Is Superman worth it anymore?

[Agent Z]

DC fails to make Superman more popular in modern age. He was DC's most popular character throughout 20th century. Even the name Superman is synonymous with superhero.

Supes is one of the most powerful heroes. He was created to do things that no other human can ever do. This also makes it harder to create conflicts for him. So they gave him a weakness.

But i didnt like how Zack Snyder made Supes kill. Supes was created to do things that no other human can ever do. He was supposed to represent the best of humanity. Making someone who is seen as the best of humanity kill just sends a bleak message to us humans.

Supes is morally superior to us all. But in terms of motive for doing good, Supes doesnt stand out among large pool of superheroes. This makes people see Supes as a typical good guy.

The only way to fix Supes is to make him less of a typical good guy. Still a good guy but not typical good guy. Humanizing him more (giving him relationships, fleshing out his character like what types of people he hates and what types of people he would protect, etc...)

This post is contradictory. If Superman is supposed to "do what no one else can't" then humanizing him is not going to work by your logic. Also, typical good guys do have relationships and types of people they hate.

[prepmaster]

This post is contradictory. If Superman is supposed to "do what no one else can't" then humanizing him is not going to work by your logic. Also, typical good guys do have relationships and types of people they hate.

I need to rephrase it better. What i meant when i said that he was supposed to "do what no one else can't" is that he doesnt give up on his human values and uses his powers to the fullest extent to preserve his own human values. He doesnt do things the easy way.

Supes is a protector of lives - the type of guy that would take all kind of attacks from bad guys to protect people and defeat the bad guys without resorting to killing.

You cant make Superman a symbol of hope if a guy with his powers cant even preserve his own human values.

Sure Supes would feel conflicted that even his powers cant help him protecting everyone. But he isnt the type of guy that would use his powers (heat vison, superstrength, etc...) to immediately kill the bad guys with the goal of preventing them from killing more people. He even holds back when he fights bad guys.

If Supes is the type of guy that feels justified in his killing of Zod, he would feel justified in killing other bad guys with the same of goal of preventing them from killing more people. He would become a cynical Superman - the Superman that doesnt believe in the good coming from his foes.

Even in the context of the fights, they dont make much sense. Supes had seen bunch of buildings collapsed before choosing to kill the bad guy. The fights should have ended earlier.

Relationships need to be more than partnerships. Relationships that show heroes care about certain types of people more than other types of people.

Sure typical good guy hates bad guy. But which types of bad guy that the good guy hates the most and which types of bad guy that the good guy sympathizes with more?

[Tony]

After reading about the original plans zack snyder had for justice league aswell as how screwed over superman was and might still get in the upcoming snyder cut https://bleedingcool.com/movies/zack...equel-jim-lee/

Aswell as the news that jj abrahams and coates will helm solely a black superman movie with no plans for anything regarding the traditional superman, it makes me really wonder what the point is in being a fan of superman anymore. Apart from the superman and lois series, there is hardly any good portrayals for superman in the mainstream media. There is still superman is the villian schtick going on relentlessly and if zacks take on the original justice league is proof of anything, supermans sole reason for existance as far as dc and warner bros is concerned is to be used as a tool to help reinforce their love and appreciation for batman.

Vote with your wallet. I enjoyed the Rebirth books, dropped out with Bendis, and will be checking out the new run starting this week.

Snyder did horrible movies that are not even worth watching but there are plenty of great movies tv shows and cartoons. Just wait it out, revisit old favorites, discover something you missed or just take a break. The two young men who made this amazing icon are long gone, no soulless corporation run by talentless hacks will get it right all of the time, or even often.

I love bronze age Batman, I've really enjoyed cartoons and movies with Batman, the thing is they are nothing like the modern comic character that I find to be utter garbage. The truth is they get Superman right far more than Batman in the pages of DC comics. The amount of easily available entertainment in general will always keep me away from the failed versions. Life is short, just go with what works.

[TheSuperMule]

Absolutely. Now more than ever. Superman is and aways will be great. We just need writers with a little more imagination, better editors and movie studos who actually want to tell a Superman stories instead of just trying to ride the hype-train and make a quick buck.

[manwhohaseverything]

By definition he is the Übermensch.

Yes there are christ like allegorical elements but it is in the eye of the beholder; moreover, if he was so christ like why isn't Superman embraced by church going middle Americans?
I can't really argue with someone who thinks Superman isn't "fun" because there isn't anything I can point to that would change your opinion because "fun" is purely subjective.

Nevertheless, I don't agree that the MCU is "escapist fantasy."

The MCU is cynicism in a candy coating, something palatable for the kiddies.

9/11 style attack - check
Patriot Act - check
Corporate Greed/War Profiteering - check
Totalitarianism - check
Genocide - check
Eugenics - check


The MCU isn't as escapist as you think it is.

There is only one ubermensch in dcu.That's batman.Batman embodies nietzschean philosophy.Superman is anti-nietzschean philosophy.He's at best a kantian deontologist or other times someone who embodies judeo-christian theology.
Simple fact,christianity is exclusivist in nature .Being christ like does not mean christ.For one main sticking point at the end of the day is superman punches and is alien,not divine or "real" for them.Superman ain't fun.The guy is all about lectures and stuff like that.how is this guy fun?Byrne farmboy is too much class monitor to have fun.That's like saying cap is fun.Cap is boring as heck.

Listen,I like captain america movies.I am not saying it as bad thing.Superman was that back when he was created.Being escapist doesn't mean it lacks value or depth.It just mean,Characters and the world is something you can get lost in.Characters will be able to do what you wanted to do.The people of the depression wanted to punch corrupt politician.Superman did that for them.But,saying MCU is'nt escapist is stupid.It has no other layers.It's basically power fantasy.MCU stands in stark contrast to it's comics counter part which is mch soap opera in nature

[Ascended]

I agree with much of what you say, but I find it questionable to say the least that the majority of Superman output is bad.

That's just my subjective experience, and I'm only talking about more recent stuff, and not the character's whole history.

I find the comics tend to cycle through creators I like, who stick around for maybe a year or two, followed by at least two creative runs I don't like who stick around for a few years, before someone I like comes back in. So much of the time I'm not reading the comics. But who knows, I (mostly) enjoyed Bendis and I'm hoping the new guy proves to be worthwhile so maybe I'll get two runs back to back that I like.

Of the four Super-centric films we've gotten this century I only enjoyed MoS, and that still has some pretty deep flaws. Returns, BvS, and JL weren't good movies, in my opinion.

The only Super-centric video games we've gotten, that I know of, are Injustice. And I like those games, but they're not good for Clark. Much like Kingdom Come I enjoy them but accept that they're not good portrayals of Superman. And that upcoming Squad game seems to have an evil Superman (again). Granted it seems Clark and the League are being mind controlled by Brainiac and on paper that's a cool idea, but it's another game where Superman is the bad guy, with nothing to balance that out.

Haven't watched the CW show, so maybe that's a good Superman, but the CW doesn't fill me with confidence and the focus on family drama doesn't appeal to me either.

I will say that Clark was handled pretty well in the Justice League Action cartoon. My daughter loved that show. But it's been off the air for years now.

So yeah, for me personally, DC usually makes Super product I don't like, and the stuff I do enjoy is a rare gem. But again, new people are in charge so I'm hopeful that this negative downward spiral might be ending.

[Kuwagaton]

Uh... The MCU is what it is because of faithfulness to the comics. The decreased deviation from what we see im earlier superhero movies, the verbatim stories and lines of dialogue, much of the aesthetics, etc. The MCU is popular because it embraces the source and not a single creative involved would deny that. If you like MCU Cap you absolutely owe it to Stan/Jack, Waid, Gru, Bru, and DeMatteis among others.

Which is kind of the thing. Some characters cam survive on image and it's obvious which ones. Some can't really, Cap and Superman come off as stodgy. But those creators I mentioned put down some of the most fondly remembered stories in the genre... I really don't know how Ameridroid or Dragon Man aren't considered fun. Superman will never be popular like he was pre vietnam, but in fairness we'll never be the same population that we were then either. It's totally okay.

To me personally reinvention is fun but because someone mentioned it... I dread the idea of public domain. I don't think just anyone should come along and write a character

[Ra-El]

Uh... The MCU is what it is because of faithfulness to the comics. The decreased deviation from what we see im earlier superhero movies, the verbatim stories and lines of dialogue, much of the aesthetics, etc. The MCU is popular because it embraces the source and not a single creative involved would deny that. If you like MCU Cap you absolutely owe it to Stan/Jack, Waid, Gru, Bru, and DeMatteis among others.

Which is kind of the thing. Some characters cam survive on image and it's obvious which ones. Some can't really, Cap and Superman come off as stodgy. But those creators I mentioned put down some of the most fondly remembered stories in the genre... I really don't know how Ameridroid or Dragon Man aren't considered fun. Superman will never be popular like he was pre vietnam, but in fairness we'll never be the same population that we were then either. It's totally okay.

To me personally reinvention is fun but because someone mentioned it... I dread the idea of public domain. I don't think just anyone should come along and write a character

Yes, I really believe that if Superman was public domain 15-20 years ago, Homelander would be called Superman on The Boys. But I don't know if that will happen anytime soon, Disney will keep changing the laws to mantain ownership over Mickey and that will affect Superman.

[HsssH]

Uh... The MCU is what it is because of faithfulness to the comics.

Is it? For example, Guardians of the Galaxy have very little in common with comics that it was based on.

[the illustrious mr. kenway]

It's good to take a break if you feel burned out. Sometimes absence makes the heart grow fonder. If you can't support anything DC puts out then don't. You don't owe them a pity buy.

If you are creatively inclined, then make the Superman story you want to read.

[Ra-El]

Is it? For example, Guardians of the Galaxy have very little in common with comics that it was based on.

But the GA didn't knew them before the movies, Marvel didn't changed the characters to be edgy or shock the audience like the DCEU tried to do with Superman and Batman. Whatever concept the public had about Captain America, Iron Man or Spider-Man was fullfilled by what they saw in the big screen.
Yes, it wasn't a 1:1 translation from comics to movies, but we didn't see CA or Spider doing stuff that contradicted the image the public have of them. Captain America was still the patriot soldier that does what he believe is right no matter the consequences even when it puts him against the goverment of the country he loves and Spider-Man still was the blue collar kid trying to help and do good with the great powers he received.

On the DCEU Superman was a conflicted man who didn't know what or even what he wanted to do, while that may work for the first movie it was still the same thing in BvS and now we know it would still be the same on Snyder's whole cinematic saga until the moment Batman would show him what to do.
The biggest sucess on the DCEU were Aquaman and Wonder Woman, both movies that embraced the characters from the comics, Wan and Jenkins didn't set out to change Aquaman and WW into something different, more cynical or edgy to bring in people who never liked the characters, they just made so the public could see why those characters were cool in the first place.

[Prime]

I wonder what Kevin Feige would have done if he was at WB. I truly live in the worst timeline.

[Ascended]

I dread the idea of public domain. I don't think just anyone should come along and write a character

I'm with you.

A public domain Superman *could* churn out some pretty fantastic stories. But it'll also create a lot of really, really bad stories and there are plenty of negative consequences to a major company like AT&T/WB/DC losing the sole rights to one of their IP's.

Like, yeah it's great that any of us could go out there and write a Robin Hood story or make a film. Good for us. But when was the last time Robin Hood got a big, successful adaptation? Kevin Costner and 1991? We're talking about one of the most well known folktale heroes in Western culture, but there's a distinct lack of product being created with the character, in large part because he's public domain and has no corporate protection/investment.

Not to mention that if Action #1 actually hit the public domain, that still means the vast majority of things we consider essential to the Super mythos wouldn't be available to us, a public domain Superman isn't going to look terribly recognizable. And that's assuming Disney, Warners, and the other powerbrokers actually let that happen, and those guys have been successfully lobbying Washington for decades, getting the time limit on public domain extended every time Mickey or Clark get close to it.

[OpaqueGiraffe17]

The Superman or versions of it in comics or any adaptation, if you like that and still care for it, you can hold on to that even if it's not as influential or defining on the current versions that are out.

It's easy to be a fan of something when the wind is in your sails, but harder when the stock is low, and people think there's not much to the character to begin with.



At the end of the day, you have more Superman content than Wonder Woman content. More Superman content than Aquaman content, more with Superman than Hal Jordan, Martian Manhunter, and many many DC characters who struggle and toil in obscurity to this day.

Superman's stock has fallen a bit, and is too bogged down but at least there will always be a Superman every decade or so. There will not always be a Flash and even then it's not a guarantee it will always be Wally or Barry or whoever. After the sequel failed, who knows what things will hold for Wonder Woman.

And that's the DC superhero, leaving aside stuff like Plastic Man, The Question, Blue Beetle, the Fourth World, The Sandman (finally coming, seemingly, on Netflix) and so on.

yup this, if i can still consider myself a green lantern fan, I have no problem being a Superman fan. Frankly besides video games (that i still don't think would be a good fit for Superman anyway) most Batman and Spiderman movies haven't been anything to be proud of since 2008. Superman is at least doing alright in tv and animation. Comics have sucked for Batman and Superman since Tom King and Brian Bendis showed up respectively.....And Spiderman comics just suck in general in my experience. Take the good with bad, it really isn't a bad time to be a Superman fan at all.

[Doctor Know]

I'm always surprised that so many fans in the Superman fandom are miffed with how the character is treated. The only people with a bigger complex are Spider-Man and X-Men fans.

With the comics we have, but not limited to: Superman, Action Comics, The Man of Steel, Supergirl, Super Sons, Adventures of the Super Sons, Legion of Superheroes (with Jon), Lois Lane: Enemy of the People, Connor on YJ, Superman Smashes The Klan, Frank Miller's Superman Year One, Scott Snyder's Justice League with Kal, etc.

For animation where Supes has a lead role.
2020 - Superman Man of Tomorrow, Justice League Dark Apokolips War
2019 - Superman Red Son, Reign of the Supermen + Death and Return of Superman
2018 - Death of Superman

For TV:
Supergirl is coming to an end after 6 seasons.
Superman and Lois his scoring high with ratings in it's first season.

Games:
Injustice and Injustice 2 - The latter of which saw two of Supes' rogues (Darkseid and Brainaic) take center stage and met with positive response for the exposure.
Suicide Squad Kills the JL - More to build up SS, but Supes is an obstacle for the squad to overcome.

For movies:
Zack Snyder's JL wrapping up the arc started with MOS and Cavil Supes.
JJ Abrams' produced Superman film, with a black Superman.


We as Superman fans have more than most fans could ask for. Why people feel Supes is getting a raw deal and no exposure is mind-boggling.