Page 190 of 388 FirstFirst ... 90140180186187188189190191192193194200240290 ... LastLast
Results 2,836 to 2,850 of 5810
  1. #2836
    The Man Who Cannot Die manwhohaseverything's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    9,485

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stargazer01 View Post
    saw this today... I don't like it at all. Superman was the first superhero. This feels dishonest. Glad the movies have ignored it.

    Considering there are many versions of supermen. He is kinda really right. The siegel and shuster's superman was a different beast than the later incarnations in work ethics and philosophy.
    Last edited by manwhohaseverything; 06-05-2020 at 10:06 AM.

  2. #2837
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    34,012

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stargazer01 View Post
    saw this today... I don't like it at all. Superman was the first superhero. This feels dishonest. Glad the movies have ignored it.

    Even in the recent movies, Superman isn't the first superhero. As for the comic, there's nothing dishonest about it. Superman is not real and there is nothing wrong with him taking inspiration from someone else. I have never understood this insecurity over Superman not being the first superhero in-universe.

  3. #2838
    Astonishing Member DochaDocha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    4,634

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Z View Post
    I have never understood this insecurity over Superman not being the first superhero in-universe.
    Pioneer status. He gets to be Roger Bannister, Neil Armstrong, Christopher Colum... okay, maybe that's not a popular pick these days. The guys who blaze the trails have special places in history, real life or fictional.

  4. #2839
    Ultimate Member SiegePerilous02's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    15,234

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Z View Post
    Even in the recent movies, Superman isn't the first superhero. As for the comic, there's nothing dishonest about it. Superman is not real and there is nothing wrong with him taking inspiration from someone else. I have never understood this insecurity over Superman not being the first superhero in-universe.
    Because that isn't how it happened in actual publication history, and they had to do a reboot to get it to happen. It's mostly done to elevate the JSA by giving them the spot that used to be his (or one that he shared with them).

    It's not a deal breaker, it can work fine in stuff like the DCEU or YJ, but him saying they were the first and the model everyone else were inspired by when all it takes is a casual glance at publication and pop culture to see that that isn't the case creates a disconnect. And it's not as if anyone has an issue with Clark being inspired by his parents (both sets) or the Legion or anyone else he came across in his youth. But specifically the JSA seems lipservice when he was a peer of theirs out of universe, and in-universe for a not insignificant length of time. They rode his coattails to success, not the other way around.

  5. #2840

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DochaDocha View Post
    Pioneer status. He gets to be Roger Bannister, Neil Armstrong, Christopher Colum... okay, maybe that's not a popular pick these days. The guys who blaze the trails have special places in history, real life or fictional.
    What makes Superman important isn’t that he came first, it’s that he’s the best. In a meta way yeah, he’s the grandpappy of all superheroes, more or less. But in universe, whatever cosmic Geoff Johns “everything comes from Superman fan service thing” aside, you kinda figure the age of heroes would have totally happened with or without Clark. Hal still would have gotten his ring, Batman would still dress up as a bat, Wonder Woman would do her thing. Like sure there are a lot like Steel and the Legion who are directly inspired by the big man, and that’s great! But being “first” is such a nothingburger of an accomplishment when most of the other major heroes we’re going to emerge with or without him.
    Definitely not worth stunting so many possibilities within the shared universe of dc just so something so inconsequential.

  6. #2841
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    5,820

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Adekis View Post
    None of y'all gonna bring up "Knives Out"? The Last Jedi is my favorite Star Wars movie by a lot, ya'll are wrong for dissing it, but Knives Out is the bigger reason I'd want to see Rian Johnson do a sequel to BvS if he was interested - it's a total masterpiece.
    That *is* actually the reason I’d be interested in seeing him handle Superman... and why I think he’d be more likely to strike gold handling the Daily Planet and Lois and Clark as investigators - he’s an absolute master of mysteries, thrillers, and noir style storytelling, and I’d pay good money to see a Lois Lane who’s more than a little Benoit Blanc (or Brendan from “Brick”) and a Lex Luthor who lines up more things Ransom (or the Pin in Brick.) And I honestly can’t see him doing to Superman what he did to Luke - I think that was the result of creative instincts he only exercised because he was in *that* franchise with *that* set-up... and because we’ve already seen a version of Superman closer to that Luke (Snyder’s in BvS, albeit in a more mild and less provocative manner.)

    Johnson and Abrams are both guys I would trust whole-heartedly with a Superman story as directors, and Johnson more than Abrams there... but storyline-wise, I’d want to see both either paired with a more assertive writing partner, or given the job of adapting specific runs and stories. Abrams is a largely unoriginal creator, but that”s not nearly as much of a problem when *adapting* material - then his desire to ape classic stories would actually be specifically utilized, and his skill with actors and cast chemistry would excel. Similarly, Johnson is fantastic with his own original character, but his apathy towards Rey and Finn combined with an obsession with Kylo to torpedo all three of those characters in a swirl of accidental white male privilge writing demoting Finn and sticking Rey in an abusive relationship with Kylo. Give him more clearly set-up versions for someone else’s “toys,” and I’d expect him to freestyle in a less damaging way.

    I don’t think he’d actually make a bad movie with Superman at all - The Last Jedi was the product of a scenario for creation that almost certainly wouldn’t be recreated for Superman; the nearest equivalent would be something like Whatever Happened to the Man Of Tomorrow?

    And I think Johnson would be utterly perfect for something like an adaptation of “What’s So Bad about Truth, Justice...?”

    ...especially because I think that would provide him a blueprint for deconstruction that has already succeeded.
    Like action, adventure, rogues, and outlaws? Like anti-heroes, femme fatales, mysteries and thrillers?

    I wrote a book with them. Outlaw’s Shadow: A Sherwood Noir. Robin Hood’s evil counterpart, Guy of Gisbourne, is the main character. Feel free to give it a look: https://read.amazon.com/kp/embed?asi...E2PKBNJFH76GQP

  7. #2842
    Ultimate Member SiegePerilous02's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    15,234

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OpaqueGiraffe17 View Post
    What makes Superman important isn’t that he came first, it’s that he’s the best. In a meta way yeah, he’s the grandpappy of all superheroes, more or less. But in universe, whatever cosmic Geoff Johns “everything comes from Superman fan service thing” aside, you kinda figure the age of heroes would have totally happened with or without Clark. Hal still would have gotten his ring, Batman would still dress up as a bat, Wonder Woman would do her thing. Like sure there are a lot like Steel and the Legion who are directly inspired by the big man, and that’s great! But being “first” is such a nothingburger of an accomplishment when most of the other major heroes we’re going to emerge with or without him.
    Definitely not worth stunting so many possibilities within the shared universe of dc just so something so inconsequential.
    But he was first in-universe for a not insignificant length of time, like 50 years. And that status didn't stunt anyone else in-universe. At all. Yeah, in-universe most of them would have happened anyway, but somebody has to be first, so why not let it be the guy who was actually first? Or at least the most successful of the early ones who inspired the creation of the genre as we know it? This is a case where continuity matched real world publication events for a while, and we definitely wouldn't have Batman ("let's do a fusion of Batman and the Shadow'), Wonder Woman ('all the power of Superman, but as a woman") or Captain Marvel ("Superman with the twist that it is a kid who magically transforms into Superman")without Superman starting the trend.

    it wasn't treated as being very consequential until he lost the title, it was pretty much a given before that since it actually was. If it's inconsequential, why are others circling the status like sharks?

  8. #2843
    The Man Who Cannot Die manwhohaseverything's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    9,485

    Default

    Wasn't dr occult the first?Also, dr. Occult was created by the same creators.
    Last edited by manwhohaseverything; 06-05-2020 at 11:03 AM.

  9. #2844
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Posts
    6,887

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by manwhohaseverything View Post
    Wasn't dr occult the first?Also, dr. Occult was created by the same creators.
    Yes.

    Heck, Zatara and Mr America both started out in Action Comics #1 with Superman.

  10. #2845

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SiegePerilous02 View Post
    But he was first in-universe for a not insignificant length of time, like 50 years. And that status didn't stunt anyone else in-universe. At all. Yeah, in-universe most of them would have happened anyway, but somebody has to be first, so why not let it be the guy who was actually first? Or at least the most successful of the early ones who inspired the creation of the genre as we know it? This is a case where continuity matched real world publication events for a while, and we definitely wouldn't have Batman ("let's do a fusion of Batman and the Shadow'), Wonder Woman ('all the power of Superman, but as a woman") or Captain Marvel ("Superman with the twist that it is a kid who magically transforms into Superman")without Superman starting the trend.

    it wasn't treated as being very consequential until he lost the title, it was pretty much a given before that since it actually was. If it's inconsequential, why are others circling the status like sharks?
    It very much does stunt the dc universe.
    You can’t do any real Superhero story in the main universe set in any decade before Clark showed up. That absolutely stunts storytelling and world building possibilities. Why do you think they almost never have Clark be the first hero anymore? Because really what does it add? The metaness is the first guy being first in universe? Because you gain nothing and lose so much.
    Doesn’t matter to me who was first, it’s as much an accomplishment as a participation trophy.
    If some writer wants to tell a dc story that involves someone who was a hero in the 60s, 70s, 80s, or whatever, I say they should be absolutely be able to do it. Rules against stuff like that are just impractical.
    If Superman’s importance is so fragile (it’s not) you have to have all these dumb rules to preserve it, then he shouldn’t be in a shared universe.

  11. #2846
    The Man Who Cannot Die manwhohaseverything's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    9,485

    Default

    Yeah! Shared universes are overrated. I would rather superman's own world be expansive.

  12. #2847
    Ultimate Member SiegePerilous02's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    15,234

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by manwhohaseverything View Post
    Wasn't dr occult the first?Also, dr. Occult was created by the same creators.
    Quote Originally Posted by Will Evans View Post
    Yes.

    Heck, Zatara and Mr America both started out in Action Comics #1 with Superman.
    Yes, but it was Superman's success specifically that brought about and codified the genre.

    Like nobody except comic book historians know who the other people are. That isn't to say they aren't important in their own way, but it's different.

    Quote Originally Posted by OpaqueGiraffe17 View Post
    It very much does stunt the dc universe.
    You can’t do any real Superhero story in the main universe set in any decade before Clark showed up. That absolutely stunts storytelling and world building possibilities. Why do you think they almost never have Clark be the first hero anymore? Because really what does it add? The metaness is the first guy being first in universe? Because you gain nothing and lose so much.
    Doesn’t matter to me who was first, it’s as much an accomplishment as a participation trophy.
    If some writer wants to tell a dc story that involves someone who was a hero in the 60s, 70s, 80s, or whatever, I say they should be absolutely be able to do it. Rules against stuff like that are just impractical.
    If Superman’s importance is so fragile (it’s not) you have to have all these dumb rules to preserve it, then he shouldn’t be in a shared universe.
    And yet that wasn't really a problem pre-COIE. If we wanted the JSA...well, that's what Earth-2 was for. Continuity was easier to follow too, at least in comparison, considering things matched publication history closer and story events were preserved.

    Why is it Superman's importance could be considered "fragile," but the JSA aren't considered "fragile" when having that distinction is the main thing they have going for them collectively in a modern context? Without it, they don't have as much of a purpose in the main continuity, whereas they are the big names on Earth-2. I've seen people claim that if they were on Earth-2 DC would ignore them but...DC manages to do that when the mood strikes them no matter what. That's why it's specifically Superman who is speaking to Alan in the scan, coming from him it means a big boost for them.

    Like I said, it's not a deal breaker (I think other things Superman lost after Crisis, especially Supergirl and the Legion and having the Kents alive were much bigger deals), but it also depends on who you ask. I love Superman and his lore, and am personally kind of indifferent to the JSA, so needing superhero lore before the arrival of Superman and his peers doesn't really seem all that important to me vs someone else. It didn't used to be a problem because there didn't used to be anything there, and I think the DC universe has a lot of lore to explore before we get to the superheroes. I'm far more interested in the history of the Amazons than I am about the JSA, and of-world we got stuff like Krypton and Oa's histories, etc.

  13. #2848

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SiegePerilous02 View Post
    Yes, but it was Superman's success specifically that brought about and codified the genre.

    Like nobody except comic book historians know who the other people are. That isn't to say they aren't important in their own way, but it's different.



    And yet that wasn't really a problem pre-COIE. If we wanted the JSA...well, that's what Earth-2 was for. Continuity was easier to follow too, at least in comparison, considering things matched publication history closer and story events were preserved.

    Why is it Superman's importance could be considered "fragile," but the JSA aren't considered "fragile" when having that distinction is the main thing they have going for them collectively in a modern context? Without it, they don't have as much of a purpose in the main continuity, whereas they are the big names on Earth-2. I've seen people claim that if they were on Earth-2 DC would ignore them but...DC manages to do that when the mood strikes them no matter what. That's why it's specifically Superman who is speaking to Alan in the scan, coming from him it means a big boost for them.

    Like I said, it's not a deal breaker (I think other things Superman lost after Crisis, especially Supergirl and the Legion and having the Kents alive were much bigger deals), but it also depends on who you ask. I love Superman and his lore, and am personally kind of indifferent to the JSA, so needing superhero lore before the arrival of Superman and his peers doesn't really seem all that important to me vs someone else. It didn't used to be a problem because there didn't used to be anything there, and I think the DC universe has a lot of lore to explore before we get to the superheroes. I'm far more interested in the history of the Amazons than I am about the JSA, and of-world we got stuff like Krypton and Oa's histories, etc.
    I can respect that, on this board it makes sense for a lot of posters to value Clark over to rest of the dcu. Even if I still don’t think Superman gains anything at all from being first. But to address the bold, even with the JSA being on the main, even for them, it’s not being first, it’s about the storytelling possibilities created from having heroes around in the past. If you want to be technical I don’t think they are even currently canonically the first right now, that’d be Wonder Woman (was she a member in current canon?.) Her or anyone else existing even before them doesn’t mess anything up for them anymore than anyone being around before Superman would mess anything up for him. Not to me anyway.
    Period piece Superhero stories have been very successful in the past look at the first class X-men, Captain America or Captain Marvel movies.
    Anyway earth 2 is a cool concept and everything, but I want characters like Hawkman, Spectre and Doctor fate in the main universe, not an offshoot one. So I guess I’m just a clutter earth guy.

  14. #2849
    Astonishing Member DochaDocha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    4,634

    Default

    Different takes on the character create and remove story ideas, but I'd simply argue that Superman has more to gain with that first hero status than he has to lose. Changing this aspect doesn't have an arbitrary effect. If it did, then there's no point in DC's making it a deal that Wonder Woman is going to be the first hero. And speaking of WW, I thought it knocked the character down a peg when she was the team's rookie in the cartoon.

  15. #2850

    Default

    That’s a false comparison.
    Take the new 52, Clark was supposedly the first back then (don’t remember it ever being mentioned much on page, let alone made as anything remotely significant). But it always came across as he and the rest of the big 6 all showed up for the first time within vaguely the same 6 months or less. And before too long with that 5 year time skip the earth was chalk full of heroes and had been for quite some time. As far as I know, precrisis especially with its looser connectivity didn’t do much of anything with that either.
    Then yeah Clark having like a month of seniority over everyone else is met with shrugs.
    Compare that with say Wonder Woman or whoever making their debut decades or a century before, well that’s carries actual implications. Much more than just the novelty of being “first.”

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •