But that said, considering they're actually willing to supplant him now with a weak character like Jon, who knows what they're capable of these days.

Nerdish talk: if you really think about it, we never got pre-New 52 Superman back from oblivion. We consider SuperDad and pre-New52 Supes one and the same because they told us so. But the mere presence of Jon puts him in a different position storywise, because pre-New 52 Supes DIDN'T have a son. The birth of Jon and his growth took place in Convergence, that is they were never really told in a complete and satisfying way. Nothing would prevent them from resurrecting Lois & Clark from Jurgens' series, tell us that Jon was their son, that regular Superman thought that he was Jon's Dad because of vibrational **** and just send them to Earth-Dick or something like that. It wouldn't be messier than what we have now.

True. They're definitely not the same, they just glommed the history on rather poorly. But I've said it before, I can dream of things making sense again all I want, but its never going to. They'd have to reboot the main line completely again, and I can't ever see that happening again anytime soon. Realistically they just keep riding with this idea of referencing what they want to when they want to whether it makes any sense or not. The lore already is some really shabbily taped together hodgepodge.

[Myskin]

True. They're definitely not the same, they just glommed the history on rather poorly. But I've said it before, I can dream of things making sense again all I want, but its never going to. They'd have to reboot the main line completely again, and I can't ever see that happening again anytime soon. Realistically they just keep riding with this idea of referencing what they want to when they want to whether it makes any sense or not. The lore already is some really shabbily taped together hodgepodge.

Nerdish talk 2: I don't think that they will ever get Superbro back, but that's not actually that important, because the real discriminating factor here is the presence of Jon (in each of his incarnations). That's the only important point narrative-wise. if they erase Jon from continuity, they can do whatever they want. They can make Superman older, they can get Superbro back, they can create a whole new origin, they can make Luthor a mad doctor or a tycoon or whatever. Jon is really the only break it or make it factor (and the marriage, but at this point I don't think that anyone would argue for erasing that). Since the very first moment they introduced Jon into "regular continuity", I immediately knew (and I am not particularly clever) that it would cause more harm than good, because it's the type of character who always stands in the way and is very difficult to ignore (whereas you can do it with relative easiness with Supergirl or Conner Kent). Years later, I think that facts have proven me right.

[kryptonian]

Nerdish talk 2: I don't think that they will ever get Superbro back, but that's not actually that important, because the real discriminating factor here is the presence of Jon (in each of his incarnations). That's the only important point narrative-wise. if they erase Jon from continuity, they can do whatever they want. They can make Superman older, they can get Superbro back, they can create a whole new origin, they can make Luthor a mad doctor or a tycoon or whatever. Jon is really the only break it or make it factor (and the marriage, but at this point I don't think that anyone would argue for erasing that). Since the very first moment they introduced Jon into "regular continuity", I immediately knew (and I am not particularly clever) that it would cause more harm than good, because it's the type of character who always stands in the way and is very difficult to ignore (whereas you can do it with relative easiness with Supergirl or Conner Kent). Years later, I think that facts have proven me right.

Jon is here to stay

His failed legion comic still sold more than new 52 Superman towards the end


And the fact that they went out of their way to not only kill off new 52 Superman...but did it so thoroughly that they basically de-canonized grant Morrison’s action comics run speaks to the level of hatred fans and the company had for post-flashpoint Superman

To the point where they were even willing to discard a grant Morrison Superman story

The whole DC staff consists of people that hate and reject the new 52 era to a cartoonish degree


They even went out of their way to make a comic about how new 52 was a disaster in the form of death metal and doomsday clock

[Sacred Knight]

Jon's existence is in jeopardy if and when his Superman stint falls flat. De-age will be an option, but so will be erasure. He's not the stalwart you think he is. Fact is his importance to the lore is more in line with a Chris Kent than a Lois Lane. He's easily disposable. They've discarded things way older and way more built up than him before. Five years being dedicated to him is nothing to an 80+ year old concept. If I were to put money on it, I'd say de-age is more likely, unfortunately. But this idea that he's untouchable is ridiculous.

[Yoda]

In outside media there definitely seems to be a sense of having projects on different points of Superman's timeline with My Adventures of Superman, Superman and Lois, and the new animated movies. I could see them having different maxi or miniseries at different junctures and would welcome them. I think there's a real benefit to having fresh takes on these things. Superman & Lois handled the Triangle for Two exceptionally well. Seeing a fresh take on that in the comics would be great. Plus, I think WB's has settled into a "evolution" of the character over his existence that they are mining for adaptions and stories. PKJ said as much in a recent interview.

But the idea that they'll create a series just based on another Earth version concurrently seems far fetched, particularly where the only difference is a slight change in attitude that they could incorporate aspects of if they really want into the mainline one. If they were to launch a second Earth version of Superman, it's going to be a version of Calvin Ellis or Val Zod. Though what the nature of this "Elseworld" will be remains to be seen.

[Quinlan58]

If (when?) there's a reboot, I don't think they'll throw things back to the classic status quo, given they already tried that with the New 52 and then decided they had to nuke everything they had built 5 years later. I think it's more likely to go back to a post-marriage status quo. As for Jon's status... they're not going to kill him because that'd just be way too depressing, but in case of a reboot I can see them throw things back to before he was born.

Chris Kent's different because Chris was always built to be a one-arc character, and even then they brought him back (first in a stupid way and then in a stupid and insulting way, but hey, they did it).

[Sacred Knight]

While acknowledging that times have changed, history at the same time shows there's merit to two Supermen whose differences are subtle. I mean, what was the difference between Earth-Two and Earth-One Superman? One was married, the other wasn't, one was older, the other was younger, one worked at the Daily Planet, one worked at the Daily Star. One had sweater sleeves and the other didn't. I mean, these are small differences and yet the two versions co-existed for a long time and comics fans didn't complain. Again, that was a long time ago so would things be different now? Perhaps. But perhaps not. Honestly I think a different version of Kal still has a better chance of success than an alternate verison that's vastly different if we were talking a system of being regularly published. As no matter how long ago we're talking about, one thing has remained the same and that's that comic fans tend to be more receptive to the familiar, while the vastly different they feel more comfortable in a staunchly labeled "imaginary" or "Elseworld" type label. Things stop being imaginary tale when they're published with the regularity of an ongoing monthly. Its a weird frame of mind stepping outside the mindset of comic fandom, admittedly, but it is a phenomenon that exists.

But honestly in the end there's no way to know unless it were tried. Which probably won't happen so I'm just left with my own opinions on the idea. And since I support it obviously I lean toward a positive frame of mind. I can't prove it though.

[kryptonian]

Erasure is an option


But being an option and actually being possible are two different things


This entire argument hinges on the idea that DC would be willing to double down on a version of the character that hadn’t been successful outside of comics in 30 years(pre-marriage Superman)

And it hinges on the idea that Jon’s Superman will be a complete failure(which is unlikely given Taylor’s brand)


As well as the disproven assumption that Jon is unpopular, when his reviled incarnation still sold as much as Wonder Woman and the fucking flash while leading a dead franchise(legion of superheroes)


Want to know what happens in a reboot

Jon gets de-aged


That’s the only option that is both an option and actually possible

[Sacred Knight]

They're not really. If something is an option, then its possible.

And no, the argument doesn't hinge on that, as you're still misconstruing the idea as replacing, when its not. And that's incorrect anyway, younger Superman has had success outside of comics. Man of Tomorrow was a successful animated take just this year. No one cared that MOS Superman was young and unmarried, that verse had other problems that coalesced later. TAS Superman was never married. And so on.

And a writer's brand doesn't mean much these days. A name isn't an automatic big seller anymore, that goes with names bigger than Taylor's. We're simply in a period right now where that doesn't matter that much for whatever reason. The idea will sink or swim that book, not just advertising it as being written by the guy who wrote some Injustice and DCeased.

[kryptonian]

They're not really. If something is an option, then its possible.

And no, the argument doesn't hinge on that, as you're still misconstruing the idea as replacing, when its not. And that's incorrect anyway, younger Superman has had success outside of comics. Man of Tomorrow was a successful animated take not even a year old.

And a writer's brand doesn't mean much these days. A name isn't an automatic big seller anymore, that goes with names bigger than Taylor's. We're simply in a period right now where that doesn't matter that much for whatever reason. The idea will sink or swim that book, not just advertising it as being written by the guy who wrote some Injustice and DCeased.

When Jon is still here 10 years from now


I will take pleasure in rubbing it in your face

[Vordan]

I’m just going to say that given Lee is probably going to try to push his Wildstorm characters in DC media alongside another attempt to integrate them with the DCU, that I’d love if they did an Authority animated series that starred this lineup.

[Sacred Knight]

When Jon is still here 10 years from now


I will take pleasure in rubbing it in your face

Good luck with that I suppose. I won't even remember you in ten years.

I’m just going to say that given Lee is probably going to try to push his Wildstorm characters in DC media alongside another attempt to integrate them with the DCU, that I’d love if they did an Authority animated series that starred this lineup.

I'd watch that.

[Myskin]

Jon's existence is in jeopardy if and when his Superman stint falls flat. De-age will be an option, but so will be erasure. He's not the stalwart you think he is. Fact is his importance to the lore is more in line with a Chris Kent than a Lois Lane. He's easily disposable. They've discarded things way older and way more built up than him before. Five years being dedicated to him is nothing to an 80+ year old concept. If I were to put money on it, I'd say de-age is more likely, unfortunately. But this idea that he's untouchable is ridiculous.

If this may be of any consolation, I interpreted some parts of the awfully boring first issue of Infinite Frontier (or maybe it was #0; I don't remember. The part about him being out of time etc) as a pre-emptive strike should the Jon-as-Superman thing go wrong.
Unless they retcon him as an enemy (which could even happen, by the way: something similar happened to Cir-El, even if that character was way more insignificant) Jon won't die. Only Bryan Singer could think that killing Superman's son is a good idea. But they can quietly erase him from existence, relocate him on a different earth, change him into an amnesiac Daxamite, retcon him as Earth-2 Superman's son, etc. I guess that it depends from multiple factors. I guess that they could even de-age him, but: 1- At this point Jon has been an adult longer than he was a child and it would really sound weird; 2- I guess that he has had a girlfriend or something like that in some title, maybe Legion? That would make it even weirder; and, in particular: 3- Am I wrong or historically speaking deaging a character from an adult to a child is an EXTREMELY rare occurrence for DC? I mean, as far as I remember it happened only once - after Bart Allen became the Flash and died, and he was the Flash just for one year, in a series that nobody cared for and it actually took some time to get him back. Besides this specific case, I really can't remember any precedent. Of course, they actually merged two Supermen into one, so at this point I shouldn't be surprised if they did something equally silly.

[kryptonian]

If this may be of any consolation, I interpreted some parts of the awfully boring first issue of Infinite Frontier (or maybe it was #0; I don't remember. The part about him being out of time etc) as a pre-emptive strike should the Jon-as-Superman thing go wrong.
Unless they retcon him as an enemy (which could even happen, by the way: something similar happened to Cir-El, even if that character was way more insignificant) Jon won't die. Only Bryan Singer could think that killing Superman's son is a good idea. But they can quietly erase him from existence, relocate him on a different earth, change him into an amnesiac Daxamite, retcon him as Earth-2 Superman's son, etc. I guess that it depends from multiple factors. I guess that they could even de-age him, but: 1- At this point Jon has been an adult longer than he was a child and it would really sound weird; 2- I guess that he has had a girlfriend or something like that in some title, maybe Legion? That would make it even weirder; and, in particular: 3- Am I wrong or historically speaking deaging a character from an adult to a child is an EXTREMELY rare occurrence for DC? I mean, as far as I remember it happened only once - after Bart Allen became the Flash and died, and he was the Flash just for one year, in a series that nobody cared for and it actually took some time to get him back. Besides this specific case, I really can't remember any precedent. Of course, they actually merged two Supermen into one, so at this point I shouldn't be surprised if they did something equally silly.

This is what a copium overdose looks like

All of these are nothing but dreams

Jon is staying

Deal with it


Want to know whose likely to get shipped off to a new earth...Conner kent