Controversial Superman Opinions

[Stanlos]

I've read very little of it, but I liked what I saw. I have an easy time believing this and Rucka's Lois books are the only good things to come out of the Superman office since Morrison left Action Comics

I have been having hankering for good Superman stories. Was Morrison's Superman on par with the PreFlashpoint Superman stuff (like Camelot Falls or New Krypton?)

[Stanlos]

Here's one; all the arguments people commonly use against Superman (i.e. he's too powerful etc.) are more appropriate for Batman. I think Superman should be a better fighter than Batman and he's definitely more intelligent, all just because he's Kryptonian. I think Superman should be the one teaching Batman more often than not. At this point Batman might as well be a 1938 Superman in the comics which is ridiculous to me. I'd love to see Superman teaching Batman and Robin a thing or 2 about gymnastics and martial arts. Kryptonians should naturally be able to do pretty much anything a human can do physically and at a superhuman level at that. There was an instance in the justice league unlimited TV show where someone made an off comment about Superman dancing or singing badly that sat in my craw. Superman is more coordinated than any human being can be and he has Super ventriloquism so he can literally sound like anyone he wants. Superman's stories should be morality tales and ethical challenges like Star Trek. Superman is supposed to be about how power should be used and who should benefit from such power. He's a bully to the oppressors and the champion of the oppressed!


I have a whole lot of other controversial opinions about Batman, but those are off topic to be sure.

In a whole lot of ways, Morrison's JLA took a big pooper scooper to Batman's character. And it continues today. I recently read that Batman's mech suit is more powerful than Darkseid, Superman, WW, or Cap. But he's soooooooooooooo relatable. 8^o

[Stanlos]

I think Warren Ellis would deliver the most epic, most iconic Superman run ever.

[Vordan]

I have been having hankering for good Superman stories. Was Morrison's Superman on par with the PreFlashpoint Superman stuff (like Camelot Falls or New Krypton?)

Ha you liked New Krypton? I recently reread it myself and found that I actually liked it (the main event with Superman on New Krypton that is) quite a bit. Most interesting Zod has ever been and it was really doing cool stuff but alas the placement of C-Listers on the main Superbooks was a stupid idea. So the whole thing got wasted with that godawful ending. I’d say Morrison’s run is easily on par with the Johns and Busiek era if not better. But that’s my own personal opinion.

I think Warren Ellis would deliver the most epic, most iconic Superman run ever.

I would love to see Ellis do a Superman book. It would be totally unlike your usual Superman book. Wouldn’t be a very hopeful or optimistic book but I think it would bring some cool ideas that would be interesting.

[Yoda]

I would love to see Ellis do a Superman book. It would be totally unlike your usual Superman book. Wouldn’t be a very hopeful or optimistic book but I think it would bring some cool ideas that would be interesting.

I bet an Ellis take probably wouldn't be popular here, but I think you're off as to how he'd approach it if you've seen his Why They'll Never Let Me Write Superman essay. It's definitely a take I'd like to see though:

Superman, then, is the agent of modern fable – the most compelling fable the 20th Century gave us. Soap opera is unworthy of him, and, as has been proved many times, is not big enough to contain him and the central concepts of his story. At the heart of myth and legend is Romance. That is not the same as the weak, whiny demands of soap opera that begin with "characterisation” and crap on with demands for ever more levels of “conflict”, “jeopardy”, “ensemble writing”, “tight continuity” and all the rest of that bollocks. These things are unimportant. Many of them just completely get in the way of the job at hand. SUPERMAN requires only the sweep and invention and vision that myth demands, and the artistry and directness and clean hands that Romance requires.

SUPERMAN is about someone trying their best to save the world, one day at a time; and it’s about that person’s love for that one whose intellect and emotion and sheer bloody humanity completes him. It’s about Superman, and it’s about Lois and Clark. And that’s all there is. That's the spine. That must be protected to the death, not lost in a cannonade succession of continuing stories.

What SUPERMAN must avoid is genericism. It must live up to its billing. The comics must crackle with invention and mythic power. They must always resolutely be of Now, be utterly modern – if not utterly of Tomorrow. They must thrill and frighten and inspire and give us furiously to think.

(Superman tackles natural disaster and human crime. It’s his belief that nothing else falls within his purview. War and the politics of famine, he feels, are part of human government, and so not his place. He will not interfere in the growth of the human race, as much as it sometimes breaks his heart.

He merely, obliviously, shows the human race, by example, how to be great.)“

[Ascended]

I have been having hankering for good Superman stories. Was Morrison's Superman on par with the PreFlashpoint Superman stuff (like Camelot Falls or New Krypton?)

Depends on how you like your Superman.

Morrison's Action was a bit like his Batman run, in that he tried to do a "everything counts" story, but in a spiritual fashion rather than a literal one. The run starts off with a Golden Age homage which is utterly, simply perfect for what it's trying to be and say. Anyone familiar with the original issues will recognize the Superman in Morrison's first arc. Then the story slides more into a Silver Age motif, with a great transition as Clark realizes the Golden Age style approach isn't getting the job done, then it starts to brush against some themes of the Bronze Age, and finishes off with a head twisted finale.

It's your typical Morrison story in that it's very high concept and very meta. And like a lot of Morrison's work, the tightly knit narrative starts to come a little loose towards the end. As a whole, I don't believe it's as good as his All-Star work, but there are individual issues within the run that are probably among the best Super-stories of the last forty years (at least).

If you like Morrison, or at least like Morrison half the time, I'd say check it out. But keep in mind, it's not post-Crisis Superman. It's a new Superman, paying respect to all that came before (especially pre-Crisis) while building a new setting and style and tone.

Now me, I'm 50/50 with Morrison but in my mind he's the best Superman writer of the modern era. I'd say his Action run is way better than the runs you mention. But I'm a fan of Morrison's work with Superman and a bigger fan of the Golden Age, pre-Crisis era. If you don't like Morrison, if you don't like those eras and prefer the post-Crisis stuff, you may enjoy the run less than I did.

[SiegePerilous02]

I bet an Ellis take probably wouldn't be popular here, but I think you're off as to how he'd approach it if you've seen his Why They'll Never Let Me Write Superman essay. It's definitely a take I'd like to see though:

Ellis is saying a lot of great stuff here.

I'd definitely give his run a shot if he was given the title.

I have been having hankering for good Superman stories. Was Morrison's Superman on par with the PreFlashpoint Superman stuff (like Camelot Falls or New Krypton?)

I'd actually say it's better than that stuff, but like Ascended already said, it depends on where you fall with both Morrison as a writer and how you like your Superman. it's a fresh new Superman, but it draws heavily from the Golden and Silver Ages and much less the post-Crisis stuff, with Morrison's trademark weirdness thrown in. It just so happens that Morrison's quirks generally fit Superman like a glove; the story gets lost up its own ass a bit at the end, but is overall very good and the first few arcs in particular are great.

If you liked All-Star, I'd suggest giving it a shot. Aside from the Jim Lee costume (which I wish he didn't have), it could be a prequel to All Star. It's very clearly the same guy written by the same author, just at different stages of his life. I wish it lasted MUCH longer than it did or that we could get more follow up authors with similar takes on the character. It put the SUPER back in SUPERMAN for the first time in seeming ages.

[Yoda]

Ellis is saying a lot of great stuff here.

I'd definitely give his run a shot if he was given the title.

Yeah, I think it would likely be a great story. I think a lot of people would assume it would be cynical or deconstructionist given his history. But I think he looks at it a lot differently than commercial superhero comics.

The lack of popularity comment was jokingly directed towards his use of romance as a touchstone, which is like the proverbial kryptonite to some.

[Vakanai]

That's a bad argument. Just cause he had great kidless stories for 80 years. Doesn't mean he shouldn't have one.
I am just saying it's a bad argument. I don't think it's invalid to think of the kid as bad for franchise or not for you. Jon could become scrappy doo,If not done correctly.

A question to a question is not a real answer. I don't see what's so bad. The comics have always played with the idea of the son of Superman. It just depends on the execution.




Thank you, I think you have a point. I like the kid idea, especially after 80 years of Superman's story, but it depends how it's done. I like the new possibilities and story ideas that expand the Super mythos.

Also, adopting a child sounds valid, but I find it more emotionally satisfying that Clark is able to have a biological child with the woman he loves.

You're both kind of missing the point - This is the controversial opinion thread, not the debate thread, I already listed my reasons back when the kid was new, we all did. I don't want to get dragged into it again, I just wanted to say after all this time and reading almost nothing but love for the superdad and son concept and people whining about the kid getting aged up, that I still hate the idea. People don't have to list reasons why they love the brat and concept anymore, why should I just because I still don't like it? Question rubbed me the wrong way, so I responded with a question because I knew it would rub others the same way.

Not what Superman would do, but I was tired and irritated. Basically if I were to listen to my better nature I would probably say something like, " Why do I even need to answer that," but I was irritated so...

[Vordan]

I bet an Ellis take probably wouldn't be popular here, but I think you're off as to how he'd approach it if you've seen his Why They'll Never Let Me Write Superman essay. It's definitely a take I'd like to see though:

I was actually just reading that! The whole “frighten and inspire” bit makes me still believe that an Ellis Superman story wouldn’t necessarily have a “happy” ending, which is also a hallmark of Ellis stories in general. But it did just make me want to see him write one all the more. I wonder if DC has ever asked him if he’d want to take a shot?

[Kuwagaton]

Ellis is great. It's very clear that he views work for hire as just that, but he really doesn't phone it in. He has that trademark accessibility paired with humorous irreverence and a perfect dose of action. He's just a smart and talented writer.

Honestly with Superman though... I don't get the feeling that it would be some of his best if he ever did try. Maybe this proves his point but all of what he said back then explain why we've seen him do Wolverine and Batman instead.

So the main page made me remember something weird: I love At Earth's End. It delivers no more or less than what you go in expecting and so it perfectly scratches an itch I tend to have as a kid who grew up with mid 90s direct to video sci-fi.

[Frontier]

I bet an Ellis take probably wouldn't be popular here, but I think you're off as to how he'd approach it if you've seen his Why They'll Never Let Me Write Superman essay. It's definitely a take I'd like to see though:

Sounds like his take would be kind of reminiscent of All-Star Superman.

[Stanlos]

Ha you liked New Krypton? I recently reread it myself and found that I actually liked it (the main event with Superman on New Krypton that is) quite a bit. Most interesting Zod has ever been and it was really doing cool stuff but alas the placement of C-Listers on the main Superbooks was a stupid idea. So the whole thing got wasted with that godawful ending. I’d say Morrison’s run is easily on par with the Johns and Busiek era if not better. But that’s my own personal opinion.

I would love to see Ellis do a Superman book. It would be totally unlike your usual Superman book. Wouldn’t be a very hopeful or optimistic book but I think it would bring some cool ideas that would be interesting.

I liked the ambition of New Krypton and how hard it leaned into sci-fi. The end stinks of editorial meddling though.

[manwhohaseverything]

You're both kind of missing the point - This is the controversial opinion thread, not the debate thread, I already listed my reasons back when the kid was new, we all did. I don't want to get dragged into it again, I just wanted to say after all this time and reading almost nothing but love for the superdad and son concept and people whining about the kid getting aged up, that I still hate the idea. People don't have to list reasons why they love the brat and concept anymore, why should I just because I still don't like it? Question rubbed me the wrong way, so I responded with a question because I knew it would rub others the same way.

Not what Superman would do, but I was tired and irritated. Basically if I were to listen to my better nature I would probably say something like, " Why do I even need to answer that," but I was irritated so...

Well, i didn't question your opinion. I am perfectly fine with people wishing jon not to exist. I didn't reply to you when you first put your opinion post. Only when you and @stargazer01 started replying to each other. So, i thought it had Already become a convo. Even, then i just commented on it being bad argument. Sorry, if i misjudged.

[Vordan]

I liked the ambition of New Krypton and how hard it leaned into sci-fi. The end stinks of editorial meddling though.

It 100% was. The sales were soft so DC hit the reset button hard. Zod went back to being a cackling 1-D Terrance Stamp bad guy, New Krypton blew up, etc. Don’t know why they reset everything considering not even a year later they rebooted with New 52.