Controversial Superman Opinions

[DochaDocha]

Fair point. There was a thread from a while back where we discussed a bit how good at h2h Lois should be. My personal take is she should have some self-defense skills; like not overtly overpowering, but random thugs aren't going to easily have their way. I'll add a more controversial take in the controversy thread.

Guns are a touchy subject, but I think daughter-of-a-general Lois should have a good amount of firearms training. Plus, when you consider the types of enemies she makes from doing her job, I think the movie version of Lois probably should be conceal/carry.

EDIT: I don't own a personal firearm, but speaking to people who have dangerous jobs like prosecutors and even public defenders, I understand why many of them are conceal/carry.

[CosmeticSkull]

Guns are a touchy subject, but I think daughter-of-a-general Lois should have a good amount of firearms training. Plus, when you consider the types of enemies she makes from doing her job, I think the movie version of Lois probably should be conceal/carry.

Absolutely not. That would be way to controversial.

[DochaDocha]

Absolutely not. That would be way to controversial.

It is a thread for controversial opinions.

Guns are a bit of a taboo in superhero media until they're not. Like if you took Iron Man 3 as an example, I don't think I ever heard anyone complain about Rhodey using a handgun. I know some people didn't like how Captain America used guns in CA1 or Avengers 1, but overall it wasn't a big issue. Now if Batman used a gun, I'd understand to some extent if everyone lost their minds (though upon closer inspection, Batman's gun boycott has been really selective).

[CosmeticSkull]

It is a thread for controversial opinions.

Guns are a bit of a taboo in superhero media until they're not. Like if you took Iron Man 3 as an example, I don't think I ever heard anyone complain about Rhodey using a handgun. I know some people didn't like how Captain America used guns in CA1 or Avengers 1, but overall it wasn't a big issue. Now if Batman used a gun, I'd understand to some extent if everyone lost their minds (though upon closer inspection, Batman's gun boycott has been really selective).

Yeah, I think guns are way too much of a hot topic for that to go over well these days. Like I've said, I appreciate when Lois can hold her own in a fight, but I also like when she can save the day through not-combative measures.

Waller vs. Wildstorm 001 (2023) (Digital) (Walkabout-DCP)-023.jpg

[Ascended]

It is a thread for controversial opinions.

I mean, it's a business and they have to consider the optics but does anyone truly want a story that always plays it as safe as they can? When you try to please everyone you end up pleasing no one. Lois being conceal/carry is absolutely within the wheelhouse of her character and is a valid choice. And everything else aside, I bet most of us would agree that a Superman story needs some spice, nobody likes it when they make the franchise so soft and inoffensive it ends up saying nothing at all.

And I don't think this would actually be a big issue. How many people across film/tv/gaming are running around shooting everyone in sight? Firearms are still an everyday part of our entertainment consumption. Besides, we worry about mass shootings, radicalized domestic terrorists, violent criminals, and self-destructive morons looking to avenge imaginary crimes. We don't really worry about the properly trained, educated, and responsible gun owner who carries because their job, in service to the public, puts their lives at risk. Assuming the movie treated Lois being conceal/carry with the respect it deserves, I don't see a lot of folks being upset by it, even if they don't love it.

As for the larger conversation about Lois' ability, I like to think she's plenty capable of handling herself against normal threats. Somebody tries to grab her purse, he's getting tossed on his ass. Some hired thug shows up to try and intimidate her into dropping a story? She'll give as good as she gets. This is general hardass Sam Lane's daughter; she didn't grow up without learning some quality self-defense. And Superman's wife needs to know what to do in the event of an attack. More importantly, she's Lois fucking Lane, and she's made a career out of pissing off the powerful and corrupt and plenty of them would love to see her dead. But she isn't, and shouldn't be, anywhere close to 'fighting crime' capable. She should be able to kick my ass maybe, but she's not taking down Two-Face.

All that said, I think if a writer has Lois resort to violence, they're probably doing it wrong. Lois, I think, is a talker. If you come in swinging she'll swing back but it feels more fun and rewarding, I think, if Lois just stares down the danger with a smirk on her face and says something so insightful and sharp her attacker actually bleeds.

[marhawkman]

I wouldn't have Lois aggressively use firearms to threaten people, but we're talking about a woman who has been saved multiple times by Superman from guys who wanted her to stop investigating.

[Filbert]

Lois had a handgun in her purse in the thirties. This was the before the "army brat" nonsense and just part of the dangerous, pulpy world, similar to that one early Batman story. Then came editor Whitney Ellsworth's 1940 mandate that heroes couldn't use guns (western and military characters excluded) and that's how it's been ever since. Should this change? I don't know. The stories have moved on from mobsters, but they might come in handy.

[TheKryptonMan]

Lois had a handgun in her purse in the thirties. This was the before the "army brat" nonsense and just part of the dangerous, pulpy world, similar to that one early Batman story. Then came editor Whitney Ellsworth's 1940 mandate that heroes couldn't use guns (western and military characters excluded) and that's how it's been ever since. Should this change? I don't know. The stories have moved on from mobsters, but they might come in handy.

I think that if it would increase sales that DC would let Lois carry a gun .
But Superman himself doesn't use deadly force when he really could all the time . But then it would be boring , lol .
Batman has had a very decades long policy of no guns or rifles or anything like that .

[CosmeticSkull]

I think that if it would increase sales that DC would let Lois carry a gun .
But Superman himself doesn't use deadly force when he really could all the time . But then it would be boring , lol .
Batman has had a very decades long policy of no guns or rifles or anything like that .

Modern Lois has used guns on occasion.

lane15.jpglois23.jpgloisjoannelane19.jpg

But I still think that, overall, she should be a "pen is mightier than the sword" character. That's where the uniqueness of the character lies.

[The Frog Bros]

Modern Lois has used guns on occasion.

lane15.jpglois23.jpgloisjoannelane19.jpg

But I still think that, overall, she should be a "pen is mightier than the sword" character. That's where the uniqueness of the character lies.

I agree. Plus, I think occasionally using some sort of sci-fi weapon that Superman created is different than her carrying a handgun. I also see her as being able to physically fend for and defend herself in certain situations. She’s a diplomat first, but can defend as needed.

This scene in Superman and the Authority was pretty badass too:

IMG_2454.jpg

[DochaDocha]

Plus, I think occasionally using some sort of sci-fi weapon that Superman created is different than her carrying a handgun.

Oh yeah, big symbolic difference for sure.

[Shockingjustice]

I'm torn on how I feel about John Henry Irons and his powerset. On one hand I acknowledge his accomplishments as a human and how smart he is. He's has a full on family and love interest which seems very rare for black characters. He saw superman fighting a monster and charged in to help which is pretty brave considering he's powerless. He had a solo series for 4 years and created his own supersuit and has his own legacy in Natasha. And I love that he is inspired by a African-American folklore.

But another part of me says he was the bare minimum for creating supporting black characters in Supermans world. The fact that Superman's this powerful action fantasy hero that everyone wants to be like, that's inspired many copies of himself, and the best they could do for the black guy was a dude in a suit with a hammer, which to be fair is a horrible simplification by me. Superboy was a clone of superman with telekinesis and could appeal to the teen demographic, Jon Kent was a kid superhero for the child demographic, Supergirl was powerful and could appeal to women and Kong Kenan was powerful. It just felt like when Steel was made it was saying "the best Black people could do to be powerful was be in a suit, they'll never be powerful in their own right" which not true at all, it's just what I feel. Honestly this is all my hangup.

It also doesn't help that it feels like most people at least on this forum don't seem too accepting of half of the superheros with powers in the superman family. As a kid I did imagine myself like Superman. He was the first superhero I had liked. Lately my opinion has changed on him, but I started reading New-Superman (Kenan) comics and really enjoyed it, but was once again reminded that we aren't allowed to be that powerful, which again is not true and my own bias.

[Will Evans]

I'm torn on how I feel about John Henry Irons and his powerset. On one hand I acknowledge his accomplishments as a human and how smart he is. He's has a full on family and love interest which seems very rare for black characters. He saw superman fighting a monster and charged in to help which is pretty brave considering he's powerless. He had a solo series for 4 years and created his own supersuit and has his own legacy in Natasha. And I love that he is inspired by a African-American folklore.

But another part of me says he was the bare minimum for creating supporting black characters in Supermans world. The fact that Superman's this powerful action fantasy hero that everyone wants to be like, that's inspired many copies of himself, and the best they could do for the black guy was a dude in a suit with a hammer, which to be fair is a horrible simplification by me. Superboy was a clone of superman with telekinesis and could appeal to the teen demographic, Jon Kent was a kid superhero for the child demographic, Supergirl was powerful and could appeal to women and Kong Kenan was powerful. It just felt like when Steel was made it was saying "the best Black people could do to be powerful was be in a suit, they'll never be powerful in their own right" which not true at all, it's just what I feel. Honestly this is all my hangup.

It also doesn't help that it feels like most people at least on this forum don't seem too accepting of half of the superheros with powers in the superman family. As a kid I did imagine myself like Superman. He was the first superhero I had liked. Lately my opinion has changed on him, but I started reading New-Superman (Kenan) comics and really enjoyed it, but was once again reminded that we aren't allowed to be that powerful, which again is not true and my own bias.

Isn’t that why Calvin Ellis and Val Zod were created?

[Alan2099]

It just felt like when Steel was made it was saying "the best Black people could do to be powerful was be in a suit, they'll never be powerful in their own right" which not true at all, it's just what I feel. Honestly this is all my hangup.

I suppose that is one way of looking at it. Personally, I always saw it more as "this is a man through his own intelligence and skills made a suit that puts him as a peer to Superman." Yeah, he's not as powerful as Supes, but typically supporting cast and replacement characters are either a bit weaker or they're stronger but dumber and have an attitude.

[DochaDocha]

I suppose that is one way of looking at it. Personally, I always saw it more as "this is a man through his own intelligence and skills made a suit that puts him as a peer to Superman." Yeah, he's not as powerful as Supes, but typically supporting cast and replacement characters are either a bit weaker or they're stronger but dumber and have an attitude.

Yeah, there's a bit of the Batman principle, i.e. Batman is better than Superman* because he doesn't rely on powers.

*According to a lot of folks, but not me!