Page 347 of 388 FirstFirst ... 247297337343344345346347348349350351357 ... LastLast
Results 5,191 to 5,205 of 5810
  1. #5191
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,756

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stanlos View Post
    That is one concept does a lot more in your face than DC that I do not agree with. 'Science so advanced it acts like magic'.
    In my mind there are demarcations and limits for conventional fare.
    It is meant to imply something that follows scientific rules- but not ones that we have learned yet. An airplane is scientifically possible- but if you showed one to someone from 500 AD you'd be better off calling it sorcery than the workings of even a non-jet engine as well as lift, drag, ...

    What is the practical difference between Star Trek's transporter breaking your molecules down and sending them through space and Doctor Fate simply moving you between two places. Especially if you can't recreate either effect (since you don't know how a transporter is built)

  2. #5192
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,756

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SuperX View Post
    Well your idea and my idea kinda work together, or atleast could pretty easily. see I see his powers as part physical (amp everything up to super levels thst a regular human can do), and psychic for everything else, but seen as just the same powers ampled up even more.

    My way gives writers more room to mess with superman a lot more, less viltrumite, more ways to get him crossed up.

    BTW it's pretty obvious he has energy powers, both superman and lois and the Henry Cavill superman both showed the same psychic "extra" lift needed, so it's absolutely totally a thing no matter what others think of it.
    I prefer the powers not enter the psychic realm for the same reason I wouldn't want to cross Jean Grey with Bruce Banner. It leaves things too vague,

    Conner Kent having tactile TK as a result of Cadmus trying to duplicate Superman's powers, no problem. All Kryptonians having tactile TK- with some writer having seen the door open to give Superman Phoenix level powers from some sundip,... no thanks.

    And on the S&L front I'm not really a fan of what he did in the season finale after that sundip, At some point it falls back into the bad Silver-Age trope of pulling any power you want out of ,,, "thin air" ... and handwaving it as sundipping or the effects of some other sun.

    I like the idea of his getting powers from different conditions but prefer there to be more of a character concept at the core that defines why those powers appear. YMMV

  3. #5193
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    33,943

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The World View Post
    Didn't the MCU show us that no one really cares how someone picks up something heavy or how someone most super fast. Like all that stuff where they tried to ground Superman's powers in the 80's/90's was completely pointless. No one cares why his clothes don't rip, or why things don't tear apart when he picks them up.
    The way some fans talk about the 80s and 90s, you'd think Superman had no powers and only fought regular human villains.

    Also say what you will about the N52 but it killed that "naive" junk the modern writers tried to tie to Superman. I haven't seen it since then except maybe briefly when the Post-Crisis Superman came back and they tried to revert back to it.
    It also killed competent writing, sales, coherency, etc. So maybe it wasn't the godsend some argue it was.

    Sometimes it feels like Superman fans care more about how the character is seen by a segment of the population that is never going to like Superman anyway than whether or not he's actually being written well.
    Last edited by Agent Z; 06-29-2022 at 11:11 PM.

  4. #5194
    Retired
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    18,747

    Default

    Although gravity made a kind of sense in the early days, when it was like John Carter of Mars and Superman was simply better at stuff because he was in a relatively lighter gravity--it became a catch-all for explaining every power he had. It was essentially the same as the yellow sun thing by the late 1950s/early 1960s just prior to the yellow sun being introduced.

    Yellow sun wasn't supposed to fuel him--it just made him Super, for undefined reasons. It was attractive as an idea, because it was a colour--in a comic book, where colour was the feature. You could see it.

    Gravity wasn't visual. But I can imagine using it in a different way, in terms of Einstein's theories, as providing energy--if you think of gravity as an effect of space-time--it's the warping of space and time.

  5. #5195
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,220

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Z View Post
    The way some fans talk about the 80s and 90s, you'd think Superman had no powers and only fought regular human villains.
    Never said that. Said grounded realism was at most a trendy fad back in the day but was never really important or even appropriate. Trying to use scientific fact to help make a more immersive story is fine, trying to explain Superman doesn't lift stuff but rather he "floats" them is not. Realism in general was disproven by DBZ back in the 80's when it was being written. Disproven again in the aughts with the success of All Star Superman. Disproven today with the success of One Punch Man.


    It also killed competent writing, sales, coherency, etc. So maybe it wasn't the godsend some argue it was.

    Sometimes it feels like Superman fans care more about how the character is seen by a segment of the population that is never going to like Superman anyway than whether or not he's actually being written well.
    The Post-Crisis Superman literally only exist because they thought the Superman that came before was deemed outdated and unpopular. In general I've seen more defending of Superman jobbing by Post-Crisis fans because they're afraid he will be disliked for being too powerful if he does not. I don't really care about Superman's overall popularity tbh, Superman is a character that has really nothing to prove at this point he's one of the few characters who's name is pretty much associated with both Power and Compassion. I do however care about the spirit of the character and I'll be damned if S&S's Champion of the Oppressed becomes some kind of politician style figure head.

    Quite honestly the Post Crisis Superman would be more or less fine if they just let go of the damn realism obsession.
    Last edited by The World; 06-30-2022 at 03:58 AM.
    Rules are for lesser men, Charlie - Grand Pa Joe ~ Willy Wonka & Chocolate Factory

  6. #5196
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    33,943

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The World View Post
    Never said that. Said grounded realism was at most a trendy fad back in the day but was never really important or even appropriate. Trying to use scientific fact to help make a more immersive story is fine, trying to explain Superman doesn't lift stuff but rather he "floats" them is not. Realism in general was disproven by DBZ back in the 80's when it was being written. Disproven again in the aughts with the success of All Star Superman. Disproven today with the success of One Punch Man.
    It hasn't been "disproven". Realism within Superman had less to do with his powers and more to do with character personalities and interactions, responses within the story etc. The powers thing was never that much of a big deal and post crisis largely abandoned it relatively quickly. Realism hasn't gone anywhere or is any less popular just because stuff like One Punch Man is popular. Boiling One Punch Man's popularity down to "it isn't realistic" is over simplistic anyway.


    The Post-Crisis Superman literally only exist because they thought the Superman that came before was deemed outdated and unpopular.
    Which he was.

    In general I've seen more defending of Superman jobbing by Post-Crisis fans because they're afraid he will be disliked for being too powerful if he does not.

    Given your know bias towards post crisis Superman, you'll have to forgive me if I take this with a grain of salt.

    I don't really care about Superman's overall popularity tbh, Superman is a character that has really nothing to prove at this point he's one of the few characters who's name is pretty much associated with both Power and Compassion. I do however care about the spirit of the character and I'll be damned if S&S's Champion of the Oppressed becomes some kind of politician style figure head.
    I don't even know what the hell this means.

    Quite honestly the Post Crisis Superman would be more or less fine if they just let go of the damn realism obsession.
    See above. The areas in which realism where emphasized had little if anything to do with his powers and even that was gotten rid of rather quickly. This is what I meant in my comment about how people act as if Superman's powers were removed, especially when you consider he wasn't even the weakest incarnation of Superman.
    Last edited by Agent Z; 06-30-2022 at 08:37 AM.

  7. #5197
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,933

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The World View Post
    Never said that. Said grounded realism was at most a trendy fad back in the day but was never really important or even appropriate. Trying to use scientific fact to help make a more immersive story is fine, trying to explain Superman doesn't lift stuff but rather he "floats" them is not.
    Quote Originally Posted by The World View Post
    Quite honestly the Post Crisis Superman would be more or less fine if they just let go of the damn realism obsession.
    The whole "Superman is what I can do, but Clark is who I am" angle was pretty bunk, too. I pretty much agree with everything else you said, though.
    Keep in mind that you have about as much chance of changing my mind as I do of changing yours.

  8. #5198
    Astonishing Member DochaDocha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    4,629

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by phonogram12 View Post
    The whole "Superman is what I can do, but Clark is who I am" angle was pretty bunk, too. I pretty much agree with everything else you said, though.
    In retrospect, I disliked that direction, and it makes me cringe thinking about it now. On the other hand, I thought at the time it was acceptable and I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing when the editorial teams try to read the tea leaves. If Superman was indeed stagnating then moves to reinvigorate the character should be looked at.

  9. #5199
    Astonishing Member Johnny Thunders!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    WGBS
    Posts
    2,532

    Default

    Superman had such a rich mythology pre crisis especially when you add the LSH and Superboy stories. I see huge elements of Silver Age Superman in both Jonathan Hickmans FF and Jason Aaron’s Thor. All Star Superman pointed a direction for how to tell personal stories in a cosmic setting. There is one point where Odin talks about blowing out Stars and another where Thor is asked if he was living in the Sun yet as a galactic cop. When pre-crisis Superman was abandoned, it took a generation, but so many great character ideas and concepts were there for the taking. When I seen Hemsworth and Portman together standing together as Thors, I see where Superman and Supergirl should be.

  10. #5200
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    5,816

    Default

    I tend to think that the *extreme* of “Clark is the real guy” is inherently superior in every way to “Clark is a charlatan-level caricature,” and that thus making the Clark side actually interesting and engaging is always what you should favor when looking for the middle ground, though ti should be a middle ground of some sort.

    I really find most “Superman and Lois” romances boring compared to “Lois and Clark” romances; it’s why the Reeves Superman always ends up driving me away when those films hit the romance. Lois having a work-com romance with Clark is always going to be better than having her attracted primarily to Superman first.
    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

  11. #5201
    Kon-El "The Scion" SuperX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    3,517

    Default

    supermans powers have grown on the page from his beginning to now, we can all act like he was always as powerful as he is now, or we can say he keeps growing in power, not just a young kid to adulthood, but beyond that. physically and mentally he is becoming more powerful, it's not "making sense" of it, it's just what we all know to be true, he grows in power, so over time if he could only lift a car and a bullet bounced off of him and now he can lift a planet and go fly into the sun, it's not "realism" to explain why he can do this, it's just the why the hell did he go from there to here.

    Also having a "psychic " power reasoning for his powers doesnt mean he will turn into a marvel Telepathy or TK user, there are plenty of beings with mental reasonings for their powers that still completely come off as just physical powers, if DC says his every cell explodes with psychic energy but it is used to explain why he is able to do things thst can't be done then it's OK. flash has the speeddorce, green lanterns have their magic rings, they are made up science just for comics, but everyone is ok with their explanations, but not for superman, the guy who is the most powerful, does things unbelievable, and everyone knows has had insane power escalations over the years. the double standard is ridiculous.

    he comes from a planet where the ppl had to evolve to live in the planet, BUT also they evolved because of the length and scinec of they developed, why is it so hard for ppl to just accept that physically and mentally kryptonians have evolved to be the SUPER men and women that they are today.

    Look at viltrumites, they are considered kryptonian lite type beings, why can ppl accept them evelovong to be what they are now, but not a superior race being even more evolved, and in more ways than them.
    Created from 2 of the greatest men,made with 2 powersets thst are both SUPER,and has 2 cool asf looks and attitudes.

  12. #5202
    Astonishing Member Stanlos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    4,147

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by phonogram12 View Post
    The whole "Superman is what I can do, but Clark is who I am" angle was pretty bunk, too. I pretty much agree with everything else you said, though.
    I often see this but don't understand what is negative or what the opposition is. I wonder if there is a thread dedicated to that.

    It makes me wonder if 'Superman is who I am; Clark is a comfy hat I put on every now and again to walk among you' would be as poorly received.

    What's really at the heart of that?

  13. #5203
    Ultimate Member Ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    19,547

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stanlos View Post
    I often see this but don't understand what is negative or what the opposition is. I wonder if there is a thread dedicated to that.
    Many. If there isn't one active right now, wait five minutes. This is an annual debate at the very least.

    It makes me wonder if 'Superman is who I am; Clark is a comfy hat I put on every now and again to walk among you' would be as poorly received.
    I don't know if it would have been *just* as poorly received, since in pre-Crisis the idea that "work Clark" was mostly a disguise was the standard approach more often than not. It wouldn't have been much of a change at the time, but instead an acknowledgement of what was already established. But it would have been poorly received anyway, I think. The premise that one side or the other is "real" while the other is a complete fabrication isn't going to be taken well by fans because it's the tension *between* Clark and Superman that makes him so intriguing and fun to read about. Saying one is totally legit and one is totally a mask simplifies a complex dual psychology and turns it into something generic.

    "Clark Kent, mild-mannered reporter" is largely an act, absolutely. But that's what Clark shows to people at the office he doesn't know well, and who he can't allow to know him because of secret identity concerns. But the Clark Kent who plays D&D with Jimmy Saturday nights, and buys Lois a coffee every morning, that's the part of "Clark" that's real.

    What's really at the heart of that?
    Eh, I've come to think that this is just the shorthand version of just arguing pre- or post-Crisis. There's tons of differences between the eras that ultimately matter a lot more than how Clark perceives himself in his inner monologue. But the "Super/Clark" debate kind of captures all the rest of it in a nutshell. If you're a "Clark is who I am" fan, you want stories where Clark matters, so a lot of stuff has to be on earth and Metropolis. But if you like pre-Crisis, you'd probably find that restrictive and would prefer Superman to travel more and have "bigger" adventures beyond the city and earth, but the more important "Clark" is, the more it takes to justify any lengthy journey. And that leads into power levels (more powerful = bigger scope adventures), rogues (it'd be odd to find Toyman on Almerac), and all the rest.
    "We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another, as if we were one single tribe."

    ~ Black Panther.

  14. #5204
    The Man Who Cannot Die manwhohaseverything's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    9,478

    Default

    Traveling Bigger grander adventures all the way(inside metropolis or outside it)..He is freaking superman surfing a tidle wave of dreams..Superman is free as bird in the sky and fish in the water
    Office drama, romance drama and family drama are not my cup of tea..
    Last edited by manwhohaseverything; 07-01-2022 at 08:42 AM.
    "People’s Dreams... Have No Ends"

  15. #5205
    (formerly "Superman") JAK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    iowa
    Posts
    2,405

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by phonogram12 View Post
    The whole "Superman is what I can do, but Clark is who I am" angle was pretty bunk, too. I pretty much agree with everything else you said, though.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ascended View Post
    Many. If there isn't one active right now, wait five minutes. This is an annual debate at the very least.

    I don't know if it would have been *just* as poorly received, since in pre-Crisis the idea that "work Clark" was mostly a disguise was the standard approach more often than not. It wouldn't have been much of a change at the time, but instead an acknowledgement of what was already established. But it would have been poorly received anyway, I think. The premise that one side or the other is "real" while the other is a complete fabrication isn't going to be taken well by fans because it's the tension *between* Clark and Superman that makes him so intriguing and fun to read about. Saying one is totally legit and one is totally a mask simplifies a complex dual psychology and turns it into something generic.

    "Clark Kent, mild-mannered reporter" is largely an act, absolutely. But that's what Clark shows to people at the office he doesn't know well, and who he can't allow to know him because of secret identity concerns. But the Clark Kent who plays D&D with Jimmy Saturday nights, and buys Lois a coffee every morning, that's the part of "Clark" that's real.

    Eh, I've come to think that this is just the shorthand version of just arguing pre- or post-Crisis. There's tons of differences between the eras that ultimately matter a lot more than how Clark perceives himself in his inner monologue. But the "Super/Clark" debate kind of captures all the rest of it in a nutshell. If you're a "Clark is who I am" fan, you want stories where Clark matters, so a lot of stuff has to be on earth and Metropolis. But if you like pre-Crisis, you'd probably find that restrictive and would prefer Superman to travel more and have "bigger" adventures beyond the city and earth, but the more important "Clark" is, the more it takes to justify any lengthy journey. And that leads into power levels (more powerful = bigger scope adventures), rogues (it'd be odd to find Toyman on Almerac), and all the rest.
    I see one or the other, at least in my headcanon, to be reductive. In Post-Crisis, he spent all of his life as Clark, so of course Superman will - in the first 5 years or so that the MoS miniseries takes place - seem like a costume for Clark to express himself. He hasn't really seen anything yet, so it makes sense for the character. But as he does more things as Superman, that's naturally going to shift - especially given that Superman quickly came to mean something larger across the universe.

    Ascended, you and I have talked about this before so this won't be new to you, but I still see the "Clark is who I am" as a starting point of his progression. Eventually, his thinking is broader than that - especially when the Fortress comes into play and he is around more tangible Kryptonian things. It would seem more real. He'll almost always be "Clark" in his head, but not in the same way in the 90's as he was in the 80's, if that makes any sense. That way, you can have the big adventures *and* the small ones, and they all fit.
    Hear my new CD "Love The World Away", available on iTunes, Google Music, Spotify, Shazam, and Amazon: https://smile.amazon.com/dp/B01N5XYV..._waESybX1C0RXK via @amazon
    www.jamiekelleymusic.com
    TV interview here: https://snjtoday.com/snj-today-hotline-jamie-kelley/

Posting Permissions

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