Does The Other Side of DC universe tarnish the DC superheroes?

[Mr_E_88]

Hi guys

Do you think that The Other Side of DC universe tranches the legacy of DC superheroes, like Superman and Wonder Woman?

Because through it's issues I find that while it does shine the spot on lesser known heroes like thunder, Black Lightning, and Katina it also shames heroes like Superman and Wonder Woman for almost no reason.

Don't get me wrong, I like the fact that they explore these characters and their issues but I feel like trashing Superman and Wonder woman for no real reason is disrespectful. Take for example Thunder's issue with Wonder Woman, her argument is that the media doesn't show the carnage that is left from her fight to save the planet and only praises her work. A lot of comic books and parodies have tackled this issue before, so why did they find it necessary for it to be tackled again? And the article described Thunder's view as "Superman and Wonder woman are like The Boys", how did they come up with this conclusion?
One is a bunch of guys legitimately saving the world, while the other is a bunch of guys craving media attention and power.

Another example is Katina's jealousy for Superman, the main point of that issue was that Superman was accepted more than her because of his skin and not for what he did to be likeable.

I like The Other Side of DC universe, but I feel it didn't need to attack Superman, Wonder woman, or any other hero. They can cause damage when they fight crime, albeit minor, they can't save everyone just like the other heroes can't.

So what do you guys think?

Does The Other Side of DC universe tarnish the DC superheroes?

[Multiverse]

Hi guys

Do you think that The Other Side of DC universe tranches the legacy of DC superheroes, like Superman and Wonder Woman?

Because through it's issues I find that while it does shine the spot on lesser known heroes like thunder, Black Lightning, and Katina it also shames heroes like Superman and Wonder Woman for almost no reason.

Don't get me wrong, I like the fact that they explore these characters and their issues but I feel like trashing Superman and Wonder woman for no real reason is disrespectful. Take for example Thunder's issue with Wonder Woman, her argument is that the media doesn't show the carnage that is left from her fight to save the planet and only praises her work. A lot of comic books and parodies have tackled this issue before, so why did they find it necessary for it to be tackled again? And the article described Thunder's view as "Superman and Wonder woman are like The Boys", how did they come up with this conclusion?
One is a bunch of guys legitimately saving the world, while the other is a bunch of guys craving media attention and power.

Another example is Katina's jealousy for Superman, the main point of that issue was that Superman was accepted more than her because of his skin and not for what he did to be likeable.

I like The Other Side of DC universe, but I feel it didn't need to attack Superman, Wonder woman, or any other hero. They can cause damage when they fight crime, albeit minor, they can't save everyone just like the other heroes can't.

So what do you guys think?

Does The Other Side of DC universe tarnish the DC superheroes?

I think of it less as tarnishing, and more of showing the point of view of certain street-level heroes and their views on A-Listers "Big Boy Scout" heroes (Kinda like the TV Series "Invincible" when Titan said to Invincible "Let me show you what you don't see up there!")

[Mr_E_88]

I think of it less as tarnishing, and more of showing the point of view of certain street-level heroes and their views on A-Listers "Big Boy Scout" heroes (Kinda like the TV Series "Invincible" when Titan said to Invincible "Let me show you what you don't see up there!")

Except that Omni Man was a villain, you can't possibly say that he has the same intentions and desires as Superman and Wonder Woman.

[CaptCleghorn]

I think of it less as tarnishing, and more of showing the point of view of certain street-level heroes and their views on A-Listers "Big Boy Scout" heroes (Kinda like the TV Series "Invincible" when Titan said to Invincible "Let me show you what you don't see up there!")

I agree. Everything presented in this series has been from the POV of the featured heroes. There's a weird mix of timeframe which adds to the awkward reactions and beliefs which were undoubtedly whitewashed at the time, but in the 2020s are much more fair game. And the big heroes can take a little negative attitude against them. Superman reeked of privilege from day 1 when he was white, male, and super-powered doing what Lois did as a woman back over 3/4 of a century ago.

In the real world, we all have coworkers we like more than others. Shouldn't the same apply to the superhero community?

[RobinGA]

It would be a strange world where everyone thought the same, held the same
political opinions. Fans of particular heroes may grow annoyed at time, but anyone
who goes onto the trinity boards can see that they aren't beloved here. People dump
on Batman, Superman, and Wonder Woman all the time. It hasn't stopped them from
becoming beloved heroes.

[Shimbo]

Hi guys

Do you think that The Other Side of DC universe tranches the legacy of DC superheroes, like Superman and Wonder Woman?

Because through it's issues I find that while it does shine the spot on lesser known heroes like thunder, Black Lightning, and Katina it also shames heroes like Superman and Wonder Woman for almost no reason.

Don't get me wrong, I like the fact that they explore these characters and their issues but I feel like trashing Superman and Wonder woman for no real reason is disrespectful. Take for example Thunder's issue with Wonder Woman, her argument is that the media doesn't show the carnage that is left from her fight to save the planet and only praises her work. A lot of comic books and parodies have tackled this issue before, so why did they find it necessary for it to be tackled again? And the article described Thunder's view as "Superman and Wonder woman are like The Boys", how did they come up with this conclusion?
One is a bunch of guys legitimately saving the world, while the other is a bunch of guys craving media attention and power.

Another example is Katina's jealousy for Superman, the main point of that issue was that Superman was accepted more than her because of his skin and not for what he did to be likeable.

I like The Other Side of DC universe, but I feel it didn't need to attack Superman, Wonder woman, or any other hero. They can cause damage when they fight crime, albeit minor, they can't save everyone just like the other heroes can't.

So what do you guys think?

Does The Other Side of DC universe tarnish the DC superheroes?

No, it doesn't. Those characters you think he "attacked" will be fine and are fine. And he didn't "attack" anyone. They're all fictional characters. He wasn't using characters as a mouthpiece to proselytize, and if that's what you took away from it I urge you to read it again.

[sifighter]

Not really, because it’s not as if Ridley is making any thing up to make characters look bad in the series. Like every criticism against say Batman or the Teen Titans for instance is from the specific point of view of a character who was actually involved with a previous story from the era but now we are in the POV characters headspace from those events that may not have been touched on back when the story came out.

Also there are plenty of times throughout each story where Ridley flips the discussion back on the main characters because they were wrong or learned something new along the way. Examples are Black Lightning learning why did he ever hate John Stewart, Mal and Karen as they talk about Supergirl and how Superman hid her away but it was because of his fear of losing her, and etc. Ridley in the last issue even pushes the spot light on Black Lightning by questioning his feelings those in same sex relationships through the lens of his daughter.

Ridley in the entire series isn’t necessarily saying these characters are wrong or right in there treatment he’s showing you a preexisting history and showing it to you through the eyes of actual characters who did not get the focus previously in those stories.

[Vordan]

The freak outs over The Other History are bizarre to me considering 1. how tame the criticisms are (with said criticism often being recanted once the POV character learns more) and 2. how small and unknown this series is compared to something like Injustice which portrays Supes and Wondy far worse than TOH does and reaches far more people.

Also I’d say Batman gets it the worst overall especially in the final issue.

[RobinGA]

That shouldn't be that surprising. Batman is a popular whipping boy at the moment.

[sifighter]

That shouldn't be that surprising. Batman is a popular whipping boy at the moment.

Actually I think it’s more if you were to look at Bruce Wayne’s entire DC history you might find some controversial stuff. This is after all the man who is well known for the Tower of Babel storyline/ways to take down the Justice League, mind wiping until it went to far in identity crisis, creating the brother eye satellite, and being responsible for the start of Dark Nights Metal when he raced on his own. He’s head strong and controlling and sometimes that has lead to problems.

I like Bruce Wayne but given past storylines he’s not exactly a saint in every story he’s in.

[Agent Z]

That shouldn't be that surprising. Batman is a popular whipping boy at the moment.

I wouldn't call Batman a whipping boy given how protected he is compared to most others.

[Agent Z]

Actually I think it’s more if you were to look at Bruce Wayne’s entire DC history you might find some controversial stuff. This is after all the man who is well known for the Tower of Babel storyline/ways to take down the Justice League, mind wiping until it went to far in identity crisis, creating the brother eye satellite, and being responsible for the start of Dark Nights Metal when he raced on his own. He’s head strong and controlling and sometimes that has lead to problems.

I like Bruce Wayne but given past storylines he’s not exactly a saint in every story he’s in.

Bruce wasn't involved in the mindwiping in Identity Crisis. He was a victim of it.

[sifighter]

Bruce wasn't involved in the mindwiping in Identity Crisis. He was a victim of it.

I haven’t read it in years but wasn’t he initially a part of the whole mind wiping thing until he got in a fight with everyone and they wiped him.

[Agent Z]

I haven’t read it in years but wasn’t he initially a part of the whole mind wiping thing until he got in a fight with everyone and they wiped him.

No that didn't happen. He walked in on them mindwiping Dr. Light and tried to stop it. Then they mindwiped him because of that.

[king81992]

That shouldn't be that surprising. Batman is a popular whipping boy at the moment.

Based on how Batman's been acting in comics for the past few years, he kind of deserves his whipping boy status.