Controversial Superman Opinions

[DochaDocha]

Now that I think about it, I can think of a handful of Batman and Superman stories I enjoyed. I can think of a handful of Wonder Woman and Superman stories I enjoyed. But "Trinity"? I can think of precisely one.

"Trinity" works great for marketing, but that's about it.

[Flash Gordon]

To piggy back off what my pal Ascended was saying-

I've read Golden Age Superman stuff off and on since I was a kid. I think it's important to remember where you come from, even for a flying man.

George Reeves on Nick at Nite was a big, huge deal for me.

Morrison's approach to Superman in those very early issues of his Action Comics is where the character needs to go, logically. That Bruce Springsteen/Champion of the Oppressed in his old tattered jeans...is the 2017 Superman. Of course I'm not sure it would be sustainable for a company like DC. The endgame is always going to be Jim Lee armor or a goofy son.

It WOULD be a great idea for a Young Animal book.

[Kuwagaton]

See I don't see why Clark needed more emphasis on being humble though.

Because that's not humility, it's a fabrication. That isn't the man behind the cape, it is a scenery chewing cypher. Morrison and Quitely (and I guess the movies, but the execution wasn't as good) convinced people that clumsy goofball Clark was secretly doing cool things... but no, that's a revision. That's not how it was originally written for the most part. Clark was a goof because Superman as written back in the day played him as a goof. That's how the Kill Bill movie was able to get across the idea of Clark Kent as a vehicle for mocking humans, however much Tarantino and his gang really think about Superman.

turned down an anchoring position, and regularly saved the world for free.

The entire genre is built on the idea of saving the world for free. And yeah Superman was the first to do it, but being the first to be selfless in and of itself doesn't necessarily make him interesting. Maybe the execution wasn't all it could have been, and it isn't what it could be, but the point is that writers make an attempt to give a glimpse into the why of selflessness.

Also, he was an anchor many years in our time.

It wasn't just that Clark grew up on a farm but that somehow being on a farm made him a poorer Superhero or something.

But how was he a poorer superhero? I just wonder what this means as people say it. Okay, he went in space less often, but he went into the actual world far more frequently. Diversity and different cultures actually became things worth exploring to the comic line. Byrne, Waid, and others had him actually live abroad, for a change.

Frankly I don't know why I'm suppose to care whether or not Clark's won a pulitzer when his competition are regular people and he's secretly Superman. Where suppose to praise Lois when she does well compared to Clark, not when Clark scoops joe blow. Laugh sure but not be impressed.

Life without achievement is meaningless. That's what I glimpse from people who, pre or post crisis, see him as captain wonderbread. Batman is stupid rich, but the achievement he reaches for is incredibly vast and logically impossible. That seems to be a thing that moves people. Clark being a journalist and novelist in many but not all cases has nothing to do with powers, that's what makes them compelling achievements to seek in-story. When Superman can flex and punch every problem away, people tend to get bored.

Same goes for being a QB in highschool. It's just so meaningless to me and provided nothing. All it got us stuck with was people calling Clark a jock derogatorily.

I only seem to know "jock" as being someone who plays sports. How that's something derogatory, I don't know.

But Im not saying "use the t-shirt/Golden Age because its the best evah!" Im saying it because I think it explores themes and topics that are relevant today and it would resonate with a wide audience.

Oh, I think it was brilliant, especially in the context of 2011. If I could edit history, that original period and the Morrison revival would both be twice the length.

[darkseidpwns]

I understand and agree with you on this. My post about this is really not presentable and not serious, maybe in a few days.




The sales comparisons between Rebirth and N52 are hard to make due to a Nr of subjective factors like: N52 came after Green Lantern, RB after BvS, Marvel's policy of frequent Nr1 relaunches finally caught up to them combined with blunders in story-telling, double shipping main sellers will obviously sell better than launching with a more diverse line (thus New52 was much more laudable for the people who say they want variety and diversity... )


Here's something I wrote to a friend a few months ago:

**************************
Trinity and Supersons are interesting and easier titles to compare with SMWW, BMSM and BMandRobin as they are once a month. For example, Trinity has Batman and costs one dollar less.
Trinity on the right, SMWW on your left.

SMWW-------------------------------Trinity
1 $3.99 DC 94,859----------------1* $2.99 DC 93,797
2 $3.99 DC 60,185----------------2* $2.99 DC 65,106
3 $3.99 DC 51,357----------------3 $2.99 DC 58,253
4 $3.99 DC 47,350----------------4 $2.99 DC 50,270
5 $3.99 DC 44,847----------------5 $2.99 DC 46,204
6 $3.99 DC 43,308----------------6 $2.99 DC 42,001
7 $3.99 DC 45,157----------------7 $2.99 DC 39,380
8 $3.99 DC 47,803----------------8 $3.99 DC 36,803
9 $3.99 DC 62,659----------------9 $3.99 DC 34,317


Equal launch, better numbers at the start, but fell hard all these months, while SMWW stabilized between 43~50k during Soule's writing. Did I mention trinity costs one dollar less and has Batman?

******************************************

(This was written 2 months ago and Trinity still sold for 2,99. Updated with last 2 months, point still stands.)

I think SMWW#9 sold more because of variant covers? Future's End?

Anyway, those are the results. I'm really not trying to sound like a smart ass, but boy, is it good to look at those numbers.

Heh, the formating in this forum is very limited.

EDIT:I forgot to add that SMWW was launched 2 years after New52's launch.

Yeah and Trinity like SM/WW and even Batman/Superman is a book that fizzled out after the first arc, it will last approximately the same number of issues and then poof it will go. Difference is that Trinity will stick to its own book, Superman/Wonder Woman as fishyzombie pointed out was choking writers on Superman, Action and Wonder Woman.SM//WW was bothersome both directly and indirectly, look at the bigger picture here.

[DochaDocha]

Yeah and Trinity like SM/WW and even Batman/Superman is a book that fizzled out after the first arc, it will last approximately the same number of issues and then poof it will go. Difference is that Trinity will stick to its own book, Superman/Wonder Woman as fishyzombie pointed out was choking writers on Superman, Action and Wonder Woman.SM//WW was bothersome both directly and indirectly, look at the bigger picture here.

The Superman/Wonder Woman title's only effect on the WW book was that WW wasn't allowed to date Orion, which isn't exactly a big loss from my POV. I really enjoyed Azz's run, and I would say one happy accident of editorial decree was that Azz was barred from pairing her off with Orion, because Azz's take on Orion was a little too obnoxious for me to see him get rewarded with affection, heh. Otherwise, Azzarello had free reign and he ignored everything else.

I thought one of the things that killed the Super books from 2014-2016 was all of those crappy crossover arcs. That's what was choking writers, if you ask me. The only degree of freedom lost by pairing up Superman and Wonder Woman was that they weren't free to date other people. I know for some that's a big, huge deal for a lot of readers, but otherwise I would say if Superman was fighting Zod or Circe in the Superman/WW title, that didn't have much effect on the other books any more than a concurrent arc in JL affects Action Comics. On the other hand, those crossovers... I'm not against crossovers, I just thought they were disappointing and not interesting beyond a few issues. A bad crossover will kill your interest in every Superman book.

[Sacred Knight]

Agreed. SM/WW choked absolutely nothing of value. Nothing at all in fact outside the Orion idea. The crossovers did, though. Even if all of them had been good, it was still too many that killed momentum across the line.

[FishyZombie]

Meh, who knows what they would have done without the restrictions the crossover romance made? My point still stands. Dc turned against the idea when they wanted the solo books to be able utilize that side of their character's lives. And since they were never going to make WW a regular in Superman's book and vice versa, it had to be tossed. It was never realistically sustainable. Which wouldn't be so bad but they tossed a lot of past stories and history for SM/WW's sake and then Frankenstein it back together. The Superman mythos had to bend over backwards for the sake of SM/WW.

[Dolores - The Worst Poster Ever]

The Superman/Wonder Woman romance came from Didio, Lee, and Johns. The creative teams on the Superman books and Wonder Woman didn't ask for the romance, so what you had was a relationship that creative teams didn't want, and weren't accustomed to.

Soule's run was enjoyable enough, because he's a good writer, but the romance wasn't sustainable when it was something that came from people that weren't involved with either character's books.

[manofsteel1979]

Good points Docha and Fishy. I think the very fact the SM/WW relationship came from editorial fiat and not borne from the Superman and Wonder Woman creative teams is the thing that pretty much doomed it from the start to be nothing more than a temporary thing. Had it been something say, Azzarello and Grant Morrison or George Perez cooked up when planning for the New 52 was under way, it may of had longer legs.

Now, Sacred is technically correct that the relationship didn't really stiff storytelling across the books in of itself, I suspect most of the WW Creators and Superman Creators especially probably resented being told " nope, you can't do that Lois subplot or play with any other love interests Because we are pushing the Superwonder thing as a priority " which we know anecdotally did occur in the first couple years of the SM/WW ship. Writers don't usually like being told what they can or cannot write, which is a fact.

I would safely say the only writer in that span to be enthusiastic about writing it was Charles Soule ,and he was largely outside of the DC clique and it was a time where his SM/ WW book was not tied that closely with what was going on in Superman, Action, Batman/ Superman and WW. Outside of Lobdell who was more agreeable with editorial fiat than most writers ( which I suspect is the main reason he stayed on SUPERMAN and SUPERBOY for so long) the other Superman and WW Creators didn't really use the SM/WW thing in their stories. I think the first time Pak even used it at all outside of a small nod in his intial Batman/Superman arc was during the DOOMED crossover.

On the other side of that coin, I think it's that simple fact is why that over time, especially after the 1990's Supes Creators left the books the editors and Creators that followed eventually wanted to do away with the Lois and Clark marriage. It's a natural reaction when a character changes hands, and it's very possible that will eventually too becomes Jon's ultimate undoing. Once the current crew of Creators leave, I'm sure future Creators will not like being told " Nope, you have to use Jon in your stories".

Which is why DC should utilize the Multiverse more, but unfortunately it'll probably never happen.its the perfect solution to allow writers freedom to use or not use certain aspects at their own discretion.

[Dolores - The Worst Poster Ever]

I don't think it was so much that creators wanted to do away with Lois & Clark's romance, but that they didn't want them married. Creators seem to be against marriage in serial superhero comics in general.

RT: Since you are the guy who hitched Superman and Lois Lane, what do you think about characters being hitched today? People like Peter Parker and Green Arrow and Black Canary?

DJ: Generally I’m against it.

Even with Superman, when we first did the engagement, we thought the engagement could last a good long time. We could have gotten 15 months out of it. That is what we expected, but that was not what took place.

Once you have characters who are married, you put them in a box that they can’t get out of. And we’ve seen that with both Superman and Spider-Man. How do we get them out of the box, because you remove fictional possibilities by having them in the box.

When it’s Superman and Clark Kent, he’s going to be held to a different standard than other characters. You can take Reed and Sue Richards, and Sue has walked out on Reed how many times now?

Even though I'm against romance when it comes to Superman himself specifically, I find this line of thinking perplexing. It isn't a limitation unless the writer wants it to be.

[darkseidpwns]

The Superman/Wonder Woman title's only effect on the WW book was that WW wasn't allowed to date Orion, which isn't exactly a big loss from my POV. I really enjoyed Azz's run, and I would say one happy accident of editorial decree was that Azz was barred from pairing her off with Orion, because Azz's take on Orion was a little too obnoxious for me to see him get rewarded with affection, heh. Otherwise, Azzarello had free reign and he ignored everything else.

I thought one of the things that killed the Super books from 2014-2016 was all of those crappy crossover arcs. That's what was choking writers, if you ask me. The only degree of freedom lost by pairing up Superman and Wonder Woman was that they weren't free to date other people. I know for some that's a big, huge deal for a lot of readers, but otherwise I would say if Superman was fighting Zod or Circe in the Superman/WW title, that didn't have much effect on the other books any more than a concurrent arc in JL affects Action Comics. On the other hand, those crossovers... I'm not against crossovers, I just thought they were disappointing and not interesting beyond a few issues. A bad crossover will kill your interest in every Superman book.

That's just one that we know of, you then have Lois Lane's overall treatment throughout the New 52. Besides romance isnt just about shipping, its also about opening new avenues for story telling. Orion and Wonder Woman as a couple may be no loss but if Azz had interesting ideas about Diana playing some role in the New Genesis/Apokolips conflict then those ideas went down the drain automatically.
Romance should be for the purpose of story telling not pandering to someone who faps to pretty pictures. The actual story tellers treated SM/WW with utter disdain as Clementine pointed out. If your own writers resent it then its clear that they do find it limiting and problematic. This romance became exactly what the Pre Flashpoint super marriage was, except it only needed a year to reach that state. Now writers can work in peace, whatever relationasip Kal has with Diana can be explored in JL or Trinity. I honestly see no loss, there's still SM/WW interaction.

[Ascended]

Morrison's approach to Superman in those very early issues of his Action Comics is where the character needs to go, logically. That Bruce Springsteen/Champion of the Oppressed in his old tattered jeans...is the 2017 Superman. Of course I'm not sure it would be sustainable for a company like DC. The endgame is always going to be Jim Lee armor or a goofy son.

It WOULD be a great idea for a Young Animal book.

Sustainability is certainly a consideration. I think the idea itself has legs to run for ages though. If nothing else, real world events will always be giving you new story ideas. But the big question is whether DC could capitalize on it without driving fans away with crap execution. A socially aware Superman requires a finer, more delicate touch than most of the creators they put on the character and his stories would require a little more nuance and complexity.

But if DC could get off their ass and invest a little bit of effort into the character, this direction could throw Clark back on top, make him hugely popular again, and generate a ton of revenue for DC through merchandise. But DC doesnt like money, and they certainly hate having to work for it, which is why Batman is their go-to guy now, he appeals to the lowest common denominator and that sh*t is easy as hell to write.

And a Young Animal title is inspired man! Love the idea!!

[Dolores - The Worst Poster Ever]

A socially conscious Superman book is going to shed readers as per the direct market, there's no way around it. If it's badly written, like Champions (recently checked some of it out, and yeah, Waid means well but his execution is awful) it'll lose more readers, but even if it's written superbly it'll still lose readers.

Where such a book might gain readers is in trade, and the digital market, where books like Saga thrive, but there's no guarantee it'll do well in those markets. If DC goes that route, they will have to treat it like a Vertigo/Young Animal book and settle for sales well below what superhero books usually do.

The book will have great impact, but not in the sales department.

[Jim Kelly]

There's not so much difference between the so-called social justice early Superman and the science fantasy later Superman. Everything is a development of the character and the fandom shouldn't divvy up the Man of Tomorrow into different camps.

One can take a wholistic approach to the World's Greatest Super-hero, which is what I think Grant Morrison wanted to do--in rather the same way he approached Batman; however, he was always serving different masters and the demands of DC at these individual times required him to limit his vision to specific beats within that entire concept.

If Superman was going to fly under the radar this last decade--with Batman getting all the attention--I wish that had been like the 1947 - 1957, when it seems like nothing happened with the Man of Steel yet everything happened.

[daBronzeBomma]

Watched a couple of DBZ episodes out of boredom:

I think Orion should be the Vegeta to Superman's Goku.

As in a regular supporting character who is imperious, condescending, but ultimately friendly, sparring partner for Kal who can actually train him in the art of superhuman combat (at their power levels, Earthly martial arts should be useless to them).