Michael Bailey nails the problem with Superman and DC comics: NEW COSTUME…SAME DRAMA…DEEPER SHOVEL

[DochaDocha]

Well I say it because they have gotten rid of his powers. Almost completely, and more than once now.

Again, none of that is comparable to Post Crisis.

So you're saying Superman never lost his powers in the Post-Crisis era?

And FWIW, STAS is extremely well known for having a de-powered Superman. Even Alan Burnett admitted it on one of the DVD extras.

[Vinsanity]

A lot of people are going to disagree on me with this but I felt once Johns was on Superman, it fell apart.

You had Lee and Kuder on Action
Supergirl was doing okay, Superboy was still going, Wonder Woman/Superman was hitting strides and Lobdell was going crazy fun things for Superman. After that it just went eh. Superman was at that time working on a blog to promote the truth and justice with Cat Grant, he had zany adventures in space and through time and everything seemed right.

[Cypher]

So you're saying Superman never lost his powers in the Post-Crisis era?

The point youre making of him being depowered to the point where he cant sneeze a planet out of orbit, and comparing it to Solar Flare levels, is a silly comparison is my point.

[DochaDocha]

So you're saying Superman never lost his powers in the Post-Crisis era?

The point youre making of him being depowered to the point where he cant sneeze a planet out of orbit, and comparing it to Solar Flare levels, is a silly comparison is my point.

Way to put words in my mouth.

[Cypher]

Way to put words in my mouth.

You get my analogy.

Its not the same. A man who can hang out in the sun is not the same as one who cant fly.

[DochaDocha]

I get your analogy.

I mean, yeah, he burned out his powers in two issues (three as of this upcoming Wednesday), and then had to undergo a 24-hour recharge period. Are you going to say absolutely nothing comparable ever happened in the Post-Crisis era?

I mean, the idea that Superman would lose his powers is hardly unique to Geoff Johns. There was an entire blockbuster that focused on that plot detail. If you think that was a bad idea for the movie, so be it, but I think if you're going to complain about New 52 for having this plot issue, you have to complain about a few other Superman stories and continuities, too.

[Cypher]

No its not comparable. Because Superman could still do plenty of things.

And its not even the depowering to the point where he has no powers (again), thats my biggest and only issue here. Thats just something seemingly to be picked on in my post.

I was making a general post about the general scope of things theyve blundered and failed on. Nailing the wrong things and going back on stuff that hasnt added to story, including removing something that seems silly to remove, like the identity.

[manofsteel1979]

I get your analogy.

I mean, yeah, he burned out his powers in two issues (three as of this upcoming Wednesday), and then had to undergo a 24-hour recharge period. Are you going to say absolutely nothing comparable ever happened in the Post-Crisis era?

I mean, the idea that Superman would lose his powers is hardly unique to Geoff Johns. There was an entire blockbuster that focused on that plot detail. If you think that was a bad idea for the movie, so be it, but I think if you're going to complain about New 52 for having this plot issue, you have to complain about a few other Superman stories and continuities, too.

Yeah the nitpicking over the power loss just seems to be reaching for a reason to put down the New 52 as being inferior. Losing his powers or powering him up/down is nothing new.As you said, the only difference is the solar flare plot device that forces the powering down/recharge period to happen in a quicker time frame.

[Cypher]

Yeah the nitpicking over the power loss just seems to be reaching for a reason to put down the New 52 as being inferior. Losing his powers or powering him up/down is nothing new.As you said, the only difference is the solar flare plot device that forces the powering down/recharge period to happen in a quicker time frame.

Nah, nobody was nit picking about just that.

Nitpicking has been done to my post. I listed much, much other things than that. Go back and read it.

[BBally]

Double post.

[BBally]

Wow!

While I had my disagreements with Cypher, I don't think he did anything bad enough to get banned unless I missed something.

[Blacksun]

Mike Bailey is one of the most balanced, level-headed ,and patient fans I've ever come across. He was open to the New 52 when many (myself included) weren't, and he defended it numerous times. I've listened to his Superman and comic book podcasts and can tell you that Mike does not believe in the "If it's not "MY SUPERMAN, it's crap!" argument.

I'm in total agreement with him here. Everything he says is right on the money, IMO. While we don't know the direction this new story will take, that doesn't change the fact that both DC and their corporate masters at the WB simply don't get Superman. Go research the nightmarish journey to Superman Returns to see how little WB execs get or even like the character, and then do some research on Jim Lee's comments on Superman. Then read up on Rags Morales' comments about the very character he was drawing in Action. Then go and look at how much DC did for The Batman's 75th and how much they phoned in Superman's.

Batman may be DC/WB's cash cow, but Superman was there first and could easily be the flagship character he should be. Like Mike says in his analysis, though, it's not going to happen anytime soon, especially with the current regimes at WB/DCE.

WB/DC just got lazy with the sales juggernaut that is Batman. they kind of try superman, but they seems ashamed of what superman represents

[Myskin]

WB/DC just got lazy with the sales juggernaut that is Batman. they kind of try superman, but they seems ashamed of what superman represents

Well, in the first place it should be established WHAT Superman (and ONLY Superman) really represents in a credible way.
Because, frankly speaking, I'd have serious problem in defining this point myself, if I had to judge it from the comic books of the latest 30 years.

[jimishim12]

Someone made a comparison to Captain America and Superman, well one is human and can represent the human virtues and potential intimately than symbolically an Alien with god class abilities. Superman currently is more in his element as a being beyond humans than he's ever been in ages, which I have no problem with, trying to make Superman a human representive falls on it's self when you see the fans wanting to keep complaining about his character as an overpowered blessed super entity who preaches human idealism to us when none of us have his gifts and strengths. Which is why people like Captain America more, his thing is Superman as a normal joe like us who surpasses his limits by the grit and pluck of his humanity and mortality. Same can be said by Batman and all the other street levelers.

Heres a question, why does Thor have acceptable fanbase with little controversial prattle about his godhood than Superman and interacts with the human race regularly while not being hurled as to OP for marvel earth. He can have the same adventures as Silver Surfer and as Green Lantern also like Dr. Strange is in the mystical department, but most of the time is seen as an Avenger.

[DochaDocha]

Someone made a comparison to Captain America and Superman, well one is human and can represent the human virtues and potential intimately than symbolically an Alien with god class abilities. Superman currently is more in his element as a being beyond humans than he's ever been in ages, which I have no problem with, trying to make Superman a human representive falls on it's self when you see the fans wanting to keep complaining about his character as an overpowered blessed super entity who preaches human idealism to us when none of us have his gifts and strengths. Which is why people like Captain America more, his thing is Superman as a normal joe like us who surpasses his limits by the grit and pluck of his humanity and mortality. Same can be said by Batman and all the other street levelers.

Heres a question, why does Thor have acceptable fanbase with little controversial prattle about his godhood than Superman and interacts with the human race regularly while not being hurled as to OP for marvel earth. He can have the same adventures as Silver Surfer and as Green Lantern also like Dr. Strange is in the mystical department, but most of the time is seen as an Avenger.

To answer the bold, I think Superman has become the poster boy of OP, whether we like it or not. There are a lot of people who absolutely hate the Silver Age Superman stories, and are quick to mention juggling planets and other silly feats. For some people, you mention the very name Superman, and they look at him as the ultimate OP character, someone who has so much power and ability that there's no way his stories can't be anything but boring. I disagree, but that seems to be the case.

I don't conduct polls, let alone scientific polls, but I also have this inkling that if you asked certain fans who the most over-powered (negative connotation) character in comics, they'd say Superman, but if you asked those same individuals who'd win a fight, Superman or whoever their favorite character is (such as Hulk, Thor, Silver Surfer, Batman, Goku, etc.), those same fans would say Superman would lose.

I do have one concern about the suggestion that Superman creators should follow the lead of Captain America: don't you risk making Superman feel like a blatant rip-off Captain America if you do that? Also, even if you tried, you still have to contend with the disdain many people preemptively have against Superman, that he's OP, something Captain America isn't nearly as often accused of being.