Controversial Superman Opinions

[Ascended]

Soubhagya, I think the easiest way to explain how Clark looks at Krypton is like this;

When someone dies, some people have a mournful, sad funeral where everyone cries and laments the death.

Other people have a party and celebrate the life.

That's how Superman looks at Krypton. He celebrates what it was, he doesn't wallow in it not being around anymore.

I do think it carries a certain burden on him, but its not a "sad" kind of burden. And keep in mind, the loss of an entire species is a completely different thing than what any of us can really comprehend. Saying that he wouldn't think of it as anything more than a "curious memento" rings false to me; Clark has too deep a sense of responsibility to just wave off being the last of his kind and not invest emotionally and intellectually in it. He'd want to preserve that culture as much as he could. But that doesnt mean he has to be super sad about it all the time, or that he doesnt appreciate and love his adopted world and the family he's made here.

He can do both things; love earth and the Kents and have a happy, full life, while also embracing his culture and keeping the memory of Krypton alive.

[Tzigone]

I apologize if I'm bumping a dead thread. Didn't see a more recent one.

1. I think Jimmy works much better as a cub reporter (gaining experience until "cub" dropped) than as a photographer. I think it gives him a lot more to do.

2. I like a non-butt-monkey Jimmy. I liked him in the radio show. I thought the 70s Mr. Action went to far, but I think Jimmy should be pretty cool.

3. In the next reboot (there will be one eventually), I want Chris Kent back. Abused child and adoptive son of Clark and Lois. And I want Jon too. And Thara and Kathy as their superhero partners in time. I'm greedy, I guess. No speed-aging either boy.

4. I like Clark to not be a disguise.

5. I like the idea of Lois learning fairly early. Even super early, as in MOS. Not at all compatible with Superman's history, but I really enjoyed that.

6. It's extremely irritating how, even in modern retellings, Lara and Martha matter so much less than Jor-El and Jonathan. They have less impact on Clark and what impact they have is less positive in regards to Clark becoming a hero.

7. I have no interest in a "noble" or well-intentioned Zod.

8. I have no interest in a redeemed Lex Luthor.

9. I'd like to move away from the Clark-grew-up-a-farm bit. It's probably too entrenched for me to ever get that wish, but I think it lends itself to the "gosh shucks naive rube" idea (or false persona) of Clark that I do not like. Originally it was common occupation of the era and Lois grew up on farm, too. It didn't say/indicate anything about his character, nor should it. And later in Superboy, they had store, not a farm. But the 1978 movie sure drove home Clark playing that part.

10. I don't like LexGod any more than I like BatGod. Both irritate me tremendously.

I'm conflicted on when the Kents should die, but I want them to have been important to Clark. and don't want them raising or housing any other superheroes (they do love shunting off the jr. Supers there).

[Kuwagaton]

To be honest while it's going back on 40 years of pop culture, I'd actually like to write villain Zod out. I think they just try way too hard to make him a big deal. The Zone itself is pretty difficult to maintain as a live villain storage... I like the idea of phantoms but having equals to Superman put back in the toy box at the end of a story is out of date.

[king81992]

Cir El should make a comeback.

[DrNewGod]

Byrne was right about Superman's level of powers.

[Kuwagaton]

I don't actually care how powerful he is, but I think the Byrne depiction was best and sorely needed. I like the giants spatulas and such for gags, but they're kind of corny and difficult for serial storytelling.

[The World]

It's strange because my favorite depiction of Superman is the early golden age period but thats mainly because of the attitude and vigor of the time but his powers back then were nothing even compared to Byrne's depiction.

If power levels being a problem were a more widespread talking point for characters I might be inclined to accept it but it's only ever with Superman that this comes up. I mean you'd think if being so powerful was so bad everyone would be trying their damnedest to stay as far away from being on Superman's level as possible but everyone and their momma seems to want to be more powerful than the guy. People treat his power like it's a story telling curse but everyone seems to be lurking in the shadows hoping the knock the poor guy off the mountaintop. I just don't buy the Byrne argument.

[Blue22]

I've never thought the red trunks were as big a deal as fans have made them out to be. I can take 'em or leave 'em but I will say that I think his costume looks better without them.

[SiegePerilous02]

It's strange because my favorite depiction of Superman is the early golden age period but thats mainly because of the attitude and vigor of the time but his powers back then were nothing even compared to Byrne's depiction.

If power levels being a problem were a more widespread talking point for characters I might be inclined to accept it but it's only ever with Superman that this comes up. I mean you'd think if being so powerful was so bad everyone would be trying their damnedest to stay as far away from being on Superman's level as possible but everyone and their momma seems to want to be more powerful than the guy. People treat his power like it's a story telling curse but everyone seems to be lurking in the shadows hoping the knock the poor guy off the mountaintop. I just don't buy the Byrne argument.

I like both Golden Age and early New 52 for the same reason.

Byrne's middle of the road approach is just so bland. Needing to reign him in just belies a lack of imagination necessary for the character. if you need to depower him, go back to Golden Age levels, which is the only way to make it interesting. if he is otherwise still way to powerful for grounded weaponry and villains to pose a threat to him, but not otherwise doing anything particularly weird or exciting, what the hell is the point of this guy?

[Adekis]

I like both Golden Age and early New 52 for the same reason.

Byrne's middle of the road approach is just so bland. Needing to reign him in just belies a lack of imagination necessary for the character. if you need to depower him, go back to Golden Age levels, which is the only way to make it interesting. if he is otherwise still way to powerful for grounded weaponry and villains to pose a threat to him, but not otherwise doing anything particularly weird or exciting, what the hell is the point of this guy?

Yeah, I pretty much agree with all of that. Byrne's run has some cool moments and stories here and there, but fundamentally the Bronze Age and Golden Age are both way cooler to me. Silver Age too, I suppose. I do start liking the post-Crisis era a lot after Byrne leaves, but that's mostly because writers like Louise Simonson do such a beautiful job of making Metropolis a character in a way I don't think any other Superman era manages, rather than because Superman himself is at an ideal place in terms of his action stories.

[SiegePerilous02]

Yeah, I pretty much agree with all of that. Byrne's run has some cool moments and stories here and there, but fundamentally the Bronze Age and Golden Age are both way cooler to me. Silver Age too, I suppose. I do start liking the post-Crisis era a lot after Byrne leaves, but that's mostly because writers like Louise Simonson do such a beautiful job of making Metropolis a character in a way I don't think any other Superman era manages, rather than because Superman himself is at an ideal place in terms of his action stories.

Yeah, Bronze Age found the right balance with using the Silver Age lore and and still keeping him at a high power level without going into Silver Age silliness. As with most things, the Bronze Age got it just right.

I don't generally like to speak ill of the Triangle era since I've barely read any of it, and it does seem pretty well liked. But man I do not like Byrne's lol. I made it three trades in and it was so underwhelming I had to tap out. Didn't even get to the Barda porn lol.

[superduperman]

Mxyzptlk is a stupid villain and needs to be quietly phased out. Ditto Lobo.

[Adekis]

Yeah, Bronze Age found the right balance with using the Silver Age lore and and still keeping him at a high power level without going into Silver Age silliness. As with most things, the Bronze Age got it just right.

I don't generally like to speak ill of the Triangle era since I've barely read any of it, and it does seem pretty well liked. But man I do not like Byrne's lol. I made it three trades in and it was so underwhelming I had to tap out. Didn't even get to the Barda porn lol.

Bronze Age is not only great, it's really astonishing how un-influential it is. Byrne's run starts with that big flashy miniseries that got collected over and over, so everyone knew about it, and it influenced Superman works at the time like "Lois & Clark" and "STAS", but it stayed influential all the way til Zack Snyder's Man of Steel movie. By contrast, Bronze Age material wasn't highly influential either at the time it was being published, or thirty years later, because other Superman media created concurrently with Bronze Age comics were, like early Super-Friends or the Reeve films, kind of based on a folk memory of George Reeves more than anything going on in the comics at the time. And I have nothing bad to say about George Reeves, but the fact that the Salkinds didn't draw on the Bronze Age comics is sort of a crime to me.

I don't know, I guess it's not a controversial opinion, I just think it's kind of tragic.

I don't actually hate Byrne's run though. I just don't think it's as good as what comes beforeit, a lot of what comes after, and that retconning and then killing off Superboy is simultaneously awful of Byrne and my favorite story he ever did, mostly because it's the only time that some Silver Age content comes back.

Seems really short-sighted not to have Quex-Ul turn good though, given his background. Oh well.

[Tzigone]

I like the post-COIE power level. Or lower, but it matters what Superman's power is relative to other heroes. Don't really care for Byrne-era-stories that I read, though. Definitely not a fan buffoonish or invisible Clark. And don't like him laughing up his sleeve at Lois. Or Lois not quickly rising to the top of the totem pole at the DP as best reporter (which she definitely was in the bronze age stories I read and definitely didn't start out as in the golden age).

In the radio show, and sometimes in the golden age, he could be a respectable reporter and had friends and still managed mild-mannered. Definitely not a silver age fan. I don't think there is anything unique to the silver age I like. I preferred radio show Jimmy, golden age Lois (Lois, Lana, and Steve Trevor make many of the stories they appear in unreadable to me in the silver age), less Kryptonite, no Krypto, no Fortress (yeah, I know his Citadel appeared earlier), no Superboy (I think of him as silver age, despite 49 debut), and Clark's Kryptonian heritage not really a thing with him. There are some things I like introduced then: Kara can work, and the Phantom Zone and I accept Kandor for Thara (but don't want Clark visiting), but other than that...probably some villains I like then.

One complaint I have about the bronze age is that I don't want Lana in Clark's present, really. Oh, and that they de-awesomed Pete Ross (though there was some Superdickery there). I mean, he was never a major character, but I don't like characters being diminished that way.

Mxyzptlk is a stupid villain and needs to be quietly phased out. Ditto Lobo.

I especially dislike Lobo.

[Kuwagaton]

That Clark wasn't really a buffoon though. And imo the buffoon thing is a little played up since typically every one around him seems to be a buffoon at the same time.

For everything I think Dorfman did well and the younger writers followed, I think the bronze age is the worst offender with powers. They balanced humorous mystery
and adventure with action and occaional drama, but that made it stand out when he would like, travel well beyond the speed of light. He can go in and out of time through sheer power and has the super intelligence to actually match Lex, so how does he get tagged with death rays every time? One of the rare traps that actually made sense to me was from Doctor Doom, given the understanding that they would play up Marvel's top villain and that it completely came as a one time surprise in story. But Superman's power level almost never made sense for physical challenges.

Bates also did the Flash and it was kinda easy because as soon as Barry's speed wasn't a factor he was challenged. Look at what Big Sir did. Superman needed either the worst possible narrative or to immediately lose all of his powers for the same. It's cool that Superman largely wasn't taking itself seriously but that probably would have stood out in the worst way following 1986. Post 86 he could still fight pre crisis Kryptonians. He would definitely lose to keep the drama alive, but then wally wasn't even near the zip code of Barry.

It's strange because my favorite depiction of Superman is the early golden age period but thats mainly because of the attitude and vigor of the time but his powers back then were nothing even compared to Byrne's depiction.

If power levels being a problem were a more widespread talking point for characters I might be inclined to accept it but it's only ever with Superman that this comes up. I mean you'd think if being so powerful was so bad everyone would be trying their damnedest to stay as far away from being on Superman's level as possible but everyone and their momma seems to want to be more powerful than the guy. People treat his power like it's a story telling curse but everyone seems to be lurking in the shadows hoping the knock the poor guy off the mountaintop. I just don't buy the Byrne argument.

The Byrne premise wasn't that he was less powerful than others, but presumably no longer infinite. The only established level was that he was as powerful as he believed himself to be and the trademark feats were generally just written off as opposed to being out of reach to him particularly.

But I'd say both that Superman isn't alone in power controversies and that he himself creates issues for other characters. Martian Manhunter is extremely difficult to continue as a shape shifting telepath, but making him comparable to Superman does him less favors even with the lamest weakness this side of 2965. Diana seems like a touchy subject because people insist that she is equal to Superman, but outside of some moments not really. There's kind of a weird obligation there although (in the relatively few stories I've read) it's a worthless comparison.

Batman struggles with guys like Two Face. He's been taken out on countless occasions throughout his history by nameless goons enlisted from like, the department store parking lot. Makes sense because he's human right? Not even fans like the batgod stuff. Except... we won't see him treated like a child by less popular heroes.

The best thing if you don't have staff actually comminicate is just pass down an inviolable specs bible.

I've never thought the red trunks were as big a deal as fans have made them out to be. I can take 'em or leave 'em but I will say that I think his costume looks better without them.

Probably said this already but I really and truly love the Rebirth costume. In any case though I think costume upgrades are a waste of time. Whenever they try it maybe spikes three issues already boosted by a status quo change.