What is the worst era of Superman?

[manofsteel1979]

The problem I have with saying 2003 - 2011 was the worst era is that while it sunk really low, it also delivered some of the highest highs of the Superman character. Casey's Adventures of Superman, Busiek's Superman run, some of John's Action run.

I look at the overall trajectory of quality. As I said, there was some good stuff, if not great stuff through that period, but whenever something great happened something equally horrible came after that killed any creative momentum.

For instance we went from the Casey AOS run , followed shortly thereafter with Chuck Austin's ACTION disaster. We got Busiek and Johns good runs and build up to NK a only to see it pissed away and undone with the actual execution of NK and then of course, GROUNDED. Not to mention the continiuity quagmire that resulted from BIRTHRIGHT being will nilly plugged in without any plan, destroying what was up to that time was a pretty solid continiuity that had ran from 1986.

The one step forward two steps back momentum and the incomprehensible continiuity combined just kept the Superman franchise pointed in the wrong direction. It doesn't discredit any of the stories you mentioned, but as a whole the era was a disaster that the character will be spending years yet to recover from. Of course, your milliage may vary.

[Johnny Thunders!]

I like some eras better than others but a low point for me was when Superman played straight man to Batman's "put you in your place" moments. I really feel like DC took their cue from Wolverine and Cyclops. Wolverine got to be tough guy and Cyclops played teachers pet. I am so happy the new books are completely different.

[Black Angel]

About 2003-2011. Its a long stretch but things were bad for a long time. Pretty much after Loeb's run on Superman ended (which in of itself I wasn't absolutely crazy about, but it was okay and he held the keys and general direction of the line commendably if nothing else), everything went off the rails and stayed there for the most part outside of some teases that never amounted to anything.

I swear every superman fan i know says this as well. This is why when the new 52 supes came out it sold so well many wanted correction for this period i guess we got disappointed too in that.

[superduperman]

What I'm seeing in all this is a pattern of slump periods. You have a few years of really good material and then things start to slump off for a few more years. So my question is, do you think that this is unique to Superman or is this just something every title goes through? Superman seems to go through these more than most by the look of it. One of the more interesting patterns that I notice with Superman is that usually before a slump, it looks like the books were going to go in one direction and then they end up going in another one completely. We saw this just before New 52. Or the late nineties. 1998-99 it looked like the books were starting to get back on track since the electric period and then they did the Y2K story and it went in a completely different direction. And it always seems to fit the pattern of a reboot. They did the Y2K story in 2000 and a year later they do Return to Krypton. Books start to slump for a year and a half and they do Birthright. That creates a bunch of problems and they do Infinite Crisis. That slumps along for a few years and they do New 52. And once that got old they did Rebirth. This pattern can be traced all the way back to the original COIE.

[Sacred Knight]

I think Johns run is highly overrated, really, so I don't count that as really a mega-high of the aughts like some do. Superman and the Legion of Super-Heroes was really good. Brainiac had some good ideas that weren't executed great. Other than that though? Meh.

[dumbduck]

I like some eras better than others but a low point for me was when Superman played straight man to Batman's "put you in your place" moments. I really feel like DC took their cue from Wolverine and Cyclops. Wolverine got to be tough guy and Cyclops played teachers pet. I am so happy the new books are completely different.

I can't comment on the worst eras, I only know the ~1991-2013 period anecdotaly. But this is a comment I've seen quite a few times since the internet. Dc turned Superman into Cyclops and Batman into Wolverine. The result in the popularity context couldn't be more predictable. No offense to Cyclops fans.

To the point that we nowadays have fans of other characters come here and dictate how Superman's personality should be to contrast him with Batman.

No character can survive this.

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

The New 52 without a doubt, including Morrison's run. Pretty much the worst that comics can get, especially if we regard Lobdell's run.

[Black Angel]

What I'm seeing in all this is a pattern of slump periods. You have a few years of really good material and then things start to slump off for a few more years. So my question is, do you think that this is unique to Superman or is this just something every title goes through? Superman seems to go through these more than most by the look of it. One of the more interesting patterns that I notice with Superman is that usually before a slump, it looks like the books were going to go in one direction and then they end up going in another one completely. We saw this just before New 52. Or the late nineties. 1998-99 it looked like the books were starting to get back on track since the electric period and then they did the Y2K story and it went in a completely different direction. And it always seems to fit the pattern of a reboot. They did the Y2K story in 2000 and a year later they do Return to Krypton. Books start to slump for a year and a half and they do Birthright. That creates a bunch of problems and they do Infinite Crisis. That slumps along for a few years and they do New 52. And once that got old they did Rebirth. This pattern can be traced all the way back to the original COIE.

This is true well every character seems to have this regression flaw i mean wonder woman had it for a while then new 52 happened now rebirth fans complaining about her origin and world building again. Heck in Marvel they still seem to struggle where to take Thor and spider man.

[SiegePerilous02]

While there are of course a handful of stories and runs from the period that I enjoy, as a whole 1986-2011 kind of sucks.

Morrison's New 52 run was fantastic, but after that nothing from the New 52 grabs me even though I heard great things about Greg Pak. I'm hesitant to read it though because I don't want to get too invested and then have it abruptly end.

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

While there are of course a handful of stories and runs from the period that I enjoy, as a whole 1986-2011 kind of sucks.

Morrison's New 52 run was fantastic, but after that nothing from the New 52 grabs me even though I heard great things about Greg Pak. I'm hesitant to read it though because I don't want to get too invested and then have it abruptly end.

Trust me, you're not missing out on anything.

[dumbduck]

While there are of course a handful of stories and runs from the period that I enjoy, as a whole 1986-2011 kind of sucks.

Morrison's New 52 run was fantastic, but after that nothing from the New 52 grabs me even though I heard great things about Greg Pak. I'm hesitant to read it though because I don't want to get too invested and then have it abruptly end.

Greg Pak's run is great, including 'Truth'. His were the best parts of that crossover. However I know that many Superman fans don't accept him with a more progressive worldview, and also they may consider politics in comics undesirable or badly handled. YMMV.

[MajorHoy]

New 52 after Morrison, that **** was unreadable.

Me, I hated the Morrison stuff, trying to recapture Golden Age attitude but making Clark seem needy/obnoxious instead of just confident.
George Pérez's New 52 issues started well enough, still having the feeling of the early post-CoIE Superman run, but editorial interference and the way DC treated Pérez like a mushroom (keeping him in the dark and feeding him $#!t) wound up destroying that potential.

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

Greg Pak's run is great, including 'Truth'. His were the best parts of that crossover. However I know that many Superman fans don't accept him with a more progressive worldview, and also they may consider politics in comics undesirable or badly handled. YMMV.

Politics and being progressive didn't really have much to do with it. Pak's run was fine and in fact the only time N52 Superman was readable for me. At the same time though, his run wasn't immune from being bad because of all the editorial mucking about. His Truth tie ins were pretty bad, as were his Doomed tie ins.

[dumbduck]

If I can give an informed opinion it's in other media formats: the STAS/JLU cartoon universe. The 'World's Finest' episode is a great example of worst of the worst in portraying Superman.

[dumbduck]

Politics and being progressive didn't really have much to do with it. Pak's run was fine and in fact the only time N52 Superman was readable for me. At the same time though, his run wasn't immune from being bad because of all the editorial mucking about. His Truth tie ins were pretty bad, as were his Doomed tie ins.

What didn't work for you worked beautifully for me. It's miles above tripe like STAS/JLU. Respect for the character.