Controversial Superman Opinions

[manofsteel1979]

What's your take on the New52 five year gap, and the idea that at some point Clark actively tried, and failed, to kill Lex?

Wait a minute...did this actually ever happen? Are you referring to Lex's scarred appearance during Lobdell's run?

I know he roughed Lex up in Morrison's ACTION, but I didn't take that as Clark actively trying to kill him.

[adkal]

Wait a minute...did this actually ever happen? Are you referring to Lex's scarred appearance during Lobdell's run?

I know he roughed Lex up in Morrison's ACTION, but I didn't take that as Clark actively trying to kill him.

It's an encounter we never saw, and it left both of them with physical scars.

[Agent Z]

Yeah, can't agree enough. Doesn't help that it feels like authors have a habit of cribbing of each other when creating these so called sympathetic villains. They've become souless and manufactured without much care though into their existence.

I can say the same of the complete monster villains. Hell, one of the criticisms of the Arkham games is that most of the villains came across like the Joker in a different skin.

I'm not so sure.

Frieza, Light Yagami, Dio and Kira from JOJO, Anton Chigurh from NCFOM, plenty of Bond villains, the creature from Stephen King's IT, Micheal Myers, and Griffith from Berserk are all pretty out and out evil yet very memorable and most of them have very little in the ways of backstories at all but have been pretty critically acclaimed all together. I'd rank presence over sympathetic backstories when it comes to memorable villains. Zuko basically became part of the scenery once he made the trip to the good side and completed his character arc and and the attempts to show Anakin as a good man in his past weren't well received with most people skipping him for the firmly lightside established Obi-Wan Kenobi.

Well, from what I’ve seen the villains that you feel sorry for or have some kind of standards are the ones that are very memorable and are even considered more interesting characters by the hero by some. Burton’s version of Penguin and Catwoman, Harley Quinn, DCAU Mr. Freeze, Wislon Fisk, Lindsey McDonald, Regina Mills, Rumplestilskin, Ice King, David Xanatos, Demona and YJ Black Manta and Lex Luthor are just the examples off the top of my head. The attempts to show Vader as sympathetic were panned due to poor execution and the Clone Wars tv series did a much better job of that than the movies. We’ll have to agree to disagree about Zuko.

[manofsteel1979]

It's an encounter we never saw, and it left both of them with physical scars.

So it was the scarred thing....

And it was a Lobdell idea that got retconned away and forgotten. Probably for the best....

[adkal]

So it was the scarred thing....

And it was a Lobdell idea that got retconned away and forgotten. Probably for the best....

Yeah, but it wasn't just Lobdell's idea - it was going to be explored over in Action.

This current retcon of Lex's story is a bit of a fumble at the moment.

[Superlad93]

What's your take on the New52 five year gap, and the idea that at some point Clark actively tried, and failed, to kill Lex?

I'm not fan. That's no longer "rough and tumble young scrapper." It's attempted murder.

I'm all for the idea that Lex can push Clark's buttons (even more so when Clark is a fledgling Superman), but I don't think Clark would ever lose himself and his values to that degree because Lex was being a dick. That's a fundamental misunderstanding of the character, imo.

As a rule, I don't think Lex is the foe to explore the idea of Superman crossing the no kill line (at least on Lex himself). I think if you do that story they you should earn it with a clever set up and a villain that doesn't make you go "finally Superman's nuttin' up and killing this jerk." Lex and Superman have the same issue Joker has with Batman. If you draw attention to the fact that our hyper capable heroes are letting these two regularly featured and under powered foes come back time and again, you run into a wall. You break your world wide open. Killing Joke works for it's time, and as a final (juvenile) ending to Bruce's story (regardless of how you decode the ending, Batman, as we know him, is dead by the end).

If you wanna do a story about Superman contemplating or even attempting to kill they you better not make it some half a$$ed pedestrian level anime (not that all anime is pedestrian level obviously) bs. Having Clark just say some 90's bs like "he pushed me over the edge" undercuts so much that I don't even know where to start. The story of having to go there should be fascinating and emotional journey, and not some bs "I won't let you get away with this" cathartic lowest common denominator burst of super saiyan heat vision (ps love Dragon Ball for what it is). And it shouldn't be against Lex flippin' Luthor.

I don't pretend to know what Lobdell's (DC's) actual back story for that was (if there even was one), but from what we know, it was wrongheaded from jump street. So yeah, not my cup of tea.

[llozymandias]

I prefer when Superman's power is at silver age level. I find him more interesting when his real challenge is maintaining control over seemingly limitless power.

[13th Superman]

I prefer when Superman's power is at silver age level. I find him more interesting when his real challenge is maintaining control over seemingly limitless power.

That may be fine for you but I find that downright boring.

[TheCape]

What's your take on the New52 five year gap, and the idea that at some point Clark actively tried, and failed, to kill Lex?

This is not even being "young and still forming" Superman, this is attemp of murder, plain and simple.

About his power levels, i like Byrne's idea of then growing little by little (after read that run, i think that people exagerate some details about it).

[Kuwagaton]

I like that the current comics are extremely vague on that. Having him struggle but overcome something is less reductive to me than actually slapping on a definition.

No man, that was all in the execution.

Superman pushing his powers to the limit? In a fight that didn't even leave the city? That sort of low-end stuff you only see in two places; early Golden Age, and early post-Crisis. Every other era would have taken that fight into space, the moon, Mars, the center of the earth, and if you've got someone writing who really gets off on the scope and potential of Clark's powers at their highest concept, then higher dimensions and/or time.

Hell man, even Nuperman's fight with the Collector went into low orbit, and that Superman couldn't fly!

His fight with Imperiex saw him sun-dipping and pushing a sentient planet and cosmic manifestation into the Big Bang itself.

The fight with Doomsday was underwhelming because it was written that way, not because there's anything wrong with Clark pushing his limits.

The fight with Collector worked intentionally within limitations because that was an intentionally underdeveloped Superman. The fight with Imperiex, like his reheating of the entire planet through heat vision, involved amps that don't actually detail the limit of his personal strength; we don't really know he close he can get alone, especially with the experience of having done it then under his belt.

Fighting Doomsday to the death post-crisis was underwhelming and I don't put that on them being bad stories or lesser creators, etc. They could have made it look spectacular but the problem is that once you show the ultimate spectacle, it just may not look as exciting as you could imagine. Early in the Byrne run, he had Superman throw several thousand tons of material into space. This is a stupid amount of weight so it makes for a good spectacle, but if they had him lift five thousand tons and go, "I can't do anymore, bleh" and passes out, it's just not as cool. And then with follow-up you lose something when he lifts a hundred tons because you know that he can do so much more. So what ends up happening is that writers have him lift something next time and he goes, "this... must weigh five thousand and one tons!" Which is what happened with Doomsday. Fighting Mongul to the point of collapse pre-crisis was similarly underwhelming, but it wasn't as riddled with drama as the death of Superman was (and should have been). If a creator wants to tell a story about exceeding the limits, I think there's just a better way to do it than blatantly trying to top the last time by way of lip service. Atlas is a clear example of the problem created, and it doesn't have much to do with the technical execution of Doomsday.

Also, since it was brought up, I think pre-flashpoint Superman was the worst hero when it came to fighting in the city. He should absolutely consider the lack of destruction a greater victory than winning the fight, with Man of Steel being an exception.

[llozymandias]

That may be fine for you but I find that downright boring.

Actually it means (when done right) that he needs to use his intellect to solve most problems. Also it means that he can almost never cut loose & go full power. Which do you think is harder? Pushing yourself to your limits, or using .00001% of your strength?

[Jim Kelly]

People complain about red suns or Kryptonite or magic--but it's these controls, when used judiciously, that allow both the super-powerful Superman and the weak-powered Superman to exist in the same continuity. Take those away and you're either left with a Superman who is too powerful for some readers or a Superman who is too weak for others.

The way I see it, Clark does get progressively more powerful--but not on account of the storing up energy--he just gets more powerful because he's always learning and understanding. And he probably finds a hack for each of his weaknesses. But at the same time, there are always adversaries finding new ways to weaken the Man of Steel. And, I imagine that Kal-El wants to go to places--even if artificial realities--where he can experience feeling like a regular person. To him that's a cool challenge (like mountain cllimbing is for some)--so something like the bottle city of Kandor came in handy for Superman when he wanted to divest himself of his powers for a few hours.

[13th Superman]

Actually it means (when done right) that he needs to use his intellect to solve most problems. Also it means that he can almost never cut loose & go full power. Which do you think is harder? Pushing yourself to your limits, or using .00001% of your strength?

In my opinion, pushing yourself to your limit. If Superman has such precise control from juggling planets to shaking hands with normal people, it's probably not to big an issue. It's not like we see him struggling to put his clothes own without them tearing or carefully trying to hold a pen long enough before it snaps. If that were the case, than maybe I'd buy your argument. Then again I'm the sort who likes to see my heroes sweat and struggle mentally as well as physically. I'd be perfectly fine with him using his intellect more but you can do that with golden age or Bryne level powers. It's not exclusive to the silver age incarnation. It'd be too much. I can get the same satisfaction out of Dr. Who and then some. If his story were done in a comedic light like say One Punch Man, than maybe but that still doesn't make for a successful ongoing though. A special, miniseries, maybe. I'd lose interest fast. Not to mention finding worthy talent on a consistent basis would be hell.

[The World]

Actually it means (when done right) that he needs to use his intellect to solve most problems. Also it means that he can almost never cut loose & go full power. Which do you think is harder? Pushing yourself to your limits, or using .00001% of your strength?

This might be controversial but I rather like moments like this where he loses his temper and kind of forgets his own strength.

[DochaDocha]

Learning the ropes and how to control his power is something that'd make for an interesting "Year One" type story. In addition, it's some throwaway comment that can be inserted into the story if you need to explain why Superman doesn't go all out. I do find it interesting, however. People get too concerned with the fake binary "will he live or die?" (or in Superman's case, "is he dead or is he REALLY dead?"), so focusing on other meaningful day-to-day challenges isn't a bad thing. Well, maybe it is because people really want those fake binaries...

The downside? As alluded to earlier, once you choose to do an all-out Superman story, it's hard to go back to stories where he has to show restraint. Furthermore, stories tend to escalate the danger and the action, so whatever was Superman's all in one issue is going to be surpassed in a future, and again, and again...