birthright or man of steel

[rnewbz]

i have read both these and thought they were great but is man of steel no longer in continuity, because i'm confused with all the issues it has with birthright.

[KaptainKrypton]

i have read both these and thought they were great but is man of steel no longer in continuity, because i'm confused with all the issues it has with birthright.
It was retconned, or for a simpler word, disregarded as the true origin of Superman in modern continuity.

[TheFalcon]

Yeah, Birthright is now the offical origin of Superman. It's all supposed to be explained in the Infinite Crisis Secret Files issue, along with every continuity error since COIE if I remember correctly (there was an interview on Newsarama a while ago but I can't find it right now).

[newmexneon]

**** Birthright.

[GyLocke]

**** Birthright.

:up:

Seriously, what's up with Lex "Fairy Princess" Luthor?

[The Question]

Birthright destroyed one of my favorite aspects of the Superman mythos. Lex Luthor had an afair with Perry White's wife and got her pregnant for the simple reason that he really doesn't like Perry. But, unfortunately, after Birthright, that has been washed away from continuity.

[TheFalcon]

Birthright destroyed one of my favorite aspects of the Superman mythos. Lex Luthor had an afair with Perry White's wife and got her pregnant for the simple reason that he really doesn't like Perry. But, unfortunately, after Birthright, that has been washed away from continuity.

What in Birthright contradicts that? Couldn't it have happened at a later time?
Technically Birthright makes the way Superman returned after being dead impossible, but it's not like DC have taken that story out of continuity because of it.

I think some of the Birthright/Man of Steel conflict problems (as well as other continuity problems) will be explained in Infinite Crisis (the Secret Files issue probably) as there having been a glitch in the DC Universe after Crisis on Infinite Earths or something which changed "reality" without anyone noticing/remembering it.

[The Question]

What in Birthright contradicts that? Couldn't it have happened at a later time?

The reason for that story is because Lex and perry knew each other and hated each other in high school. And, Perry's son is in his twenties. Lex is now supposed to be the same age as Clark (roughly). I hardly think Perry's wife would have cheated on him with a teenage kid from Smallville.

[Kurosawa]

I don't care for either one, although Birthright is closer to the Earth-One version, so it's less offensive to me.

[hulkamania85]

Is the original reason for Robin leaving Batman out of continuity too now that Nightwing Year One is out?

[rnewbz]

when was nightwing year one out of continuity? If this is true DC needs to get themselves together before we have another crisis....oops never mind

[Agentdemon]

Birthright retconned most of MOS but not all.

[rnewbz]

Well, if I remeber correctly MOS takes place over two yrs. Birthright could fit in somehow...but then some parts could'nt work out, like Clark's little kryptonian computer from BR

[Spike_x1]

**** Birthright.Indeed. :up:

I loved Birthright as a stand alone story, but when you actually try to replace MOS with it, then BR can go to hell for all I care.

With BR being the new origin, it invalidates almost all of what happened during the 80's and most of the 90's.

The whole "Lex Luthor clone" story and everything that came out of it no longer works since it's impossible to believe that Luthor could get cancer from a simple ring while he goes around broadcasting an entire web of kryptonite energy over Metropolis without anyone else becoming ill.

The Cyborg no longer works because he was a direct result of the birthing matrix.

B-13 is also sketchy since, in BR, Metropolis seemed to already be at the level of technology it achieved with Brainiac 13 (twin LexCorp towers, hovering tech, etc).

And Metallo's claim of having the only known piece of kryptonite is extremely hard to believe now.

When you look at all of that, then look at the cause and effect of all of those retcons, you can kiss a very large chunk of post-crisis Superman continuity goodbye.

And let it be said, the only thing that I actually like about BR more than MOS is that the \S/ is a kryptonian symbol (even though BR really took efforts to drive that fact down our throats) rather than a design by John and Clark.

[King Krypton]

Indeed. :up:

I loved Birthright as a stand alone story, but when you actually try to replace MOS with it, then BR can go to hell for all I care.

With BR being the new origin, it invalidates almost all of what happened during the 80's and most of the 90's.

The whole "Lex Luthor clone" story and everything that came out of it no longer works since it's impossible to believe that Luthor could get cancer from a simple ring while he goes around broadcasting an entire web of kryptonite energy over Metropolis without anyone else becoming ill.

The Cyborg no longer works because he was a direct result of the birthing matrix.

B-13 is also sketchy since, in BR, Metropolis seemed to already be at the level of technology it achieved with Brainiac 13 (twin LexCorp towers, hovering tech, etc).

And Metallo's claim of having the only known piece of kryptonite is extremely hard to believe now.

When you look at all of that, then look at the cause and effect of all of those retcons, you can kiss a very large chunk of post-crisis Superman continuity goodbye.

And let it be said, the only thing that I actually like about BR more than MOS is that the \S/ is a kryptonian symbol (even though BR really took efforts to drive that fact down our throats) rather than a design by John and Clark.

MoS invalidated 48 years worth of Superman stories. Why not rip on it for disregarding more than twice the history Birthright replaces?

Besides, very little of the Byrne-Jurgens version has stuck to the overall mythos. Tycoon Lex and the Kents being alive are all that's stuck. Everything else has been bypassed in favor of a more pre-Crisis conception of Superman. And a lot of the what was done in the Byrne-Jurgens era (as well as the Berganza era) was really awful, or at the very least misguided. If the goofier aspects of the pre-Crisis era can and have been bypassed, why should 1986-1999 be inviolate?

[Spike_x1]

MoS invalidated 48 years worth of Superman stories. Why not rip on it for disregarding more than twice the history Birthright replaces?.Exactly what point did this conversation turn into a bashing of MOS? Sure MOS invalidated Superman's pre-crisis history in favor of a more grounded (yet still sci-fi) reality (that was its purpose afterall), but Birthright restarts everything all over again if you want to count it as the new origin. Batman Year One accomplished the same thing as MOS and it doesn't take any s**t for erasing the wacky "Gee Golly, Batman" days. If DC published an updated origin for Batman that erased all of his post-crisis adventures, no matter how well written it is, it'd probably be met with the same criticism as BR is being met with.Besides, very little of the Byrne-Jurgens version has stuck to the overall mythos. Tycoon Lex and the Kents being alive are all that's stuck. Everything else has been bypassed in favor of a more pre-Crisis conception of Superman.But it's all still in continuity. Writers are still free to reference those events if they want to, but BR being the origin would change that.And a lot of the what was done in the Byrne-Jurgens era (as well as the Berganza era) was really awful, or at the very least misguided.You are by far in the minority with that belief. Yes, a few of the things they had Superman do were iffy, but the pros far, far, far outweigh the cons. Besides, I'd rather have the worst of their mistakes over the worst of the mistakes of the pre-crisis Superman.If the goofier aspects of the pre-Crisis era can and have been bypassed, why should 1986-1999 be inviolate?Because then you have no Metallo, no Cyborg, no Jerome Luthor, no B-13, no green kryptonite-induced cancer. And the effects of those retcons can spread throughout the DCU if they're put into practice;
-No Cyborg means that Coast City wasn't destroyed so Hal Jordan couldn't have gone crazy and became Parallex, and it also makes you wonder about what happened after Doomsday killed Superman if one of his replacement Supermen was missing from continuity.
-No kryptonite radiation poisoning means that Lex had no reason to trade his soul to Neron for a new body and leaves the Underworld Unleashed story missing most of its basic cohesion and structure, which drastically effects villains all over the DCU and their dealings with Neron.
-No B-13 means that Brainiac 13's technology shouldn't exist in the current DCU, which would make the OMACs impossible to explain, and the virus in Barbara Gordon's body that's restoring the feeling in her legs seemingly coming out of nowhere.

The repercussions of retconing MOS in favor of BR means that not only Superman's personal continuity needs restarting, but a very sizable portion of the rest of the DCU's stories need to be recalibrated in order to fit.

[newmexneon]

Well said. I agree the story was not that bad but the fact that it's supposed to replace so much really pissed me off.

[Cartoonics]

Continuity issues aside, which do you prefer as a stand-alone origin story?

Just curious. I haven't read many Superman comics, though I'm quite familiar with the first two Superman films and the 1990s animated series. I've just read BR, and thought it was fantastic. With continuity as a non-issue, what (if anything) makes MOS better?

[dr collossus]

Er...who cares? Superman isn't real, its not like arguing over factual details of history. Take each story arc in the context of its own continuity, and enjoy it for what it is. Don't get me wrong, it's MoS for me all the way, and lord knows it brings a nostalgic tear to my eyes every time I think about the fact that the late 80s/early 90s days of Superman comics are over, but hey, maybe DC will come up with something that will impress me more.

[The Question]

But the character has a history and a continuity. Completely ignoring that is just plain irrisponsible.

[Super Kal]

Man of Steel all the way.

[Super Kal]

Indeed. :up:

I loved Birthright as a stand alone story, but when you actually try to replace MOS with it, then BR can go to hell for all I care.

With BR being the new origin, it invalidates almost all of what happened during the 80's and most of the 90's.

The whole "Lex Luthor clone" story and everything that came out of it no longer works since it's impossible to believe that Luthor could get cancer from a simple ring while he goes around broadcasting an entire web of kryptonite energy over Metropolis without anyone else becoming ill.

The Cyborg no longer works because he was a direct result of the birthing matrix.

B-13 is also sketchy since, in BR, Metropolis seemed to already be at the level of technology it achieved with Brainiac 13 (twin LexCorp towers, hovering tech, etc).

And Metallo's claim of having the only known piece of kryptonite is extremely hard to believe now.

When you look at all of that, then look at the cause and effect of all of those retcons, you can kiss a very large chunk of post-crisis Superman continuity goodbye.

And let it be said, the only thing that I actually like about BR more than MOS is that the \S/ is a kryptonian symbol (even though BR really took efforts to drive that fact down our throats) rather than a design by John and Clark.
he he, I like the way you think. :up:

[Kevin Roegele]

I consider Man of Steel the definitive version of Superman. Birthright is an attempt to mix a lot of disparate elements and influences, including Smallville, pre and post crisis continuity, and so on. Man of Steel was a clean slate, no mixed messages, no previous continuity; the purest, strongest version of Superman possible, with all the crap removed.

[dr collossus]

I consider Man of Steel the definitive version of Superman. Birthright is an attempt to mix a lot of disparate elements and influences, including Smallville, pre and post crisis continuity, and so on. Man of Steel was a clean slate, no mixed messages, no previous continuity; the purest, strongest version of Superman possible, with all the crap removed.

:up: :up:

[hulkamania85]

when was nightwing year one out of continuity? If this is true DC needs to get themselves together before we have another crisis....oops never mind

It isn't. I meant out as in released. So is Robin's original reason for leaving out of continuity? I thought DC was going to fix its continuity problems.

[SuperDaniel]

Man of Steel is a thousand times better. **** Pre-Crisis.

[King Krypton]

Exactly what point did this conversation turn into a bashing of MOS?

You bashed Birthright for invalidating MOS and allthat followed. MOS did the exact same thing to more than twice the history that Birthright undid.

If you're going to attack one for retconning a chunk of the history, you can't hold another blameless for the same thing. Both of them are guilty of the same offense.

[Spike_x1]

You seem to fail to realize that MOS is not responsible for erasing the pre-crisis adventures. The actual CRISIS is what erased those events. MOS just gave us a new origin on the clean slate that the Crisis on Infinite Earths gave to us.

With Birthright, there was no crisis that gave a clean slate to work with. There's simply continuity f-ups, plain and simple. Infinite Crisis is supposedly supposed to fix that, but until it or something else repairs the situation, continuity is still royally screwed up.

There is no blame to lay on MOS, because it is not responsible for restarting Superman's continuity. The only blame that can laid on MOS is for giving us an origin to go with the new universe.

[The Question]

Exactly. And, I must say, MoS was a vast improvement. To this day I do not understand why they even thought they needed Birthright. The continuity was fine the way it was.

[co2]

Yeah, isn't 20 years a little to early to feel the need to revamp the origin and continuity?

[Metropolis_Man]

Man of Steel definately. Byrne at his best!

[rnewbz]

yeah, i liek birthright because it's been the orgin for 20 yrs and i do'nt want messy continuity. But if they had made birthright 20 yrs. ago, it would be better. I think birthright is a better story and makes more sense and the fact i love smallville also helps, but birthright should'nt mess up continuity.

[TheFalcon]

I prefer Birthright. I like some of the Man of Steel things but stuff like the birthing matrix is just too weird. Why not have him arrive as a baby/young kid?

I like that Birthrigh used the elements that the public instantly thinks of as Superman's origin. The Lex in Smallville thing could have been avoided but I thought the way it was handled was interesting. The only thing I really don't like about Brithright is the aura/soul thing that Superman can see around people.

I wish that they could have incorporated the new origin in another way though. Maybe have a crossover in which the timeline gets screwed up by Darkseid/Brainiac or someone and then have that change Superman's past somehow.
The Superboy Prime punching explains it now, but it didn't come out until much later and even if it fixes many continuity changes/errors it's not a very good explanation.

[The Question]

I just hate how they wiped away several years worth of continuity (that, unlike pre-crisis, wasn't campy or stupid. The kept the non campy elements post-crisis, for the most part). So many plots no longer make any sense:


The Cyborg Superman doesn't make sense, since his body was formed from the birthing matrix.

Lex Luthor's childhood rivalry with Perry White that resulted in a fair between Lex and Perry's wife that resulted in the birth of Perry's son, who is in actuality Lex's son, is gone now, since Perry's wife is probably twice the age of post Rebirth Lex and Perry's son is pobably the same age as post Rebirth Lex.

Lex getting cancer doesn't make any sense, since how could Lex get cancer from Kryptonite, and yet expose all of Metropolis to Kryptonite radiation and have no one suffer ill effects?

And finally, the fact that they had Lex living in Smallville and losing his hair in a lab accident as what happened in Pre-Crisis is lame. Pre-Rebirth Lex was cool. He was a self made megalomaniac. Now? It's just ruined, I'd say.


I'd have no problems with Rebirth if it were an elsworlds or a sort of Ultimate Superman story. But no, It's now cannon.

[rnewbz]

Lex getting cancer doesn't make any sense, since how could Lex get cancer from Kryptonite, and yet expose all of Metropolis to Kryptonite radiation and have no one suffer ill effects?

Because the people in the city were not exposed to the krytonite for a long period of time. Lex wore the ring for years, which is what gave him cancer.

[The Question]

Yeah. But Lex only had a small ring. The city was bathed in radiation.

[Spike_x1]

Exposure to one very small fragment of kryptonite for several years would not be equal to the amount of radiation that would have been pouring out of LexCorp Towers, covering the entire city for hours, which were also powerful enough to focus into concentrated holograms.

[Spike_x1]

I prefer Birthright. I like some of the Man of Steel things but stuff like the birthing matrix is just too weird. Why not have him arrive as a baby/young kid?You're talking about a comic where a man dresses with his underwear on the outside, can levitate himself on a whim, and shoot fire from his eyes, but you think something like the birthing matrix was too weird? Even if it fit in seamlessly with the germophobic nature of Krypton? :confused:

The entire point of Byrne introducing the birthing matrix was to make Superman technically born on earth. To symbolically humanize him more.

[TheFalcon]

You're talking about a comic where a man dresses with his underwear on the outside, can levitate himself on a whim, and shoot fire from his eyes, but you think something like the birthing matrix was too weird? Even if it fit in seamlessly with the germophobic nature of Krypton? :confused:

The entire point of Byrne introducing the birthing matrix was to make Superman technically born on earth. To symbolically humanize him more.

If you want to put it that way you can make anything sound weird.

I didn't like the whole germophobic and birthing matrix thing. A machine that grows a fetus? And if you think about it Superman wasn't even technically born at all. He was just grown inside a machine.

I just don't understand the point of him being "born" on earth. What's the point of trying to make him more human when a big point of the character is that he is an alien who grew up amongst humans?
Using the birthing matrix means that Superman has never even been on Krypton at all. The whole thing just felt very unneeded to me.

[Spike_x1]

If you want to put it that way you can make anything sound weird.The fact is that the entire concept of Superman is weird. You were simply singling out one part of the character's history as if its weirdness was uncommon.I didn't like the whole germophobic and birthing matrix thing. A machine that grows a fetus? And if you think about it Superman wasn't even technically born at all. He was just grown inside a machine.

I just don't understand the point of him being "born" on earth. What's the point of trying to make him more human when a big point of the character is that he is an alien who grew up amongst humans?He still is an alien who grew up around humans. What part of MOS changed that? :confused:Using the birthing matrix means that Superman has never even been on Krypton at all. The whole thing just felt very unneeded to me.That is exactly the point Byrne was trying to make. Superman is regularly referred to as "the most human of us all" and the birthing matrix symbolized that point. Why would Superman need to have been on Krypton at all? What purpose could that serve in a story besides to take away from the whole schtick of "the most human despite being an alien"?

[TheFalcon]

He still is an alien who grew up around humans. What part of MOS changed that? :confused:That is exactly the point Byrne was trying to make. Superman is regularly referred to as "the most human of us all" and the birthing matrix symbolized that point. Why would Superman need to have been on Krypton at all? What purpose could that serve in a story besides to take away from the whole schtick of "the most human despite being an alien"?

I think the "most human despite being an alien" thing is very important for the character. He sets an example for the humans by saying that if he, an alien, can become such a good "human being", then it should be even easier for all humans to do the same.

And I don't like seperating Superman from Krypton as much as Byrne wanted.
Superman was the last child of the planet Krypton, and IMO having him being "born" on Earth by a machine ruins some of that. He is the Last Kryptonian, but he doesn't really have any connections to Krypton. He could just as well have been a normal human with some mutant genes that gave him some powers.
I feel the whole thing takes something away from the character and his story. Having him be born on Krypton and meeting his parents, even if he doesn't remember it, works much better IMO.

By the way, If he was born on Earth is he actually an alien?

[The Question]

Why? How does that make him any more connected to Krypton? He still wouldn't remember Krypton at all.

[TheFalcon]

Why? How does that make him any more connected to Krypton? He still wouldn't remember Krypton at all.

If he has been on Krypton he would be more connected than if he was not, but I understand that Superman probably wouldn't care about it because, as you said, he wouldn't remember it.

It's more of an importance to the whole story and character of Superman. I think it takes something away from that.

And since you continue to ask why I want him more connected to Krypton, why not?
The story of Superman is that he is the last kryptonian, was sent to earth and grew up amongst humans. Everybody who knows the character knows that. So why did Byrne change him?
I just don't understand the point of trying to make him even more human. He was already a better human than most actual humans.
Why go to the length of changing an origin that even people who haven't read a comic in their entire life knows?

[Spike_x1]

I think the "most human despite being an alien" thing is very important for the character. He sets an example for the humans by saying that if he, an alien, can become such a good "human being", then it should be even easier for all humans to do the same.That's exactly what Man of Steel concreted for the character and was the precise point that Byrne was trying to make.And I don't like seperating Superman from Krypton as much as Byrne wanted.
Superman was the last child of the planet Krypton, and IMO having him being "born" on Earth by a machine ruins some of that. He is the Last Kryptonian, but he doesn't really have any connections to Krypton. He could just as well have been a normal human with some mutant genes that gave him some powers.
I feel the whole thing takes something away from the character and his story. Having him be born on Krypton and meeting his parents, even if he doesn't remember it, works much better IMO.No connections? He still has the combination of both his parents' genes the same way any child would get. It's just that, instead of his mother's womb, he developed in the matrix. He was still cared for and loved by his parents.By the way, If he was born on Earth is he actually an alien?I would say so, since his DNA isn't mutated and it's definitely not human, so what would you call it?If he has been on Krypton he would be more connected than if he was not, but I understand that Superman probably wouldn't care about it because, as you said, he wouldn't remember it.

It's more of an importance to the whole story and character of Superman. I think it takes something away from that.But how could it possibly be an importance to the story and character if he doesn't remember any of it? Where is the sense of importance that you refer to?And since you continue to ask why I want him more connected to Krypton, why not?
The story of Superman is that he is the last kryptonian, was sent to earth and grew up amongst humans. Everybody who knows the character knows that. So why did Byrne change him?Byrne did not change any of that. Superman is still the last Kryptonian. He was still sent to earth and he still grew up amongst humans? Where is the change? :confused:I just don't understand the point of trying to make him even more human. He was already a better human than most actual humans.You do understand symbolism, right?

I think the very last page of MOS summed up everything that Superman is about and what he should always be about.

"Krypton bred me, but it was earth that gave me all I am. All that matters. It was Krypton that made me Superman, but it is earth that makes me human!!"

Superman shouldn't be about focusing on a dead planet, but rather about valuing what Earth gives him. Putting unneeded emphasis on Krypton takes away Superman's focus on Earth and makes the character less humanized.

[The Question]

Exactly. Superman may respect Krypton and his heratige, but it's not really that important to him. In his mind, he is Clark Joseph Kent, the son of two Kansas farmers who's always had a knack for writing and just happens to be a super powered alien.

[Eros]

John Bryne superman is fine, but i think most people just ignore the "birthing matrix" thing. People usually just say superman was sent to earth as a baby. I always assumed they retconned the "birthing matrix" nosense years ago. Who the hell even uses the birth matrix thing.....not the cartoon version of superman, not the movies, and not smallville its officially been retconned in most peoples minds.

[krpton2]

Birthright.

[KaptainKrypton]

I like either for different reasons. They're both solid Superman literature to me as I feel they paint a background picture of my fav'rit. There are certain things I didn't like about Byrne's Krypton (namely the sterility of it). I didn't mind what was done in a lot of the other places in Byrne's origin (meeting with Lois, Batman, etc.). I liked the stories in Birthright that revolved around his years leading up to donning the costume, and I liked the look and feel of Waid's Krypton a bit more as it gave me a better impression that Superman would hold pride in his heritage, and not have to have Jonathan Kent hit the remains of it with a shovel to get it out of Superman's mind. I for some odd reason, don't like that fact that the Kents survived in either incarnation. I guess I'm just old-fashioned and have seen the movies too many times, but I like that feeling of isolation he gets when he moves to Metropolis, as opposed to being able to fly back to Kansas on a whim and talk things over with the folks. I'm just nitpicky, I guess.

[dr collossus]

Byrne's Sperman was the most logically consistent incarnation there had been. That's why there needed to be a revamp a la COIE. Before MoS, there wasn't really a definitive, coherent Superman, just a mishmash of different interpretations to suit whatever story they wanted to tell.

[The Question]

John Bryne superman is fine, but i think most people just ignore the "birthing matrix" thing. People usually just say superman was sent to earth as a baby. I always assumed they retconned the "birthing matrix" nosense years ago. Who the hell even uses the birth matrix thing.....not the cartoon version of superman, not the movies, and not smallville its officially been retconned in most peoples minds.


Doesn't hurt anything either. And it led to the whole deal with the Cyborg Superman and the destruction of Coast City.

[TheFalcon]

I would say so, since his DNA isn't mutated and it's definitely not human, so what would you call it?

The DNA is still kryptonian, but he was born on Earth. It clearly doesn't make him a human, but does it make him an earthling?
Can someone born on Earth really be an alien?
Is every person in America with African genes Africans?

Technically Superman's origin is alien so I guess you can say he's an Kryptonian-Earthling. I just thought it was an interesting question to ask.

But how could it possibly be an importance to the story and character if he doesn't remember any of it? Where is the sense of importance that you refer to?Byrne did not change any of that. Superman is still the last Kryptonian. He was still sent to earth and he still grew up amongst humans? Where is the change? :confused:You do understand symbolism, right?

As I said I wasn't talking about what the character himself would feel about things since he doesn't remember either way. It was more about what the reader would feel about it. To me it takes away something from the Superman story if they make him even more human and almost just ignores his Kryptonian past.
It doesn't really affect the story itself, it's just my preference.

Basically I understand the point that Byrne wanted to make, but I just don't think it was an important or needed one to make. I don't think it was worth changing such a well known origin to make it.

And as Eros said most people/writers later has just ignored the birthing matrix part of the origin anyway. I'm glad that they changed it back to him being sent as a baby and I think most people would feel the same.

[rnewbz]

So I hear that they're going to explain supes change of orgin by having the reason for it being superboy prime banging on the walls and messing with the time space continuam, this is supposed to make everything fit. It will also be the reason why son of the demon is now canon again.

[TheFalcon]

So I hear that they're going to explain supes change of orgin by having the reason for it being superboy prime banging on the walls and messing with the time space continuam, this is supposed to make everything fit. It will also be the reason why son of the demon is now canon again.

Yeah, that's the explenation their going with to "fix" every continuity error/change since Crisis On Infinite Earth. It's not a very good one, but it works as well as any other. If they absolutely want to fix everything I don't think theres many good ways to do it.

Son of the Demon,though, wasn't out of continuity because of contradictions or things like that. It was just because DC at the time didn't like the idea of Batman having a son. There were some small character flaws, but you can find that in almost every other in continuity story too. There wouldn't be any problems if they just one day decided to put it in again regardless of the Superboy thing.

[Spike_x1]

John Bryne superman is fine, but i think most people just ignore the "birthing matrix" thing. People usually just say superman was sent to earth as a baby.He was still sent to earth as a baby in MOS. Why does everyone think that Byrne changed that? :confused:I always assumed they retconned the "birthing matrix" nosense years ago. Who the hell even uses the birth matrix thing.....not the cartoon version of superman, not the movies, and not smallville its officially been retconned in most peoples minds.The inaccuracies that are in uninformed minds should never pressure continuity into chaging itself to better suit people who don't even read the comics.

If that were the case, we would have never gotten out of the cheesy "POW!" and "ZIFF!" years of Batman comics.

[Eros]

while i agree wiht most of that spike, it just stand to reason that most comic fans can't even explain the "birthing Matrix" in full detail. I still don't get how superman actually came back to life after doomsday killed him. Besides that The Bryne superman is great, and obviously the one clear interpretation of the character. Clark finally arrivng in Metropolis has a very epic feel, its alot better then pre-crisis 14 year old clark putting on the suit and calling himself superboy. The reason Bryne superman is better cause it felt like an epic journey into heroism rather then a quick campy trip like pre-crisis with the superboy nonsense lol.

[kieron39]

Is the original reason for Robin leaving Batman out of continuity too now that Nightwing Year One is out?
what was the original reason? i read nightwing year one, but never really looked up the history of Grayson leaving batman.

[Cartoonics]

I read Birthright a few weeks ago. Just finished reading Man of Steel. My thoughts...

Story
MOS seems more serialized, with each issue standing alone. BR seems to flow as more of a continuous narrative rather than a series of year one excerpts. Winner: Birthright.

Superman
I like that MOS reminds us that Superman and Batman don't get along, but wouldn't Superman's distrust for "vigilantes" get in the way of his first meetings with other DCU heroes? Superman and Batman should be oil and water, but I can't quite see Superman making a special trip to Gotham to turn Bats in. On the other hand, I like the nods to Christopher Reeve's Superman, flying away and waving "bye now." MOS Superman is immediately confident; BR Superman takes a little while to find his footing. Despite a few gripes...Winner: Man of Steel.

Clark Kent
MOS offers a newly-assertive Clark Kent. This Clark is less of a dual identity than he is a change of clothing. There doesn't seem to be a major shift in behavior. It's just glasses, slick hair, and a little slouch. BR restores the mild-mannered reporter of earlier days, making 'Metropolis Clark' a necessary sacrifice to maintaining Superman. I'm not sure which offers the greater story-telling potential, but iconic elements win tiebreakers. Winner: Birthright.

Lois Lane
MOS Lois is just too over the top. Driving her car off a pier to get Superman's attention? Stupidly not realizing that her dress was a gift, not a loaner, and then throwing a fit? Lois should be tough and resourceful, but this is too much. Winner: Birthright.

Lex Luthor
One of the key changes in MOS was Lex Luthor. Corporate Luthor is much more interesting than Mad Scientist Luthor. Although Mark Waid claimed to be keeping Corporate Luthor, BR Lex is a blend of the old and the new, with an unnecessary nod to Smallville thrown in for good measure. I think MOS Lex walked into his arrest when he should have been smart enough to avoid it, and I hate the red hair (which I assume goes somewhere down the line), but this is one change that was an undisputable improvement. Winner: Man of Steel.

Kryptonite
MOS offers the best explanation of Kryptonite and the destruction of Krypton. I love that the Kryptonites were slowly dying from Kryptonite poisoning leading up to the planet's explosion. And while the S-shard in BR gives a quick link between Superman and Kryptonite, MOS establishes that Kryptonite was already lethal to Superman before the explosion of Krypton. Not to mention that the radiation broadcast across Metropolis seems to set too easy a precedent for immobilizing Superman. Winner: Man of Steel.

The S
In MOS, Clark and Pa Kent design the S as an emblem for the Superman costume. I much prefer the S as a Kryptonian symbol, whether as the family crest in the Richard Donner films or as the Kryptonian flag in BR. The Kryptonian S reinforces the dual identity of Superman as an immigrant, which I feel is part of his resonance as an American icon. Winner: Birthright.

Birth
MOS has Superman symbolically born on Earth, while BR has him born on Krypton. The birthing matrix stuff, while nice symbolically and re-used in later stories, is a bit convoluted. Simplify, and stick with the classic rocket over the birthing matrix. Winner: Birthright.

Krypton
Is Krypton sterile and emotionless, or just more advanced scientifically? MOS gives you the loveless, sexless Krypton. This creates a further contrast between Krypton and Earth, and makes Superman less like his ancestors. On the other hand, Lara was pretty damn obnoxious in MOS. And the destruction of Krypton sequence in BR was damn good. Winner: Birthright.

Continuity
As I understand it, MOS was written against a clean slate after the original Crisis, whereas BR simply appeared and is expected to be forcibly inserted into continuity as a result of Infinite Crisis. While the continuity issues involved don't particularly bother me since I'm not a regular reader, I feel that I should at least give MOS some points for its clean reboot, even though BR may fit in properly sometime in the near future. Winner: Man of Steel.


In ten categories, I have Birthright winning, 6-4. There's a lot to like about Man of Steel, but I think Birthright is the better story.

[The Question]

Story
MOS seems more serialized, with each issue standing alone. BR seems to flow as more of a continuous narrative rather than a series of year one excerpts. Winner: Birthright.

I do think that some of the stories in MoS were better. The Bizarro one was rather touching.

Superman
I like that MOS reminds us that Superman and Batman don't get along, but wouldn't Superman's distrust for "vigilantes" get in the way of his first meetings with other DCU heroes? Superman and Batman should be oil and water, but I can't quite see Superman making a special trip to Gotham to turn Bats in. On the other hand, I like the nods to Christopher Reeve's Superman, flying away and waving "bye now." MOS Superman is immediately confident; BR Superman takes a little while to find his footing. Despite a few gripes...Winner: Man of Steel.

I've gotta agree here.

Clark Kent
MOS offers a newly-assertive Clark Kent. This Clark is less of a dual identity than he is a change of clothing. There doesn't seem to be a major shift in behavior. It's just glasses, slick hair, and a little slouch. BR restores the mild-mannered reporter of earlier days, making 'Metropolis Clark' a necessary sacrifice to maintaining Superman. I'm not sure which offers the greater story-telling potential, but iconic elements win tiebreakers. Winner: Birthright.

Don't agree. Just because it's iconic does not make it better at all. Personally, I find the whole Clark as an act think to make Superman far too aloof. Like, nothing he says as Clark is true, so what's the point? Clark and Superman are the same damn person, and both are equally true. Your aditude can shift based on your situation. Same happens with Clark. At work, he shouldn't put on an act. He should simply blend into the croud. Not be noticed as much. And as Superman, well, when he shows up, it's hard not to notice him.

Lois Lane
MOS Lois is just too over the top. Driving her car off a pier to get Superman's attention? Stupidly not realizing that her dress was a gift, not a loaner, and then throwing a fit? Lois should be tough and resourceful, but this is too much. Winner: Birthright.

MoS could be a tad over the top at times, so yeah, I guess I agree here.

Lex Luthor
One of the key changes in MOS was Lex Luthor. Corporate Luthor is much more interesting than Mad Scientist Luthor. Although Mark Waid claimed to be keeping Corporate Luthor, BR Lex is a blend of the old and the new, with an unnecessary nod to Smallville thrown in for good measure. I think MOS Lex walked into his arrest when he should have been smart enough to avoid it, and I hate the red hair (which I assume goes somewhere down the line), but this is one change that was an undisputable improvement. Winner: Man of Steel.

I agree. I don't mind a blend of mad scientist and buisnessman, but only really to the extent of him being a buisnessman with scientific skills. And yes, Lex did eventually lose the hair. He got cancer from Kryptonite exposure and lost his hair because of the chemo therapy.

Kryptonite
MOS offers the best explanation of Kryptonite and the destruction of Krypton. I love that the Kryptonites were slowly dying from Kryptonite poisoning leading up to the planet's explosion. And while the S-shard in BR gives a quick link between Superman and Kryptonite, MOS establishes that Kryptonite was already lethal to Superman before the explosion of Krypton. Not to mention that the radiation broadcast across Metropolis seems to set too easy a precedent for immobilizing Superman. Winner: Man of Steel.

I agree. Besides, I liked how Post Crisis, Kryptonite is also leathal to humans, it's just that it;s slower since our cells don;t absorb the radiation as quickly.

The S
In MOS, Clark and Pa Kent design the S as an emblem for the Superman costume. I much prefer the S as a Kryptonian symbol, whether as the family crest in the Richard Donner films or as the Kryptonian flag in BR. The Kryptonian S reinforces the dual identity of Superman as an immigrant, which I feel is part of his resonance as an American icon. Winner: Birthright.

Here, I agree. I think having the \S/ be a Kryptonian symbol and just happen to look like an \S/ works better.

Birth
MOS has Superman symbolically born on Earth, while BR has him born on Krypton. The birthing matrix stuff, while nice symbolically and re-used in later stories, is a bit convoluted. Simplify, and stick with the classic rocket over the birthing matrix. Winner: Birthright.

I don't have a problem with the matrix, and I don;t see how it's that complicated.

Krypton
Is Krypton sterile and emotionless, or just more advanced scientifically? MOS gives you the loveless, sexless Krypton. This creates a further contrast between Krypton and Earth, and makes Superman less like his ancestors. On the other hand, Lara was pretty damn obnoxious in MOS. And the destruction of Krypton sequence in BR was damn good. Winner: Birthright.

Disagree. I really like the cold qand sterile Krypton. It makes the fact that no one believes Jor-El more plausible. They think that they're gods. That nothing can harm them. They're arrogance is their dowmfall. It's easyer to believe that arrogance in a cold, sterile world than in a happy utopia. Besides, the coldness is a nice contrast to Clark's inherent humanity.

Continuity
As I understand it, MOS was written against a clean slate after the original Crisis, whereas BR simply appeared and is expected to be forcibly inserted into continuity as a result of Infinite Crisis. While the continuity issues involved don't particularly bother me since I'm not a regular reader, I feel that I should at least give MOS some points for its clean reboot, even though BR may fit in properly sometime in the near future. Winner: Man of Steel.


With that, I doubt anyone could disagree with.

[Spike_x1]

I do agree with just about everything The Question said above me, except for Lex losing his hair because of chemo therapy. Silly Q, Luthor lost his hair before stealing the kryptonite from Metallo :rolleyes: :D. I assume he just went naturally bald because, even in MOS, you can see him slowly losing what he had when he was first introduced.

I didn't like Lex being fat in MOS though. Of course I didn't want him to be a skinny little man like he was in BR either.

And about Krypton; I think it's more dramatic to have Jor-el, on a planet devoid of real emotion, to confess that he loved Lara right before their deaths.

And I still don't understand what people think is so complex about the birthing matrix. He was still rocketed to earth as a baby. WTF is so complicated? :confused:

[The Question]

I do agree with just about everything The Question said above me, except for Lex losing his hair because of chemo therapy. Silly Q, Luthor lost his hair before stealing the kryptonite from Metallo :rolleyes: :D. I assume he just went naturally bald because, even in MOS, you can see him slowly losing what he had when he was first introduced.

Oh. I thought it was the chemo. My mistake. So, it's just that his genes hate him. Whatever.

I didn't like Lex being fat in MOS though. Of course I didn't want him to be a skinny little man like he was in BR either.

Yeah, he was a bit scrawny in BR. I prefer a rather athletic and health conscious Luthor. I mean, if he's such a damn genius, he'd probably have a good understanding of how to take care of his body.

[Kane]

Im hearing rumors that MOS is back to being the official postcrisis origin (after IC)? Is there any truth to these? Hopefully its true.

[Spike_x1]

I hope it's true but it's probably not, considering DC seems really gungho on bringing back as much stuff from Pre-Crisis DCU as possible lately (removing Lex from LexCorp and giving him back the disco collar/mad scientist theme, constantly upping Superman's power, bringing more kryptonite to Earth, etc).

[The Question]

Hell, I don't mind Lex being a fugitive on the run. At least the way they did it flowed rather organically, and really, he needs a change after all these years. But he should still be a behind the scenes mastermind in an itallian suit. Disco collar? Ugh.

[Kane]

Okay I talked to my friend off Toonzone and he said this:

"uhhh from Toonzone. The writer on something, god I forgot said that Birthright is being ret-conned because of the poor sales and poor reviews from critics and fans. IC is taking care of it with having Lex not be in Smallville and having Clark be geekish again"

If anyone whos on Toonzone can find this, I'd be awesome!

WOOT BIRTHRIGHT is going to be REMOVED from continuity Post-Infinite Crisis! :D

We're going back to MAN OF STEEL.

[The Question]

Thank god. Smallville Lex is just plain stupid.

[Kane]

LOL agreed. Jonathan Kent being an idiot like on the SV television show was annoying too.

[The Question]

I didn't notice much idiocy, but maybe I didn't read it carefully enough. Although, I acrtually kind of liked the soul vision thing. It doesn't really hurt anything, and is a rather nicve touch. But yeah, Superman could easily do without it.

[TheFalcon]

Okay I talked to my friend off Toonzone and he said this:

"uhhh from Toonzone. The writer on something, god I forgot said that Birthright is being ret-conned because of the poor sales and poor reviews from critics and fans. IC is taking care of it with having Lex not be in Smallville and having Clark be geekish again"

If anyone whos on Toonzone can find this, I'd be awesome!

WOOT BIRTHRIGHT is going to be REMOVED from continuity Post-Infinite Crisis! :D

We're going back to MAN OF STEEL.

I highly doubt this. Some friend of yours said that a writer on something said that Birthright would be ret-conned? That sounds like a very reliable source.

If Birthright, which came out around 2003 sold bad why would they wait until now to decide to remove it from continuity?

Either way they have said that the "continuity waves" will clear up all continuity errors/changes since COIE and I found this on Newsarama:

Asked how – or it - readers will be able to justify the events of Superman: Birthright with Superman: Man of Steel, Johns replied, “Crisis #6.”

So I guess we'll have to wait and see.

[Kevin Roegele]

The problem with Birthright is it makes Superman too intimidating, and too alien. You cannot relate to him at all.

Man of Steel goes back to the real concept of Superman; a normal man who transforms into a flying hero with incredible powers. Clark Kent needs to be as human as possible so the reader can relate to him. Hence him being 'born' on earth (Byrne actually wanted Lara to arrive in the capsule, and actually give birth to Kal-El on earth).

[The Question]

Exactly how I see it. Really, while I loved Alan Moore's "For the Man who has Everything", the characterization of Superman I prefer wouldn't have been on Krypton in his halucination, but a normal human novelist living in Smallville, married to Lana Lang and being the father of a few children. While some normal people may aspire to greatness, Superman already has greatness, and what he wants more than anything if normalcy. He'd love to be just like everyone else.

[Mentok]

I liked BIRTHRIGHT.

[Spike_x1]

I enjoyed Birthright too. It really is a great read, but only (IMHO) as an Elseworlds tale of "what would happen if modernday Superman had his pre-crisis origin?"

I mean, sure I loved Frank Miller's "Dark Knight Returns," but that's still definitely not the character that I want our current Batman to grow into. If DKR weren't an Elseworlds story and was forced into continuity as being the way Batman will act when he's older, the story itself would still be great, but its effects on mainstream Batman comics would undoubtably piss quite a few people off and would make the story leave a bitter taste in my mouth.

[Cartoonics]

The problem with Birthright is it makes Superman too intimidating, and too alien. You cannot relate to him at all.

Man of Steel goes back to the real concept of Superman; a normal man who transforms into a flying hero with incredible powers. Clark Kent needs to be as human as possible so the reader can relate to him. Hence him being 'born' on earth (Byrne actually wanted Lara to arrive in the capsule, and actually give birth to Kal-El on earth).

Actually, I didn't think Superman was at all intimidating or unrelatable in BR. In addition to being an origin story, it's a coming of age story and an immigrant narrative. Like many hyphenated-Americans, Clark struggles to resolve the different elements of his heritage into his identity as he comes of age. That, for many people, is easier to relate to than a guy who just happens to be able to fly.

True, the "mild-mannered Clark" persona is not something that readers readily identify with, but BR takes pains to point out that "mild-mannered Clark" is not the "real" Clark Kent.

[The Question]

And, to me at least, that is very cheap. If Clark is a lie, what's the point? It's like a game to Superman. He may like it, but it's all a sham. That bothers me. Clark should not be a diferent persona. Simply him trying to blend in. To not be noticed. People act differently in different situations. Doesn't mean either way of acting is a lie. That's how it should be for Clark. It's not a lie. At work, he's quiet and he keeps to himself. Nothing he does draws atention to him, besides his writing. And that's what he really wants. Way I see it, Clark doesn't like the spotlight. He doesn't wnat to be big and spectacular. He wants to blend into the croud. To feel normal. Clark is not a lie. Just a different part of the truth.

[Binker]

Birthright or Man of Steel? NEITHER.

I got and prefer Action Comics #800. Not only does that retell Superman's origin but it also goes in and explores real life people and how Superman affected them.

[SuperDaniel]

And, to me at least, that is very cheap. If Clark is a lie, what's the point? It's like a game to Superman. He may like it, but it's all a sham. That bothers me. Clark should not be a diferent persona. Simply him trying to blend in. To not be noticed. People act differently in different situations. Doesn't mean either way of acting is a lie. That's how it should be for Clark. It's not a lie. At work, he's quiet and he keeps to himself. Nothing he does draws atention to him, besides his writing. And that's what he really wants. Way I see it, Clark doesn't like the spotlight. He doesn't wnat to be big and spectacular. He wants to blend into the croud. To feel normal. Clark is not a lie. Just a different part of the truth.
:up: THats what i think too!

[Zor-El]

Maybe it'll go more in depth and confront the issue better in IC #6... but Birthright was just explained in IC Secret Files & Origins.

I also highly doubt that they would do away with BR and go back to MoS...but that remains to be seen.

[DarKush]

Read Man of Steel years ago, but recently flipped through Birthright at a local bookstore.

I have to stick with Man of Steel. It still felt more timely to me, and I like the reimagining of Lex Luthor as a ruthless businessman/mogul.

I didn't care for the way Birthright did the crazy scientist Lex and his "friendship" with Clark. I know it harkened back, to some extent, with the original Lex's origins-losing his hair in a botched experiment, but it just didn't work for me.

I did like Birthright's artwork, the worldwide trip young Clark went on, and the Smallville-esque look of the main characters. I wish they had also incorporated the Smallville friendship of Clark & Lex, and the meteor shower as the cause of Lex's baldness.

[nite-owl]

**** Birthright.

:up:

[Eric_Draven83]

I'd hate to interrupt as the majority of you have a vastly superior knowledge of the Man of Steel than I. But, coming from an "everyday joe", like myself who happens to pick up comics (and subsribe) every few months on & off...When has Clark NOT been a lie? I always saw Clark to Superman as Bruce was to Batman. They're not really a lie, they're more of a Necessity.

You see, the MOS stories were the 1st Superman stories I was introduced to when I was a child. In my honest opinion, the story hasn't changed much since then...BR included. Stories like BR and Smallville only STRENGTHEN the Icon that is Superman. They merely add to the myth. I'm one of those "hyphenated-Americans" as mentioned above (Mexican-American, born here in the U.S.), and one thing that has always been relatable to me when it comes to Supes is the fact that he too was/is similar to me.

Part of the reason that (I feel) Clark was made to be more Alien than human is because that's how it truely feels to be "different." I can tell you firsthand. Growing up in Chicago and being "privelaged" enough to attend a good Elementary school in a suburban part of the city was TOUGH. In no way was I treated equally, or looked at the same. With BR, you are TRUELY seeing things through the perspective of someone who's different, who doesn't feel he belongs. If you can't identify w/that, then you've probably never experienced this.

Whether it be the films, or the comics I haven't noticed a difference in storytelling aside from the obvious. But, everything that makes that character interesting is STILL present in BR. It's simply a retelling for a new generation of fans...and that's not a bad thing. Smallville really seems to focus on the whole notion of being different and wanting to explore your heritage, BR took it a step further, and even Superman Returns seems that it too will put emphasis on this. Obviously, this angle is important to many people, and is being expressed for a reason.

[Spike_x1]

I'd hate to interrupt as the majority of you have a vastly superior knowledge of the Man of Steel than I. But, coming from an "everyday joe", like myself who happens to pick up comics (and subsribe) every few months on & off...When has Clark NOT been a lie? I always saw Clark to Superman as Bruce was to Batman. They're not really a lie, they're more of a Necessity.Throughout the late 80's, the 90's and the early years after the millennium.

My question is, for those people who want Clark Kent to be merely the disguise that Superman uses, and not his true self, what is the point? He can hear the airwaves, so he does not need to hang out in a newsroom to hear about disasters in order to prevent them. This is an aspect that BR didn't really screw up on, they just went a little too far and expanded too much. Clark and Superman still has a passion for reporting and telling the truth, but when he was alone in the diner after his coworkers ditched him, you can't really feel bad for him since he did knowingly bring it unto himself by being in his self-imposed isolation from any potential friends.

Clark Kent is still Superman and vise-versa. They're just different aspects of who the real man is. Clark should not be a lie, just an mild mannered reporter. If he were a lie, not only does that make it seem like he's looking down on humanity with his nerdy "disguise," but it's also hypocritical in a way for a man who "fights for truth, justice, and the American way."

Superman can still be an outsider when viewed by Humanity as a whole - kind of an angelic savior figure, but also an alien who has his awkward moments when comparing himself and his strong values with other people and humans. But Clark Kent should be in his element with his job at the Daily Planet and with friends.

[The Question]

The way I've always seen it, Clark is him being what he truely wants to be. A normal guy with a nine to five job, with friends and hassles and everything else. That's what he wants. He's Superman because he feels he has to be. He feels a responsibility to use his abilities to help as many people as he can. But, deep down, on a somewhat subconscious level, he realizes that if he could give up his powers and being Superman to be a normal person, he would.

[nite-owl]

I always kinda liked Grant Morrison view on Superman

By Grant Morrison

NRAMA: Since we’re hitting the broad issues about Superman, let’s go for the fun one as well - the Jules Feiffer viewpoint, which was recently adopted in Kill Bill v2 – in your view, is Clark the mask Superman wears, or is Superman Clark’s mask, or are both masks for the alien, Kal-el?

GM: I don't know, we could talk about this all day. 'Superman' is an act. 'Clark Kent' in Metropolis is also an act. There are actually two Kents, at least - one is a disguise, a bumbling, awkward mask for Superman. The other is the confident, strong, good-hearted Clark Kent who was raised by his surrogate Ma and Pa in Kansas and knows how to drive a tractor. I think he's the most 'real' of all. 'Kal El' is where he goes when he wants to escape from his human nature and see things from outside.

[Jlandsw]

I love both!!

Maybe Birthright a little more because:
1)The artwork is awesome
2)It reminds me of Smallville

[DavidTyler]

Let's see....

Wrap a baby in blankets and shove him in the cockpit of a little rocket for a 5 month long (or close to it) journey in outer space with no way to sustain the poor kid and no companionship ... OR ... take him in his substitute womb (the birthing matrix) which is complete with everything the baby will need for that same journey. Hmmmmm........

If I had more time, I could get into some of the other things that I thought MOS has the better take on.

BTW, Clark taking a 'walking tour' of the countries of the Earth didn't start with Birthright. That actually was taken from the regular books. There are a couple of stories about Clark between his teen years and his emergence as Supes that involve him visiting other countries while trying to find himself.

I kind of have a soft spot for Waid's take on Clark, though. As long as it doesn't go nerdy, I'm fine with him being a little unsure of himself.

[The Question]

Oh, I've always liked Clark being unsure of himself. Because, really, he's basically a Kansas farmboy who just happened to get powers. I always thought that all of that confidence was just for show, and deep down he's constantly questioning himself.


Still, I think Man of Steel is just better. The characterizations, I think, are better, the stories seem more logical, and it doesn't have Lex being a childhood friend of Clark's, which is always a plus for me.

[rnewbz]

I think the real Clark Kent is the one from smallville, the farmboy (like on the tv show) Repoter Clark is just a guise, he's bumbling and sloppy, but it's just an act to further seperate him from superman. I think superman is also an act, he's a classic good guy hero who inspires people and gives corney speeches to the public.

[The Question]

I really don't think either has to be that much of an act, though. Clark, in the newsroom, simply has to be inconspicuous. He blends in. Not many people pay much atention to him. He sist at his desk, writes up his story, and turns it in to Perry at the end of the day. He may get recognition for his work, but he's not a face in the croud that you'd instantly notice or pay much atention to. Superman, on the other hand, simply has to be noticed. He's big and flashy and helpful. You can't help but look at him.

[Spike_x1]

One thing that I always wondered...

With the goofy and nerdy Clark, wouldn't he be doing the exact opposite of what the whole "mild mannered reporter" schtick was originally intended to do: NOT draw attention to himself.

[bulok]

Birthright? The vegetarian hippy Clark is now cannon?? Whaaaat? Say it ain't so. blech.

It seems like all Birthright was to make the current Supes more in line with Smallville. They even made Pa Kent look like Bo Duke er John Schneider and Lex like Rosenbaum.

Don't get me wrong, I really liked the Birthright storyline, but um, I gleamed lots of 'new age' stuff from Clark that doesn't seem to sit right with me.

[David Ford, RPD]

To me, Birthright Superman would've worked perfectly if

a) DCU had been in the middle of completly re-starting thier universe

or

b) If it was the first few issues of a new Ultimate Superman comic.

Sadly, this isn't how BR came about and, as others here have pointed out, it just doesn't fit in current continuity.

[Whack Arnolds]

Birthright, is the best Superman story EVER. In any MEDIUM.

[The Question]

Now, that is definately a streatch. I'd say For All Seasons is a good deal better.

[Whack Arnolds]

Now, that is definately a streatch. I'd say For All Seasons is a good deal better.It's my opinion. I don't get bogged down by "continuity" and all that... I definetely think it is the best.

[D'Artagnan]

I enjoyed Birthright too. It really is a great read, but only (IMHO) as an Elseworlds tale of "what would happen if modernday Superman had his pre-crisis origin?"

I mean, sure I loved Frank Miller's "Dark Knight Returns," but that's still definitely not the character that I want our current Batman to grow into. If DKR weren't an Elseworlds story and was forced into continuity as being the way Batman will act when he's older, the story itself would still be great, but its effects on mainstream Batman comics would undoubtably piss quite a few people off and would make the story leave a bitter taste in my mouth.

The Batman comics have been heading towards Dark Knight Returns territory for years now. Not that they'll actually get there, but that's clearly what the writers and artists have in mind.

[D'Artagnan]

And, to me at least, that is very cheap. If Clark is a lie, what's the point? It's like a game to Superman. He may like it, but it's all a sham. That bothers me. Clark should not be a diferent persona. Simply him trying to blend in. To not be noticed. People act differently in different situations. Doesn't mean either way of acting is a lie. That's how it should be for Clark. It's not a lie. At work, he's quiet and he keeps to himself. Nothing he does draws atention to him, besides his writing. And that's what he really wants. Way I see it, Clark doesn't like the spotlight. He doesn't wnat to be big and spectacular. He wants to blend into the croud. To feel normal. Clark is not a lie. Just a different part of the truth.

Of course Clark is a lie. He's Superman and he's pretending not to be. That's why the glasses and suit go over the costume - to hide the real man. Clark Kent is Superman pretending to be a normal man.

[D'Artagnan]

Man of Steel is better, because it's the definitive version of Superman of all-time. Birthright is an attempt to update Superman for the 2000's. Man of Steel is simply, "This is Superman, this is his story." Clean slate, anybody can read it.

[Super Kal]

i tried to sit down and just read Birthright, but I just couldn't get into it at all.

[The Question]

Of course Clark is a lie. He's Superman and he's pretending not to be. That's why the glasses and suit go over the costume - to hide the real man. Clark Kent is Superman pretending to be a normal man.


That makes no sense. He wasn't born Superman. He wasn't raised as Superman. He was born Kal El, but he was raised as Clark Kent. He made the conscious descision to become Superman. He could have easily become a criminal or simply not used his powers at all. He wasn't Superman from the start. He was Clark for over 20 years before he became Superman.

[Lobo]

I like Birthright a lot not my favorite Superman story but it's good IMO

and beautifully put Question

And, to me at least, that is very cheap. If Clark is a lie, what's the point? It's like a game to Superman. He may like it, but it's all a sham. That bothers me. Clark should not be a diferent persona. Simply him trying to blend in. To not be noticed. People act differently in different situations. Doesn't mean either way of acting is a lie. That's how it should be for Clark. It's not a lie. At work, he's quiet and he keeps to himself. Nothing he does draws atention to him, besides his writing. And that's what he really wants. Way I see it, Clark doesn't like the spotlight. He doesn't wnat to be big and spectacular. He wants to blend into the croud. To feel normal. Clark is not a lie. Just a different part of the truth.

[D'Artagnan]

That makes no sense. He wasn't born Superman. He wasn't raised as Superman. He was born Kal El, but he was raised as Clark Kent. He made the conscious descision to become Superman. He could have easily become a criminal or simply not used his powers at all. He wasn't Superman from the start. He was Clark for over 20 years before he became Superman.

(At this point, it would help if everyone was familiar with not only MoS and BR, but the original Siegel and Schuster comics as well.)

I completely understand what you are saying. John Byrne would agree with you. But S&S would not. Back in the 30's, Kal-El was always destined to be Superman (indeed, back then, the origin of a superhero was more a short explanation than anything else). Morality in those early tales was black and white; he was a man with a great gift, he helped the world. He was a hero, end of story. He was born to be Superman. He was more or less raised as Superman, depending on which comics you read. In some he was Superbaby and Superboy, in some he only became Superman. It just depends.


As for the 'S' logo, I like all the different explanations. Byrne's idea was that Supes just designed it himself, for two reasons; 1. Byrne wanted to get away from Supes' Krytpon origins so having a huge Krypton symbol on his chest was out, and 2. It's (slightly) easier to believe that Clark would use an 'S' after Lois had already named him Superman, than have a Kryptonian symbol just happen to look like an 'S', after which he's called Superman (although the latter makes more sense in that Lois doesn't just come up with the name Superman off the top of her head.....)

Birthright says that the 'S' is a symbol representing the whole of Krypton, not just the house of El.

[The Question]

(At this point, it would help if everyone was familiar with not only MoS and BR, but the original Siegel and Schuster comics as well.)

I completely understand what you are saying. John Byrne would agree with you. But S&S would not. Back in the 30's, Kal-El was always destined to be Superman (indeed, back then, the origin of a superhero was more a short explanation than anything else). Morality in those early tales was black and white; he was a man with a great gift, he helped the world. He was a hero, end of story. He was born to be Superman. He was more or less raised as Superman, depending on which comics you read. In some he was Superbaby and Superboy, in some he only became Superman. It just depends.

But, he wasn't born to be Superman. He was simply born. It was his descision to become Superman. He could, just as easily, become a criminal, or not used his powers at all. It was entirely his choice. He was Clark Kent before he ever donned the suit.


As for the 'S' logo, I like all the different explanations. Byrne's idea was that Supes just designed it himself, for two reasons; 1. Byrne wanted to get away from Supes' Krytpon origins so having a huge Krypton symbol on his chest was out, and 2. It's (slightly) easier to believe that Clark would use an 'S' after Lois had already named him Superman, than have a Kryptonian symbol just happen to look like an 'S', after which he's called Superman (although the latter makes more sense in that Lois doesn't just come up with the name Superman off the top of her head.....)

Birthright says that the 'S' is a symbol representing the whole of Krypton, not just the house of El.

I actually prefer it being a Kryptonian symbol myself. It seems somewhat egotistical for Clark to call himself Superman. I'd think he simply chose the symbol becaused it looked alien and would draw atention away from his face, and Lois noted that it looked like an S and called him Superman.

[Kevin Roegele]

But, he wasn't born to be Superman. He was simply born. It was his descision to become Superman. He could, just as easily, become a criminal, or not used his powers at all. It was entirely his choice.

Exactly! There's my point. In some versions of the story, he WAS born to be Superman. The Kryptonian deity Rao planned everything, from the destruction of Krypton to Superman becoming the most powerful man in the universe.


He was Clark Kent before he ever donned the suit.

Don't confuse the costume with the character. He was only called Clark Kent when he got to earth. His birth name, the name his parents gave him, is Kal-El.


I actually prefer it being a Kryptonian symbol myself. It seems somewhat egotistical for Clark to call himself Superman. I'd think he simply chose the symbol becaused it looked alien and would draw atention away from his face, and Lois noted that it looked like an S and called him Superman.

I don't think Superman has ever chosen his name in any of his incarnations - I could be wrong.

Intresting to note that in Man of Steel, Clark has to save a shuttle (with Lois inside) before he even comes up with the Superman costume. Lois sees him without his glasses, which is why he needs them as Clark. Presumably otherwise he would wear a mask as Superman.

[The Question]

Exactly! There's my point. In some versions of the story, he WAS born to be Superman. The Kryptonian deity Rao planned everything, from the destruction of Krypton to Superman becoming the most powerful man in the universe.

Are you serious? That seems very odd. Why would Rao kill over seven billion people just so that one would go to Earth, get really strong, and save Earth a bunch of times? I mean, there are plenty of characters in DC who dwarf Superman in terms of power. Dr. Fate alone could probably defeat most of the Justice League single handedly.

Don't confuse the costume with the character. He was only called Clark Kent when he got to earth. His birth name, the name his parents gave him, is Kal-El.

True. But he was raised Clark Kent. He was refered to and thought of himself as Clark Kent before he ever figured out that his birth name was Kal-El. And, he had been Clark for over two decades before he decided to be Superman.

[D'Artagnan]

Are you serious? That seems very odd. Why would Rao kill over seven billion people just so that one would go to Earth, get really strong, and save Earth a bunch of times? I mean, there are plenty of characters in DC who dwarf Superman in terms of power. Dr. Fate alone could probably defeat most of the Justice League single handedly.

Absolutely I'm serious! And in another version, in the 70's, The Guardians of the Universe genetically manipulated the House of El on Krypton for 10,000 years to produce Kal-El. They actually intended Superman to lead the Green Lanterns and be the ultimate protector of the entire universe! There was even a Sword of Superman that floated through space for centuries, destined to end up in his hands.

Check out Superman Annual # 10, which you can read online here http://superman.ws/tales2/sword/

So yes, not only was he born to be Superman, his entire family and perhaps even Krypton as well were born for him to be Superman.

[The Question]

That is mind numbingly stupid. Why couldn't Rao just have a Kryptonian go to Earth? Why kill seven billion people?

[Kevin Roegele]

That is mind numbingly stupid. Why couldn't Rao just have a Kryptonian go to Earth? Why kill seven billion people?

It's complicated. Read the comics.

[The Question]

It sounds complicated. Unnecessairily so. What comics did this happen in?

[Morgoth]

I ahve got to read Birthright, just to see for my self what it's all about. I also need to reread Man of Steel. I love that book.:supes:

[Kevin Roegele]

I ahve got to read Birthright, just to see for my self what it's all about. I also need to reread Man of Steel. I love that book.:supes:

Both books are fantastic, really. Man of Steel is serialised, Birthright reads like a movie.

[The Question]

Now, Maybe I should have really sat down and read the whole thing, but Birthright just seemed kind of boring to me. Though, I'm very much against anything related to "Clark and lex being best buddies as kids" being in continuity, so maybe I'm a little biased.

[darwinwins]

MoS invalidated 48 years worth of Superman stories. Why not rip on it for disregarding more than twice the history Birthright replaces?

Besides, very little of the Byrne-Jurgens version has stuck to the overall mythos. Tycoon Lex and the Kents being alive are all that's stuck. Everything else has been bypassed in favor of a more pre-Crisis conception of Superman. And a lot of the what was done in the Byrne-Jurgens era (as well as the Berganza era) was really awful, or at the very least misguided. If the goofier aspects of the pre-Crisis era can and have been bypassed, why should 1986-1999 be inviolate?too bad your post goes unmentioned by the peanut gallery. i agree. it's stupid to argue this based on erasing so much history when MoS invalidated the history before it. and in any case, it's just a comic book.

[The Question]

The thing is, almost all of the histoy that MoS invalidated was the campy 60s stuff. You know, the 100 different issues of Superman trying to kill Jimmy or Lois or turning into a genie or stuff like that. Only a few actually good stories were invalidated, to the best of my recolection. Most of the good stuff remained.

[darwinwins]

how does that one saying go ... you can't have your cake and eat it, too?

[The Question]

How does that apply? They primairily got rid of the very lame or campy stories. Only a few of the actually good ones, and only because they made no sense without the campy ones.

[Whack Arnolds]

Birthright is superior to MOS in virtually EVERY way/

[Kandorcitizen]

:up: Birthright

[Agentdemon]

But, he wasn't born to be Superman. He was simply born. It was his descision to become Superman. He could, just as easily, become a criminal, or not used his powers at all. It was entirely his choice. He was Clark Kent before he ever donned the suit.

There's no way he could "choose" to be a criminal, his upbringing doesn't exhibit the neseccary factors.

I agree with Bryan singer though, farm clark is the truest part of him while metropolis clark and superman are more a facade.

[The Question]

There's no way he could "choose" to be a criminal, his upbringing doesn't exhibit the neseccary factors.


There are no "necesairy factors." While many criminals are pruducts of their upbringing, some people simply become criminals because they feel like it.

[Spike_x1]

What "necessary factors" are needed? Personally, I've grown up in a goody-two-shoes lifestyle, going to church as a youngster, both parents are active in my life, no alcoholism or drugs involved anywhere, and no trauma anywhere to be seen, but I was taken home in a police car twice last year for fighting in public. Care to explain that to me?

Some people just choose to do bad s**t because they want to. No psycho-babble necessary.

[Spike_x1]

too bad your post goes unmentioned by the peanut gallery. i agree. it's stupid to argue this based on erasing so much history when MoS invalidated the history before it. and in any case, it's just a comic book.Well, MOS didn't invalidate all of that.

There was this one little story that probably just flew right over your head which was responsible for erasing all of the continuity that came before it. What was it called? Oh yes, now I remember. The F-ing Crisis on Infinite Earths!

Man of Steel simply gave us a new origin to go with the blank slate that COIE gave to us. If you're going to put the blame for wiping out 48 years of continuity on one particular story, put the blame on COIE. :rolleyes:

[DavidTyler]

..........
I don't think Superman has ever chosen his name in any of his incarnations - I could be wrong.

Intresting to note that in Man of Steel, Clark has to save a shuttle (with Lois inside) before he even comes up with the Superman costume. Lois sees him without his glasses, which is why he needs them as Clark. Presumably otherwise he would wear a mask as Superman.


Byrne spent a lot of time figuring out many minor details and finding a way to explain them in rational ways. The glasses being just one more detail.


Still, I find it interesting as to how many posters here are willing to throw that all away and criticize Byrne just because splashy, sparkly 'Birthright' is the latest flavour. I'm betting that a few years down the road, after the glitz of Birthrights 'newness' has worn off, fans will have a lessor opinion of it.

Byrne's not a great writer but he is a phenominal with concepts.

[Spike_x1]

Byrne spent a lot of time figuring out many minor details and finding a way to explain them in rational ways. The glasses being just one more detail.


Still, I find it interesting as to how many posters here are willing to throw that all away and criticize Byrne just because splashy, sparkly 'Birthright' is the latest flavour. I'm betting that a few years down the road, after the glitz of Birthrights 'newness' has worn off, fans will have a lessor opinion of it.

Byrne's not a great writer but he is a phenominal with concepts.Couldn't agree more :up: :up:.

[Whack Arnolds]

MOS is corny just like Superman: The Movie.