Controversial Superman Opinions

[DochaDocha]

I don't need for bad guys to be afraid of a beating from Superman, but I want them to know that you can't eff with the guy, because he'll always have the last say, laugh, and hurrah. That's partly why I wouldn't mind if Superman were a bit of a troll. Being physically abusive to bad guys may be overkill, but if he's making you pay somehow for being a criminal or a jerk, you stop doing that. When you're Superman, there's a level of oneupmanship that us normies just can't match, and I'm all for seeing him do it. There used to be a time when "Don't tug on Superman's cape" meant something meaningful...

[Vordan]

This is all because of Frank Miller's bullshit honestly. It's not a complaint about Superman, it's a complaint about the "idea" of Superman perpetuated by pop culture and based on DKR's character assassination. There are plenty of examples of Post Crisis Superman being intimidating or angry or "scary."

Fun fact: Waid is referencing a Golden Age story where Supes did something very similar to what he did in Birthright. Stuff like this is something I’m a-ok with, Supes using his powers to intimidate people without actually beating them black and blue.


Heh I always get a kick when people talk about Supes always being a Boy Scout. Dude was a massive dick all the way through until DKR like you said. Silver Age Superman and Bronze Age Superman were massive trolls and Golden Age Superman could give Batman a run for his money


That said I’m generally ok with Supes not torturing people like he kinda did in the Golden Age and how Batman does these days. I’d rather see Supes use his powers or his brains to get around people in his way then seeing something like the Arkham Knight torture scene with the Batmobile. I don’t see Superman’s respect for civil liberties as a “weakness” honestly.

[manwhohaseverything]

I don't really care about him being cool or not myself but I also see that saying alot about "Superman never was cool so you shouldn't try to make him". I must have saw that phrase about a half million times when the N52 dropped along with "kewl" but I think even a blind man would say Golden Age Supes was a lot cooler than Modern Supes. He just has characteristics more people envy while Post-Crisis Superman really only had powers people envied even if they appreciated his existence.

I've noticed a lot of people that seemed to prefer Post-Crisis Superman kind of need a distraction from him at the same time. They need the marriage, The Kents, and now Jon because there really isn't much going on in the modern guys head. You just can't do much with him because his character is fairly limited and that's kind of modern ideology; every character should have a certain role they play and should stay within the parameters of that role. So yeah you get characters that are all very clearly different from each other but they're much more limited in utility that their Pre-Crisis selves imo. It plays out pretty clear in the clip Docha played Batman's schtick is that he's intimidating, so Superman ,a character played as Batman's opposite is a cupcake. Almost more like a boy band or something, sensitive one, bad boy, jokester, etc.

Yeah! That's me. I realised this after jon was taken of the board and i was left with the guy. The drama just put me to out of it. There were other elements ofcourse, but those all just overshadowed by senseless boring drama. It's just not my thing.

This is all because of Frank Miller's bullshit honestly. It's not a complaint about Superman, it's a complaint about the "idea" of Superman perpetuated by pop culture and based on DKR's character assassination. There are plenty of examples of Post Crisis Superman being intimidating or angry or "scary."

It is. And dc, it's writer are also complicit in that. That's why people get whiplash when superman gets pissed and puts a wifebeater through a wall or something . They have perpetuated the saint nonsense so much that a section won't be able to handle a morally ambiguous superman. So,they do what has to be done, tear him down. Birthright is great. But, was it kept? They went right back to secret origins. Which is tame and boring.Sure, some writers don't play to that perception. Most do.

[DochaDocha]

I don’t see Superman’s respect for civil liberties as a “weakness” honestly.

Well put. Hard to fight for the American way if you think civil liberties are a minor inconvenience when upholding justice.

I like to think as part of Superman's arc, he probably went from his Golden Age self to something tamer and more respectful of things like not invading privacy by staring and listening through the walls of suspects without probable cause, and not coercing guys to act according to his will through violence. Not to say he ever gets soft on crime, but gets a little less scary to the otherwise-innocent people who are just living day-to-day.

[Vordan]

Well put. Hard to fight for the American way if you think civil liberties are a minor inconvenience when upholding justice.

I like to think as part of Superman's arc, he probably went from his Golden Age self to something tamer and more respectful of things like not invading privacy by staring and listening through the walls of suspects without probable cause, and not coercing guys to act according to his will through violence. Not to say he ever gets soft on crime, but gets a little less scary to the otherwise-innocent people who are just living day-to-day.

That’s exactly how I envision his career going. He starts out mad as hell and eager to smash evildoers cars (gotta get that Action 1 reference!), cocky and arrogant because he thinks he’s invincible and relishes showing off his powers after spending his childhood hiding for fear of discovery, and over time matured into the much more experienced and calmer icon who recognizes he can’t solve everything and he doesn’t know what to do always but isn’t ever going to stop fighting for people.

[Yoda]

It is. And dc, it's writer are also complicit in that. That's why people get whiplash when superman gets pissed and puts a wifebeater through a wall or something . They have perpetuated the saint nonsense so much that a section won't be able to handle a morally ambiguous superman. So,they do what has to be done, tear him down. Birthright is great. But, was it kept? They went right back to secret origins. Which is tame and boring.Sure, some writers don't play to that perception. Most do.

Most don't. It's the perception that they do. Geoff Johns wrote Secret Origin, in which Superman refuses to knowtoe to General Lane and it leads into this type of scene:

ltW1XzR8N2ECr2f93By9I_bKjDFFMROOtjOulGVkTgI.jpg

Tame and pushover.

[Ascended]

I adore the Golden Age bully and the "treat people right Metropolis, or expect a visit from me" mentality. But it becomes less fun to see Clark treat the bullies the way they've treated others once Clark becomes older and/or mega powerful. It stops being "the tables have turned and now you're the 90 lbs weakling" to "god smites the wicked men."

I don't want that "bully the bullies" attitude to disappear though, because this guy isn't anyone's doormat and is supposed to give voice to the common man's grievances. But I like to think Clark just gets better at it with time. He goes from slapping dudes around and shows of brute strength to just glaring at people with his arms crossed and making them stop in their tracks. More effect for less effort. It's a little more mature without losing its edge.

[Flash Gordon]

I always thought Superman would embody Teddy Roosevelt's old adage "Speak softly, but carry a big stick".

[Vordan]

I adore the Golden Age bully and the "treat people right Metropolis, or expect a visit from me" mentality. But it becomes less fun to see Clark treat the bullies the way they've treated others once Clark becomes older and/or mega powerful. It stops being "the tables have turned and now you're the 90 lbs weakling" to "god smites the wicked men."

I don't want that "bully the bullies" attitude to disappear though, because this guy isn't anyone's doormat and is supposed to give voice to the common man's grievances. But I like to think Clark just gets better at it with time. He goes from slapping dudes around and shows of brute strength to just glaring at people with his arms crossed and making them stop in their tracks. More effect for less effort. It's a little more mature without losing its edge.

Agreed. It’s an attitude that I believe suits him well in his early days, especially if he’s starting at Golden Age power levels like I prefer him to. But by the times he’s spent a year or two with the JL he should be already much cooler headed and by the time he’s proposed to Lois he should be what we think of as the “iconic” Superman. That Golden Age guy is never fully gone, tug on Superman’s cape and he’ll come out, but he’s not ready to smash people into the wall simply for giving him lip anymore. It’s a show of character growth and maturity for Clark.

I always thought Superman would embody Teddy Roosevelt's old adage "Speak softly, but carry a big stick".

Yeah that’s a good description of it. “Offer one hand in friendship but arm the other for war” would be another.

[manwhohaseverything]

As said, going tame is one thing. When people start to think it's not in superman to do that or it's out of character then we have a problem .i would rather he keeps the roughness. This comics arc don't mean much anyway and revert. It never ending.Seemingly Static perception of the character mean much more than arcs do for comics, in general .

He isn't cocky nor arrogant during car smash scene. He is pissed and he feeling the rush of strength and adrenaline , that's it. Now i have said him love the rush. That and arrogance are two different things. Because if it was arrogance or cockyness. He would be busy feeling proud.Instead, he was trying to appease lois of not being harmful to her.

Clark's first save should be a reaction. It can even be involuntary. His choice to to be a vigilante should be his desperate move to do something regarding all the bad stuff around him. Not his proud accomplishment.At the end of the being superman is a bad thing. Nobody should be encouraged to be vigilantes. Vigilantism is unacceptable . As for civil liberties, well the guy decided that he cares more about defending the defenseless more the minute he put on that strongman suit with that police badge s on.Not to say civil liberties don't matter. He just doesn't give a damn, if in the name of those people are getting hurt. He isn't out there for people to follow him as some paragon. Quite contrary he wouldn't want good people to.

The serious disconnect is the guy is no different than batman. Yet, sprouts nonsense like "i won't tolerate Vigilantism in my town". It feels like people aren't reading a story of a vigilante.And superman himself doesn't see himself as such. But a saviour from the sky. Even when he says he is. He is trying to perpetuate that image. That's a problem.because if he isn't a vigilante. What is he? This is what i mean about denying the fundamental attributes of the character. If superman ain't a strongman. That is big bulky strong dude nor a guy out there taking law into his own hands nor an alien from space. He is basically not superman for me.

Most don't. It's the perception that they do. Geoff Johns wrote Secret Origin, in which Superman refuses to knowtoe to General Lane and it leads into this type of scene:

ltW1XzR8N2ECr2f93By9I_bKjDFFMROOtjOulGVkTgI.jpg

Tame and pushover.

Sorry, i didn't see this reply. This is not from secret origins. Nor does secret origins superman have the anger. This is from chris kent thing (not continuity) . Passive aggressive nonsense like in dcau or rebirth isn't struggling with a flaw nor does it make others feel he is dangerous . It's trying to force one on a character through bad writing so that people can feel something. Anger is hard thing to control for many. It takes discipline to get it under control . I show a similar scene from rebirth.But, once he moves to the next scen he doesn't have any issue. He is smiling.He goes back to doing what he does without any aftermaths. Let's him do the same with anyone else.

[The tall man]

It wouldn't have been one if Clark had shared his secret with more than one person. Most of the problems with Clark's secret where entirely of his own making.



How many times has this happened to Superman? The one person in his life who became a super villain is Lex Luthor.

How is it a problem that Clark doesn't want to reveal his secret to anyone? No one has a right or a need to know. Pete's reaction on Smallville is exactly why he shouldn't tell anyone, Pete couldn't handle it because Clark only told him and no one else. How hard is it to honor a promise to a friend and keep their secret. People act like they have a right to know everything about another person's life, and if they find out someone's secret later on they act like some wounded party. As if they were owed something. As I said, anything short of marriage no one needs to know any other person secret.

[Kuwagaton]

I don't really care about him being cool or not myself but I also see that saying alot about "Superman never was cool so you shouldn't try to make him". I must have saw that phrase about a half million times when the N52 dropped along with "kewl" but I think even a blind man would say Golden Age Supes was a lot cooler than Modern Supes. He just has characteristics more people envy while Post-Crisis Superman really only had powers people envied even if they appreciated his existence.

I don't know how cool he was supposed to be back then really, but it was 80 years ago. I think we've seen them both keep those traits and allow them to become uncool and also add traits to keep up that got dated anyway. I think Kelly's Superman is often a target for an example of that, but his Deadpool was largely the same and lives on famously.

So I am one to say that yeah, I don't think it's all that productive to try convincing people that Superman is cool. He's pretty cool, but if you want to go 2010s Scott Summers on him, sorry... that falls through eventually. While a Wolverine or Batman just sustains what they have because that's more in line with what they are. The New 52 Superman being young, more vulnerable and on edge, more of a defiant loner, kinda lives across Lobdell and Truth which isn't the most loved stretch.

I've noticed a lot of people that seemed to prefer Post-Crisis Superman kind of need a distraction from him at the same time. They need the marriage, The Kents, and now Jon because there really isn't much going on in the modern guys head. You just can't do much with him because his character is fairly limited and that's kind of modern ideology; every character should have a certain role they play and should stay within the parameters of that role. So yeah you get characters that are all very clearly different from each other but they're much more limited in utility that their Pre-Crisis selves imo. It plays out pretty clear in the clip Docha played Batman's schtick is that he's intimidating, so Superman ,a character played as Batman's opposite is a cupcake. Almost more like a boy band or something, sensitive one, bad boy, jokester, etc.

That... sounds pretty exaggerated. The most extreme examples of competent or incompetent Superman behavior generally line up, and the supporting cast for a given character has to be pretty big if they're carrying several books.

Heh I always get a kick when people talk about Supes always being a Boy Scout. Dude was a massive dick all the way through until DKR like you said. Silver Age Superman and Bronze Age Superman were massive trolls and Golden Age Superman could give Batman a run for his money

I actually would say I'm thankful that the bronze age left 80% of the weird misogyny and erratic characteristics behind, but I can't say there wouldn't be a fun way to bring back a Superman who enjoys pranks on the job. Maybe if Fraction stays around?

[Hatut Zeraze]

I am not sure if this is controversial or not, but if I were given the choice between a new Star Wars movie and a new issue of Superman's Pal Jimmy Olsen, I would easily pick a new issue of Jimmy Olsen. Star Wars movies do not provide the same level of entertainment.

[Vordan]

I am not sure if this is controversial or not, but if I were given the choice between a new Star Wars movie and a new issue of Superman's Pal Jimmy Olsen, I would easily pick a new issue of Jimmy Olsen. Star Wars movies do not provide the same level of entertainment.

Probably wouldn’t be controversial on this forum, but if you were to say it on a Star Wars fan site it would be a different story haha. I’m kind of in the same boat, SW lost me with the ST which seemed to be nothing more than an excuse to undo the OT and retell it in a worse way.

[Agent Z]

How is it a problem that Clark doesn't want to reveal his secret to anyone? No one has a right or a need to know. Pete's reaction on Smallville is exactly why he shouldn't tell anyone, Pete couldn't handle it because Clark only told him and no one else.

That's my point. It shouldn't have been Pete's burden to bear alone since Clark had other friends. Friends who actually did see that Clark was hiding something and encouraged him to be honest with them.

How hard is it to honor a promise to a friend and keep their secret.

It's certainly not so easy when you're being tortured.