Controversial Superman Opinions

[Steel Inquisitor]

You are basically saying a guy coming from an abusive or toxic upbringing cannot be good or turn out allright.The lotus symbolism,
"The lotus is the most beautiful flower, whose petals open one by one. But it will only grow in the mud. In order to grow and gain wisdom, first you must have the mud --- the obstacles of life and its suffering. ... The mud speaks of the common ground that humans share, no matter what our stations in life. ... Whether we have it all or we have nothing, we are all faced with the same obstacles: sadness, loss, illness, dying and death. If we are to strive as human beings to gain more wisdom, more kindness and more compassion, we must have the intention to grow as a lotus and open each petal one by one"
This is true hope.Not nihilistic crap or the meaningless monologues about abstract concepts like hope, they have been serving as superman elsewords and mainbooks.Some people doesn't have it in them.They find their way(dao).Lotus blooms in mud.And regardless of what,lotus will only become a lotus.People all have a spark of altruism.Otherwise,society would have collapsed long back.Lao tzu is awesome.True hope.

Except its a concept based in reality, it's true that philosophy has merit but not everyone grows up to be wonderful person in toxic environments, there re many, many monsters in the world and entire cottage industries have examined how they came to be, like criminal profiling and university studies on psychology. I disagree how Superman came to be how he is was entirely about how he was born with this morals and the Kents did absolutely nothing to guide him to those beliefs, when that's the opposite of canon. It's a fool's game to choose nature or nurture are needed when it's both. Clark may be an alien but his psychology is very human. Clark is optimistic about humanity and brings hope simply by his deeds as a super-hero, he doesn't gaslight people like the Homelander for his own agenda. Societies come and go, and that's not an individual thing that's about civilisations and there are various reasons why they rise and fall including numerous tyrants, the ancient past wasn't all smiling there was horrid things people liked through and did, which continues. Because humanity need progress, acknowledging the bad parts of humanity is the first stage to fixing then. People aren't born perfect with no need for parents or mentors. You know what tools kids find useful for guidance? Super-heroes like Superman.

He is superman.Kents just allowed his instincts to be nurtured so that he can defeat Lex.

See i told people,hats are badass.Why the hell is clark not wearing it more often?

Whatever interesting philosophy being examined here loses its authority being connected to a movie about talking animals, I suggest going to the source next time. And the Kents weren't his babysitters, they were his parents who raised him - which is an incredibly important role in how people learn how to be adults. It'd be meaningful had the Kents been abusive and trying to twist him into Lex but we know that's not true, he didn't become who he was in spite of them. Clark wasn't raised by wolves.

[manwhohaseverything]

Except its a concept based in reality

Whatever interesting philosophy being examined here loses its authority being connected to a movie about talking animals, I suggest going to the source next time.

sure,it is. /s You read batman and who was raised in toxic and abusive enviornment(don't give me superman is not batman crap.batman exists cause of superman).Moreover,statistically you are wrong.There is enough chance that a guy from toxic and abusive background can turn out alright .it happens all the time.The chances are'nt that stacked up against it.I would know cause i happen to be one of them,pardon the bragging.Those people are lotuses for a reason.To create something that beautiful,you need to go through some stuff.Dude! i could say superman's boyscott,messiah,example..etc thing is him being fake and putting on an act to people of being good.Homelander is a portrayal of that view point.He is essentially gaslighting people with his "follow me cause i am hope" nonesense.And it's not even questioned by anyone.Atleast,the clark kent persona was just an alien hiding amongst people.nothing more or less.It was never made out to be a good thing.This is a fake politician making some sort of cult of personality(ironic,the guy is a stick in the mud).That's eeeesh! What canon?there is no such thing.This is american comics.whatever the company says is added or removed from a "mainline" of comics continiuity.That's it.For example,superman birthright.Your argument fallsapart cause clark acts like he is perfect or he atleast tries to be perfect with kent's raising him to be that.There is no journey there,he is basically a robot gets morality programmed into him.So?how would a guy like that be useful tool for anyone,let alone kids.You know my nephew and his friends usually wrinkled his nose at superman.They all thought him to be and i quote "preachy and perfect".It's only cause of jon he started getting interest and that too because of me.Kids generally don't read comics.Period.They aren't the main demographic anymore.Moreover,Who said anything about clark being perfect by birth.He just has altruistic nature by birth.He has helpful personality by birth.He learns other things through his life journey and experiences.

nope!superman is the guy who was based on a character raised in a jungle in africa by gorillas.i didn't know that for a person reading about a flying guy that goes out in underpants suit made by his mom,talking animals would be considered intellectually inferior.A parent's role is just to nurture postive instinct in a child and to try to curb the negative impulses and just that.Nothing more or less.period.I can't make my son play football,if it's not in him.Atleast the talking animal can get a sequal and make money without ever being a household ip prior to that.

[Steel Inquisitor]

sure,it is. /s You read batman and who was raised in toxic and abusive enviornment(don't give me superman is not batman crap.batman exists cause of superman).Moreover,statistically you are wrong.There is enough chance that a guy from toxic and abusive background can turn out alright .it happens all the time.The chances are'nt that stacked up against it.I would know cause i happen to be one of them,pardon the bragging.Those people are lotuses for a reason.To create something that beautiful,you need to go through some stuff.Dude! i could say superman's boyscott,messiah,example..etc thing is him being fake and putting on an act to people of being good.Homelander is a portrayal of that view point.He is essentially gaslighting people with his "follow me cause i am hope" nonesense.And it's not even questioned by anyone.Atleast,the clark kent persona was just an alien hiding amongst people.nothing more or less.It was never made out to be a good thing.This is a fake politician making some sort of cult of personality(ironic,the guy is a stick in the mud).That's eeeesh! What canon?there is no such thing.This is american comics.whatever the company says is added or removed from a "mainline" of comics continiuity.That's it.For example,superman birthright.Your argument fallsapart cause clark acts like he is perfect or he atleast tries to be perfect with kent's raising him to be that.There is no journey there,he is basically a robot gets morality programmed into him.So?how would a guy like that be useful tool for anyone,let alone kids.You know my nephew and his friends usually wrinkled his nose at superman.They all thought him to be and i quote "preachy and perfect".It's only cause of jon he started getting interest and that too because of me.Kids generally don't read comics.Period.They aren't the main demographic anymore.Moreover,Who said anything about clark being perfect by birth.He just has altruistic nature by birth.He has helpful personality.He learns other things through his life journey and experiences.

Batman wasn't raised in a toxic environment, the only reason he got unhinged is because his parents were murdered in front of him as a boy and he was raised in a loving and supportive environment by Alfred. Batman may have been inspired by Superman's success, but he was the polar opposite in many ways, this is why they have a love/hate relationship with each other, they're not clones of each other. If being inspired by other characters made then copies Batman would be Spanish and kill people with a sword as a vigilante.

The statistics disagree.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/...cycle-of-abuse

The debate focused on the fact that children who are abused are much more likely to become adults who abuse (between 30% and 40% of people who are abused as children go on to become abusers themselves) – so it is vital to concentrate efforts on families that could be identified as being at greater risk of abuse. Supporting those families would pay huge dividends in the long term because reducing the incidence of abuse in the short term would have the knock-on effect of reducing the number of adults likely to become abusers in the decades ahead.

It's not an accident DC made Lex abused by his parents in many continuities.

Let's just say your beliefs have been very controversial in these threads. Sure, but the point is not every abused child becomes a "lotus" instead the argument is that there are no bad people from those backgrounds, when that's false. No, you don't need to be abused to create beautiful things.

Which is an opinion not backed by facts, that's how you see Superman since to believe he's not as good as he is on paper would undermine your arguments that he needs to be changed. Homelander is a deconstruction of Superman but the argument provided is just saying it's regular Superman. Lex questing Superman's morality regularly, because he can't believe Superman is who he says he is, this is because Lex is a nihilistic narcissist with zero self awareness and the ego the size of a planet. The reason it's not called out that much is because Superman lives up to his reputation and he's not alone, Wonder Woman does the same, as well as Captain America. They put in the work to gain trust and show the trust is earned - there is no ulterior motive because they're super-heroes not super-villains. Superman doesn't make speeches about hope, that's more Captain America's thing - he inspired hope through his actions and telling people to believe in themselves. Technically correct that he is an alien in hiding but that is incredibly vague and ignores how human he is, even J'onn has very human attributes and he comes from a vastly more alien culture. He's not a xenomorph, he's a person. The reasons for hiding are more about being a super-hero, he's the one who started that secret identity cliche because he wants a normal life outside of super-heroics. Hi Clark identity is a part of him, he's Clark even when out of costume.

Fake politicians are Lex Luthor, nor Superman.

How does he have a cult of personality?

Do you read comics? Of course there is canon. It's whatever the main DC universe is at any given moment. Throwing out canon justifies the tactic that since nothing is concrete Superman can be twisted into whatever you want him to be to win an argument. Canon can also be retconned since the company changed their mind about keeping it in continuity, that's normal in comics.

Clark and the kent's try to be as good as possible, that's not bad thing to have a goal in life but they're not saints.

His journey occurs off-screen mostly, though it's explored in stories like the Smallville tv show, because that's just normal, boring things everyone goes through. Less story fodder to mine, unlike with Batman and his parents.

That's the movie "Brightburn," not Superman. And how did you come to that conclusion?

Because how he acts is being a role model for kids, and adults, to look up to. I don't know why you have trouble with this, he's not Lex Luthor.

So? Superman isn't for everyone, he's still incredibly popular and inspirational. The world has billions of people, anecdotes aren't very useful in that respect.

True, but they do watch movies, cartoons and tv shows and collect super-hero merchandise. DC doesn't get most of its money from comic books.

You did, and are still doing so in that very paragraph. How did you arrive to the conclusion he was immediately like that? And why did you rule out the Kent's influence?

Clark does continues to learn - the Kents just provided a base and continue to guide him as an adult. Read more comics, and watch other media with Superman, this is more about how you view him than how he actually is.

nope!superman is the guy who was based on a character raised in a jungle in africa by gorillas.i didn't know that for a person reading about a flying guy that goes out in underpants suit made by his mom,talking animals would be considered intellectually inferior.A parent's role is just to nurture postive instinct in a child and to try to curb the negative impulses and just that.Nothing more or less.period.I can't make my son play football,if it's not in him.Atleast the talking animal can get a sequal and make money without ever being a household ip prior to that.

Superman is a character who went through multiple drafts, starting out a villain like Lex Luthor who was a vagrant that was tricked by a mad scientist into taking a drug that gave him psychic powers which wore off, being a science adventurer from Earth's future before finally setting on the Superman that we know today. He wasn't based on Tarzan. Only when discussing real life philosophies, pop culture really isn't a good starting point that it's being looked at deeply and this is about Superman, who was a reaction by real events like the Great Depression - it's not a comedy about talking animals like Kung Fu Panda. Parents teach their kids how to interact with the world and guide them through everything, because children don't automatically know it. Including Superman. This isn't about making chidden play sports, this is how they gain their morality and thrive in the world. Is that a snipe at Superman? The character who was a household name in the Depression era just by being in comics.

[Tzigone]

Superman is a character who went through multiple drafts, starting out a villain like Lex Luthor who was a vagrant that was tricked by a mad scientist into taking a drug that gave him psychic powers which wore off, being a science adventurer from Earth's future before finally setting on the Superman that we know today.

That argument has never really worked for me. It's more like the name Superman was applied to more than one character than the character morphing.

Let's just say your beliefs have been very controversial in these threads. Sure, but the point is not every abused child becomes a "lotus" instead the argument is that there are no bad people from those backgrounds, when that's false. No, you don't need to be abused to create beautiful things.

No, you don't, and I definitely agree with that. But statistically, it's still very much a minority of abused children who grow up to be abusers (even though they are more likely than a non-abused person to do so). Less than 25%, from most numbers I've seen. And I do believe abused children are more likely to end up as abuse victims than abusers in adulthood.

[Robanker]

Sorry.
But,Isn't hating and denying Watchmen and DKR unpopular opinion?

It is. I regularly take shots at both but frankly most kowtow to both as the ur examples of excellence in superhero comics.

And it's a goddamn shame.

[manwhohaseverything]

Superman is a character who went through multiple drafts

This is entirely wrong.This first one was entirely a different character.But,superman as he was pitched to national comics went through changes in tone, certain characteristics due to outside forces and to appeal to a mass audiences.But,the dude was a hero.He didn't get a character-overhaul.He was,is and always will be a circus strongman protecting the weak.Dude!there is nothing more comedic than a action hero who doesn't do action.A guy making out superman to be more than what he deserves to be.Yes,He is reaction to the great depression.Yes,He is working class dude.But, don't oversell the dudes importance.There was comedy in kung fu panda.But,it being comedic?no,i don't think so.Yes,it was a snipe at condescending attitude,not at superman persay.Superman is allegorical character for kids.He is essentially po.Just because he is superman the working class hero of the great depression.He threw wifebeaters into wall or make hitler/stalin wet his pant(so to speak).Doesn't mean his story would ever be more than an imaginary tale.Also,clark kent persona is comedic.Satire wasn't beneath superman,neither action nor stories made for children.If these things are treated as beneath superman.You get a big round zero.That's not something anyone would want to read.
As said, those who turn out bad is very less compared to those that turn out alright.Even if it wasn't,that makes the rare ones that do that much worth being appreaciated.btw,the whole black(yin) and white(yang) contrast between batman and superman is bullshit.As if,these guys know a thing about lao tzu ,taoism and it's philosophy.Their nuanceless portayals mean nothing.

[rpmaluki]

I want Superman to go public, maybe then we'll get someone who actually gives a dime about the character, his supporting cast and whatever rogues are available put out a great product (comics, animation, tv and films).

[manwhohaseverything]

I want Superman to go public, maybe then we'll get someone who actually gives a dime about the character, his supporting cast and whatever rogues are available put out a great product (comics, animation, tv and films).

I endorse this notion.But,people don't need superman to tells superman stories anymore.

[The Frog Bros]

I want Superman to go public, maybe then we'll get someone who actually gives a dime about the character, his supporting cast and whatever rogues are available put out a great product (comics, animation, tv and films).

Harkens back to Spawn #10 where he had all the original superheroes behind bars to symbolize they were kept locked up by the publishers. Although McFarlane was jabbing at the lack of control the creators had specifically as compared to the publishers who held the trademarks, but still. Pretty similar. I'm not too familiar with this, but I have read that with music songs become public domain after x amount of years and therefore free for anyone to use. Could be an interesting concept...

[rpmaluki]

Harkens back to Spawn #10 where he had all the original superheroes behind bars to symbolize they were kept locked up by the publishers. Although McFarlane was jabbing at the lack of control the creators had specifically as compared to the publishers who held the trademarks, but still. Pretty similar. I'm not too familiar with this, but I have read that with music songs become public domain after x amount of years and therefore free for anyone to use. Could be an interesting concept...

Honestly, I feel like Superman is doing time in a DC/WB/AT&T prison and nothing will convince me otherwise.

[Jabare]

The Justice League episode Twilight annoyed me because Superman was right the entire time and no one listened to him.

Batman was the biggest hypocrite in this particular instance, but it felt like the entire episode was trying to make it out like Batman was right and the voice of reason at the end.

Still bugs me years later

[Robanker]

The Justice League episode Twilight annoyed me because Superman was right the entire time and no one listened to him.

Batman was the biggest hypocrite in this particular instance, but it felt like the entire episode was trying to make it out like Batman was right and the voice of reason at the end.

Still bugs me years later

Don't worry, they pay it off by having Superman finally not hold back in the series finale and then he gets to deliver a speech that every idiot thinks is dope because they turn their memory off and forget Darkseid dumpsters him with a flick of his wrist right after.

The funny thing about Justice League is that while it positions Batman as the one in the right all the time, Clark never trusting Lex and thinking Darkseid needed to be dealt with was always correct and if they listened to Superman they probably would have saved everyone a lot of grief.

But hey, Bruce got to say "cry me a river" so suck it, alien.

The DCAU has some cool moments, but when you take a step back and examine how they had Batman run wild over it and hook up with (or be the object of desire of) most the women on it, you see it as what it is. A lot of it can still be enjoyable (primarily BTAS) but it's certified Batwank.

Honestly, I feel like Superman is doing time in a DC/WB/AT&T prison and nothing will convince me otherwise.

I think of him as Boxer from Animal Farm. Strong, proud character who worked himself to the bone and put the struggles of everyone on his back and when he was tired from giving everything he had to others, he got sold for a tidy profit to a glue factory.

Make no mistake, Superman is the end boss of the DC Universe for Batman to beat when they run out of money. I'm exaggerating, but only slightly.

[Vordan]

The Justice League episode Twilight annoyed me because Superman was right the entire time and no one listened to him.

Batman was the biggest hypocrite in this particular instance, but it felt like the entire episode was trying to make it out like Batman was right and the voice of reason at the end.

Still bugs me years later

That and the finale where they make sure to have Darkseid praise Batman as the only one to dodge his Omega Beams even as a kid struck me as bullshit.

[manwhohaseverything]

well,you guys might hate it.But,batman fans do live it up.

[Gaius]

The Justice League episode Twilight annoyed me because Superman was right the entire time and no one listened to him.

Batman was the biggest hypocrite in this particular instance, but it felt like the entire episode was trying to make it out like Batman was right and the voice of reason at the end.

Still bugs me years later

I never watched the DCAU as a kid so when I watched it years after it had been concluded and yeah, good lord that whole two-parter annoyed me. Seriosuly, not even the Super-Friends JL would have trusted Darkseid. Probably the worst ep of the JL/JLU.

What's even funnier is I think Timm said in some behind the scenes that the end line of Clark saying to Bruce "you're not always right" was him finally letting Supes get one over on Batman. Even though when I watched it, it still felt like the episode was framing Clark as a whiner.