Controversial Superman Opinions

[Stick Figure]

Reading these discussions makes me think these characters weren’t intended to be examined under a microscope by adults. I’m sure this was much simpler when the primary audience was children.

I’m all for tearing everything down and recreating the characters to reflect modern diversity. I don’t have a connection to any comics from the silver age or whatever. I mean I’ve seen some but I don’t have any nostalgia. Rebooting works for me but that’s not popular. Like make Superman whatever color you want and just change his upbringing to reflect that. I know that gets away from the origins of the character but if it sells and the stories are good, does that matter? Keep the core ideals but change everything else.

[manwhohaseverything]

Reading these discussions makes me think these characters weren’t intended to be examined under a microscope by adults. I’m sure this was much simpler when the primary audience was children.

I’m all for tearing everything down and recreating the characters to reflect modern diversity. I don’t have a connection to any comics from the silver age or whatever. I mean I’ve seen some but I don’t have any nostalgia. Rebooting works for me but that’s not popular. Like make Superman whatever color you want and just change his upbringing to reflect that. I know that gets away from the origins of the character but if it sells and the stories are good, does that matter? Keep the core ideals but change everything else.

ok,i will bite.What is the core ideal of superman you speak of? what or who is a superman?two jewish guys made a character that has a secret id to fit in and an outlet to be themselves in front of everyone as he truly is.That outlet is called superman.How is that not part of the ideal you speak of?

[Stick Figure]

I guess I just see Superman as a guy trying to do good. He’s not of this planet but spends all his energy trying to help. He isn’t motivated by vengeance or anything other than he wants to do good.

Having said that, he was written more as a vigilante as you’ve mentioned, I could support that. That sounds interesting.

[manwhohaseverything]

I guess I just see Superman as a guy trying to do good. He’s not of this planet but spends all his energy trying to help. He isn’t motivated by vengeance or anything other than he wants to do good.

Having said that, he was written more as a vigilante as you’ve mentioned, I could support that. That sounds interesting.

You say good.That needs clarity.What does being good mean in superman stories(or atleast from what you read)?I would say different version of supermen in different eras have defined good in different ways.The vigilante superman would say defending the weak and the oppressed is good.But,i want to hear what you get from the stories you have read.

[Stanlos]

Reading these discussions makes me think these characters weren’t intended to be examined under a microscope by adults. I’m sure this was much simpler when the primary audience was children.

I’m all for tearing everything down and recreating the characters to reflect modern diversity. I don’t have a connection to any comics from the silver age or whatever. I mean I’ve seen some but I don’t have any nostalgia. Rebooting works for me but that’s not popular. Like make Superman whatever color you want and just change his upbringing to reflect that. I know that gets away from the origins of the character but if it sells and the stories are good, does that matter? Keep the core ideals but change everything else.

More than that they were ideas and ideals. Superman would be Superman even if the planet of origin changed and he had a pterodactyl beak thing. So long as he was the whole faster than a speeding bullet but used his powers for good with the good upbringing it would still ring true.

[Stanlos]

Who are the other two?

Captain Marvel and Wonder Woman.

Those three were made as Can Do and had uber versions of those powers as a natural part of their designs.

[Johnny Thunders!]

So Alan Moore gets accused of turning comics "dark" but I think he's also responsible for the "Sobbing Superman." I remember a period in comics where Superman seemed to be ugly crying a lot. I think Mark Millar made fun of this idea during his Authority run, but there was a period of Superman where he was crying over the injustice of it all. Except in the book Injustice, I don't think that Superman sobs, but he should, it would be therapeutic. And not to slam Alan Moore, I love it when he did it in Whatever Happened to the Man of a Tomorrow, but that was new and original, at least to me. And I'm not talking about the occasional Silver Age "Choke, maybe Lois really does love that Creature From the Black Lagoon." I'm talking, helplessly crying. Or was it Crisis on Infinite Earths? My ill informed opinion puts it on Moore.

[Quinlan58]

When you say "Sobbing Superman", my mind immediately defaults to that cover of COIE with him holding Kara's body, more so than when he does it on For the Man Who Has Everything (where it's overshadowed by his rage later on) or in Whatever Happened... (where the perspective doesn't show his face as he's sobbing). So yeah, I'd say this falls on Wolfman and Perez more than on Moore.

Threat Tax: Clark being succeeded by a biological off-spring is boring and undermines the "Superman is here to inspire us to join him in the sun" narrative DC insists on him having. I understand it's been a thing since the 60's (with Kara previously representing a non-offspring but still Kryptonian successor), that everyone from Hamilton to Moore to Morrison to Busiek and now DC in general has used it and that Superman as Kal-El's birthright (and thus to be passed to his children) has a lot of traction, but I'd much rather prefer someone like Steel or Kenan Kong to a Kryptonian successor, and in turn someone like Kara or even Chris to any biological off-spring of Clark.

[rpmaluki]

Superman is supposed to inspire others to be heroes in and of themselves, joining him in the sun, not to take up his name and try to be him while he does what exactly.... DC opting for his offspring to do that is understand as children often inherit from their parents. It may be iffy to have Superman replaced but it's easier to accept that than the former. I still prefer they have their own identity but that ship has sailed. While non related people can take up the "mantle", it has to be in a limited capacity imo.

[PCN24454]

Superman is supposed to inspire others to be heroes in and of themselves, joining him in the sun, not to take up his name and try to be him while he does what exactly.... DC opting for his offspring to do that is understand as children often inherit from their parents. It may be iffy to have Superman replaced but it's easier to accept that than the former. I still prefer they have their own identity but that ship has sailed. While non related people can take up the "mantle", it has to be in a limited capacity imo.

You say that as though the inspired person has to be different from Superman. The idea that no one would want to take his place is unrealistic but I guess Comic books never really cared about realism to begin with.

[Tzigone]

You say that as though the inspired person has to be different from Superman. The idea that no one would want to take his place is unrealistic but I guess Comic books never really cared about realism to begin with.

Lots of people want to "take the place" (assume the role) of individuals who inspired them. Very, very few actually take on that person's name (at least, within a lifetime of the person's death).

[Gaius]

Superman being presented as the “strongest/best” of DC’s heroes is fine but if you’re argument for why he should considered in top is because he’s generally considered the first superhero is as weak an argument Bat-fans make for Batman’s real world popularity being used to justify Bat-God.

[SiegePerilous02]

Superman being presented as the “strongest/best” of DC’s heroes is fine but if you’re argument for why he should considered in top is because he’s generally considered the first superhero is as weak an argument Bat-fans make for Batman’s real world popularity being used to justify Bat-God.

I think it's less that he was the first and more than he gained the reputation very quickly in and out of universe. I think people view him that way because for 50 or so years of publication it was legitimately true, and the reputation has been questioned because of the various reboots and retcons that have worn away at it.

Also doesn't help that a lot of the heroes on par with him or stronger (Captain Marvel, Captain Atom, the Spectre) were originally not created to be part of the same universe as Superman (at least not the main one), so either he gets nerfed, has to share the glory (which IMO he should only have to do with Wonder Woman and Supergirl) or they are the ones who get nerfed.

[marhawkman]

I think it's less that he was the first and more than he gained the reputation very quickly in and out of universe. I think people view him that way because for 50 or so years of publication it was legitimately true, and the reputation has been questioned because of the various reboots and retcons that have worn away at it.

Also doesn't help that a lot of the heroes on par with him or stronger (Captain Marvel, Captain Atom, the Spectre) were originally not created to be part of the same universe as Superman (at least not the main one), so either he gets nerfed, has to share the glory (which IMO he should only have to do with Wonder Woman and Supergirl) or they are the ones who get nerfed.

"Share the glory" is fine imo. I don't really like the sort of fiat of "X is THE best at Y". with no contest or exceptions.

[SiegePerilous02]

"Share the glory" is fine imo. I don't really like the sort of fiat of "X is THE best at Y". with no contest or exceptions.

That's what Wonder Woman and Supergirl are for. And Captain Marvel across the multiverse.

Everyone on the same Earth is overkill