Controversial Superman Opinions

[Vordan]

Wasn't one of the original ideas for Krypton being Earth from the future?

Yep, hence the “Man of Tomorrow” moniker. I believe that was the second “Superman”, with the evil telepathic Super-Man being the first, the time traveler being the second, and Superman as we know him being third. That conception popped up in Red Son, and I believe Busiek used it as the basis for the Samaritan although don’t quote me on that.

[OpaqueGiraffe17]

Yep, hence the “Man of Tomorrow” moniker. I believe that was the second “Superman”, with the evil telepathic Super-Man being the first, the time traveler being the second, and Superman as we know him being third. That conception popped up in Red Son, and I believe Busiek used it as the basis for the Samaritan although don’t quote me on that.

whoa thats where that nickname came from? you blew my mind just now, never knew that.
As someone who loved the Red Son comic but the animated movie, not so much. Could have done without that twist in the ending though. Thought it was random.

[Kurt Busiek]

Yep, hence the “Man of Tomorrow” moniker. I believe that was the second “Superman”, with the evil telepathic Super-Man being the first, the time traveler being the second, and Superman as we know him being third. That conception popped up in Red Son, and I believe Busiek used it as the basis for the Samaritan although don’t quote me on that.

I didn't know about that version until afterward, and I'm guessing Millar didn't either, because he (and Morrison, who suggested it, as I recall) though they were nicking it from me.

kdb

[Vordan]

I didn't know about that version until afterward, and I'm guessing Millar didn't either, because he (and Morrison, who suggested it, as I recall) though they were nicking it from me.

kdb

Then it’s just one hell of a coincidence. Hilarious that they were stealing from your Superman expy for their own alternate take on Superman. Testament to how great Samaritan is! Shame we don’t have anything left of that second conception, I would’ve loved to know more details of what Siegel and Shuster had envisioned.

[Jim Kelly]

I think Fritz Lang's METROPOLIS was supposed to be a dystopian vision of the future, not a utopia. If we progress in a positive direction, we'll get away from urban squalor and progress toward forest cities as Mr. Trump put it (probably the nicest thing I've ever made out of that guy's verbal vomit). We already can see that we can work remotely--except for blue collar and pink collar workers. And with things like 3D copiers, it's possible every little townsite can have its own cottage industries. If we ever solve fusion, that could create a new return to nature. Why would highly advanced intelligences impose a hellscape on the Earth?

For me Wayne Boring is the architect of Metropoils. It should all be vertical straight lines and forced perspective. These pretty pictures with overly detailed cityscapes are not comic booky to me. Comics is lines and dynamic perspectives--prettied up panels with lots of detail get in the way of the headstrong accelerated story telling.

I know comic books are also about stealing ideas from other creators, so people want to invoke Fritz Lang for Superman's Metropolis. But maybe we should let Mr. Lang enjoy his own place in the arts and not exploit his work for underhanded purposes.

[phonogram12]

As much as I like both Bibbo and dogs, I'd rather he let that mutt drown than let him call it Krypto. Thankfully, the real Krypto is back and that mutt has not been mentioned in years.

[Stanlos]

Today's controversial Superman opinion came from thinking about revisions and additions and comparing them to the original design. The train of thought was triggered when the beautiful Superman Year One arrived. I was reading it and I thought it strange that the text says there was a world for him to save.

I might be mis-remembering but I could have sworn that originally he was sent here as an act of desperation and love for their wee one so he would not perish; that he would have extraordinary powers on earth, and that the powers were a new discovery that no one else before him had because no one had done any space exploration (their advancements were in other areas).

My controversial opinion is that the whole John 3:16 thing doesn't belong. I also wonder when did it emerge (was it the Donner fillm?). I also think the story is more beautiful and more true to the immigrant experience as a shot in the dark. His parents wanted him to survive and in taking the action they did provided him with opportunity and advantages undreamed of.

[Tzigone]

Today's controversial Superman opinion came from thinking about revisions and additions and comparing them to the original design. The train of thought was triggered when the beautiful Superman Year One arrived. I was reading it and I thought it strange that the text says there was a world for him to save.

I might be mis-remembering but I could have sworn that originally he was sent here as an act of desperation and love for their wee one so he would not perish; that he would have extraordinary powers on earth, and that the powers were a new discovery that no one else before him had because no one had done any space exploration (their advancements were in other areas).

My controversial opinion is that the whole John 3:16 thing doesn't belong. I also wonder when did it emerge (was it the Donner fillm?). I also think the story is more beautiful and more true to the immigrant experience as a shot in the dark. His parents wanted him to survive and in taking the action they did provided him with opportunity and advantages undreamed of.

I loathe the space-Jesus idea of Clark. Space-Moses, at least in origin (guess he could later lead Kryptonians out of Kandor...). He was sent to Earth to save him, not to save Earth. Donner film is the first I know of to use it, but it's certainly been used since then. Not my thing. Jor-El and Lara sent Kal-El to Earth because he would otherwise die. If the planet wasn't going to explode, they would have kept him. That it's for me. Who he became and what he did was not something they "intended" for him, but a product of his nature, his raising, and his decisions. Don't care for Jonathan and Martha raising him with an eye to him being a savior, either.

I don't recall when it was known he'd have special powers on Earth, as at least at one point, all the Kryptonians had powers on Krypton. Then it was Earth's lighter gravity and after that the yellow sun that gave him powers.

[Stanlos]

Soooooooooooooooo finally finished SUPERMAN YEAR ONE and my second Controversial Opinion of the day is that Frank Miller kind of redeemed himself with respect to his treatment of Superman. The story while not mind blowing was decent and gets major points for the way the Batman confrontation went down. I think that this story joins FOR TOMORROW as much needed balance in the depiction of the interactions of the World's Finest. If I never see Superman job to Batman again I will be a very very happy fan.

Unfortunately Miller's silliness with Wonder Woman continued with this story. But regarding Supes he did well.

[rpmaluki]

I loathe the space-Jesus idea of Clark. Space-Moses, at least in origin (guess he could later lead Kryptonians out of Kandor...). He was sent to Earth to save him, not to save Earth. Donner film is the first I know of to use it, but it's certainly been used since then. Not my thing. Jor-El and Lara sent Kal-El to Earth because he would otherwise die. If the planet wasn't going to explode, they would have kept him. That it's for me. Who he became and what he did was not something they "intended" for him, but a product of his nature, his raising, and his decisions. Don't care for Jonathan and Martha raising him with an eye to him being a savior, either.

I don't recall when it was known he'd have special powers on Earth, as at least at one point, all the Kryptonians had powers on Krypton. Then it was Earth's lighter gravity and after that the yellow sun that gave him powers.

Yes, my idea of Superman, his whole existence is first to be saved himself, then to save Krypton (from extinction, which is why I want him involved in New Krypton), to save the little guy (either by punching someone before he has godlike strength to bench press an entire planet or exposing corruption through his job as a reporter) and then to save earth. I prefer the Moses analogy than the Jesus one which makes me cringe, but that's more because of my actual faith than anything else, there's simply no comparison.

[Tzigone]

Yes, my idea of Superman, his whole existence is first to be saved himself, then to save Krypton (from extinction, which is why I want him involved in New Krypton), to save the little guy (either by punching someone before he has godlike strength to bench press an entire planet or exposing corruption through his job as a reporter) and then to save earth. I prefer the Moses analogy than the Jesus one which makes me cringe, but that's more because of my actual faith than anything else, there's simply no comparison.

Well, I'm an atheist. I prefer Superman not sent to save Earth because it really makes no sense with the original story. And because I dislike him seeing himself (or DC editorial seeing him) as God (or even a god) and someone above humans. That DC loves to publish ones where's he's an evil god or takes on a totalitarian role in AUs and the bleedover to fandom perception just makes it worse. Sure, he was essentially an operative of the government of the time - so was every other hero in that era (kinda have the same irritation over how Barry's rogues treated post-COIE, when all rogues were like that back in the CCA days).

I also think it takes agency away from human beings. Say what you want about MoS, but I really like that humans were doing something. Couldn't have succeeded without Superman, of course, but they weren't just sitting on their thumbs, either. And I think the first "save" of the movie was the fisherman pushing Clark out of the way. Alas, more Jesusy-Superman elements followed.

I also think it takes agency away from Superman. He was sent to do this, instructed for years of his life to do this (Donner-verse or some Superboy). Instead of, as I desire, him choosing it all on his own and of his own initiative with no destiny and no one else giving him the direction to be a hero. I generally hate the idea of destiny and prophesied heroes for that reason.

[rpmaluki]

Another argument I have seen and also agree with is that pushing the space-Jesus angle and less a relatable man makes it difficult for him to gain new fans. If Superman himself can't live up to this lofty version of himself, how is that attractive to regular people with very down to earth issues? DC has moved too far away from the man and I'm not talking about the "Clark is who I am and Superman is what I do" stance but rather they have made it difficult to rise to his level which is what that Donner speech about humans joining him in the sun is implying. I love Superman pushing the boundaries of limitations, that's inspiring, not this perfect like persona that's unattainable as much as it limiting/imprisoning.

[stargazer01]

I think the central idea is that Kal's parents wanted to save their baby son, and Jor-El thought the Solar system would make him powerful enough to survive and thrive almost anything. The rest is artistic interpretation, which is valid.

[PCN24454]

I think the central idea is that Kal's parents wanted to save their baby son, and Jor-El thought the Solar system would make him powerful enough to survive and thrive almost anything. The rest is artistic interpretation, which is valid.

I always thought that Jor-El chose it because Earthlings outwardly looked like Kryptonians, so Kal-El would be able assimilate easier.

[Osiris-Rex]

I think the central idea is that Kal's parents wanted to save their baby son, and Jor-El thought the Solar system would make him powerful enough to survive and thrive almost anything. The rest is artistic interpretation, which is valid.

Seems odd Joe-El would know the effects a yellow sun would have on someone born under a red sun. What factual base would Jor-El have come to this conclusion? In what way was Jor-El familiar with the effects of a yellow sun.
I'd also go with sending Kal-El to Earth because Jor-El could actually see the Earth through Krypton's powerful telescopes and could see what Earthlings looked like and that Earthlings looked like Kryptonians.