Post-Crisis Superman Pitches That Didn't Require A Reboot?

[Thor-Ul]

Does anyone have any specific information regarding the pitches for revamping Superman post-COIE that didn't involve a reboot? I've read that Moore, Miller, and Byrne pitched ideas that wouldn't have required the full reboot WB/DC ultimately decided on.

I known than Miller wanted to do the origin stories of Superman (man of steel) Batman (dark knight) and Wonder Woman.(amazon).as three different miniseries. Well, you know where those titles were used instead. Two of them at least.
On Alan Moore doing a post crisis Superman reboot....no.. in thoae years Moore was in full deconstruction mode. In his reconstruction era, mid late 90s he created his reboot for Supreme tjat it eas a homage to the precrisis Superman. And it was a pretty functional reboot. But then Eric Larsen came in...

[All Star Superman]

Its been ages (like at least a decade) since I've read some of this stuff, so unfortunately I don't remember all of the details. I'm guessing he'd have basically redone the origin, and then skipped ahead to the present-day, with all the Silver/Bronze Age elements (Krypto, Phantom Zoners, Red Kryptonite etc.) now 'off-screen' but having still once existed, leaving the bulk of past continuity intact.

Damn, this is what I would have liked to have seen. It happened but it doesn't have to be acknowledged if deemed "outdated" or whatever.

[superduperman]

Its been ages (like at least a decade) since I've read some of this stuff, so unfortunately I don't remember all of the details. I'm guessing he'd have basically redone the origin, and then skipped ahead to the present-day, with all the Silver/Bronze Age elements (Krypto, Phantom Zoners, Red Kryptonite etc.) now 'off-screen' but having still once existed, leaving the bulk of past continuity intact.





Yeah, he's said that he wished he'd retained Superboy after DC/WB forced him to have Superman as an established hero by the end of MOS.

That's where this strange tension in MOS (and even some of the early issues of Superman vol. 2) comes from, where on the one hand we're dealing with an established Superman, and on the other hand it still feels like this is a 'Year One' story. I mean, Superman meeting Lex Luthor for the first time, fighting his first real 'supervillain' in the form of Bizarro, and discovering his Kryptonian heritage, feels like 'Year One' stuff, and yet in-universe all this happened after he'd been around for a few years (probably many years if you account for the wider DCU timeline). If you pick up an early issue of Byrne's Post-Crisis Superman run today, its weird to think that this stuff was supposed to be set in the then-present DCU, rather than being a 'flashback' story!

I think Batman YO kind of threw the whole "MOS only takes place a few years before the regular books" thing for a loop because it makes direct reference to Superman in it. That means that Superman would have to have been around at least as long as Batman. And if we're dealing with a Batman that has a 19 year old Dick Grayson operating as Nightwing, that makes things even more difficult. I think at one point Byrne said he'd been willing to come on and keep the pre-Crisis history but just not acknowledge it. So Krypto, Superboy, Kandor, all that stuff would still be part of his past but they just wouldn't reference it ever again. Which is kind of the route I wish they'd went. The Superboy book had been cancelled by that point and he was only referenced in the Legion books which he wasn't a full time member by that point anymore anyway. Who knows how that would have gone.

[Kuwagaton]

I think people usually overlook how freaking weird Batman is with reboots. Like both times, Superman was legit streamlined and even if some things didn't line up they didn't want the reader to believe there was some story missing.

[superduperman]

I think people usually overlook how freaking weird Batman is with reboots. Like both times, Superman was legit streamlined and even if some things didn't line up they didn't want the reader to believe there was some story missing.

I think part of that is because YO worked so well that to replace it doesn't serve a purpose. The only thing that might be considered problematic is the treatment of Catwoman. And some elements haven't aged well. Like smoking indoors. But other than that the story works fine.

[Kuwagaton]

I was surprised they let Zero Year happen really. But what I mean is how, speaking of the New 52, George Perez and Grant Morrison started from points where you didn't even need the other when it came to issue one, and issue one of Batman had all the Robins lined up. For Crisis I love the Barr Davis run but same, Jason is just there immediately after Miller finishes and it's so far into his timeline that you can only understand how pre Crisis was relevant.

I've always liked the Earth Two idea of Post Crisis. Especially because I literally consider Secret Origins #1 to be a perfect comic.

[All Star Superman]

It's sad to think that so much could have been preserved while also "adjusting" Superman's mythos for new readers. After all, those Silver/Bronze concepts came back eventually, albeit in new forms. Maybe an effect of the Crisis could have been that Superman's memory of the elements DC felt were "dated" was wiped, including his time as Superboy. Meanwhile, the Legion would remember but wouldn't reference Superboy outside of allusions to the hero who inspired their formation.

[Kuwagaton]

Sounds more confusing to have him walking around finding out a bunch of stuff he should know.

Honestly if it wasn't for the work output of Byrne I'd be disappointed that they didn't go with Gerber. But then again, he didn't have a DC ongoing. I think Bates was the only writer who had a DC title post crisis.

[kingaliencracker]

Regarding THE MAN OF STEEL's timeline, it was officially established that from the point Clark put on his costume for the first time, to the beginning of Superman #1, 5 years had passed, with Superman #1 being the start of Year 6. Clark was 28-years-old at the end of MoS #6, and he was 33-years-old by the time ZERO HOUR rolled around, meaning roughly 10 years had passed from Clark's debut as Superman up to Zero Hour.

As far as other reboot proposals, outside of Cary Bates', Chris Claremont's, and John Byrne's proposals, I don't know if any other writer who has come forward to say what their proposal was. John Byrne was the only one that was really considered to do the reboot, since he was immensely popular at the time. It's unfortunate that he has called his work on Superman the biggest regret of his career.

And yes, Byrne did say that he was willing to work within established continuity to make his changes to Superman work. But he also said that the "clean slate" approach made things much easier for him.

[bat39]

I was surprised they let Zero Year happen really. But what I mean is how, speaking of the New 52, George Perez and Grant Morrison started from points where you didn't even need the other when it came to issue one, and issue one of Batman had all the Robins lined up. For Crisis I love the Barr Davis run but same, Jason is just there immediately after Miller finishes and it's so far into his timeline that you can only understand how pre Crisis was relevant.

I've always liked the Earth Two idea of Post Crisis. Especially because I literally consider Secret Origins #1 to be a perfect comic.

When it comes to Batman, both with COIE and with the New 52, there had been too much forward progress with the characters and the mythos that DC did not want to turn the clock back - whereas with Superman they've always wanted to turn the clock back and/or reinvent the character and his mythos in some manner. Its why Batman continuity has broadly been consistent, while Superman's has more often than not been a mess.

As far as Secret Origins goes, I think Secret Origins # 6 contains one of the best retellings of Batman's origin ever!

Regarding THE MAN OF STEEL's timeline, it was officially established that from the point Clark put on his costume for the first time, to the beginning of Superman #1, 5 years had passed, with Superman #1 being the start of Year 6. Clark was 28-years-old at the end of MoS #6, and he was 33-years-old by the time ZERO HOUR rolled around, meaning roughly 10 years had passed from Clark's debut as Superman up to Zero Hour.

As far as other reboot proposals, outside of Cary Bates', Chris Claremont's, and John Byrne's proposals, I don't know if any other writer who has come forward to say what their proposal was. John Byrne was the only one that was really considered to do the reboot, since he was immensely popular at the time. It's unfortunate that he has called his work on Superman the biggest regret of his career.

And yes, Byrne did say that he was willing to work within established continuity to make his changes to Superman work. But he also said that the "clean slate" approach made things much easier for him.

Actually, if you follow the internal chronology of MOS, its pretty clear that only about 3 years (well, maybe closer to 4 years) pass between Superman's debut and the start of the relaunched title.

Clark makes his debut as Superman in MOS # 1 at the age of 25 (its been 7 years since he left Smallville at age 18). MOS # 2 is set in the days/weeks immediately after his debut.

He meets Batman for the first time in MOS # 3, which is set about 8 months after his debut, so still within his first year as Superman. Batman seems to be pretty early in his career - still technically a vigilante wanted by the GCPD (though the portrayal of early Batman doesn't quiet line up with what Miller would establish in Year One the following year).

MOS # 4, which recounts Superman's first encounter with Lex Luthor, is set 18 months after Superman's debut, so halfway through his second year.

MOS # 5 is set 2 years after the previous issue and features Superman's first encounter with Bizarro. So its about 3.5 years since his debut (in the issue, Lois does say that she's dreamt of kissing Superman for '5 years'...either a mistake by Byrne, or Lois in-universe just rounding up).

MOS # 6 is set not long after the previous issue, maybe a few weeks/months later. We're a little over 3.5 years into Superman's career, and he's stated to be 28 (with it being 10 years since he left Smallville).

The relaunched Superman # 1 kicks off, iirc, 3 months after the end of MOS # 6. So maybe close to 4 years after Superman's debut.

[Kuwagaton]

Speaks to the less than flawless reboot concept. MoS to Superman #1 was three years, but at some points they arbitrarily said five. Then Zero Hour established "10 years, Superman started at 23." I'd still take that over trying to figure how Batman has so much time to train so many Robins and is still at the peak of a human lifespan without serious mileage.

The Miller and Gerber take was supposed to make Superman grittier and presumably less powerful but I don't think they spoke on what they planned for the length of the character's career.

[kingaliencracker]

When it comes to Batman, both with COIE and with the New 52, there had been too much forward progress with the characters and the mythos that DC did not want to turn the clock back on - whereas with Superman they've always wanted to turn the clock back and/or reinvent the character and his mythos in some manner. Its why Batman continuity has broadly been consistent, while Superman's has more often than not been a mess.

As far as Secret Origins goes, I think Secret Origins # 6 contains one of the best retellings of Batman's origin ever!



Actually, if you follow the internal chronology of MOS, its pretty clear that only about 3 years (well, maybe closer to 4 years) pass between Superman's debut and the start of the relaunched title.

Clark makes his debut as Superman in MOS # 1 at the age of 25 (its been 7 years since he left Smallville at age 18). MOS # 2 is set in the days/weeks immediately after his debut.

He meets Batman for the first time in MOS # 3, which is set about 8 months after his debut, so still within his first year as Superman. Batman seems to be pretty early in his career - still technically a vigilante wanted by the GCPD (though the portrayal of early Batman doesn't quiet line up with what Miller would establish in Year One the following year).

MOS # 4, which recounts Superman's first encounter with Lex Luthor, is set 18 months after Superman's debut, so halfway through his second year.

MOS # 5 is set 2 years after the previous issue and features Superman's first encounter with Bizarro. So its about 3.5 years since his debut (in the issue, Lois does say that she's dreamt of kissing Superman for '5 years'...either a mistake by Byrne, or Lois in-universe just rounding up).

MOS # 6 is set not long after the previous issue, maybe a few weeks/months later. We're a little over 3.5 years into Superman's career, and he's stated to be 28 (with it being 10 years since he left Smallville).

The relaunched Superman # 1 kicks off, iirc, 3 months after the end of MOS # 6. So maybe close to 4 years after Superman's debut.

I understand what was said in the comics at the time MoS was published but Byrne's timeline was wonky at best. For example, Superman #2 was referred to by Byrne as both years ago later in his run to just a few months ago.

Again, the official timeline that was ultimately established was that MoS spans about 5 years from the point Clark puts the costume on. Then, another 5 years have passed around the mid-90's. That makes more sense that trying to cram everything in a 3 year span. That doesn't even make sense in the broader DCU.

[kingaliencracker]

Speaks to the less than flawless reboot concept. MoS to Superman #1 was three years, but at some points they arbitrarily said five. Then Zero Hour established "10 years, Superman started at 23." I'd still take that over trying to figure how Batman has so much time to train so many Robins and is still at the peak of a human lifespan without serious mileage.

The Miller and Gerber take was supposed to make Superman grittier and presumably less powerful but I don't think they spoke on what they planned for the length of the character's career.

Most of the creators at the time had the idea that Superman needed to go back to his Golden Age roots. So, I would imagine that most of them had that concept in mind with the post-Crisis Superman. Much like creators in the 00's wanted to go back to the Silver Age concept, while creators today kind of lean on the Triangle years and a mix of other eras.

[exile001]

I read this as "Post-Crisis Superman Pitches That Didn't Require A Robot?"

I was rushed in to see what it could mean. The actual title makes far more sense.

[bat39]

I understand what was said in the comics at the time MoS was published but Byrne's timeline was wonky at best. For example, Superman #2 was referred to by Byrne as both years ago later in his run to just a few months ago.

Again, the official timeline that was ultimately established was that MoS spans about 5 years from the point Clark puts the costume on. Then, another 5 years have passed around the mid-90's. That makes more sense that trying to cram everything in a 3 year span. That doesn't even make sense in the broader DCU.

Okay. To be fair, I haven't read much of the later part of Byrne's run so I dunno how he retconned the timeline there. Would be interested to find out.

I think at some point there was probably a realisation that the timeline established in MOS didn't jibe well with the wider DCU, and a belated effort to 'fix' things.

The problem however isn't cramming things into 3 years. The problem is actually the reverse...that not a lot happens to Superman for years because of all the time-skips in MOS. I mean, story-wise, MOS feels like it should be set over the span of about a year, but its needlessly stretched out to 3-plus years. Or more, as you say. But that doesn't make sense in the context of the wider DCU. Are we to believe, for instance, that in all those years during which Dick Grayson grew up and became Nightwing, the Teen Titans became the New Teen Titans, there were multiple iterations of the JLA etc. Bizarro was the only supervillain that Superman fought? That he didn't know about his Kryptonian heritage for all that time? That he basically spent all those years flying around saving kittens from trees?!

I am curious to know about this 'official timeline' you're referring to. Is it the Post-Zero Hour timeline? And if so, where does it establish that MOS took place over the course of 5 years? And if it did, then at what point exactly does the second time-skip happen to the 'present' DCU? Because my understanding is that the relaunched Superman # 1 was supposed to be set in the present of the immediate post-Crisis DCU - which meant that Superman first encountered Metallo in a world where the New Teen Titans were around and Jason Todd was the incumbent Robin. (In fact, didn't Superman team-up with the New Teen Titans around this time?)

The solution that I think eventually came into place, after IC, was simply what Byrne wanted to do all along - bring back a version of the Pre-Crisis continuity and have those stories fill out the missing years.

Most of the creators at the time had the idea that Superman needed to go back to his Golden Age roots. So, I would imagine that most of them had that concept in mind with the post-Crisis Superman. Much like creators in the 00's wanted to go back to the Silver Age concept, while creators today kind of lean on the Triangle years and a mix of other eras.

Yeah, its pretty cyclical. Though I'm not very sure about the Golden Age influence when it comes to Post-Crisis Superman. I guess Byrne was more influenced by the George Reeves TV show and, to a limited extent, the Donner movie. Then again, those were influenced by the Golden Age comics (well, the TV show for sure), so I guess in a roundabout way the Golden Age did influence the Byrne reboot?

I suppose we'll eventually get to the point where the New 52 becomes an influence...