Controversial Superman Opinions

[Kaitou D. Kid]

This is in response to what's going on over in the Superman retro movie thread, but...

The fact that everyone is tiptoing over who they'll piss off if Superman just takes a stance akin to the intent of his creators is kind of proof that he needs to. Superman fights for the little guy. If any political party feels that's a problem, well frankly they can eat it. The fact that any issue where Superman sides with the common people is constantly pushing against Republican ideals and we're not really coming up with many where he pisses off Democrats may lend credence to the concept that Clark's crusade leans left. The left is not without fault, but right now it seems like asking Clark to stand up to oppression is political. Trying to force Clark to stand in the middle and have no opinion is exactly why he's stagnated in popularity for 40 years. He will never matter or be relevant if we are constantly trying to make sure he never offends anyone. Batman's most popular book is one where he is actually hunted by the Republican president and he blew up. At some point, the character has to be a character.

This is ridiculous, frankly. Next we're going to debate that the next Wonder Woman movie can't have too feminist a platform or else them wimenz may start asking for equal pay and equal lunacy. Give me a break.

Quoted for Truth.

[PCN24454]

This is in response to what's going on over in the Superman retro movie thread, but...

The fact that everyone is tiptoing over who they'll piss off if Superman just takes a stance akin to the intent of his creators is kind of proof that he needs to. Superman fights for the little guy. If any political party feels that's a problem, well frankly they can eat it. The fact that any issue where Superman sides with the common people is constantly pushing against Republican ideals and we're not really coming up with many where he pisses off Democrats may lend credence to the concept that Clark's crusade leans left. The left is not without fault, but right now it seems like asking Clark to stand up to oppression is political. Trying to force Clark to stand in the middle and have no opinion is exactly why he's stagnated in popularity for 40 years. He will never matter or be relevant if we are constantly trying to make sure he never offends anyone. Batman's most popular book is one where he is actually hunted by the Republican president and he blew up. At some point, the character has to be a character.

This is ridiculous, frankly. Next we're going to debate that the next Wonder Woman movie can't have too feminist a platform or else them wimenz may start asking for equal pay and equal lunacy. Give me a break.

Because there's nothing more satisfying than seeing the World's Strongest Man throw his weight.

[Robanker]

QFT dude, Superman is a frequently if not fundamentally progressive character, and trying to stay neutral or apolitical always benefits entrenched power structures, injustice, and ultimately, evil. And that ain't Superman.

Quoted for Truth.

Because there's nothing more satisfying than seeing the World's Strongest Man throw his weight.

I seem to have misread the room when I posted this in "controversial" opinions. Nice to be wrong this time!

[Vordan]

I seem to have misread the room when I posted this in "controversial" opinions. Nice to be wrong this time!

It’s not a controversial idea here but it definitely is out amongst the “normies”. I still remember the pearl clutching that happened when Morrison’s Action Comics started (and oh man remember when Pre-Flashpoint Superman renounced his American citizenship?). Most people see Superman as standing for a sort of non confrontational “goodness” where he just kind of twiddles his thumbs and doesn’t take sides (unless he’s going evilllllll) and basically operates with a “oh golly gee I sure hope it all works out!”

[Kaitou D. Kid]

I seem to have misread the room when I posted this in "controversial" opinions. Nice to be wrong this time!

While I agree we shouldn't tone down Superman to please everyone, I also think people overestimate just how controversial that would be. There is no evidence that Superman would piss off half the country. I repeat: There is literally no evidence that Superman would piss off half the country.

Research polls done on Americans show that most aren't as divided as Fox and CNN keep going on about. The majority of Americans have what we would call center-left positions:
https://medium.com/@StealYoRedBull/a...y-b770db517ba5
(Note that some of those numbers are already dated. For example, the % of Americans in favor of healthcare are now at 70%).

Even among Republicans, we forget that Trump won in 2016 by pretending to be anti-Establishment.

This fear that Superman would piss off half the country is a worst-case scenario, not even the most likely scenario. Frankly the people who insist on this don't bother to do any research and some may be even using it to rationalize the fact they don't want a Superman that is an actual champion for the little guy.

[Ascended]

It’s not a controversial idea here but it definitely is out amongst the “normies”. I still remember the pearl clutching that happened when Morrison’s Action Comics started (and oh man remember when Pre-Flashpoint Superman renounced his American citizenship?). Most people see Superman as standing for a sort of non confrontational “goodness” where he just kind of twiddles his thumbs and doesn’t take sides (unless he’s going evilllllll) and basically operates with a “oh golly gee I sure hope it all works out!”

I think with the New52 Morrison stuff, a big chunk of the reaction was born from the "ain't yo grand-pappy's Superman!" marketing, and the severe whiplash of going from the older, married Superman who had become rather useless and impotent since Infinite Crisis, to the young, reckless, *angry* young man Morrison gave us. It was a big change and the marketing trying so damn hard to tell us the previous version was terrible set a lot of fans against the reboot before the first issue even hit.

A Golden Age Superman would definitely be something audiences aren't used to seeing and I think you'd have to kind of ease everyone into the experience a little bit; Clark's legend casts a big shadow even on his own character, and I'd use the old source material like the 40's cartoons in a lot of the marketing to get people ready for a kind of Superman most people have forgotten about. Just to remind them that, yeah this is who the guy used to be and he used to be about more than just punching aliens.

The Action 900 thing, I think, was largely a perfect storm of a story that was told too quickly, and people jumping on the band wagon. You actually read the story and Superman renounces a citizenship out of a sense of patriotic duty; he doesn't want America blamed for his actions. But it's only a few pages long and doesn't really have the space to show that this wasn't an anti-American sentiment but an attempt to protect the nation from the consequences of Clark's actions. The fact that half the country was still convinced every Muslim was a terrorist didn't help any either. And a few morons getting on the "They're trying to take our flag-waving all-American Superman away from us!" shtick managed to catch a lot of ears and people who should've known better got swept up in it.

Basically, just another tale of DC having the seed of a good idea and completely botching the execution.

[Kuwagaton]

You can tell just from the three panels shown, although Vinnie is the inker of record, Murphy Anderson was a strong presence on this story, since his Lois and Superman are there, not Colletta's. Sadly, Werner Roth passed away in 1973. He was great.

I also end up thinking that cover deserves more praise. Especially that middle portion with Superman at the dials, really cool.

This is in response to what's going on over in the Superman retro movie thread, but...

The fact that everyone is tiptoing over who they'll piss off if Superman just takes a stance akin to the intent of his creators is kind of proof that he needs to. Superman fights for the little guy. If any political party feels that's a problem, well frankly they can eat it. The fact that any issue where Superman sides with the common people is constantly pushing against Republican ideals and we're not really coming up with many where he pisses off Democrats may lend credence to the concept that Clark's crusade leans left. The left is not without fault, but right now it seems like asking Clark to stand up to oppression is political. Trying to force Clark to stand in the middle and have no opinion is exactly why he's stagnated in popularity for 40 years. He will never matter or be relevant if we are constantly trying to make sure he never offends anyone. Batman's most popular book is one where he is actually hunted by the Republican president and he blew up. At some point, the character has to be a character.

To me at least, this has usually been an exaggerated and rather unfair attack on the character image. I mean if we say 40 years... it's not that he wasn't more or less the same 40 years ago as 50 years ago. He's been kind of mild in his sales spikes and slumps...but still political to a degree that's relevant. His archenemy is the cult of personality champion, a financial and technological tyrant who straight up became a crooked president. He's never really turned away from real world conflict.

Over the last forty years you have some of the best material in the first half and at least competitively relevant stuff in the second. A major story set in a xenophobic future, child abduction, lethal force, etc. Just because it's not always stellar doesn't mean it's not there. Mostly it seems like there are just a lot of stories that try to give him something he can't punch. With a lot of people coming away with seeing that as a compromised character, as the point of the story is pretty much just him flexing problems away.

[Stanlos]

This is in response to what's going on over in the Superman retro movie thread, but...

The fact that everyone is tiptoing over who they'll piss off if Superman just takes a stance akin to the intent of his creators is kind of proof that he needs to. Superman fights for the little guy. If any political party feels that's a problem, well frankly they can eat it. The fact that any issue where Superman sides with the common people is constantly pushing against Republican ideals and we're not really coming up with many where he pisses off Democrats may lend credence to the concept that Clark's crusade leans left. The left is not without fault, but right now it seems like asking Clark to stand up to oppression is political. Trying to force Clark to stand in the middle and have no opinion is exactly why he's stagnated in popularity for 40 years. He will never matter or be relevant if we are constantly trying to make sure he never offends anyone. Batman's most popular book is one where he is actually hunted by the Republican president and he blew up. At some point, the character has to be a character.

This is ridiculous, frankly. Next we're going to debate that the next Wonder Woman movie can't have too feminist a platform or else them wimenz may start asking for equal pay and equal lunacy. Give me a break.

Well, we're late to the party on the WW part as the movie has already compromised quite a bit of the design's feminism.

The bolded part sounds a lot like Frank Miller's Elseworlds interpretation of Supes has overtaken the main continuity.

In this way Superman has been a victim of publisher interference along the same manner as Wonder Woman. Of course, with WW her whole deal is subversive and the DiDidiot and company tried their bestest to dumb her down with the Zeus bit being their gleaming accomplishment.

[Agent Z]

Well, we're late to the party on the WW part as the movie has already compromised quite a bit of the design's feminism.

The bolded part sounds a lot like Frank Miller's Elseworlds interpretation of Supes has overtaken the main continuity.

In this way Superman has been a victim of publisher interference along the same manner as Wonder Woman. Of course, with WW her whole deal is subversive and the DiDidiot and company tried their bestest to dumb her down with the Zeus bit being their gleaming accomplishment.

The movie didn't compromise Diana's feminism. I'd have preferred the clay origin but it was as feminist as a movie can be.

[Stanlos]

I think there are many other ways to depict or explain Superman's powers outside of yellow sun cell batteries.

[PCN24454]

I think there are many other ways to depict or explain Superman's powers outside of yellow sun cell batteries.

Writers and fans like to cling onto that when they want to be "scientific" and "realistic".

I'm perfectly fine with Kryptonians being portrayed weaker than they usually are. The DCAU had a nice power level.

I think Superman would be fine with a sidekick.

[manwhohaseverything]

I think there are many other ways to depict or explain Superman's powers outside of yellow sun cell batteries.

Hell yeah! Finally, someone who sees it my way.The sun explanation is a overused jesus symbolism that needs to die or change.

[Vordan]

Writers and fans like to cling onto that when they want to be "scientific" and "realistic".

I'm perfectly fine with Kryptonians being portrayed weaker than they usually are. The DCAU had a nice power level.

I think Superman would be fine with a sidekick.

Personally I’m a fan of Clark always starting out roughly Golden Age tier during “Year One”: Strength, speed, bulletproof (but only bulletproof anything stronger like a grenade or missile or tank shell could kill) skin, heat/x-Ray vision, and enhanced hearing/smell.

[Laufeyson]

I think there are many other ways to depict or explain Superman's powers outside of yellow sun cell batteries.

To make it easier to write to him and giving a 'reasonable' explanation of where his power comes from, Byrne writes him as the solar battery guy. To be fair, I'm perfectly fine with that, because it's what distinct him from the other kryptonian.

[Ra-El]

I think there are many other ways to depict or explain Superman's powers outside of yellow sun cell batteries.

I like the way it was in the earlier days, Kryptonians were just most powerful than humans, they are aliens they don't need to have power source, just like Martian Manhunter don't have one.
It's what Robert Kirkman did in Invincible too, the viltrumites are just superpowered aliens, and so should be the kryptonians.

My only problem with this logic, is that Superman and other kryptonians should not be as powerful as they are and get killed by a planet explosion. Given Superman feats and all, if Earth exploded he was survive it. So, without the sun connection, maybe kryptonians should be toned down power wise. Or They can come up with something that explain why Clark is more powerful.