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

[Doctor Know]

I recall reading that Byrne, Frank Miller and Wolfman have all stated their biggest influence for crafting their respective Supermen came from Golden Age Supes (Siegel and Shuster), the Fleischer cartoon Superman from the 40s, and the Donner/Reeve movies.

I think Simonson was the George Reeves Superman fan and influence. But I'm sure a lot more people like that show who group up with it during that era.

[Kuwagaton]

Byrne a little moreso loved George Reeves. His first Superman experience was the second episode of the series and it's where he got the idea for his Clark. But as kac mentioned I'm sure so many creators were just looking for a sort of throwback Superman in a sense

[bat39]

I recall reading that Byrne, Frank Miller and Wolfman have all stated their biggest influence for crafting their respective Supermen came from Golden Age Supes (Siegel and Shuster), the Fleischer cartoon Superman from the 40s, and the Donner/Reeve movies.

I think Simonson was the George Reeves Superman fan and influence. But I'm sure a lot more people like that show who group up with it during that era.

Byrne a little moreso loved George Reeves. His first Superman experience was the second episode of the series and it's where he got the idea for his Clark. But as kac mentioned I'm sure so many creators were just looking for a sort of throwback Superman in a sense

Honestly, I have a hard time picturing Siegal/Shuster Superman as an inspiration for Frank Miller's Superman (assuming you're referring to DKR)

When it comes to Byrne, I think the George Reeves portrayal of Clark Kent was a major inspiration for his take on Clark. The Donner/Reeve movie I think was mainly an inspiration for his take on Krypton (IIRC, he wanted to make it a lot more like the movie, but legal reasons prevented that). I feel in general the George Reeves show, and Donner, went with a stripped-down "back-to-basics" take on the mythos (no Superboy, no Legion, no Krypto) that must have appealed to Byrne and thus shaped his reboot (as well as the dominant perception of the Superman mythos ever since).

[Kuwagaton]

Miller loves noir, pulp, "guys and dolls" type stuff. I could easily see it but it's surprising he'd mesh with Gerber over Chaykin, who's always had a similar wheelhouse

[kingaliencracker]

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.



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...

Yes, it was the Zero Hour timeline mostly, although Stern and others mostly rectified this during their run. But the Zero Hour timeline had Superman arriving in Kansas 33 years ago and his debut 10 years ago, and Clark is 28 in MoS #6. With that Kath, he was 23 when he first puts on the costume and 5 years pass between that moment and MoS #6.

[kingaliencracker]

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.



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...

Yes, it was the Zero Hour timeline mostly, although Stern and others mostly rectified this during their run. But the Zero Hour timeline had Superman arriving in Kansas 33 years ago and his debut 10 years ago, and Clark is 28 in MoS #6. With that, he was 23 when he first puts on the costume and 5 years pass between that moment and MoS #6.

[bat39]

Yes, it was the Zero Hour timeline mostly, although Stern and others mostly rectified this during their run. But the Zero Hour timeline had Superman arriving in Kansas 33 years ago and his debut 10 years ago, and Clark is 28 in MoS #6. With that Kath, he was 23 when he first puts on the costume and 5 years pass between that moment and MoS #6.

I checked out that timeline now again after ages...was an interesting read for sure! Amazing how much of it still kinda holds up today (though I guess you'd have to add another 11-12 years to it given Jon's age, and Damian's).

So the timeline has Superman's debut '10 years ago', at age 23, while COIE is said to have happened '4 years ago', when Superman was presumably 28-29. If we assume MOS # 6 is supposed to have happened shortly before COIE, then your theory of a 5 year timeframe for MOS does hold up. That said, the timeline itself doesn't confirm anything about Superman's history during the intervening years and when the events of MOS # 6, or the early issues of Byrne's Post-Crisis run, were meant to have happened. Since it has clearly retconned MOS's timeline already (by making Superman 23 rather than 25 at debut), I suppose its theoretically possible that MOS # 6 was retconned as occuring earlier in Superman's career (and thus the overall DC timeline) as well. Though that then raises the question of how much of the Post-Crisis Superman run was retroactively set Pre-Crisis, and how much was actually Post-Crisis. And where the time-jump occurs. So either way, its a bit of a mess.

One point in favor of MOS # 6 being retconned to be set earlier? I seem to recall an issue of Martian Manhunter's solo series which depicts J'onn's first meeting with Superman (after he went public as Superman...as per the story he'd already met Clark in Smallville when the latter was a kid). During that meeting, Superman is already aware of his Kryptonian heritage (its an important plot point actually). And the story is clearly set early in Superman's career, and in the 10 year timeline, since Superman doesn't already know J'onn from the JLA.