Controversial Superman Opinions

[SiegePerilous02]

In general but Batman is the patron saint of pushing the idea that being more cynical is a part of being a stronger person so the DCU becoming more cynical is unquestionable linked to Batman. I said this a few post back but if superhero comics are power fantasies and the single most powerful person in the universe is a regular man who's cynicism, rage, and suffering are treated as having exalted him to a near mythic level of capability to the point where he's capable of taking down essentially anyone, to the point where multiple people claim he's the most dangerous man in the world it stands to reason that people will want to emulate that when they go to create their own power fantasies.

I'm not sure exactly what popularized Hero vs Hero story lines to the magnitude they enjoy but I do know Batman fed well off of them and that they helped aggrandize his general image. Often with the idea that his paranoia and cynical nature is what gave him an edge over his fellow better natured peers because they were too trusting or too kind or some insipid junior high idea like that. There's that one silly scan floating around out there where Batman mutters under his breath about how Superman won't expect something because "Clark is a good man and he (Bruce) is not". Making the implication that good=dumb, mean=smart. But there a constant sort of background noise in post-crisis like that and it only got worse as time went on.

I'd argue another instance was during Infinite Crisis I believe when Kal-L was going on another rant about his good old days but has a moment of clarity when he relizes that a perfect world probably wouldn't have a fleet of superpowered defenders. But I can't help but laugh at how much Supes, Wonder, and the other seemed to struggle with the idea of a reality better than the ocean of blood their own world had devolved into. Sure the scene leaves Kal-L looking like a delusional old man that's past his prime but I'll be damned if Clark and co didn't look like a bunch of little kids struggling to imaging what life outside of their war torn country could possibly be like.

I can see your point on all of this, but the bolded is especially distressing. Mainly because I don't think Batman should be driven by those things at all, but it seems to cater to the lowest common denominator and it sells

I miss the real Batman before Frank got his hands on him and other writers took the wrong messages from that book.

[fan_of_the_messiah]

Hello all,

I do beg your pardon, when I meant Christopher Priest would be a wonderful writer for Superman, I meant the British author who wrote novels such as The Prestige and Inverted World, not the comic book writer James Christopher Owsley.

As for the British novelist Christopher Priest, given his background in writing science fiction, I think he would be a wonderful choice to write a Superman story. Given how he introduced the real life engineer, Nikolai Tesla, in The Prestige in a very unique way (and I never thought of it previously) but over the last day or two I began to think how remarkable it would be if this author penned a Lex Luthor origin story, using historical figures such as figures from American aristocracy and American engineers/scientists or both such as: members of the Rockefeller family, the Koch family (William, Charles and David spring to mind) and the Cargill family as well as some of the most diabolical political leaders across the world (past and present), to serve as his template for Lex Luthor.

[Robanker]

Well, that's far more than I was expecting. Thanks for taking the time to even entertain the idea in the first place (because, again, you certainly didn't have to).

But I largely agree. While I don't personally agree that he's more or less a copy of his dad, I do acknowledge that as being a trap he's walking the line on. Right now, I'm actually really digging his modest and largely laid back attitude with the bouts of ill-advised and impetuous choices.

Hey man, I come here to discuss comics so I'm always ready to entertain different points of view! That's the fun of it.

I don't know, it's that laid back, modest attitude that screams Clark to me. That's who I see him as when he's at home. The impulse decisions I just chalk up to his youth. He's not entirely his dad but dangerously close.

[9th.]

Idk if this is controversial but American Alien is my favorite origin, I enjoyed the hell out of that story.

Also I enjoyed Tom Wellings cameo in the Arrowverse Crisis, even if we didn't see him in the suit it was a great scene.

[marhawkman]

I can see your point on all of this, but the bolded is especially distressing. Mainly because I don't think Batman should be driven by those things at all, but it seems to cater to the lowest common denominator and it sells

I miss the real Batman before Frank got his hands on him and other writers took the wrong messages from that book.

Yeah Batman comes across as a lunatic in way too many stories. This is a guy who spends enormous amounts of time and money coming up with ways to take out his friends... He's also a guy who has a sanctimonious "no-killing" rule that seemingly only applies to Humans. It makes it really hard to take him seriously as a hero sometimes.

[manwhohaseverything]

The problem with that is, superman doesn't have a counter balance who critics him, the concept itself, is unbiased and is heroic. Someone people can relate to with their fear and distrust . When batman showed kicking superman's and becoming "the one man that beat him". Everyone latched on to that. Batman being the black Knight who takes people's scorn to protect them, that draws people in towards him.
"Because we have to chase him. Because he's the hero Gotham deserves, but not the one it needs right now, so we'll hunt him. Because he can take it, because he's not a hero. He's a silent guardian, a watchful protector, a Dark Knight."


Superman is seen as the White Knight. That's why we see him constantly turn bad. It's him pulling a two face. His goodness comes across hollow to many, so they turn him bad. And many want that kind of thing too. I mean, people love superman in jl movie.

[Robanker]

The problem with that is, superman doesn't have a counter balance who critics him, the concept itself, is unbiased and is heroic. Someone people can relate to with their fear and distrust . When batman showed kicking superman's and becoming "the one man that beat him". Everyone latched on to that. Batman being the black Knight who takes people's scorn to protect them, that draws people in towards him.
"Because we have to chase him. Because he's the hero Gotham deserves, but not the one it needs right now, so we'll hunt him. Because he can take it, because he's not a hero. He's a silent guardian, a watchful protector, a Dark Knight."


Superman is seen as the White Knight. That's why we see him constantly turn bad. It's him pulling a two face. His goodness comes across hollow to many, so they turn him bad. And many want that kind of thing too. I mean, people love superman in jl movie.

People are also inherently petty and don't like those they perceive as their better, ergo "he's not so special, just take [x] away and he's nothing." In Clark's case, they think killing Lois sends him full dictator and DC indulges them because they'll pay for it. Superman's conceit is that he's fundamentally a good person who is incorruptible, so people take offense because they can't get over themselves long enough to be inspired by an example and instead want to tear it down to feel better about themselves. That's why they love Batman. He's "one of us," so they get to tear down Superman vicariously through him even though Bruce is equally unrealistic, just in a different context.

There's a lot of reasons people can dislike Superman. It's not just because someone doesn't chime in to say "Superman, you ain't ****" because there's a bald dude in an ivory tower who does that regularly.

[Korath]

I can see your point on all of this, but the bolded is especially distressing. Mainly because I don't think Batman should be driven by those things at all, but it seems to cater to the lowest common denominator and it sells

I miss the real Batman before Frank got his hands on him and other writers took the wrong messages from that book.

Perhaps it's just wishful thinking from me, but hopefully, Bruce's characterization will change sooner rather than later.

Rebirth made him into such an unlikable jerk to me that I actually can't wait to see him ditch the cowl. Right now, he oscillates between arrogant ******* to cold-hearted brute in the comics, and it's getting really tiring. King's lack of warmth in his run did a lot of damage to the Bat-corner, and it is in serious need of someone like Bendis, to inject positivity and energy in there.

[Agent Z]

People are also inherently petty and don't like those they perceive as their better, ergo "he's not so special, just take [x] away and he's nothing." In Clark's case, they think killing Lois sends him full dictator and DC indulges them because they'll pay for it. Superman's conceit is that he's fundamentally a good person who is incorruptible, so people take offense because they can't get over themselves long enough to be inspired by an example and instead want to tear it down to feel better about themselves. That's why they love Batman. He's "one of us," so they get to tear down Superman vicariously through him even though Bruce is equally unrealistic, just in a different context.

There's a lot of reasons people can dislike Superman. It's not just because someone doesn't chime in to say "Superman, you ain't ****" because there's a bald dude in an ivory tower who does that regularly.

There is an argument to be made that in trying to defend Superman, writers can resort to using straw men and villifying characters whose morality clashes with his own even if that morality isn't actually evil. An example would be Wonder Woman following her killing of Maxwell Lord or Muhammad X in Superman #179 (one of the most embarrassing attempts at discussing race in superhero comics I've ever seen).

[manwhohaseverything]

People are also inherently petty and don't like those they perceive as their better, ergo "he's not so special, just take [x] away and he's nothing." In Clark's case, they think killing Lois sends him full dictator and DC indulges them because they'll pay for it. Superman's conceit is that he's fundamentally a good person who is incorruptible, so people take offense because they can't get over themselves long enough to be inspired by an example and instead want to tear it down to feel better about themselves. That's why they love Batman. He's "one of us," so they get to tear down Superman vicariously through him even though Bruce is equally unrealistic, just in a different context.

There's a lot of reasons people can dislike Superman. It's not just because someone doesn't chime in to say "Superman, you ain't ****" because there's a bald dude in an ivory tower who does that regularly.

But, the problem with that is superman becomes christ and batman becomes the grand inquisitor. Superman sets a bar too high for anyone to be like him. Batman doesn't. So they reject him. They bow to batman, because he gives them something to flock towards . They respect him. They view Superman with contempt for giving them the burden of freedom to choose.

“In place of the clear and rigid ancient law, You made man decide about good and evil for himself, with no other guidance than Your example. But did it never occur to You that man would disregard Your example, even question it, as well as Your truth, when he was subjected to so fearful a burden as freedom of choice?”
In the end, superman as idol will lose.
"Go and do not come back . . . do not come back at all . . . ever . .. ever!"
He would have to leave into the town's dark streets and squares.

That isn't much of a happy ending. If we are making superman into a saint like figure and comicbook fandom as analogies of mankind.So, bringing him back to what he was originally would be better."A powerful man who doesn't seek control you nor is he looking to set an impossible example". A man who seeks to do the right thing for its own sake. Who puts ideal before everything and to his bitter end, because he himself comes short of it.

If you write him as a god or saint. All good and powerfull, then people will have the devil tear him down or hollow him out.

He will bring him down to the level of man.

After that, they will show contempt towards him for being a god in the first place. By having him humiliated by a righteous flawed man.Worse turn the god into devil himself. It is only natural.

“I think the devil doesn't exist, but man has created him, he has created him in his own image and likeness.”

[Robanker]

But, the problem with that is superman becomes christ and batman becomes the grand inquisitor. Superman sets a bar too high for anyone to be like him. Batman doesn't. So they reject him. They bow to batman, because he gives them something to flock towards . They respect him. They view Superman with contempt for giving them the burden of freedom to choose.

“In place of the clear and rigid ancient law, You made man decide about good and evil for himself, with no other guidance than Your example. But did it never occur to You that man would disregard Your example, even question it, as well as Your truth, when he was subjected to so fearful a burden as freedom of choice?”
In the end, superman as idol will lose.
"Go and do not come back . . . do not come back at all . . . ever . .. ever!"
He would have to leave into the town's dark streets and squares.

That isn't much of a happy ending. If we are making superman into a saint like figure and comicbook fandom as analogies of mankind.So, bringing him back to what he was originally would be better."A powerful man who doesn't seek control you nor is he looking to set an impossible example". A man who seeks to do the right thing for its own sake. Who puts ideal before everything and to his bitter end, because he himself comes short of it.

If you write him as a god or saint. All good and powerfull, then people will have the devil tear him down or hollow him out.

He will bring him down to the level of man.

After that, they will show contempt towards him for being a god in the first place. By having him humiliated by a righteous flawed man.Worse turn the god into devil himself. It is only natural.

“I think the devil doesn't exist, but man has created him, he has created him in his own image and likeness.”

So you're arguing that because people are petty, don't write Superman as what we could be because then petty people won't like him. I'm good, dude. I still believe that we can get over ourselves and strive to do better because I do my best to every damn day.

If you want to tell a story about tearing down a perceived saint, you can very well make it about how deeply flawed we are that we cannot allow anyone to help us; you can make it a bad thing.

I don't want to change Superman because Batfans don't like him. I want him to get written well, stop deferring to him and rebuild his own fan base. It doesn't have to be either or. You can have both. In the USA we are obsessed with binary choice and it bugs me there as it does here. DC has been trying to Batmanify Clark by bringing him down time and again and "humbling God" when he never was God to begin with. Just a good man with the power to do anything who chose to do good. I don't want that to change just because teenagers and emotionally stunted adults are angry with the reality that some people will just be better than them and continue to be as long as they are unwilling to change. The big message behind Kal is that YOU can be Superman of you're willing to try; to do good even when it's hard and to not turn away when others are in need. Surrendering to cynicism is as far from what the character is about as you can get.

[SiegePerilous02]

Yeah Batman comes across as a lunatic in way too many stories. This is a guy who spends enormous amounts of time and money coming up with ways to take out his friends... He's also a guy who has a sanctimonious "no-killing" rule that seemingly only applies to Humans. It makes it really hard to take him seriously as a hero sometimes.

I miss when Bruce considered Dick and Clark his best friends, with no bullshit "keeping them at arms length" or "uneasy allies" stuff thrown in. I can't believe that seemingly most comic fans prefer the modern take on him. When I first watched BTAS as a kid I loved the character. Then I go read some comics from around the same time or later and I'm like "what the f***? Did I imagine him being a likeable protagonist?" And then I read some old Bronze age issues and I get a take closer to what I first encountered.

If they have to keep going back to the "Superman vs. Batman" well, I'd rather the Superman side get some more shots in. But as a fan of both characters, I'd prefer it be put to rest altogether and both characters overhauled without the last few decades worth of baggage.

Perhaps it's just wishful thinking from me, but hopefully, Bruce's characterization will change sooner rather than later.

Rebirth made him into such an unlikable jerk to me that I actually can't wait to see him ditch the cowl. Right now, he oscillates between arrogant ******* to cold-hearted brute in the comics, and it's getting really tiring. King's lack of warmth in his run did a lot of damage to the Bat-corner, and it is in serious need of someone like Bendis, to inject positivity and energy in there.

I'm not too hopeful as long as the current people are in charge.

But it goes back further than just them. Bruce has been capable of being awful off and on since the 80s. The pre-Morrison stuff from the 2000s and post-Morrison stuff with Snyder didn't really help the situation either. I think as far as the mainstream comics go, the character is pretty tainted from the last few decades and it may be best to put the post-Crisis version out of his misery and get us a new one that doesn't suck.

[Ascended]

So you're arguing that because people are petty, don't write Superman as what we could be because then petty people won't like him. I'm good, dude. I still believe that we can get over ourselves and strive to do better because I do my best to every damn day.

I'm with you, but he does have a point. Superman demands a little more of people. With Batman and other "flawed" heroes, they're all about letting your worst attributes rule you, and as long as you can channel that negativity into something vaguely positive then hooray for you. But Superman? This guy asks for more from you, just by existing. Just by being who and what he is, he shows you a better way, but it's a much harder path. And people who aren't interested in trying to be better people, the ones who think they're good as they are and would rather let the bad days rule them? They don't like Superman showing that there's another option. Those people look like less, when compared to Clark. So, when culture is leaning towards the angry and selfish, when we're jaded and cynical and are fine with cheating and flexible morality, of course Superman's popularity wanes.

But I'll be damned if that's not the best reason there could be for Clark to stay exactly as he is, and keep showing us that better path.

[Speed Force League Unlimited]

Superman Returns is a good movie.
Superman III is not a bad movie.
Earth-1 Superman (Silver Age - 1987) is the best version of the character.
Superman the animated series needlessly underpowered Superman, especially in the Livewire episode.
I miss Matrix Supergirl.

[manwhohaseverything]

So you're arguing that because people are petty, don't write Superman as what we could be because then petty people won't like him. I'm good, dude. I still believe that we can get over ourselves and strive to do better because I do my best to every damn day.

If you want to tell a story about tearing down a perceived saint, you can very well make it about how deeply flawed we are that we cannot allow anyone to help us; you can make it a bad thing.

I don't want to change Superman because Batfans don't like him. I want him to get written well, stop deferring to him and rebuild his own fan base. It doesn't have to be either or. You can have both. In the USA we are obsessed with binary choice and it bugs me there as it does here. DC has been trying to Batmanify Clark by bringing him down time and again and "humbling God" when he never was God to begin with. Just a good man with the power to do anything who chose to do good. I don't want that to change just because teenagers and emotionally stunted adults are angry with the reality that some people will just be better than them and continue to be as long as they are unwilling to change. The big message behind Kal is that YOU can be Superman of you're willing to try; to do good even when it's hard and to not turn away when others are in need. Surrendering to cynicism is as far from what the character is about as you can get.

No, i am providing the limits of superman as a symbol. Have you read karamazov brothers? In it the grand inquisitor questions christ as figure on his return. It's verbal one sided dark knight returns match. Grand inquisitor says that there two type of men since jesus resisted the 3 temptations of the devil and gave humanity a chance at free will.
1. those who can handle freedom. He estimates these to be the tens of thousands. Less than one- hundredth of one percent.

2. those who can't handle freedom. He estimates these to be the thousands of millions. The other 99.99%.

He says that christ can only cater to the tens of thousands. He couldn't cater to rest who are weak. He accuses him codemning him to hell. He says challenges christ to judge him for being the idol for the weak.

"what will become of the millions and tens of thousand millions of creatures who are
not strong enough to disdain the earthly bread for the heavenly sort? Or are the only ones you care
about the tens of thousands of the great and the strong, while the remaining millions, numerous
as the grains of sand in the sea, weak, but loving you, must serve as mere raw material for the
great and the strong?
No, we care about the weak, too."

Humanity always needed an idol to bow. True, but is the saint figure(superman) that or is it the grand inquisitor (batman)? If the above math is vague estimate, then superman's failure in that regard isn't surprising . He isn't connecting to the fandom for the same reason.

Saints are hard for humanity to connect too. So, it is natural for writers to find it hard. So much so they make his goodness hollowed out. Their inability makes it come of as fake and boring. Because they can't grasp it. It's why, not many can write superman in the all star superman-esque saint avatar.

In story, superman is embraced and never criticised in his own corner. Have you noticed that? Has lois written article taking superman to school? Has perry ever considered superman could be bad? They don't(i am not talking about pulling a Jonah jameson, but legitimate unbiased critic ) . He is criticised when batman is around and by batman himself. Because when superman steps outside of his world(even, jl book is his domain. Since, He is the top of the popularity hierarchy. Entire dcu accept for superman's corner is his domain) . He steps into batman's world. The man's world, where god is dead. But, devil(joker) is still the king. box office attests to that. Even the devil is something audiences connect to.People can't stand gods. They would always tear them down. So, out story readers begins to influence the inner workings of the story. Clark starts lossing out. Because him as symbol doesn't reach people. Nor do they want it.

So there becomes two supermen. One a saint in his domain(his books). Two in batman's domain. batman's domain is that of an existentialist. A god cannot live their.Cynism is paramount. Where men are struggling to stop themselves from becoming the monsters they fight. The instance, steps foot in that world as this figure. He will be a hollow idol.

Besides that, Superman has always changed. it is inevitable and part of the course. The character was made into the saint because of three things comics code, accumulative whitewashing and the continues unending nature of comics. He was never that originally. He was as much a vigilante as batman is. The problem is now batman is allowed to embrace his vigilante nature. He is allowed to be dangerous.Superman isn't. His sainthood prevents him from having fangs.superman is'nt allowed to be hunted By authorities or other figures for what he is,truly . Just an alien vigilante strongman doing the right thing.

See, the conundrum of superman is this. In his world superman has to be a saint or a god and nothing else. Why? Because his followers(superman fans) who are comparatively less demand so.But, in batman's dc he cannot be a saint nor god. because the others demand so. They want a dead god or hollow idol.how can a dead person affect a world?how can hollow idol be a symbol of anything?

And furthermore, you say he isn't a god. Yet, refuses to accept flaws in him. A man is flawed. He does the right thing. True. But, the problem comes when he set out to be a flawless example for people to follow. Because men who can follow or even admire such an example is very low, comparatively .Tell me, would you accept a lazy superman or glutton superman? Because sloth and gluttony are a human condition. A sin, but very much a human condition.