Your DC-Only controversial opinions (part II)...

[Jim Kelly]

It's interesting that just as DC is being more and more about super-heroes and nothing but super-heroes all the time and every day in their comic books, over on the live action scene, we have stories that are not about super-heroing at all or not very much. We have the upcoming JOKER which is in a grounded reality--if not in our reality. And likewise PENNYWORTH, which but for the mysticism could just be an action spy thriller. I could see Lois Lane getting her own series or movie--if they could take the Superman out of the story and just set it in the world of crime reporting.

[CaptCleghorn]

Superman doesn't need Lois Lane more than she needs him. He doesn't even need her for great stories.

That said, I love Lois, she's a great character who can also work on her own, but historically, Superman has saved her from many death, including the movies and shows lol.

The original appeal of Lois was an example of someone who went against the odds, busted the glass ceiling (for the Golden Age anyway), and was everything Clark kent was without the privilege of gender and super-powers. If we have a Superman story where he's dealing with cosmic stuff and super-villains, then Lois becomes a hostage placeholder and isn't needed. But in a look at Superman dealing with his humanity, Lois is an example of what people can do.

[Yoda]

It's interesting that just as DC is being more and more about super-heroes and nothing but super-heroes all the time and every day in their comic books, over on the live action scene, we have stories that are not about super-heroing at all or not very much. We have the upcoming JOKER which is in a grounded reality--if not in our reality. And likewise PENNYWORTH, which but for the mysticism could just be an action spy thriller. I could see Lois Lane getting her own series or movie--if they could take the Superman out of the story and just set it in the world of crime reporting.

I've said this before, but my ideal DCUniverse show would be a Metropolis version of The Wire with Lois as one of the POV characters. Set it before Superman comes in, with Luthor coming and getting his tendrils all into the city, you now have the Invisible Mafia as well you can work into things. It'd be great.

The original appeal of Lois was an example of someone who went against the odds, busted the glass ceiling (for the Golden Age anyway), and was everything Clark kent was without the privilege of gender and super-powers. If we have a Superman story where he's dealing with cosmic stuff and super-villains, then Lois becomes a hostage placeholder and isn't needed. But in a look at Superman dealing with his humanity, Lois is an example of what people can do.

I don't think it's that difficult to work Lois into those type of stories either though. A human POV character does have value in those settings. Really, it's not that difficult to tell a story without putting her in the damsel role. It's just one of the easiest so it's a fall back for a lot of writers who don't put in the effort. Much of the "Lois is bad" because she's a damsel stuff seems to be cover for just disliking her character. Superman's function in most stories is save people. The entirety of the human race is his "damsel" yet it's only an issue for Lois.

My controversial opinion... hmmm. I think generally the Green Lanterns and the Green Lantern Corps are boring. No matter who - Hal, Guy, John, Kyle, etc. Never seen the appeal and it's gotten worse over the years as they expanded the spectrum. I think characters like Adam Strange, Hawkman, etc. are much better windows into the DCU cosmic stuff.

[Sacred Knight]

Superman doesn't need Lois Lane more than she needs him. He doesn't even need her for great stories.

That said, I love Lois, she's a great character who can also work on her own, but historically, Superman has saved her from many death, including the movies and shows lol.

Absolutely true. And its absolutely possible to believe this and still like Lois Lane as a character, as I do. Pointing this out all too often gets one labeled as a Lois-hater, and that's not always the case. Its just that the idea that he needs her more than she needs him reeks of a cheap attempt at a meta statement to validate her position with female readers. Problem is its not only completely false and farcical, it doesn't need to be validated that way in the first place. Her history and evolution as the main supporting character in the Superman mythos, and how that has branched out many times in the past, is what validates her. It doesn't need to be twisted with falsehoods and forced with silly catchphrases like "the most dangerous woman in the DCU". Talk about trying too hard with a character that can stand on her own two feet without it. None of this is saying that the mythos should be without her, but hypothetically it could survive without her more than she could survive without him.

[Yoda]

Superman stripped of all the human elements, Clark Kent, the Daily Planet, etc. is a generic character with little to differentiate him from the literally hundreds of characters he's spawned over the years. So the cosmic Superman stories are interchangeable with any number of characters. You can tell those with Green Lanterns, Hawkman, etc. They are generic.

The Daily Planet Earth bound stories, the Clark Kent secret identity stories, etc. are not and Lois is an integral part of those and that. Not to mention that the romance element of Superman and Lois was there since the inception and has been cemented over the decades as one of the central themes of the story. She's a co-star in the mass media portrayals. The idea that she's an interchangeable supporting character isn't true.

[SiegePerilous02]

Superman stripped of all the human elements, Clark Kent, the Daily Planet, etc. is a generic character with little to differentiate him from the literally hundreds of characters he's spawned over the years. So the cosmic Superman stories are interchangeable with any number of characters. You can tell those with Green Lanterns, Hawkman, etc. They are generic.

The Daily Planet Earth bound stories, the Clark Kent secret identity stories, etc. are not and Lois is an integral part of those and that. Not to mention that the romance element of Superman and Lois was there since the inception and has been cemented over the decades as one of the central themes of the story. She's a co-star in the mass media portrayals. The idea that she's an interchangeable supporting character isn't true.

Too much focus on the human elements to the exclusion of the cosmic stuff can make him generic too. It's not as if he's the only superhuman character who lives in a city and has a supporting cast of civilians. A healthy Superman mythos really depends on both and a good balance between them.

He's spawned hundreds of other characters on multiple fronts. Green Lantern and Hawkman can cover the same cosmic ground, but the Flash or Spider-Man cover the save basics of the grounded Earth-bound superhero.

[Sacred Knight]

The argument isn't that she's interchangeable. You can't replace Lois Lane in the mythos with Star Reporter/Rival/Love Interest B or C, she's earned that beyond measure. That package all put together is her, cultivated from the very beginning. She's important, always has been. But at the same time "Superman Needs Lois More Than Lois Needs Him" as a statement of in-story or meta connotation of both, is just comical and trying too hard. Its not necessary in-story to paint Superman as a guy who just falls apart without her while she could soldier on without him, and from a meta standpoint, again, its just patently false. Superman can and has thrived in many a story where she's not a part. It all depends on what the story is. Of course you don't want to have her gone just wholesale, you need the balance, but that's not the suggestion. Balance is always key but if we're going hypothetical, where the pendulum would swing one way or another if it was absolutely forced to be one or the other for some unforeseen reason, it would swing in Superman's direction. Its just that these hamfisted types of pronouncements just to gain woke points don't reflect the reality of the total mythos, and its why certain writers fall flat for me despite being otherwise quite skilled.

[Yoda]

Too much focus on the human elements to the exclusion of the cosmic stuff can make him generic too. It's not as if he's the only superhuman character who lives in a city and has a supporting cast of civilians. A healthy Superman mythos really depends on both and a good balance between them.

He's spawned hundreds of other characters on multiple fronts. Green Lantern and Hawkman can cover the same cosmic ground, but the Flash or Spider-Man cover the save basics of the grounded Earth-bound superhero.

I don't generally disagree with any of that. Though I'd argue that his Earthbound elements are more his own. With the exception of the Legion, none of the cosmic elements are significantly tied to "Superman" in the way that the human elements are. The Daily Planet, Clark Kent as a reporter, Lois Lane, Luthor, etc. are all squarely seen as "Superman" where as the cosmic stuff simply doesn't hold that connection.

[Jim Kelly]

It's just a philosophical opinion on my part that Superman should have normals in his stories. I want the status quo to be like Spider-Man from the 1960s and 1970s, where the stories were mainly about normal people in a big city--there were super-heroes and super-villains, too, but they weren't the majority of the population. The stuff that happened with Gwen, Captain Stacy, Flash Thompson, Mary-Jane, Robbie, J. Jonah, Harry is what kept the ongoing drama interesting--and I liked how the writers kept these sub-plots going through the run of the comic, so you were always following what happened with those characters, just as much as Spidey's web battles over the Manhattan skyline.

[SiegePerilous02]

The argument isn't that she's interchangeable. You can't replace Lois Lane in the mythos with Star Reporter/Rival/Love Interest B or C, she's earned that beyond measure. That package all put together is her, cultivated from the very beginning. The argument is that its just a falsehood that in a hypothetical situation, Superman needs her more than she needs him. Its just a comical statement be whether it has an in-story or meta connotation of both. Its trying too hard. Its not necessary in-story to paint Superman as a guy who just falls apart without her while she could soldier on without him, and from a meta standpoint, again, its just patently false. Superman can and has thrived in many a story where she's not a part. It all depends on what the story is. Of course you don't want to have her gone just wholesale, you need the balance, but that's not the suggestion. Its just that these hamfisted types of pronouncements just to gain woke points don't reflect the reality of the total mythos, and its why certain writers fall flat for me despite being otherwise quite skilled.

Agreed, especially the bolded part.

I don't generally disagree with any of that. Though I'd argue that his Earthbound elements are more his own. With the exception of the Legion, none of the cosmic elements are significantly tied to "Superman" in the way that the human elements are. The Daily Planet, Clark Kent as a reporter, Lois Lane, Luthor, etc. are all squarely seen as "Superman" where as the cosmic stuff simply doesn't hold that connection.

Are we including stuff like Krypton, the Phantom Zone, Brainiac, Bizarro world and Kandor in the cosmic stuff though? Because all of that is squarely Superman first and foremost, or as an extension, Supergirl. Eve more so than the Legion.

[Yoda]

The argument isn't that she's interchangeable. The argument is that its just a falsehood that in a hypothetical situation, Superman needs her more than she needs him. Its just a comical statement be whether it has an in-story or meta connotation of both. Its trying too hard. Its not necessary in-story to paint Superman as a guy who just falls about without her while she could soldier on without him, and from a meta standpoint, again, its just patently false. Superman can and has thrived in many a story where she's not a part. It all depends on what the story is. Of course you don't want to have her gone just wholesale, you need the balance, but that's not the suggestion. Its just that these hamfisted types of pronouncements just to gain woke points don't reflect the reality of the total mythos, and its why certain writers fall flat for me despite being otherwise quite skilled.

I think it's more of a statement on what constitutes a "Superman" story for some people than trying to score points of one kind or another. And that goes back the the danger of making the stories more generic. The idea being that she does add something integral to the mythos that would be lost when she's removed. And it's not just writers like Rucka. I don't think people accuse Warren Ellis looking for "woke points" when he said this:

Superman is about someone trying their best to save the world, one day at a time. And it's about that person's love for that one whose intellect and emotion and sheer bloody humanity completes him. It's about Superman, and it's about Lois and Clark. And that's all there is. That is the spine. That must be protected, to the death, not lost in a cannonade succession of continuing stories. That's what, in the continuing rush to top the last plotline, I see getting lost.

It comes down to one's interpretation of what makes a Superman story a Superman story. The further away you get from that the more you lose that core.

Finally, in context, a lot of those comments are in reaction to attempts to wholesale write her out in one way or the other. So the hyperbole is forgivable to me.

[stargazer01]

I like Cyborg and Martian Manhunter just fine.....but NEITHER of them deserve to be founding members of the Justice League. What do Batman, Aquaman, Superman, The Flash, Green Lantern and Wonder Woman have, that J’onn and Victor don’t?
The other six have their own mythos unique to them, solos that last more than 30 issues before cancellation, their own villains and supporting characters. J’onn is just too derivative of Superman. And Cyborg just isn’t a solo character. He doesn’t have his own mythos outside of the new gods or the Titans.
Again, I like them just fine. But if it were up to me, the only founding members would be Clark, Bruce, Diana, Hal, Barry and Arthur. But if I absolutely had to pick a 7th member, it would be another woman like Hawkgirl or Vixen.

Agree completely. I think some writers trying to make MM and Cyborg more important than they really have been in the DCU in all media, imo.

[Uncanny Mutie]

Too much focus on the human elements to the exclusion of the cosmic stuff can make him generic too.

...and this is EXACTLY why I hate Bendis' Action Comics run so much.

[Sacred Knight]

I am aware of that old quote by Eliis, and while I don't completely agree with Ellis' statement, I respect it more because he's clearly talking about a partnership, not making mention of one needing the other more or anything like that to prop up one individually. But personally I feel Superman is complete as an individual being before he even meets Lois, in my view. He's complete in his being because of his parents and his experiences up to that point. Lois is a prime example of what he loves about humanity, but he doesn't start loving humanity because of her, he already does before then.

[Yoda]

Are we including stuff like Krypton, the Phantom Zone, Brainiac, Bizarro world and Kandor in the cosmic stuff though? Because all of that is squarely Superman first and foremost, or as an extension, Supergirl. Eve more so than the Legion.

I don't count that as "cosmic" type stories since they interact primarily with Superman on Earth. Bizarro does have a strong connection, though I'd argue that it is as a doppelgänger first and foremost and not as a planet of them. So that's not really a "cosmic" element in my view. Kandor & Brainiac... That I'll agree on. Though again, they are elements that are not disconnected from the interaction with the earthbound stuff. Brainiac & Zod are known to interact with Superman within the context of the Earth stuff as well and their scale is contrasted against that. I'm talking mainly about the idea set out that you can strip Superman of all those elements, whether it's the secret ID, the reporter role, etc. and still have a character that is fundamentally "Superman" and not "GenericSuperheroMan"

You can tell a Brainiac story in a space context with anyone. What would make that a Superman story?