I fear for the current status of Superman.

[The Question]

After Infinite Crisis, and even a little before, I've been having some uneasy feelings about the direction Superman is going in. There are many factors that have brought about these feelings, and they all seem to culminate into a direction that I am not fond of.

1) The power levels. For the last few years, his power levels have risen considerably. He has recently (and by recently I mean within the past could of years) destroyed a small moon and even pulled the moon out of it's orbit. Now, these aren't entirely big deals. I am simply irked by non cosmic characters preforming such feats. Makes him finding challenge with Earthly criminals seem rather far fetched. However, the worst aspect of his power levels, for me at least, was in the recent "Up Up and Awya" arc. There, his sensory abilities showed to be sow potent that he could see an hear practically everything that was going on on the planet at any given time. That bothers me. Alot. I mean, how can he ever not see anything coming if he is basically all knowing now? And, more importantly, are they simply going to ignore that that level of power would corrupt a man very quickly? I mean, how could he not be tempted to use that ability to listen in on every conversation on the planet, even if he justifies it as making sure the world stays safe? He has also, seemingly, regained his super inteligence that has been missing since pre-crisis. I, personally, am not fond of Superman also being a superhuman scientist and thinker along with his other abilities. I mean, I don't think he should be able to do everything.

2) The villains. This is a far larger problem than the power levles. Superman's villains have seriously gotten the shaft recently.

In "Up Up and Away," Luthor was a shadow of his former self. A generic, two dimensional, maniacle villain. Gone was all of the depth that had been apart of his character up until recently. The very fact that he would destroy Metropolis, the city he loves more than life itslef, is terribly out of character.

Rody Jones, The Parasite, was killed a few years ago, and was replaced by a far less powerful and a far worse character in the form of the new, female Parasite.

Metallo lost his personality of the inteligent, sophisticated street level criminal, and was basically turned into a pale imitation of The Parasite. He was then stripped of his powers

Then Atomic Skull was turned from a crazy, almost tragic man who simply wanted to be a hero into a rent-a-thug who explodes when you shoot him.

Darkseid, who was once a threat to the entire DCU, can now get pimp smacked around by Superman and have his Omega Effect bounce of Supes' chest.

Terra-Man's personality was turned back into that of his pre-crisis thug who was obsessed with the old west, and then brutally killed simply to make a point.

Worst of all, in Up Up and Away, Superman easily defeated five villains who had all given him an equal fight seperately (Live Wire, Silver Banshee, Hellgrammite, Bloodsport, Riot) with minimal effort.


Is anyone else worried? Is anyone not worried? Does anyone find me really annoying and whiney?

[Spike_x1]

I worry, but that should come as no surprise to anyone who reads my posts on this subject.

Pre-crisis Superman elements have their place in the All-Star book. If I wanted to read about them, that is the comic I'd read.

[SpideyInATree]

I don't know about you but Up Up and Away got me back into Superman. If they keep writing Supes like this I'll have no problem with it. Though all the Superman Returns references are kind of annoying. It'd be REALLY nice if one god damn comic company could separate the movie plots from the COMIC plots.

[DavidTyler]

Several times over the years, writers and editors have teamed up to try to bring Supes power down to a level that would make him less a god and more a hero we can identify with.

Unfortunately, other writers come along and power him right back up again. I think DC needs stronger leadership.A hero who can't juggle planets and can be broken. I mean, what's the sense of giving him opponents if you KNOW he's going to win easily? Where's the excitement in that? Sure, I expect him to win eventually but how about making him struggle to get there. Otherwise we would have a two page story every month.

[retconned]

I also fear for the comics. With Superman Returns doing the backtracking thing, I feel the comics will as well as a reflection of the movie franchise. This was my greatest fear about Singer's vision.

[batman44]

I'm with you guys on this one. Why must DC go back to making Superman, Supergod.

[retconned]

I'm with you guys on this one. Why must DC go back to making Superman, Supergod.

Agreed. Thats actually what makes Superman boring in alot of eyes.

[Gogo Bananas]

When DC is going to move a character into a new phase, like Supes getting more powerful, alien, etc, they really gotta start planning an escape route so they can reset things organically without a crisis.

[Motown Marvel]

yeah, i loved the up up and away arc, but i really dont want his power levels being off the charts again. they need to be reasonable.

[The Sage]

Several times over the years, writers and editors have teamed up to try to bring Supes power down to a level that would make him less a god and more a hero we can identify with.

Unfortunately, other writers come along and power him right back up again. I think DC needs stronger leadership.A hero who can't juggle planets and can be broken. I mean, what's the sense of giving him opponents if you KNOW he's going to win easily? Where's the excitement in that? Sure, I expect him to win eventually but how about making him struggle to get there. Otherwise we would have a two page story every month.

While they should lower his power levels, the villains' problem could be solved by giving Superman opponents who are either as powerful as he is or very intelligent.

[Gogo Bananas]

Grant Morrison really is to blame for bringing back Supes ricockulous power levels.
Normally I'm with Morrison, but sometimes he's just fried.

[Jimmy-San]

Eh, right before Infinite Crisis, I would've agreed. I like the Busiek/Johns Superman, though.

[Sloth7d]

Meh- atleast he isn't a total tool who exposed himself to the world like another superhero I lost faith in.

[Spike_x1]

While they should lower his power levels, the villains' problem could be solved by giving Superman opponents who are either as powerful as he is or very intelligent.The villains aren't really a problem as long as Superman's powers aren't too "up there."

I mean, even low level grunts like Barrage or Bloodsport could give Superman a pretty decent fight a few years ago if they really played up their strengths, before Superman became noticeably re-powered up. But if Superman is on the level of power where he can pull the moon, it's pretty hard for a reader to believe that someone whose gimmick is just a set of fancy blasters and lasers can give Superman even a moments pause.

[dpm07]

I have no interest in seeing Superman at Pre-Crisis levels of power. It's a sad testament that Singer really didn't seem to do a lot of research on Superman other than the Donner film.

The best interpretation of Superman was done in STAS/JL/JLU in the DCAU by the Timm/Dini team. Those guys gave the DC heroes, and most notably the respect they deserved, and made them interesting and worth watching. They made Superman powerful, but not too powerful. They made him be able to be hurt by other things than kryptonite, and they also when necessary allow him to take his game to the next level when opponents came on that were waay powerful. This is the best interpretation of Superman I've ever seen.

This is not what I seen in Singer's film, and I agree with The Question. When Superman can push a moon, or hear all things in the world, that really makes things boring real quick. Sure, they can make the villains more powerful, but then people will complain that the villains are too powerful. People lose their connection to a hero and especially one like Superman when they see how god-like he is. Granted, I love the metaphorical allegory of Superman presented in a messianic sense, but I really don't need to see the Pre-Crisis power level. That allegory can be presented without making Superman that powerful.

Case in point, in SR, he lifts a continent in space. That was lame. Granted, they made a point to show that he was able to do it because he soaked up the sun's energy. However, if this is Superman at that power level all the time, it's going to get pretty old.

I like Marvel and DC, but one thing Marvel has always had the edge on, is having relatively established limits for their heroes. This is one thing that DC really hasn't done, and wasn't really presented well until the Animated DC Universe was done on-screen with Timm/Dini.

Also, I like the fact that Superman is not always portrayed as super intelligent. When they started playing the super intelligent card, it will likely turn a lot of people off as well. Again, it's dipping back into that Pre-Crisis world, which belongs in the past. That's one of the (many) things that annoyed me about that travesty of a show called The Superfriends, and one reason it really doesn't hold a candle to the JL/JLU over time. JL/JLU was a presentation of the way heroes IMO should be done. With characterizations, arcs, clearly defined abilities, and respect for the characters.

Again, this is all my opinion, but it's an opinion based on almost 35 years of association to superheroes.

[Jimmy-San]

Whether Superman struggles to lift a building or can toss around planets doesn't make much difference to me. As long as the villains are portrayed well and he has peers, power levels don't mean much to good writing.

[Gogo Bananas]

Flash was better after COIE, when they brought him down to the speed of sound. His old rogues gallery was a credible threat again. As soon as they brought him back to the speed of light, he lost all that.
Superman's the same. There's really no need for him to be a planet juggler and back when Byrne had him straining to lift a ocean liner the stories were more dramatic. And a guy with that many powers just doesn't need to be the greatest in all of them. Kinda like Batman is second best in the world at everything.

[Fan of Tomorrow]

"Up, Up, and Away!" was great. But you're right. His power level is getting dangerously close to pre-crisis levels, if not there already. The moment he started "thinking quickly" I started to get a little bit worried.

Now so far, it hasn't affected me, mainly because the writing has been so good. They can still tone it down or level it out to a decent level in the coming months as well. If it continues as it has though, I think a lot of readers are going to be turned off. A point will come where he will just seem completely unrelatable. That's a charge Superman's been unfairly charged with for a long time now, but the stronger he becomes, the more weight I think it carries.

[TheOriginalman]

I guess I look at it like this. While one wouldn't want Superman to be too powerful like Pre-Crisis, I certainly wouldn't want him like in TAS. In TAS, I've seen him having trouble with Bane. Even pumped up with venom, Bane should be nowhere near a match for Superman. In other words, he shouldn't be Pre-Crisis (too powerful) or TAS (too weak).

[dpm07]

I guess I look at it like this. While one wouldn't want Superman to be too powerful like Pre-Crisis, I certainly wouldn't want him like in TAS. In TAS, I've seen him having trouble with Bane. Even pumped up with venom, Bane should be nowhere near a match for Superman. In other words, he shouldn't be Pre-Crisis (too powerful) or TAS (too weak).

He's not weak in TAS. Have you seen Legacy? That episode with Bane where Bane hit him, was intentional. He was dressed as Batman and supposed to be conveying this. Did you see when he did cut loose on Bane? He man raped him. Bane couldn't even believe it, and neither could the Mad Hatter.

STAS and later JL/JLU captured Superman's strength perfectly. Not too powerful, but able to cut loose when he needed to. This was never more evident than in the episode titled, Destroyer!. He cut loose major in that one. Another barometer of Superman's power was Supergirl. In the JLU episode Far From Home, she took on the entire Legion of Superheroes, and an experienced Green Lantern, and almost beat them all! Factor in that she's only half as strong as Superman as stated by Livewire in Girls Night Out, and one gets the idea of how powerful and well portrayed Superman's power levels were done. Look at the episode of FTMWHE. Wonder Woman who is supposed to be a distant second to Superman illustrated just how less she was when she took on Mongo. Superman again almost killed Mongo in that episode.

The Timm/Dini team and the DCAU really captured Superman's power level the best.

[Kool-Aid]

I like Superman having incredible power, just as long as they don't have him doing to far feats I'm game.:up: The whole time during Infinte Crisis I was praying he would just slap the taste outta Superboy Prime. Superman is supposed to be SUPERman. I feel Morrison and Johns have portryed him best. He's supposed to always win. I don't understand the need to see him struggle there's plenty other characters like that to chose from. :)





Flash was better after COIE, when they brought him down to the speed of sound. His old rogues gallery was a credible threat again. As soon as they brought him back to the speed of light, he lost all that.


Geoff Johns' run on Flash is arguably the best run on Flash ever and he was at that power set.:o

[Spike_x1]

He's not weak in TAS. Have you seen Legacy? That episode with Bane where Bane hit him, was intentional. He was dressed as Batman and supposed to be conveying this. Did you see when he did cut loose on Bane? He man raped him. Bane couldn't even believe it, and neither could the Mad Hatter.

STAS and later JL/JLU captured Superman's strength perfectly. Not too powerful, but able to cut loose when he needed to. This was never more evident than in the episode titled, Destroyer!. He cut loose major in that one. Another barometer of Superman's power was Supergirl. In the JLU episode Far From Home, she took on the entire Legion of Superheroes, and an experienced Green Lantern, and almost beat them all! Factor in that she's only half as strong as Superman as stated by Livewire in Girls Night Out, and one gets the idea of how powerful and well portrayed Superman's power levels were done. Look at the episode of FTMWHE. Wonder Woman who is supposed to be a distant second to Superman illustrated just how less she was when she took on Mongo. Superman again almost killed Mongo in that episode.

The Timm/Dini team and the DCAU really captured Superman's power level the best.*cough*Mongul*cough* ;)

[dpm07]

*cough*Mongul*cough* ;)

Man, it's always the little stuff that gets me. :)

Thanks for the correction. :up:

[TheOriginalman]

He's not weak in TAS. Have you seen Legacy? That episode with Bane where Bane hit him, was intentional. He was dressed as Batman and supposed to be conveying this. Did you see when he did cut loose on Bane? He man raped him. Bane couldn't even believe it, and neither could the Mad Hatter.

STAS and later JL/JLU captured Superman's strength perfectly. Not too powerful, but able to cut loose when he needed to. This was never more evident than in the episode titled, Destroyer!. He cut loose major in that one. Another barometer of Superman's power was Supergirl. In the JLU episode Far From Home, she took on the entire Legion of Superheroes, and an experienced Green Lantern, and almost beat them all! Factor in that she's only half as strong as Superman as stated by Livewire in Girls Night Out, and one gets the idea of how powerful and well portrayed Superman's power levels were done. Look at the episode of FTMWHE. Wonder Woman who is supposed to be a distant second to Superman illustrated just how less she was when she took on Mongo. Superman again almost killed Mongo in that episode.

The Timm/Dini team and the DCAU really captured Superman's power level the best.Ok. I guess you're right about the Bane episode. I haven't really watched many episodes of JL/JLU to really judge. I miss them everytime they come on. My point is you expect a certain level of power from Superman. That post was basically me playing "devil's advocate". I like him powerful. He's one of my 4 favorite all time heroes. The other 3 are Batman, the Hulk, and Thor.

[Jakomus]

Does anyone find me really annoying and whiney?I do. You have to understand that Superman's conflict doesn't come from fighting the bad guys. Superman is supposed to be powerful. That's the idea. The conflict comes from Superman and his ideals, and how the villain's ideals go against his. Not from whether he can beat up the bad guys or not.

Example:

Red Son

The story features a powerful Superman that stopped foes in seconds. But it dealt with his moral views, and that's what made the story interesting.

[dpm07]

Is anyone else worried? Is anyone not worried? Does anyone find me really annoying and whiney?

You're not wrong at all, nor are you annoying or whiney. You make great sense, and pushing back Superman to the Silver Age status of Pre-Crisis Power Levels is pretty lame, IMO.

A Superman who can defeat everything around him without even trying is going to get really old. It will probably alienate many of the readers.

I want to see him win of course, but not without struggle. Like I've said before, STAS/JL/JLU did him perfectly. Not too powerful, not too weak, but able to rise to the occasion when he needed to. I don't want to see Superman turning back time or destroying moons or pulling planets. That's lame, IMO.

The whole thing with appealing to his heart is fine, but don't make him so powerful that people become bored reading him or wanting to watch him. I really get tired of the cop out of using kryptonite to beat him. Again, the DCAU did him right by not making him too powerful and not making him too weak. They made him just right, and have really provided the best modern day adaptation to date.

One of the reasons the film is bombing is because Singer made him boring, and provided a pretty boring story that fans really aren't interested in seeing. That's why they're taking prints down of Superman on screen and giving screens to POTC 2.

[ChrisBaleBatman]

Hmmm....making him so powerful is a mistake. I mean, if he's that powerful......where's the sense of danger?

Kryptonite still hurts him.....right?

Btw, can't this still be an effect of his pwers returning almost? Sort of like a mega power surge for the time being until he settles in or something?

[xxAPCxx]

I have no problem with him being really strong. Problem I have is when they ignore basic laws of physics. He wouldnt be able to pull the moon. He would pull a chunk off the moon just as he cant push it because he would go through it. They screwed up with that in the movie a couple times with the yacht and new krypton.

[The Leaguer]

I wasn't worried until I read Up, Up, and Away. Then I worried. That story was not good at all.

[SpideyInATree]

I wasn't worried until I read Up, Up, and Away. Then I worried. That story was not good at all.

Damn, man. Do you like anything at all? :confused:

[Kool-Aid]

I wasn't worried until I read Up, Up, and Away. Then I worried. That story was not good at all.


What didn't you like about it? Was it the power upgrades or did you just think it was boring?

[The Leaguer]

Damn, man. Do you like anything at all? :confused:
If that's a serious question, you know nothing about me.

What didn't you like about it? Was it the power upgrades or did you just think it was boring?
I love power upgrades. What I didn't like was Lex's sudden desire to destroy the city he loves so much, the new costume, the whole crystal thing and the whole time I was anticipating the dramatic return of Superman, and I was let down.

[SpideyInATree]

If that's a serious question, you know nothing about me.


I love power upgrades. What I didn't like was Lex's sudden desire to destroy the city he loves so much, the new costume, the whole crystal thing and the whole time I was anticipating the dramatic return of Superman, and I was let down.

No, it wasn't serious. :spidey:

[The Leaguer]

Your face isn't serious!

[SpideyInATree]

I don't have a face. I'm like The Question.

[The Leaguer]

That's what I mean. The ol' faceless mask prank.

[Diamondhead]

After Infinite Crisis, and even a little before, I've been having some uneasy feelings about the direction Superman is going in. There are many factors that have brought about these feelings, and they all seem to culminate into a direction that I am not fond of.

1) The power levels. For the last few years, his power levels have risen considerably. He has recently (and by recently I mean within the past could of years) destroyed a small moon and even pulled the moon out of it's orbit. Now, these aren't entirely big deals. I am simply irked by non cosmic characters preforming such feats. Makes him finding challenge with Earthly criminals seem rather far fetched. However, the worst aspect of his power levels, for me at least, was in the recent "Up Up and Awya" arc. There, his sensory abilities showed to be sow potent that he could see an hear practically everything that was going on on the planet at any given time. That bothers me. Alot. I mean, how can he ever not see anything coming if he is basically all knowing now? And, more importantly, are they simply going to ignore that that level of power would corrupt a man very quickly? I mean, how could he not be tempted to use that ability to listen in on every conversation on the planet, even if he justifies it as making sure the world stays safe? He has also, seemingly, regained his super inteligence that has been missing since pre-crisis. I, personally, am not fond of Superman also being a superhuman scientist and thinker along with his other abilities. I mean, I don't think he should be able to do everything.

2) The villains. This is a far larger problem than the power levles. Superman's villains have seriously gotten the shaft recently.

In "Up Up and Away," Luthor was a shadow of his former self. A generic, two dimensional, maniacle villain. Gone was all of the depth that had been apart of his character up until recently. The very fact that he would destroy Metropolis, the city he loves more than life itslef, is terribly out of character.

Rody Jones, The Parasite, was killed a few years ago, and was replaced by a far less powerful and a far worse character in the form of the new, female Parasite.

Metallo lost his personality of the inteligent, sophisticated street level criminal, and was basically turned into a pale imitation of The Parasite. He was then stripped of his powers

Then Atomic Skull was turned from a crazy, almost tragic man who simply wanted to be a hero into a rent-a-thug who explodes when you shoot him.

Darkseid, who was once a threat to the entire DCU, can now get pimp smacked around by Superman and have his Omega Effect bounce of Supes' chest.

Terra-Man's personality was turned back into that of his pre-crisis thug who was obsessed with the old west, and then brutally killed simply to make a point.

Worst of all, in Up Up and Away, Superman easily defeated five villains who had all given him an equal fight seperately (Live Wire, Silver Banshee, Hellgrammite, Bloodsport, Riot) with minimal effort.


Is anyone else worried? Is anyone not worried? Does anyone find me really annoying and whiney?Speak for yourself
I want superman back to full power level
Competition is really tough out there when it comes to character such as dragon balls z

One thing I really like about superman was his intellect and all the cool stuff he had in his fortress of solitude including kandor
I want the clumsy Clark Kent back , because I always thought if superman fell like he's “living in a world of cardboard” , therefore it’s only normal he acts so clumsy when he's being Clark Kent
Because he's trying so hard not to break stuff around him

They can always come up with a way for superman to control his solar energy absorption through his costume therefore keeping him at a lower power level for fear of losing touch with his humanity
But when really needed he can have the ability to power back to his full power and beyond.

Just like dragon ball z character and their Super Sayan stuff
I’ve been thinking about this for so long ever since I heard writers claiming not being able to make interesting story because superman was too powerful
And it was way before I ever seen any dragon balls characters.

[Vanamonde]

I like him being extremely strong. His rightful place is at the very top tier of non-god characters. In the right circumstance he should be pretty much unbeatable. He is Superman, the first and the best, and that's just how it should be.

As others have said his struggles come from trying to live a normal life on Earth among humans. Balance that with an almost manic sense of responsibility to protect people. When is it right to unleash some of that held-back strength for the greater good? Superman genuinely doesn't want to alienate himself too much from humanity and succumb to the tempations of limitless power, yet the potential is there.

The one thing I would agree with is he shouldn't have super intellect. Photographic memory is fine. But super high IQ, scientific genius, and Batman-like intuitiveness? Not his style and not needed. Just like he doesn't need to know any advanced fighting techniques, its simply pointless.

[The Leaguer]

I say make Superman powerful as Hell. That's the fun Superman, not this "omfg teh speid of sound is tooo fasst1" bulls***.

[Kurosawa]

After Infinite Crisis, and even a little before, I've been having some uneasy feelings about the direction Superman is going in. There are many factors that have brought about these feelings, and they all seem to culminate into a direction that I am not fond of.

1) The power levels. For the last few years, his power levels have risen considerably. He has recently (and by recently I mean within the past could of years) destroyed a small moon and even pulled the moon out of it's orbit. Now, these aren't entirely big deals. I am simply irked by non cosmic characters preforming such feats. Makes him finding challenge with Earthly criminals seem rather far fetched. However, the worst aspect of his power levels, for me at least, was in the recent "Up Up and Awya" arc. There, his sensory abilities showed to be sow potent that he could see an hear practically everything that was going on on the planet at any given time. That bothers me. Alot. I mean, how can he ever not see anything coming if he is basically all knowing now? And, more importantly, are they simply going to ignore that that level of power would corrupt a man very quickly? I mean, how could he not be tempted to use that ability to listen in on every conversation on the planet, even if he justifies it as making sure the world stays safe? He has also, seemingly, regained his super inteligence that has been missing since pre-crisis. I, personally, am not fond of Superman also being a superhuman scientist and thinker along with his other abilities. I mean, I don't think he should be able to do everything.

2) The villains. This is a far larger problem than the power levles. Superman's villains have seriously gotten the shaft recently.

In "Up Up and Away," Luthor was a shadow of his former self. A generic, two dimensional, maniacle villain. Gone was all of the depth that had been apart of his character up until recently. The very fact that he would destroy Metropolis, the city he loves more than life itslef, is terribly out of character.

Rody Jones, The Parasite, was killed a few years ago, and was replaced by a far less powerful and a far worse character in the form of the new, female Parasite.

Metallo lost his personality of the inteligent, sophisticated street level criminal, and was basically turned into a pale imitation of The Parasite. He was then stripped of his powers

Then Atomic Skull was turned from a crazy, almost tragic man who simply wanted to be a hero into a rent-a-thug who explodes when you shoot him.

Darkseid, who was once a threat to the entire DCU, can now get pimp smacked around by Superman and have his Omega Effect bounce of Supes' chest.

Terra-Man's personality was turned back into that of his pre-crisis thug who was obsessed with the old west, and then brutally killed simply to make a point.

Worst of all, in Up Up and Away, Superman easily defeated five villains who had all given him an equal fight seperately (Live Wire, Silver Banshee, Hellgrammite, Bloodsport, Riot) with minimal effort.


Is anyone else worried? Is anyone not worried? Does anyone find me really annoying and whiney?

For 20 years now, ever since DKR and MOS, DC has been pushing the idea that Superman is a country bumpkin boyscout dork and that Batman is the real badass of the DCU who could kick Supermans ass and outsmart him anytime he wished.

To fix Superman, DC needs to go back to Jerry Siegel's core concepts of the character and they need to base the characters visual style more on what Shuster did, with a touch of Curt Swan thrown in.

Superman needs to be the reality, Clark the disguise. It's what Siegel intended.

Krypton needs to be based on the visions of Alex Raymond and Fritz Lang, not the bucket of throw-up that Byrne hacked out. "Flash Gordon Krypton" is what Joe Shuster INTENDED for Krypton to be.

The Clark/Superman/Lois triangle was what Siegel intended for the strip to have, but it's also important to note that DC stole creative control of Superman from S & S over the "K-Metal" story, where Lois was to find out Superman's real identity. So the marriage itself is not a bad thing, but the way Lois has walked all over the stupid country bumpkin boyscout that DC has stupidly turned Superman into is a disgrace.

Power levels are nowhere near as important as Superman having a brain, acting like a leader, and being a bad-ass. That's where DC has missed the mark-for the most part-over the past 20 years. It's not a coincidence that the best Post-Crisis Superman story, the Death of Superman, was a story where Superman fought with a lot of guts and determination.

I personally could easily take a Superman who could just jump an eighth of a mile if he was terrorizing a criminal while doing it, smirking all the time.

[Spike_x1]

Speak for yourself
I want superman back to full power level
Competition is really tough out there when it comes to character such as dragon balls z

One thing I really like about superman was his intellect and all the cool stuff he had in his fortress of solitude including kandor
I want the clumsy Clark Kent back , because I always thought if superman fell like he's “living in a world of cardboard” , therefore it’s only normal he acts so clumsy when he's being Clark Kent
Because he's trying so hard not to break stuff around him

They can always come up with a way for superman to control his solar energy absorption through his costume therefore keeping him at a lower power level for fear of losing touch with his humanity
But when really needed he can have the ability to power back to his full power and beyond.

Just like dragon ball z character and their Super Sayan stuff
I’ve been thinking about this for so long ever since I heard writers claiming not being able to make interesting story because superman was too powerful
And it was way before I ever seen any dragon balls characters.Who else did you think he was speaking for? :confused:

[ssj wolverine]

I am personally glad they are returning him to his near pre-crisis level. He is Superman for god sake. The writers depowered him way to much. On the cartoon side, watching Supes on Justice League they made him way too weak but they did a better job with his power levels on Justice League Unlimited. Superman should always be near the top or at least in the top 5 most powerful characters in DC. You can't have the name Superman and have 50 characters be more powerful than you. My only solution as was mentioned here already is raise the power levels of his enemies where it won't be such a cake walk for Superman.

[Superman Prime]

Superman was never meant to be 'super-intelligent', at least not by my personal standards. I think some of the people at DC want to highten Superman up to where he surpasses Batman in everything. But that isn't what it should be like. where Batman lacks in super powers, he makes up for with quick and sharp intellect: that is how he is even worthy to stand in superman's presence!

Superman's IQ should never be anything above slightly average. say probably 110-115 maybe.

As far as being omniscient, I'm undecided where they should draw the line. Hard to say for sure.

[Kurosawa]

nvm

[Kurosawa]

Superman was never meant to be 'super-intelligent', at least not by my personal standards. I think some of the people at DC want to highten Superman up to where he surpasses Batman in everything. But that isn't what it should be like. where Batman lacks in super powers, he makes up for with quick and sharp intellect: that is how he is even worthy to stand in superman's presence!

Superman's IQ should never be anything above slightly average. say probably 110-115 maybe.

As far as being omniscient, I'm undecided where they should draw the line. Hard to say for sure.

Wrong.

http://superman.ws/tales2/thesuperman/cover-sketch.jpg

Superman having high intellect and being a scientist was always part of the characters concept:

http://superman.ws/tales2/masterofevil/page-9.gif

[The Leaguer]

I'm glad he has super-intellect. It makes him even more interesting.

[Kool-Aid]

I love power upgrades. What I didn't like was Lex's sudden desire to destroy the city he loves so much, the whole time I was anticipating the dramatic return of Superman, and I was let down.



I agree :(

[Michael Corleone]

You know what really got me with up up and away was that as I finished it I kept thinking...wow that could have been a good film. I liked Returns but Johns just is on target with Superman in this story. It could have easily been the movie.

[The Batman]

Yeah, I've been kinda sick ofthe superwuss we've gotten for the past twenty years. the guy who can get whopped by second rate villains and whatnot. He does need to be powerful again, as he's superman.

Theres no reason why supes cant be powerful while having his foes present a threat. Batman could beat the crap out of most of his entire rogues gallery in a physical fight, but its their other skills that challenge him. Supes needs that.

[Superman Prime]

Yet, there are some books in which Supes appears to have only average intelligence.

I'll come out and admit that Golden Age Superman was meant to be smart. But as time went on, less and lesse emphasis was layed on his 'intellect.' Fans just wanted to really read about his powers. He was always clever, yes, but has not always exhibited unnatural genius.

[Spike_x1]

Superman was never meant to be 'super-intelligent', at least not by my personal standards. I think some of the people at DC want to highten Superman up to where he surpasses Batman in everything. But that isn't what it should be like. where Batman lacks in super powers, he makes up for with quick and sharp intellect: that is how he is even worthy to stand in superman's presence!

Superman's IQ should never be anything above slightly average. say probably 110-115 maybe.

As far as being omniscient, I'm undecided where they should draw the line. Hard to say for sure.Superman's always been a very, very smart guy. Even in the early post-crisis years. Maybe not "Super" intelligent, but definitely of a genius-level intellect. :confused:

[KaptainKrypton]

I have no problem with Superman being powered up. The only reason that wouldn't work in a storyline is if the writers drop the ball. Although I like Byrne's take, it could also be said that his depowering of Superman is just a cop-out to make it easier to write a slugfest. Look at Alan Moore's run on Supreme. It used all of the Silver Age-type elements, and it IMO was loads more creative and engrossing than anything Byrne or Jurgens spat forth (even though Supreme was basically written as a Silver Age Superman).

I don't think we'll be seeing Superman do things like he did in the old days where he used telescopic vision to read lips in another galaxy. A happy medium is okay for me, and I think that is what we'll get. I personally couldn't stand watching a guy with a lousy gun or explosive get the best of Superman. It's insulting. I damn sure don't want to watch Mediocreman or Prettygoodman. Super is on the title for a reason. For that kind of standard physical conflict drama, I read/watch Spidey or Batman. DC either needs to up the ante of his rogues' power levels, or make the villains more intelligent in their attempts to take out Superman and have them hatch better schemes to take him down.

It's like the JLU episode "Destroyer." Superman unloads on Darkseid enough to shatter buildings and nearly knock him into another zipcode, but Darkseid smiles and uses the Agony Matrix to bring him swiftly to his knees. He nearly kills him with intelligence, not simply knocking him around. That's what is still unsettling with me about the Doomsday storyline. It was scripted as well as it could be for how dumb the premise was, but Luthor and a few other top-tiers should've ganged up on him and cornered him for once (like I believe the Question suggested once). Creativity in the plotting is what will make or break Superman, not whether his power levels are increased (to an extent).

[Kurosawa]

Yet, there are some books in which Supes appears to have only average intelligence.

I'll come out and admit that Golden Age Superman was meant to be smart. But as time went on, less and lesse emphasis was layed on his 'intellect.' Fans just wanted to really read about his powers. He was always clever, yes, but has not always exhibited unnatural genius.

Irrelevant. The original creator's intentions always take precedence over minor deviations.

Superman is supposed to have high intelligence. His father was the greatest scientist of a highly advanced civilization.

It's what Jerry Siegel intended.

[The Question]

For 20 years now, ever since DKR and MOS, DC has been pushing the idea that Superman is a country bumpkin boyscout dork and that Batman is the real badass of the DCU who could kick Supermans ass and outsmart him anytime he wished.

Actually, I'm not too fond of that portrayal of Batman, either.

To fix Superman, DC needs to go back to Jerry Siegel's core concepts of the character and they need to base the characters visual style more on what Shuster did, with a touch of Curt Swan thrown in.

Character concepts, maybe. But I don't think the artists should be so limited in terms of visual style.

Superman needs to be the reality, Clark the disguise. It's what Siegel intended.

For me, at least, that just seems far too simple. People are complicated. People are multifaceted. A fellow can seem like a corny nerd most of the time, and then turn out to be the single most badass mofo on the planet, and yet neither side would really be false. Clark is Superman, and Superman is Clark. They're the same person, just in different situations.

Krypton needs to be based on the visions of Alex Raymond and Fritz Lang, not the bucket of throw-up that Byrne hacked out. "Flash Gordon Krypton" is what Joe Shuster INTENDED for Krypton to be.

I know we've gone over it alot, but I still don't see what's inherently wrong with Byrne's Krypton. Was it happy sunshine land? No. Was it nazi Germany? No. It was just a highly advanced, utopian society. I really don't think it's worse or better than anyone else's version of Krypton. They all seem pretty good to me.

The Clark/Superman/Lois triangle was what Siegel intended for the strip to have, but it's also important to note that DC stole creative control of Superman from S & S over the "K-Metal" story, where Lois was to find out Superman's real identity. So the marriage itself is not a bad thing, but the way Lois has walked all over the stupid country bumpkin boyscout that DC has stupidly turned Superman into is a disgrace.

What are you talking about. How has she "walked all over him"?

His father was the greatest scientist of a highly advanced civilization.

So? Just because his biological father was a scientific genius doesn't mean he has to be. Personally, I think Supes should be very inteligent, but not in any scientific way.

[charl_huntress]

the Timm/Dini team and the DCAU really captured Superman's power level the best.

Ohhh...I don't know abou this one? In STAS he was weak. It's not that he's got his ass kicked all the time, but he's pushed back and strains A LOT. That was my problem with his power levels in STAS. Bullets are knocking him around and things that shouldn't even phase him have him straining...Timm went overboard there.

AND...LET'S not mention JL season one. I...OMG....I...OMG....no words!

As for Supes direction in the comics, I'm not worried right now. They seem to be going in a good direction, and though I know some don't agree I think the re-incorporation of SOME SA aspects isn't so bad. It's hard to say right now, but in comparison to what had been churned out, Busiek is staying consistent. This may change when the writers are shuffled though.

[Nerial]

I posted this on another thread about Superman's intellect, and I think it holds valid here:

I'm going to argue that being a genius doesn't mean you can't be naive and also fall for traps. I mean...

...who doesn't know a nerd--really smart, well educated--that has fallen for a bully prank, or has gotten their head dunked in the toilet (or something to that effect)? From what I've seen, intellectuals are many times the butt of jokes and the most gullible people on the planet.

Superman is not clever like Lex, nor does he have the creativity. He's not a detective like Batman; the boy lacks street-smarts. But, he can comprehend book-smarts--theories, languages, mechanics, math--these types of things that require very little bias to understand.

Think about it. Superman is all about truth and justice--he's extremely idealistic. Wouldn't it make sense that his intellectual strength lies in fields that are prone to find absolute truths like math and science?

[SatEL]

:up: I like Superman having incredible power, just as long as they don't have him doing to far feats I'm game.:up: The whole time during Infinte Crisis I was praying he would just slap the taste outta Superboy Prime. Superman is supposed to be SUPERman. I feel Morrison and Johns have portryed him best. He's supposed to always win. I don't understand the need to see him struggle there's plenty other characters like that to chose from. :)








Geoff Johns' run on Flash is arguably the best run on Flash ever and he was at that power set.:o

:up: You are correct Superman shouldnt be weak but powerful thats one of the things that drew me to him the fact that his so powerful yet so gentle i say make supes the badest of them all/

[The Question]

I posted this on another thread about Superman's intellect, and I think it holds valid here:

I'm going to argue that being a genius doesn't mean you can't be naive and also fall for traps. I mean...

...who doesn't know a nerd--really smart, well educated--that has fallen for a bully prank, or has gotten their head dunked in the toilet (or something to that effect)? From what I've seen, intellectuals are many times the butt of jokes and the most gullible people on the planet.

Superman is not clever like Lex, nor does he have the creativity. He's not a detective like Batman; the boy lacks street-smarts. But, he can comprehend book-smarts--theories, languages, mechanics, math--these types of things that require very little bias to understand.

Think about it. Superman is all about truth and justice--he's extremely idealistic. Wouldn't it make sense that his intellectual strength lies in fields that are prone to find absolute truths like math and science?

I just don't like him being good at everything. He doesn't need to be a scientific genius. He should be very inteligent, yes, but not in a scientific way. Just in a general kind of way. Alot of people know the type of guy who isn't good at math or science, but is just very inteligent. Retains information well, can wrap his head around problems easily, reads alot. That kind of inteligence.

[Xybalba69]

I also fear for the comics. With Superman Returns doing the backtracking thing, I feel the comics will as well as a reflection of the movie franchise. This was my greatest fear about Singer's vision.

im with you on this one...i already saw the belt \S/ showing in some rough sketches some where...and i'd hate to see Singer's version get into the comics as well...

when that day comes...i'll stop buying Superman comics...

[The Leaguer]

I want Superman to get more powerful. I'm tired of him being pussified. He's a badass motherf***er.

[The Question]

He doesn't need to be the single most powerful to be a badass mofo. He should be very powerful, but not the most powerful. Hell, he's even more badass if he's willing to take on threats much larger than him like Darkseid and Neron.

[The Leaguer]

I never said I wanted him more powerful than Darkseid or Neron. You're looking at this the wrong way.

Superman should not be depowered so that Darkseid will become a threat again.

Darkseid should be powered up so that he will become a threat again.

The more powerful Superman is, the more interesting he is.

[The Question]

Why? I've never seen power levels as what makes a character interesting. Sure, Darkseid should be a bigger threat, but Superman's strengths as a character lie not hin his, well, strength, but his, you know, character. Yes, Superman should be powerful, but he should still be equals with the likes of Wonder Woman and Martian Manhunter.

[The Leaguer]

The argument that higher powerlevel equates to weaker character is bulls***. One of my favorite aspects of Superman is the whole god-amongst-men angle. Superman has mind-blowing power setting him apart from the group of people he wants so desperately to be a part of. That's interesting as Hell to me.

[Harlekin]

Irrelevant. The original creator's intentions always take precedence over minor deviations.

Superman is supposed to have high intelligence. His father was the greatest scientist of a highly advanced civilization.

It's what Jerry Siegel intended.
So you want Batman to go back to handling tommy guns, and Supes limited to strength of a locomotive, speed of a bullet and leaping tall buildings in a bound? I know you're a Pre-Crisis fanboy Kurosawa, but even you've got to admit this is a little ridiculious.

[The Question]

The argument that higher powerlevel equates to weaker character is bulls***.

And I didn't make that arguement. All I said was that higher power level doesn't equate to better character.

One of my favorite aspects of Superman is the whole god-amongst-men angle. Superman has mind-blowing power setting him apart from the group of people he wants so desperately to be a part of. That's interesting as Hell to me.

I suppose. But why does he have to be more powerful than he is now. He's already stronger than 99.99% percent of the Earth's population could ever hope to be. I don't mind Superman being really strong. I just don't want him to be planet moving, faster than light traveling Superman of yesteryear.

[The Leaguer]

In my opinion, it does equate to a better character, at least in Superman's case. Majestic is a fantastic example. Throughout both his mini-series and his on-going, he displayed incredible feats of strenght, speed and intelligence, and he was one of the most interesting characters being published. The entire time I wished that was the level at which Superman was depicted. Making Superman more powerful opens up far more fun stories.

[The Question]

Yes and no. You can do some interesting cosmic stuff, but if he's at planet moving levels, then his rogue's gallary, with the exception of maybe Brainiac, is pretty much useless. I think power levels like that would work much better story wise if he wasn'tr on Earth fighting regular crimes, but instead was battling cosmic threats like gods and demons and stuff like that.

[The Leaguer]

Saying his rogues gallary is useless is idiotic. Look at Luthor.

[The Question]

I'm not saying they are useless. I'm saying that they would be useless is Superman were put at the planet pushing, faste rthan light flying power levels. There would be no threat from Luthor that Superman couldn't deal with effortlessly. Same with the rest of his rogues, with the exceltion of maybe Bizarro since he's Superman's clone.

[The Batman]

Batman could whoop most of his rogues gallery in physical combat....and yet, they still give him a hard time

[The Question]

The difference between Batman in The Joker is almost nil compared to the difference between Pre-Crisis level Superman and Luthor. There is literally nothing Luthor could do to threaten Superman or other people to get to Superman if Supes is at those levels. Let's say Superman now moves faster than the speed of light. Radio signals and computer data move slower than the speed of light. So, it's not like Luthor could build a machine to kill someone that reacts to fast for Superman to stop it in time. Luthor builds a giant robot? Superman hurles it into space. Death ray? Superman just stands in it's way. With a Superman that powerful, Luthor is almost useless as a villain. At least The Joker can still take a gun and try to shoot Batman.

[The Leaguer]

I don't understand why people say something can't be done in comics, when the opposite is so obviously true.

[The Question]

You're right. It can be done. But it wouldn't make much sense. If Superman can push planets around, why couldn't he throw a robot into space?

[The Leaguer]

It would make just as much sense as any comic book.

[The Question]

It would make just as much sense as any comic book.

You make it sound like every comic throws logic completely to the wind. Yes, they are fictional, and do take liberties with reality, but most still follow logic based on how the universe is set up. If Superman is strong enough to move planets, why waste time fighting a giant robot and just throw it into space?

[The Leaguer]

You make it sound like a giant robot is as sophisticated as comics get. There are far more ways to hurt Superman than something as simple as a giant robot.

[The Question]

Okay. Name some. Besides Kryptonite. :o

[The Leaguer]

Magic.

[The Question]

What kind of magic? Is it a sorcerer? Because, if it's a sorcerer, then he might have problems because he doesn't kill people. But he could still just throw a demon into space.

[Manhunter]

Okay. Name some. Besides Kryptonite. :o

How about Subjeckt 17? Or the Auctioneer? I think it's safe to say the villains in Superman's life are going to be scaled up to pose a physical threat to the man of steel.

Since UU&A, Superman's senses and memory have been expanding, but I haven't seen any planet juggling yet. Sure in ASS (lol) his strength is tripled, but it's killing him too, hence the plot.

I'm not sure what your reading, but between All-Star, Action, Superman, and World's Finest, I haven't been this pleased with the current status in Superman in years.

[The Question]

How about Subjeckt 17? Or the Auctioneer? I think it's safe to say the villains in Superman's life are going to be scaled up to pose a physical threat to the man of steel.

Who the hell are Subjekt 17 and the Auctioneet? As for posing a physical threat, that brings up another problem: If Superman is brought up to planet moving levels, and his villains are suped up acordingly, then all Metallo or The Parasite would have to do is punch the ground and they'd kill most of the people on the east cost.

Since UU&A, Superman's senses and memory have been expanding, but I haven't seen any planet juggling yet. Sure in ASS (lol) his strength is tripled, but it's killing him too, hence the plot.

We were talking hypothetically about the planet moving.

I'm not sure what your reading, but between All-Star, Action, Superman, and World's Finest, I haven't been this pleased with the current status in Superman in years.

I stopped reading after Up Up and Away. It started out okay, but went to crap quickly. Superman beat several villains that would normally give him trouble by themselves with ease, and Lex was an absolute shell of his former self.

[Manhunter]

Who the hell are Subjekt 17 and the Auctioneer?

Oh I'm sorry I assumed you were actually reading Superman comics.

If Superman is brought up to planet moving levels
If it happens perhaps then your concerns will have some sort of basis in reality.

I stopped reading after Up Up and Away. It started out okay, but went to crap quickly. Superman beat several villains that would normally give him trouble by themselves with ease, and Lex was an absolute shell of his former self.

If that's all you got out of UU&A, then I can see why you're afraid.

[The Sage]

Personally I love the current status of Superman. Up Up and Away in my mind, made Lex more credible and showed he could be deadly outside the business office. With Geoff Johns teaming with Donner, and Kubert doing art too in October? It's going to be a great year with those guys. I've been reading comics consistently for three years now, and for Superman, this is the golden year I've been waiting for. Same with Batman.

[The Question]

If it happens perhaps then your concerns will have some sort of basis in reality.



We were talking hypothetically when planet moving was brought up. However, Superman has been powered up alot in recent years, and it seems like he might be headed in that direction.

Up Up and Away in my mind, made Lex more credible and showed he could be deadly outside the business office.


:eek:





Up Up and Away mangled Lex as a character. In the past few years, Lex has actually had some depth to him as a character. In Up Up and Away, he was just Snidely Whiplash in a bald cap.

[The Leaguer]

Up, Up and Away was a f***ing terrible characterization of Lex. We all know he could be deadly outside the office, that's what half of his character is built on. What Up, Up and Away was show how s***ty he can be written.

[gildea]

then all Metallo or The Parasite would have to do is punch the ground and they'd kill most of the people on the east cost.


Metallo no, he has kryptonite, doesn't need to be as strong.

Parasite yes, but why would they want to destroy the world?



As Said I'm not in the planet moving camp and I'd like the flash to be faster but in general I think all star superman is about the right level for supes powers.

I don't want a character at WW of MM status, other wise I'd read their books, I want to read about the best hero of them all.

[The Question]

Parasite yes, but why would they want to destroy the world?

That's not the point. If he's that strong, he'd kill billions before he was stopped.

As Said I'm not in the planet moving camp and I'd like the flash to be faster but in general I think all star superman is about the right level for supes powers.

All Star Superman is at planet moving levels.

I don't want a character at WW of MM status, other wise I'd read their books, I want to read about the best hero of them all.

1) So you're saying that you prefer Wonder Woman and J'onn to be much weaker than Superman, correct?

2) A hero can be the best without being the most powerful.

[Spike_x1]

Metallo no, he has kryptonite, doesn't need to be as strong.I will never understand how anyone can ever be satisfied with an inanimate green rock as a threat. When someone uses kryptonite on Superman, as a reader, why the hell would you want to see a boring scene where all the villain does is stand there while Superman struggles in pain? :confused:

If Metallo is going to have a body powered by kryptonite (people always forget that he didn't even have green k for most of his career), than I'd prefer it if he actually uses his fists as much as he uses the radiation. It's much more dynamic and exicting that way.

[The Question]

I will never understand how anyone can ever be satisfied with an inanimate green rock as a threat. When someone uses kryptonite on Superman, as a reader, why the hell would you want to see a boring scene where all the villain does is stand there while Superman struggles in pain? :confused:

Really, if I had my way, i'd do one of three things:


1) Get rid of Kryptonite all together.

2) Extend Superman's weakness to high levels of radiation in general.

3) Make Kryptonite highly lethal to everyone, not just Kryptonians.

[The Leaguer]

Increasing Superman's weakness would blow just as badly as de-powering him.

[The Question]

It's not like he's bound to come in contact with radiation all the time. I'd really prefer just getting rid of Kryptonite all together, but if they're not willing to do that, then I'd include all massive amounts of radiation as a cause for alarm. But really, getting rid of the rock would be my preference.

[The Leaguer]

Lame. As-is is best.

[The Question]

Not for me. I hate Kryptonite. Horible plot device. I'd rather have Superman get into fights with villains powerful enough to hurt him than have him get queasy around a green rock.

[The Leaguer]

It goes far beyond being just a "green rock."

It's his home. Peaces of his legacy are lethal to him. That's one Hell of a metaphor: not only are you, at your core being, alone on this planet, not only is everything you should have been born into long destroyed, not only is the very stuff that made up your family spread out across the universe, but what is left f***ing kills you. People and comic characters loves to say, "his heart, not Kryptonite, is the best way to hurt Superman," but Kryptonite does just that. It strikes at his heart.

[gildea]

That's not the point. If he's that strong, he'd kill billions before he was stopped.

why?
there is nothing I know of in the parasites character that suggests they would want to kill billions



All Star Superman is at planet moving levels.

this is physics I suppose. How strong would one need to be to move a planet?? (as so far in all star supes he hasn't demonstrated this).



1) So you're saying that you prefer Wonder Woman and J'onn to be much weaker than Superman, correct?

Yes.

2) A hero can be the best without being the most powerful.

To be honest thats not really true.
The best hero should be able to deal with the greatest range of threats (seems a fair enough basis for judging).
Power levels are generally what determine the level of threat you face.

[gildea]

I will never understand how anyone can ever be satisfied with an inanimate green rock as a threat. When someone uses kryptonite on Superman, as a reader, why the hell would you want to see a boring scene where all the villain does is stand there while Superman struggles in pain? :confused:

Good writing wouldn't make it interesting.

That simple.

If Metallo is going to have a body powered by kryptonite (people always forget that he didn't even have green k for most of his career), than I'd prefer it if he actually uses his fists as much as he uses the radiation. It's much more dynamic and exicting that way.

Oh I agree with that.

[The Question]

It goes far beyond being just a "green rock."

It's his home. Peaces of his legacy are lethal to him. That's one Hell of a metaphor: not only are you, at your core being, alone on this planet, not only is everything you should have been born into long destroyed, not only is the very stuff that made up your family spread out across the universe, but what is left f***ing kills you. People and comic characters loves to say, "his heart, not Kryptonite, is the best way to hurt Superman," but Kryptonite does just that. It strikes at his heart.

It's still a lame plot device. I'd rather have Superman be in a fight with someone whi can match him than get weak around Kryptonite.

why?
there is nothing I know of in the parasites character that suggests they would want to kill billions

Except the fact that he randomly kills people all of the time.

this is physics I suppose. How strong would one need to be to move a planet?? (as so far in all star supes he hasn't demonstrated this).

He hasn't actually moved a planet, but he's at planet moving levels. All Star is meant to be Pre Crisis Superman at his peak.

Yes.

Why?

To be honest thats not really true.
The best hero should be able to deal with the greatest range of threats (seems a fair enough basis for judging).
Power levels are generally what determine the level of threat you face.

It's not a fair basis for judging. How good a hero you are is dependant solely on your non physical atributes. Your mind and your heart. Someone could have Superman's powers and be the worst hero in the world because of his aditude and how he uses them. Wheras Superman could lose his powers and still be one of the best because of what he stands for and believes in.

[gildea]

It's still a lame plot device. I'd rather have Superman be in a fight with someone whi can match him than get weak around Kryptonite.

We can have BOTH you know.



Except the fact that he randomly kills people all of the time.

No parasite isn't a joker/carnage type psycho, if he kills there is a reason. He isn't simply a murder he has ambitions beyond that.



He hasn't actually moved a planet, but he's at planet moving levels. All Star is meant to be Pre Crisis Superman at his peak.

Not really for example he can't go through the sun (which even post cripes supes can do, oddly enough i never liked the whole going throu the sun thing). Thats why I asked the physics question we KNOW his strength level but does anyone know if thats enough to move a planet and what size of planet? Planet moving is a very misleading thing, the differences in moving saturn and pluto are enormous.



Why?

Already answered but i'll repeat. Simply if I want to read about someone at mm or ww power levels (or the myriad of generic heroes around those levels) I'll read THEIR comics. I want to read about the TOP level of superhero, not the level loads of other people are at. There are, as you point out, many other comics that cater to that power level.



It's not a fair basis for judging. How good a hero you are is dependant solely on your non physical atributes.

Sorry I completely disagree. For example Cap America is a great hero but if brainiac comes to town I want superman to take him on not cap. But this continues below.

Your mind and your heart. Someone could have Superman's powers and be the worst hero in the world because of his aditude and how he uses them.

He's not a hero then. You're also implying that I'm saying personality doesn't matter it obviously does I just didn't touch on it because power levels where the thrust of discussion. Of course I include strength of personality as a 'power' of its own anyway so I was impicitly assuming he would be the standard setter for that also.
I concede I should have been clearer.

Wheras Superman could lose his powers and still be one of the best because of what he stands for and believes in.

Though I answer this above I just want to point out "one of the best" yes maybe but I want him to be THE best.

[The Question]

We can have BOTH you know.

I simply prefer the former. And I really don;t see what;s so great about the latter.

No parasite isn't a joker/carnage type psycho, if he kills there is a reason. He isn't simply a murder he has ambitions beyond that.

He's not a serial killer, but he's got a damned impressive body count. He's essentially a blue collar thug thrill seeker with super powers. He's the type who gets into a barroom brawl for fun. It's just with him, he ends up killing everyone in the bar. He's often been known to kill people for fun. Hell, one time a group of criminals were breaking him out of prison, and he showed his graditude by draining them all to death.

Not really for example he can't go through the sun (which even post cripes supes can do, oddly enough i never liked the whole going throu the sun thing). Thats why I asked the physics question we KNOW his strength level but does anyone know if thats enough to move a planet and what size of planet? Planet moving is a very misleading thing, the differences in moving saturn and pluto are enormous.

He's still at planet moving strength levels in All Star. The fact that he can't go through the sun doesn;t effect his strength levels.

Already answered but i'll repeat. Simply if I want to read about someone at mm or ww power levels (or the myriad of generic heroes around those levels) I'll read THEIR comics. I want to read about the TOP level of superhero, not the level loads of other people are at. There are, as you point out, many other comics that cater to that power level.

I don;t see why Superman can't be equal with Wonder Woman and J;onn and still be the greatest.

Sorry I completely disagree. For example Cap America is a great hero but if brainiac comes to town I want superman to take him on not cap. But this continues below.

As would I. But that doesn't make him the greatest. I'd rather have The Hulk take on The Juggernaut, but I think Captain America is still the greatest hero in Marvel.

He's not a hero then. You're also implying that I'm saying personality doesn't matter it obviously does I just didn't touch on it because power levels where the thrust of discussion. Of course I include strength of personality as a 'power' of its own anyway so I was impicitly assuming he would be the standard setter for that also.
I concede I should have been clearer.

But his morals are all that counts in the "greatest hero" arguement. Someone can be the most powerful hero in the world and still be a compkete dick.

Though I answer this above I just want to point out "one of the best" yes maybe but I want him to be THE best.

How much power he has doesn't relate to how good a hero he is. Way I see it, Superman can be the best and still be equal with Wonder Woman and Martian Manhunter. And really, I prefer it that way. I want Clark to have peers, not subordinates.

[Spike_x1]

No parasite isn't a joker/carnage type psycho, if he kills there is a reason. He isn't simply a murder he has ambitions beyond that.Not necessarily. In his first appearance after turning purple and killing a subway train full of people, Superman asked him why he did it. The Parasite's response was simply "because they were there?"

Unless there's a bigger scheme going on, Rudy will kill indiscriminately and without any form of remorse, either because someone is pissing him off or he's hungry. More than likely, it's both, though.

[The Question]

Or, as I said, it could be for thrills. He is the type who'd get into a fight for fun, so giving him powers that can, theoretically, enable him to take on the entire JLA at once makes such atempts at thrill seeking infinitely more lethal to the general public.

[gildea]

Hell, one time a group of criminals were breaking him out of prison, and he showed his graditude by draining them all to death.

Thats him feeding though, its justified.


He's still at planet moving strength levels in All Star. The fact that he can't go through the sun doesn;t effect his strength levels.

I didn't say it affected his strength levels I was using it as an example to show he is not quite the same as pre crisis superman.

He hasn't moved a planet yet.
For me to accept he is at planet moving levels in all star you need to prove it by doing 2 things
a) specifying the size of planet we're talking about
and b) specifying how much it weighs and how much force is needed to alter its orbit

Until then you're just making a rather large assumption.



I don;t see why Superman can't be equal with Wonder Woman and J;onn and still be the greatest.

As I've already said, because then he is operating on a lower level.



As would I. But that doesn't make him the greatest. I'd rather have The Hulk take on The Juggernaut, but I think Captain America is still the greatest hero in Marvel.

But you would rather have someone else do the heroic thing?

I find it odd that your definition of heroism actually doesn't give any weight to the heroic acts a hero can perform.



But his morals are all that counts in the "greatest hero" arguement. Someone can be the most powerful hero in the world and still be a compkete dick.

And someone can have the best morals in the world but be completely in capable of being a superhero.
Its a combination of both truth told but all the morals in the world are simply not enough to save the earth sometimes, I don't care how good your morality is.
I don't think many superhero comics are based around philosophy and morality professors.

How much power he has doesn't relate to how good a hero he is.

As i've said repeatedly of course it does simply because it governs how many threats you can respond to and how you respond to them.

Way I see it, Superman can be the best and still be equal with Wonder Woman and Martian Manhunter. And really, I prefer it that way. I want Clark to have peers, not subordinates.

Ok in which way is superman morally superior to martian manhunter?

[gildea]

Unless there's a bigger scheme going on, Rudy will kill indiscriminately and without any form of remorse, either because someone is pissing him off or he's hungry. More than likely, it's both, though.

You claim its indiscriminant but then give two possible (and logical) reasons for it.

Logical contradiction.

[The Question]

Thats him feeding though, its justified.

It's hardly justified. He doesn't need to drain people to death to survive. He could easily feed off of other sources. He drains people to death because he enjoys it.


I didn't say it affected his strength levels I was using it as an example to show he is not quite the same as pre crisis superman.

He hasn't moved a planet yet.
For me to accept he is at planet moving levels in all star you need to prove it by doing 2 things
a) specifying the size of planet we're talking about
and b) specifying how much it weighs and how much force is needed to alter its orbit

Until then you're just making a rather large assumption.

No, I'm not. All Star is basically writing pre-crisis Superman. He's at planet moving levels, even if not stated.

But you would rather have someone else do the heroic thing?

I find it odd that your definition of heroism actually doesn't give any weight to the heroic acts a hero can perform.

Of course it doesn't. How powerful a hero is is the worst way to judge how heroic he is. Wonder Man greatly dwarfs Captain America in terms of power. However, Captain America is a better hero, because he is by his very nature more heroic. That's what matters.

And someone can have the best morals in the world but be completely in capable of being a superhero.
Its a combination of both truth told but all the morals in the world are simply not enough to save the earth sometimes, I don't care how good your morality is.

And yet saving the earth doesn't instantly make him the best hero. It simply makes him very powerful.

As i've said repeatedly of course it does simply because it governs how many threats you can respond to and how you respond to them.

And as I've said repeatedly, that doesn't instantly make him a great hero. Simply a more powerful one.

Ok in which way is superman morally superior to martian manhunter?

Really, he's not any more morally right. But still, that's not the only factor. The way Superman can lead and inspire people, that's what makes him the best. And really, I don't think he needs to be far above the others at all. He should have peers, not subordinates. Otherwise, having a League in the first place is completely pointless.

[gildea]

It's hardly justified. He doesn't need to drain people to death to survive. He could easily feed off of other sources. He drains people to death because he enjoys it.


The killing or the energy kick?

Cos he doesn't need to drain to kill.

That said i'm not really disputing that just the idea that he would suddenly go on a mad killing rampage. He's a petty thug with amazing powers but he still has petty thug wants, money, possesions women.

Having said that make a character that powerful and give him a carnage or joker like mindset and you have a damned intersting superman arc.


No, I'm not. All Star is basically writing pre-crisis Superman. He's at planet moving levels, even if not stated.

Having researched this a bit you may actually be correct in that his strength level is enough to lift the largest planet in this solar system (jupiter). Depending on morrisons definition of quintillion (american or british). Regadless earth should be well within his weight range.

I simply don't have the knowledge of physics to work out how gravity works in.

What I will say though is regardless of strength I don't think someone of supermans size can move a planet because he simply go through it instead. However I don't think thats actually your point (ie. its more the level of strength than the actual ability to move a planet) So I concede the point of all star superman being able to move a planet. :)

Of course it doesn't. How powerful a hero is is the worst way to judge how heroic he is. Wonder Man greatly dwarfs Captain America in terms of power. However, Captain America is a better hero, because he is by his very nature more heroic. That's what matters.

Ok next time I'm attacked by doomsday I'll stand behind cap.

What would cap do that makes him more heroic than wonderman anyway?


And as I've said repeatedly, that doesn't instantly make him a great hero. Simply a more powerful one.

Implying that to be a great hero you don't actually need to do anything heroic just have good morals.

I could sit all day in my living room and do that.

I'm sorry I think it's perfectly valid (in most cases) to judge people on what they do.

Its how most people in the world are judged.

I don't think he needs to be far above the others at all. He should have peers, not subordinates. Otherwise, having a League in the first place is completely pointless.

Not really even superman can't be everywhere at once, and being the best hero doesn't make you infallible. Plus some do have attributes superman doesn't have, telepathy, shape shifting, magic, strategy, etc etc etc.

I'm also curious as to your definition of subordinate being solely based on power does that you conisder batman a subordinate to even your weakened preference of superman??

[The Question]

The killing or the energy kick?

The killing. Though, maybe both.

Cos he doesn't need to drain to kill.

That said i'm not really disputing that just the idea that he would suddenly go on a mad killing rampage. He's a petty thug with amazing powers but he still has petty thug wants, money, possesions women.

He also liked to watch things die when he's bored.


Ok next time I'm attacked by doomsday I'll stand behind cap.

That's not my point at all. Being the most powerful does not make you the best hero. It simply makes you the most powerful. Yes, a high powered individual is more likely to save you from a threat like Doomsday than Captain America. But I'd be damned if you say that that makes them better heroes.

What would cap do that makes him more heroic than wonderman anyway?

Because he's Captain-****ing-America. He is by his very nature more heroic than Wonder Man.

Implying that to be a great hero you don't actually need to do anything heroic just have good morals.

I could sit all day in my living room and do that.

That is not what I said at all.

I'm sorry I think it's perfectly valid (in most cases) to judge people on what they do.

Its how most people in the world are judged.

You're not judging Superman on what he does. You're judging him on what he's capable of.

Not really even superman can't be everywhere at once, and being the best hero doesn't make you infallible. Plus some do have attributes superman doesn't have, telepathy, shape shifting, magic, strategy, etc etc etc.

Still, having a Superman who completely dwarfs Wonder Woman and Martian Manhunter on the League with them makes the team pointless. I'd rather have Superman working with them than doing their jobs for them.

I'm also curious as to your definition of subordinate being solely based on power does that you conisder batman a subordinate to even your weakened preference of superman??

In terms of battling big scary monsters, **** yes. There's pretty much nothing Batman can do against AMAZO.

[gildea]

Because he's Captain-****ing-America. He is by his very nature more heroic than Wonder Man.


Thats not an argument.
Thats just saying he's better because you say so.

I'm asking why


That is not what I said at all.

I didn't say it was I said it was implicit because it is.


You're not judging Superman on what he does. You're judging him on what he's capable of.

Technically true however given that we tend to learn in comics what heroes can do by seeing them do it rather than being told I think the correlation is strong enough that and what you do is governed largely by what you can do I think i'm operating on a sound enough logic.

Still, having a Superman who completely dwarfs Wonder Woman and Martian Manhunter on the League with them makes the team pointless. I'd rather have Superman working with them than doing their jobs for them.

Pointless right up until a telepathy or shape shifter is required or the need to compel someone to tell the truth (and so on)
Everyon brings something different to the table but supes brings the most muscle and the ideals.

In terms of battling big scary monsters, **** yes. There's pretty much nothing Batman can do against AMAZO.

A limitation then to his ability to act a superhero. Which means therefore that the concept of "best" has to include power levels. Simpy because the "best" superhero by definition should be "better" than other heroes in the actual PROCESS of being a superhero.

It amazes me that your blind to the inherent contradiction that the best superhero can be allowed to be inferior to others in the actual acts and jobs involved in being a superhero.

[The Question]

Thats not an argument.
Thats just saying he's better because you say so.

I'm asking why

Christ, because he's Catain America. I don't know how to explain it any better than that.

I didn't say it was I said it was implicit because it is.

You are completely missing the point of what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that how good a hero does not depend on what you are capable of nor how spectacular or large scale your feats are. It's about how heroic you and your actions are. A fellow could have the power to save the world and even do it a few times and still be a selfish *******, while a non powered hero does things on a smaller scale yet is self sacrificing, kind, and honorable. Which would you say is the better hero.

Technically true however given that we tend to learn in comics what heroes can do by seeing them do it rather than being told I think the correlation is strong enough that and what you do is governed largely by what you can do I think i'm operating on a sound enough logic.

No, you're not. As I said, what someone is capable of doing doesn't instantly make them a better hero. Captain America can't dissarm 20 bombs in different locations over the city before the explode. Quicksilver can. But would you really say that Quicksilver is a better hero than Cap?

Pointless right up until a telepathy or shape shifter is required or the need to compel someone to tell the truth (and so on)
Everyon brings something different to the table but supes brings the most muscle and the ideals.

Still, think about it. If Superman can solve most of the problems by himself, it shouldn't be the Justice League. Just Superman and some guys he calls on when he needs a telepath or a shapeshifter.

A limitation then to his ability to act a superhero. Which means therefore that the concept of "best" has to include power levels. Simpy because the "best" superhero by definition should be "better" than other heroes in the actual PROCESS of being a superhero.

No. That's complete bull****. In terms of role on the League, Batman is less important than Superman because he can do less. But that doesn't make him a better or worse hero.

It amazes me that your blind to the inherent contradiction that the best superhero can be allowed to be inferior to others in the actual act of being a superhero.

There is no contradiction. You're telling me that if The Punisher was the most powerful hero on Earth, you would consider him the best?

[gildea]

Going to bed so i'll just take these 2 points.


There is no contradiction. You're telling me that if The Punisher was the most powerful hero on Earth, you would consider him the best?

No because the punisher doesn't do heroic things.
I've already said that strength of character is important as well. You're only concentrating on one part of what i've said. Its ideals and ablity each is as important as the other but only one of them governs your actual ability to act as a hero.
We don't give gold medals to athletes who operate on the best morals rearding their sports we give them to those who are the best at their sports. The best hero whilst morality governs their actions is judged by how well they can superhero.

Its a results based business, like everything else.

No, you're not. As I said, what someone is capable of doing doesn't instantly make them a better hero. Captain America can't dissarm 20 bombs in different locations over the city before the explode. Quicksilver can. But would you really say that Quicksilver is a better hero than Cap?

No because of his actions past and present. But he has the potential to be a better hero than cap because of his powers.

Queston for you:
2 heroes both have the personality of Cap
one has the abilities of cap the other has the abilities of superman

who is the better hero?

[The Question]

No because the punisher doesn't do heroic things.

He saves lives. He fights evil. Sounds somewhat heroic to me

I've already said that strength of character is important as well. You're only concentrating on one part of what i've said. Its ideals and ablity each is as important as the other but only one of them governs your actual ability to act as a hero.
We don't give gold medals to athletes who operate on the best morals rearding their sports we give them to those who are the best at their sports. The best hero whilst morality governs their actions is judged by how well they can superhero.

Comparing a hero to an athlete doesn't work at all.

Its a results based business, like everything else.

It's not a ****ing buisness. And results don't make you a better hero. Quicksilver could defeat a giant monster while Cap couldn't. Cap's still a better hero.

No because of his actions past and present. But he has the potential to be a better hero than cap because of his powers.

No, he doesn't. At his core, Cap's still a better person. And that's what counts.

Queston for you:
2 heroes both have the personality of Cap
one has the abilities of cap the other has the abilities of superman

who is the better hero?

I'd say they're about equal.

[Spike_x1]

You claim its indiscriminant but then give two possible (and logical) reasons for it.

Logical contradiction.:rolleyes:

By indiscriminately, I meant that he doesn't care WHO he kills. He has no preference. If he's hungry or mad at them, it does not matter who they are, he'll kill them without blinking an eye.

[gildea]

:rolleyes:

By indiscriminately, I meant that he doesn't care WHO he kills. He has no preference. If he's hungry or mad at them, it does not matter who they are, he'll kill them without blinking an eye.

fair enough I misinterpreted you sir.

[gildea]

He saves lives. He fights evil. Sounds somewhat heroic to me

He killed someone for jaywalking. He doesn't fight evil he kills evil, in a judge jury and executioner sort of way. Of course you knew I would type that stuff just there so I'm wondering the point of this offshoot of the debate.



Comparing a hero to an athlete doesn't work at all.

Course it does, I even gave an example to back it up.
Please at least provide some sort of argument rather than just claiming you're right.



It's not a ****ing buisness. And results don't make you a better hero. Quicksilver could defeat a giant monster while Cap couldn't. Cap's still a better hero.

I could find you plenty of quotes with heroes referring to it as a business. And results do count, who wants a hero to that always fails???????

Cap is a better hero because of his actions. I'm not not trying to debate cap vs quicksilver.


No, he doesn't. At his core, Cap's still a better person. And that's what counts.

No it just means he's a better person not a better superhero (referring to potential here not quicksilver as is).



I'd say they're about equal.

They are either equal or they aren't.

If they are "about" equal that means one is slightly better so tell me which one is slightly better superhero?


You seem to think that being a good person automatically equates to being a good superhero, which is nonsense because a large portion of the world would therefore be superheroes.

[The Question]

He killed someone for jaywalking.

When the hell did that happen?

Course it does, I even gave an example to back it up.
Please at least provide some sort of argument rather than just claiming you're right.

It doesn't work as an analogy. Athgletes are judges entirely on their physical prowess. Heroism can't be judged by how much you bench.

I could find you plenty of quotes with heroes referring to it as a business.

I think that's just what they call it. They don't actually think of it as a buisness.

And results do count, who wants a hero to that always fails???????

Failure doesn't mean someone isn't heroic.

No it just means he's a better person not a better superhero (referring to potential here not quicksilver as is).

How good a hero you are depends on how heroic you are, not how skilled you are.

They are either equal or they aren't.

If they are "about" equal that means one is slightly better so tell me which one is slightly better superhero?

You're being nitpicky. I'd say they're equal, then.

You seem to think that being a good person automatically equates to being a good superhero, which is nonsense because a large portion of the world would therefore be superheroes.

That's not even remotely what I said. How HEROIC you are makes you a good superhero. And how heroic you are has little to do with actual skill. Someone could be the most skilled super hero, but that doesn't make them the best super hero. Judging who the best hero is must be based on more intangible qualities. Otherwise, a complete selfish ******* could be considered the best super hero.

[GNR]

I'm enjoying Busiek's current take on Supes.

[gildea]

When the hell did that happen?

Dunno. They mention it here http://www.geocities.com/marvel_terror/punisher/punisher.html



It doesn't work as an analogy. Athgletes are judges entirely on their physical prowess. Heroism can't be judged by how much you bench.

No they're not athletes have to adhere to some fairplay rules. Regardless the point is that in ANY and EVERY field of endeavour you are judged on your performance, superheroing is no different.



I think that's just what they call it. They don't actually think of it as a buisness.

Of course they do.
Business can just refer to your occupation or trade. Cap america occupation : superhero.



Failure doesn't mean someone isn't heroic.

Indeed heroic failure and what not. It just means they suck at being a superhero.






You're being nitpicky. I'd say they're equal, then.

No I'm just trying to get something from your increasingly wooly answers



That's not even remotely what I said.

Oh no it is completely what you said. You claim you want heroism but you keep throwing morality around interchangeably and have said more than once something along the lines of "the best hero could be a dick"



Otherwise, a complete selfish ******* could be considered the best super hero.

Doesn't matter. Results and actions.



Cripes name 3 professions anywhere where people are primarily judged on something other than their performance in said profession!!
(I can think of 1 and even then its a stretch)

[The Question]

Dunno. They mention it here http://www.geocities.com/marvel_terror/punisher/punisher.html

I think that was during some mental breakdown he had.

No they're not athletes have to adhere to some fairplay rules. Regardless the point is that in ANY and EVERY field of endeavour you are judged on your performance, superheroing is no different.

Yes, it is. What makes you a good hero is not based on what you're capable of, but what you do with what you have.

Of course they do.
Business can just refer to your occupation or trade. Cap america occupation : superhero.

They don't think of it as a buisness because it isn't a buisness. Buisness implies monitairy gain. They may call it a buisness, but they don't actually think of it as one. It's just something they call it.

Indeed heroic failure and what not. It just means they suck at being a superhero.

Doesn't mean they're not heroic.

No I'm just trying to get something from your increasingly wooly answers

Yes, you are.

Oh no it is completely what you said. You claim you want heroism but you keep throwing morality around interchangeably and have said more than once something along the lines of "the best hero could be a dick"

No, I haven't said that at all. Please, I would aprechiate it if you would stop twisting my words around. How heroic someone is makes them the best super hero. Captain America is considered the best in Marvel because of how much of a hero he is, not because he can crush an armored tank with his bare hands.

Doesn't matter. Results and actions.

Yes, it does matter.

Cripes name 3 professions anywhere where people are primarily judged on something other than their performance in said profession!!
(I can think of 1 and even then its a stretch)

Heroism isn't a profession and isn't comperable to any profession. Stop trying to compare it to something when there is no comparison.

[gildea]

No, I haven't said that at all. Please, I would aprechiate it if you would stop twisting my words around. How heroic someone is makes them the best super hero. Captain America is considered the best in Marvel because of how much of a hero he is, not because he can crush an armored tank with his bare hands.


about to go to work so being brief.

Not twisting your words sir.
You're the one that broght personality into this when you said the guy could be a great hero but still be a selfish twit. There are other examples as well of you blurring your definition of heroism into the realms of personality.

As I said wooly answers, you've said above "cap is the best hero because of how much a hero he is" thats akin to saying he's good because he's good. You're not really making a case for your point of view as much as bludgeoning repetition.


Name 3 fields of endeavour where people aren't judged on their actual ability to perform that endeavour.

[The Leaguer]

I fear for the current state of Superman because this thread is sooooo laaaaaaame.

[The Question]

about to go to work so being brief.

Not twisting your words sir.
You're the one that broght personality into this when you said the guy could be a great hero but still be a selfish twit. There are other examples as well of you blurring your definition of heroism into the realms of personality.

I didn't say that. What I said is going by the way you describe it, a person could be a complete dick and still be a great hero.

As I said wooly answers, you've said above "cap is the best hero because of how much a hero he is" thats akin to saying he's good because he's good. You're not really making a case for your point of view as much as bludgeoning repetition.

I'm sorry, but I don't know how to explain it any better than that. Cap has always been portrayed as the ultimate hero. Brave, honorable, kind, never gives up, that sort of stuff.

Name 3 fields of endeavour where people aren't judged on their actual ability to perform that endeavour.

Why the hell do we have to compare heroism to something else when heroism is completely unique?

[Spike_x1]

Can't you guys just agree to disagree about your definitions of heroism? It seems that you both simply have different opinions about it, and neither of you are going to change the other's mind.

I mean, heroism is pretty much in the eye of the beholder.

[The Question]

I guess.

[Thespiralgoeson]

I for one rest in the camp that DESPERATELY wants to see some limits on Superman's powers. The dude should not be able to move planets, fly anywhere near light speed, nor should he be able to hear a spider spinning its web from across the galaxy. I'm sorry, but I'm with dpm07 in that I think that STAS/JL/JLU was the ideal interperatation of Supes.

On top of the fact that I just think it's friggin stupid to think of or see a humanoid being moving an object trillions and trillions times its own size, when you make Superman omnipotent, you do a tremendous disservice to the rest of the heroes in the DC universe. The Leaguer several times has said something along the lines of how "Superman should always be the best" and "if I wanted to watch a hero struggel physically I'd road someone else's stories etc..." I understand his point. It's part of Superman's charm. But here's my problem with that; Superman exists in the same universe as the rest of DC's heros and villains. It'd be different if Superman was a character like Spawn in his own universe aside from maybe a cross-over every few years, but this isn't the case. It's one thing for Superman to make the Blue Beetle look like heaping pile of feces by comparison, but the other heavyweights in the Justice League absolutely have to be on a level playing field with Supes. It just has to be that way for me. As The Question so eloquently put it, Superman should have peers, not subordinates. Also, for the sake of a character like the flash, who while not as engraned in our culture as Supes, is still very much an icon in his own right, Superman should NOT be as fast as Flash. Not even close really. I mean, that's all the Flash has. When you give Superman equal or greater speeds, you render the Flash competely useless and pointless.

Batman and Wonder Woman in particular come to mind. For me, ideally, they're all on equal footing. Maybe Wonder Woman isn't as strong as Supes, but she can give him a run for his money. Batman is a different story altogether. I think the two characters should always be seen as equals, and under no circumstances should this ever change. I think that's the way most of the more faithful writers intended it to be as well. Batman needs to be able even the odds with Supes and engage him in hand-to-hand combat if need be ala DKR or Hush. It just has to be. Whether you like Supes or Bats better, both characters are just too important to have such an enormous gap between them. It's why Superman entrusted Batman with the Kryptonite ring. Supes knows that Batman is as close to an equal as he has as far as heros go, and he knows Batman probably could defeat him if he really had to (not saying he would, but that he'd have a chance to) But really, what the hell kind of use is a kryptonite going to be to Batman if Superman can fly into outer friggin space and hurl and astroid at him from light years away?? Incidently, this is also the reason why I can't stand the idea of Superman having super-intelligence; he just can't be smarter than Batman. That's Batman's greatest asset. You take that away from him and make Superman smarter, you're just ruining Batman's character in the same way you ruin the Flash by making Superman faster.

I'm sorry, but Superman just has to be powered down IMO. The TAS levels were acceptable to me. It's the only way I can enjoy him. Otherwise I'm just bored to tears, and honestly just plain pissed off at DC that they would show such utter disrespect and contempt for a character like Batman by making him an insect compaired to the god-like Superman. Besides, if Superman is as powerful as he is pre-crisis or more, isn't it just stupid to call him the "Man of Steel?" Considering he can fly through suns and survive, wouldn't "Man of Steel" be an insult? Really, for someone that powerful, it'd be the equivalent of referring to Batman as "sissypansyfairymarshmellow-wuss" instead of "The Dark Knight." Superman is supposed to be faster than a speeding bullet and more powerful than a locamotive. Not faster than a beam of light wearing Nikes and more powerful than a supernova on steroids.

I'm also decidedly and supremely against just making Superman's villains stronger as opposed to him weaker. I mean, honestly people, Darkseid is powerful enough. Hell, why don't we start giving Batman superpowers while we're at it? The Leaguer mentioned Dragon Ball Z as a comparison, as if DC has to somehow compete with the DBZ universe. It's interesting that DBZ comes up in this discussion, because the main thing that I just COULD NOT STAND about DBZ was just how ridiculously overpowered the characters were. I mean honestly, for anyone who's familiar, it's just plain laughable. In the Sayain saga Vegeta is strong enough to destroy a planet just by pointing at it, and they progressively get EXPONENTIALLY more powerful as the series progesses. By the time the Buu saga starts, they're supposedly dozens, if not hundreds (hell, maybe thousands, it's so hazily defined) of times more powerful than they were when the series started, yet anytime these characters fight eachother, its a big deal when one of their attacks makes a huge crater, or creates a lot of smoke, as opposed to vaporizing Earth along with a big chunk of the rest of the solar system.

As such, if it were up to me, that is if I were the Superman writer/editor, Superman would always strain, if even only slightly, in slowing stopping a jet liner. Superman in flight should be superfast, like faster than most advanced fighter jets, but certainly nothing even remotely approaching light speed; I can accept the speed of sound (the Flash being a good deal faster than Mach 1). The super-senses I'm willing to give a little more on for no other reason that my favorite part of Superman Returns was seeing Supes hovering high above the earth listening for distress, just a beautiful scene. I do not, however, want him to be able to hear spider spinning its web from the other solar system. Superman should be able to survive a nuclear explosion, but just barely, ala Dark Knight Returns (one of my favorite sequences in the history of comics) Flying through suns is out of the friggin question! (Honestly people, that's just retarded. Even IF he could survive the heat, the idea that his body could withstand that kind of gravity is just plain dumb. Even moreso when you consider that it was a red sun!) And for the love of god, the Omega Beams should never EVER bounce of his chest.

Basically my ideal Superman is the Michael Jordan of the DC universe. Pound for pound, he is the most powerful, but the other heavyweights, if they can't necessarily beat him, CAN hold their own against him.

I'm willing to compromise though. If I were writing it, Superman would normally be around TAS power levels, but say there's also other energies Superman can tap into that give him the god-like powers temporarily, but come at a price. Say if a being like Imperiex or the Anti-moniter is threatening the universe, Superman can briefly achieve his pre-crisis level power, but it starts tearing his body apart and nearly kills him every time, so he only uses it as an absolute last resort. Maybe he can't control when or how it happens either. Maybe it's spontaneous, or it's triggered by some major cosmic change or disaster. Just ideas.

These are just my views and my take on the character. I understand that part of Superman's appeal is just that he's so over-the-top in his superpowers. That many of his fans want him to be nearly omnipotent and put the rest of the heros to shame. I just don't happen to be one of them. If you disagree, that's cool. But please, I'd appreciate it if nobody would give a bunch of replies along the lines of "Superman is teh ****! Batman is his biatch!"

[The Question]

While I agree with most of what you said, I have a few points to make.


1) The reason people want Darkseid back at pre-crisis power levels isn't because they want him to be able to face Superman. It's because they don't want him to face Superman. Darkseid as a Superman villain is an insult to the character. Even pre-crisis, Darkseid greatly dwarfed Superman in terms of power, and was once able to take on the entire Legion of Superheroes, including two 18 year old Kryptonians, and fight them to a standstill. Darkseid should be a threat to the entire DCU, not just Superman.

2) With Batman, I do think Batman should be considered less capable than Supes in the areas where Supes excells Batman can't fight Mongul or save towns from natural disasters or anything like that. However, I do think they should at least be intelectual equals, if not Batman being Superman's superior.

[Spike_x1]

Flying through suns is out of the friggin question! (Honestly people, that's just retarded. Even IF he could survive the heat, the idea that his body could withstand that kind of gravity is just plain dumb. Even moreso when you consider that it was a red sun!) And for the love of god, the Omega Beams should never EVER bounce of his chest.I said the exact same thing in the DC Comics forum a while ago. :up:

I mean, if he can survive the gravity and heat of a sun (red, no less, meaning he's already being depowered), then we know that nothing short of some major cosmic threat can hurt him.

Something that I want is for somebody like the Toyman or Bloodsport to launch a missile at Superman, and for Superman to not necessarily go "ah f**k!" as if he's scared in any way, but I want him to at least raise his hands and try to shield himself somewhat.

I think the ideal power level I want Superman at is what he was in the 80's, in Superman #9, where he was confronted with a forty megaton thermo-nuclear bomb, and he was knocked-the-hell-out by it, but wasn't killed. When he woke up, he was just kind of like, "Ow. That friggin' hurt," and it took him a little while to compose himself.

Right now, DC is trying to balance those two levels of power (the overthetop level of red sun diving with Superboy Prime, and the lower level of being taken aback by Earth 2 Superman hitting him with a simple car), but the balancing act really can't be kept up for too much longer, IMHO. It's just too wide of a margin between the two, even for a comic book.

[The Question]

Truth be told, the nuke arguement has always bothered me. I just can't decide about it. Way I see it, if he is hit by a nuke, then it should depend where. If he's standing at ground zero, I think it should kill him. If he's not at the dead center of the explosion but a bit away from it, say a mile or so, it wouldn't kill him but still severely **** him up like in Dark Knight Returns.

And in any event, he should not be able to withstand the force of over one million nuclear explosions and only be really sore and tired because of it.

[Spike_x1]

Yeah, I get what you mean. With the bomb that I cited above, he was right next to it at the time of its detonation (carrying it into space, in fact), so I'm perfectly fine with him being knocked out by it. And ontop of being nuked, Superman even survived the heat of reentry, and the force of crashing into the Earth, unconscious no less.

So he was still pretty damn tough in those days. Just not 'cosmic-level-red-sun-diving' tough.

[The Question]

I get that. It's primairily the radiation I'm worried about. I know Superman's cells regenerate very fast, which is apart of his invulnerability, but such massive amounts of radiation would **** up anyone's cellular structure, including Superman's. Combined with a heat that is several times that of the sun and a fore that can flatten cities, Superman surviving a nuclear explosion at ground zero just bothers me a bit.

[Thespiralgoeson]

While I agree with most of what you said, I have a few points to make.


1) The reason people want Darkseid back at pre-crisis power levels isn't because they want him to be able to face Superman. It's because they don't want him to face Superman. Darkseid as a Superman villain is an insult to the character. Even pre-crisis, Darkseid greatly dwarfed Superman in terms of power, and was once able to take on the entire Legion of Superheroes, including two 18 year old Kryptonians, and fight them to a standstill. Darkseid should be a threat to the entire DCU, not just Superman.

Oh I agree completely. All I'm saying is that I don't want the Omega Beams to bounce of Superman's chest.

2) With Batman, I do think Batman should be considered less capable than Supes in the areas where Supes excells Batman can't fight Mongul or save towns from natural disasters or anything like that. However, I do think they should at least be intelectual equals, if not Batman being Superman's superior.

Again, I agree. When I say the two should be equals, I certainly don't mean in terms of how powerful they are. I just mean that Bats and Supes should see eachother as equals. Batman knows what Superman is capable of. He knows he could never under any circumstances hope to be as powerful as Supes. However, he also knows Superman better than anyone else, including his weaknesses, mental as well as physical. Supes knows that if push comes to shove, and the two were forces into combat, Batman can even the odds. In fact, Superman not only knows this, but he counts on it. If his mind is being controlled, who does he count on above all others to take him down? Wonder Woman? Green Lantern? Martian Manhunter? Nope... Batman. All Batman needs is prep-time. Batman can hold his own against pretty much anyone provided he has the time to study them and prepare appropriately. See JLA: Tower of Babel. R'as Al Ghul took down the entire Justice League using fail-safes that he had stolen straight from Bats. Hell, Batman was the one who created Brother Eye.

But then again, I honestly think Batman has to kept in check as well as Superman. Honestly, I don't like it when Batman gets too involved in these apocalyptic, end-of-the-universe scenarios. I don't mind it every now and then, because he's right at the heart of the JL, but Batman is a detective and a crime fighter. He's the Dark Knight, not Buzz Lightyear. If I in charge of the DC continuity, Batman would basically be a free-lance member of the Justice League; he rarely has any involvement with them, pretty much just keeping to himself and taking care of Gotham, but the league knows he has a valuble skillset and sometimes ask him to come in as a consultant of sorts. You could say he's a seasonal member of the league, with Superman, Wonder Woman, Flash, Green Lantern and rest being lifers.

[The Question]

In fact, Superman not only knows this, but he counts on it. If his mind is being controlled, who does he count on above all others to take him down? Wonder Woman? Green Lantern? Martian Manhunter? Nope... Batman. All Batman needs is prep-time. Batman can hold his own against pretty much anyone provided he has the time to study them and prepare appropriately. See JLA: Tower of Babel. R'as Al Ghul took down the entire Justice League using fail-safes that he had stolen straight from Bats. Hell, Batman was the one who created Brother Eye.

Okay, there I call bull****. Sorry, but Batman can't beat anyone as long as he has time to prepare. He's only human. He has limitations, and even his impressive resources are finite. In Tower of Babel, Ra's needed an army of highly trained terrorists to carry out Batman's plans, and even then they didn't defeat the League, simply cripple them temporarily. If Superman went Rogue, he'd still be able to wipe the floor with Bruce. Mainly because he's too damned fast for Bruce to react. If Superman's smart, he'd count on Diana or J'onn to take him down if something happened more than Bruce. And if Bruce's smart, his plan to take down Clark would involve calling Diana or J'onn.

[Thespiralgoeson]

Okay, there I call bull****. Sorry, but Batman can't beat anyone as long as he has time to prepare. He's only human. He has limitations, and even his impressive resources are finite. In Tower of Babel, Ra's needed an army of highly trained terrorists to carry out Batman's plans, and even then they didn't defeat the League, simply cripple them temporarily. If Superman went Rogue, he'd still be able to wipe the floor with Bruce. Mainly because he's too damned fast for Bruce to react.

*sigh* Whatever man. If Lex Luthor is a worthy adversary to Superman, then so is Bruce Wayne. Superman's too fast for Batman? So is the Flash. But it doesn't matter. He's the goddamn Batman. He finds a way. And R'as only needed an army of terrorists to take down the JLA all at once. You think Batman couldn't take down any one of them individually? I beg to differ. When I said all Batman needs is prep-time and he can take on anyone, that wasn't limited to physical combat. But now that you mention it, Batman would realistically stand a much better chance against Superman than most of the other League Members. The other league members don't have this green rock that kills them just by being near it. That's one of the problems I've always had with Kryptonite, but that's just the way it was written. I'm not saying Batman should be able to take on someone like Doomsday, Mongul, or Darkseid but he CAN engage Superman.

If Superman's smart, he'd count on Diana or J'onn to take him down if something happened more than Bruce. And if Bruce's smart, his plan to take down Clark would involve calling Diana or J'onn.

Yeah, but that's just not the way it is. If Batman were smart he wouldn't have a friggin child as his crime-fighting partner, but he does. If Superman were smart, he'd probably use something besides a pair of glasses to disguise himself, but he doesn't. Batman and Superman are the two most beloved, iconic figures in all of comicdom. They're the World's Finest. If Superman does have an equal, it's not Wonder Woman or Martian Manhunter, or anyone else. It's Batman. The fact is Superman entrusted the ring to Batman, and nobody else.

[The Question]

*sigh* Whatever man. If Lex Luthor is a worthy adversary to Superman, then so is Bruce Wayne.

Lex rarely poses a major physical threat to Superman himself. Superman simply tries to take down Luthor's plans with varrying degrees of success, rarely finding any proof that would link them to Luthor. That's a completely different kind of warfare than how Bruce would be forced to take Clark down if something happned.

Superman's too fast for Batman? So is the Flash. But it doesn't matter. He's the goddamn Batman. He finds a way.

That's a terrible arguement. And why bring up The Flash? When has Bruce ever been able to defeat The Flash? For that matter, when has he ever tried?

And R'as only needed an army of terrorists to take down the JLA all at once. You think Batman couldn't take down any one of them individually? I beg to differ.

He was still sending twelve to fifty guys after each member of th League. Last time a checked, Bruce didn't have twelve to fifty guys fighting on his behalf.

When I said all Batman needs is prep-time and he can take on anyone, that wasn't limited to physical combat. But now that you mention it, Batman would realistically stand a much better chance against Superman than most of the other League Members. The other league members don't have this green rock that kills them just by being near it. That's one of the problems I've always had with Kryptonite, but that's just the way it was written. I'm not saying Batman should be able to take on someone like Doomsday, Mongul, or Darkseid but he CAN engage Superman.

Even with the Kryptonite, Bruce would be hard pressed to take Clark down. Clark's way too damn fast for Bruce to react in time to use it properly. A smart plan would simply be for Bruce to give Diana or J'onn the Kryptonite ring and have them fight Clark.

Yeah, but that's just not the way it is. If Batman were smart he wouldn't have a friggin child as his crime-fighting partner, but he does.

That doesn't make Batman uninteligent. That just makes him kind of crazy. Which he is.

If Superman were smart, he'd probably use something besides a pair of glasses to disguise himself, but he doesn't. Batman and Superman are the two most beloved, iconic figures in all of comicdom. They're the World's Finest. If Superman does have an equal, it's not Wonder Woman or Martian Manhunter, or anyone else. It's Batman.

That is also a terrible arguement. Yes, Superman and Batman are highly popular. But that doesn't mean Bruce should be able to beat Clark in a fight.

The fact is Superman entrusted the ring to Batman, and nobody else.

Because Bruce could come up with a very good plan to take Clark down. But I would pray to god that the plan involves calling Diana or J'onn for help.

[Spike_x1]

Superman's too fast for Batman? So is the Flash. But it doesn't matter. He's the goddamn Batman. He finds a way.HAHAHAHA!!

That is so going in my sig. :D:down

[Thespiralgoeson]

Lex rarely poses a major physical threat to Superman himself. Superman simply tries to take down Luthor's plans with varrying degrees of success, rarely finding any proof that would link them to Luthor. That's a completely different kind of warfare than how Bruce would be forced to take Clark down if something happned.

I clearly said above "When I said all Batman needs is prep-time and he can take on anyone, that wasn't limited to physical combat."

That's a terrible arguement. And why bring up The Flash? When has Bruce ever been able to defeat The Flash? For that matter, when has he ever tried?

I bring up the flash because you said the main reason Bats couldn't take down supes is because he's too fast. By that logic Bruce couldn't take down the Flash either. I beg to differ. Don't take it too seriously. It was a joke, really. I might as well have said "Superman's too fast for Batman? Well I had cottage cheese for dinner."


He was still sending twelve to fifty guys after each member of th League. Last time a checked, Bruce didn't have twelve to fifty guys fighting on his behalf.

Dude, you do realize Batman designed those fail-safe for HIMSELF to use on the JLA. They were designed for one man, the friggin BATMAN. Besides, take Prometheus for example. He immoblized the entire JLA, including Batman, and he did so all by himself. Batman would do so in similar fashion.

Even with the Kryptonite, Bruce would be hard pressed to take Clark down. Clark's way too damn fast for Bruce to react in time to use it properly.

Well by that logic then a character like Metallo wouldn't be able to make Superman break a sweat.

In most interpretations I've seen, Kryptonite pretty much renders all of Clark's powers null, superspeed included. All he has to do is get close enough. But even so, if your only argument for Bruce not being able to take on Supes using kryptonite is that Supes is "way too damn fast" then you really don't have much of an imagination.

In DKR, a 55 year old Bruce defeated Clark in combat using a powered suit, some tank missiles, and a piece of sythetic kryptonite. Yeah, he had some help from Robin and a one-armed Green Arrow, but they did nothing he couldn't have done himself. He took down supes, and I found it believable. That's enough for me.

"You're beginning to get the idea, Clark. This... is the beginning of the end, for both of us... We could have changed the world... Now look at us... I've become a political liability, and you.... you're a joke. I want you to remember, Clark... in all the years to come... in your most private moments.. I want you to remember my hant at your throat... the one man who beat you..."

Classic. One of my favorite moments in comic history.

Now I'm not saying DKR is the end all and be all, but I certainly found it believable enough. There was never a moment I was reading and thought to myself "This is stupid. Superman could just use his superspeed. He's tood damn fast for Batman!"

That doesn't make Batman uninteligent. That just makes him kind of crazy. Which he is.

That's subjective. Personally I think it's not only crazy, but just a little stupid.

That is also a terrible arguement. Yes, Superman and Batman are highly popular. But that doesn't mean Bruce should be able to beat Clark in a fight.

Oh but I think it does. If the two heros weren't so linked together and identified with eachother then I might agree. Then I would be fine with Batman being a character like what Wolverine is to Marvel. Sure, Wolverine is close to the bottom of the food chain in the marvel universe in terms of power. No way could he stand a chance against a character like Juggernaught or dozens of others. But he doesn't need to because he's a better character anyway. Batman is different, at least in regards to Superman.

Batman and Superman aren't just highly popular. They're also almost universally identified with each other. That's why they've been teamed up time and time again moreso than any other two heros over the past 60 years. That's why on several occassions WB has seriously considered green-lighting a Batman/Superman movie. Who are the world's finest? Is it Superman and Wonder Woman? Is it Superman and Flash? Is it Superman and Marian ManHunter? Is it Superman and Green Lantern? Is it Superman and Hawkman? Nope... It's Superman and Batman. They've got to be on a level playing field, otherwise it's just silly teaming them together and calling them the world's finest. Otherwise, Batman's just Superman's sidekick. I'm not saying he needs to be able to take on Darkseid, or mongul. But he DOES need be able to engage Superman. If not, then Batman really should never ever be involved with the Justice League IMO, and certainly not teamed up individually with Clark.

Because Bruce could come up with a very good plan to take Clark down. But I would pray to god that the plan involves calling Diana or J'onn for help.

It could, but why the hell should it have to? Maybe he designs synthetic Red Kryptonite that paralyzes supes completely... oh wait, he already did that... Well maybe he builds this satellite that's designed to.... oh wait, he already did that too... My point is, he's the goddamn Batman. It's not hard at all to imagine a way Batman could even the odds with a character like Superman. Hell, he's done before more than once. Who knows, maybe he gets his hands on a green lantern power ring... maybe commandeers some alien technology that teleports them both to a planet with a red sun... Use your imagination.

But really, I'm not disagreeing with you. If Batman were to take down Superman, his plan almost certainly would involve other Superheros. I imagine it would be similar to the plan he himself was a victim of at Bane's hands. Bane unleashed all the inmates of Arkham and wore Batman out completely, so when they finally fought face-to-face, Bats had nothing left in the tank. Batman probably would devise a plan involving some other heros softening Supes up first, or even taking him down completely. I'm just saying that it doesn't necessarily have to be that way.

[The Question]

I clearly said above "When I said all Batman needs is prep-time and he can take on anyone, that wasn't limited to physical combat."

So Batman should start a major criminal organization that Superman would have no means of bringing down entirely on his own?

Dude, you do realize Batman designed those fail-safe for HIMSELF to use on the JLA. They were designed for one man, the friggin BATMAN.

So? If it took a dozen guys to carry out each plan, I doubt Bruce could do it on his own.

Besides, take Prometheus for example. He immoblized the entire JLA, including Batman, and he did so all by himself. Batman would do so in similar fashion.

Prometheus threatened to kill over 100 innocent people if the League didn't do as he said.

Well by that logic then a character like Metallo wouldn't be able to make Superman break a sweat.

Metally also has a vast amount of superhuman speed and strength on his side.

In most interpretations I've seen, Kryptonite pretty much renders all of Clark's powers null, superspeed included. All he has to do is get close enough. But even so, if your only argument for Bruce not being able to take on Supes using kryptonite is that Supes is "way too damn fast" then you really don't have much of an imagination.

Kryptonite doesn't take away his powers. It just makes him feel like absolute **** and slowly kills him.

In DKR, a 55 year old Bruce defeated Clark in combat using a powered suit, some tank missiles, and a piece of sythetic kryptonite. Yeah, he had some help from Robin and a one-armed Green Arrow, but they did nothing he couldn't have done himself. He took down supes, and I found it believable. That's enough for me.

He couldn't have done those things himself because it would have requird him to be in multiple places at once. And yes, if he were using a super suit of sorts, then a fight between the two would make sense. My problem is how he would obtain the suit, other than him magically pulling it out of his ass like the writers enjoy having him do.

That's subjective. Personally I think it's not only crazy, but just a little stupid.

Oh, it's really more crazy. Bruce is still highly inteligent.

Oh but I think it does. If the two heros weren't so linked together and identified with eachother then I might agree. Then I would be fine with Batman being a character like what Wolverine is to Marvel. Sure, Wolverine is close to the bottom of the food chain in the marvel universe in terms of power. No way could he stand a chance against a character like Juggernaught or dozens of others. But he doesn't need to because he's a better character anyway. Batman is different, at least in regards to Superman.

Batman and Superman aren't just highly popular. They're also almost universally identified with each other. That's why they've been teamed up time and time again moreso than any other two heros over the past 60 years. That's why on several occassions WB has seriously considered green-lighting a Batman/Superman movie. Who are the world's finest? Is it Superman and Wonder Woman? Is it Superman and Flash? Is it Superman and Marian ManHunter? Is it Superman and Green Lantern? Is it Superman and Hawkman? Nope... It's Superman and Batman. They've got to be on a level playing field, otherwise it's just silly teaming them together and calling them the world's finest. Otherwise, Batman's just Superman's sidekick. I'm not saying he needs to be able to take on Darkseid, or mongul. But he DOES need be able to engage Superman. If not, then Batman really should never ever be involved with the Justice League IMO, and certainly not teamed up individually with Clark.

That's not a reason within the continuity for Bruce to be able to beat Clark. That's just Batman and Superman being identified as a team, which stems pretty much entirely from them being DC's two most popular.

It could, but why the hell should it have to?

Because it's the smart thing to do.

Maybe he designs synthetic Red Kryptonite that paralyzes supes completely... oh wait, he already did that... Well maybe he builds this satellite that's designed to.... oh wait, he already did that too... My point is, he's the goddamn Batman.

That's not an excuse. That's saying his namke and putting "the goddamn" on front of it.

It's not hard at all to imagine a way Batman could even the odds with a character like Superman. Hell, he's done before more than once. Who knows, maybe he gets his hands on a green lantern power ring... maybe commandeers some alien technology that teleports them both to a planet with a red sun... Use your imagination.

If Batman had access to a GL ring or highly advanced teleportation technology, then him having a hard time with The Joker makes no sense whatsoever.

But really, I'm not disagreeing with you. If Batman were to take down Superman, his plan almost certainly would involve other Superheros. I imagine it would be similar to the plan he himself was a victim of at Bane's hands. Bane unleashed all the inmates of Arkham and wore Batman out completely, so when they finally fought face-to-face, Bats had nothing left in the tank. Batman probably would devise a plan involving some other heros softening Supes up first, or even taking him down completely. I'm just saying that it doesn't necessarily have to be that way.

It really should, though.

[DavidTyler]

Herein lies the problem, gang. When Superman was created there weren't a lot of superhero characters out there. It was easy for him to be the most powerful character in comix without being much more than a tuned up human. He could hold back trains with a bit of a struggle and lift cars over his head. Then came the onslaught - starting w/Captain Marvel. Well, DC got Marvel axxed and that kept Supes the strongest and the smartest. Soon, however, the assault on Superman's uniqueness was ramped up. There were long underwear characters everywhere who possessed similar powers. DC starting ramping up Superman to get him above the pack. It got to the point where he could move the Earth. After a character does that, how do you write him as having a believable problem with terrestrial types. And he was outsmarting Luthor.

Is it any wonder that Superman, our premeire hero in tights, became one of DC's worst selling main titles? Marvel was killing DC. The solution was simple. Go back and see what made the character work initially. They did it with a lot of their characters - including Batman.

Byrne didn't so much power the character down as he made an honest attempt to return him to the original concept - a tuned up human and not a god. With the exception of 'The Death of Superman', sales of his books were at some of their highest levels. Superman was interesting again.

So now we have fans here who want to return to the power level that makes it imperative that he fight a Mongul every issue?

Let me tell you, if it goes that way, I won't be buying and I'm guessing that a lot of other readers will lose interest quickly.

[KaptainKrypton]

Personally, I don't mind which level they choose, but they should gear him towards that end of the spectrum and keep him there (either urban or nearly cosmic). Having him be an everyday, urban superhero is retarted if he's able to lift continents, if you ask me. Him saving people or stopping bank robbers in those instances every issue is like watching me take out my Monday trash. Otherwise, keep his power levels a little more reserved and make him work for his money in his day to day meanderings. This is definitely a case of not being able to have your cake and eat it, too. Although, after reading Alan Moore's run on Supreme, I wouldn't mind if they did some utterly fantastic stuff with his characterization/abilities and amped it up. Although if it was executed poorly, it would taste like a turd filet.

[The Question]

(embarrased for not noticing the response)


I completely agree. Both DC abd Marvel have a tendancy to want to have it both ways, when really only one works. I would love to see Superman at planet moving levels if his stories were adjusted to acomidate. He can't be able to rearange solar systems and still simply be fighting killer Lexcorp robots on Earth.

[Jacobhiggins]

Well in reality, Superman was the first and everybody in the back of there mind knows Superman is really the Ultimate Superhero so I think they should gear him towards very godly and very powerful and keep him there.

How would you continue writing comics with someone so powerful though, that's the question that's been around for a long time.

Superman might not be the coolest or the most controversial Super Hero, but he was the first and I think should be maybe the most powerful or at the very least, one of the most powerful forces in the DC Universe.

I personally would have him as a rare Superhero, someone who is called when there is no other solution or the circumstances are very dire. When all the other heroes have failed or need help, thats when Superman enters the scene. Have him watching over earth and let him make an appereance every 3 to 4 years when the Universe or Earth is in danger. That would be cool, but that's not gonna happend.

[The Question]

Well in reality, Superman was the first and everybody in the back of there mind knows Superman is really the Ultimate Superhero so I think they should gear him towards very godly and very powerful and keep him there.

How would you continue writing comics with someone so powerful though, that's the question that's been around for a long time.

Superman might not be the coolest or the most controversial Super Hero, but he was the first and I think should be maybe the most powerful or at the very least, one of the most powerful forces in the DC Universe.

I personally would have him as a rare Superhero, someone who is called when there is no other solution or the circumstances are very dire. When all the other heroes have failed or need help, thats when Superman enters the scene. Have him watching over earth and let him make an appereance every 3 to 4 years when the Universe or Earth is in danger. That would be cool, but that's not gonna happend.

The thing is, he doesn't have to be the most powerful to be the ultimate super hero. He simply has to serve as an inspiration to others. He can still have people who are equal to him in power and who are more powerful than he is.

[true316]

Herein lies the problem, gang. When Superman was created there weren't a lot of superhero characters out there. It was easy for him to be the most powerful character in comix without being much more than a tuned up human. He could hold back trains with a bit of a struggle and lift cars over his head. Then came the onslaught - starting w/Captain Marvel. Well, DC got Marvel axxed and that kept Supes the strongest and the smartest. Soon, however, the assault on Superman's uniqueness was ramped up. There were long underwear characters everywhere who possessed similar powers. DC starting ramping up Superman to get him above the pack. It got to the point where he could move the Earth. After a character does that, how do you write him as having a believable problem with terrestrial types. And he was outsmarting Luthor.

Is it any wonder that Superman, our premeire hero in tights, became one of DC's worst selling main titles? Marvel was killing DC. The solution was simple. Go back and see what made the character work initially. They did it with a lot of their characters - including Batman.

Byrne didn't so much power the character down as he made an honest attempt to return him to the original concept - a tuned up human and not a god. With the exception of 'The Death of Superman', sales of his books were at some of their highest levels. Superman was interesting again.

So now we have fans here who want to return to the power level that makes it imperative that he fight a Mongul every issue?

Let me tell you, if it goes that way, I won't be buying and I'm guessing that a lot of other readers will lose interest quickly.

This is an interesting discussion going on in here! :up:

David, I agree with a lot of what you wrote but I disagree with this part that I highlighted. I don't think Bryne returned to the original concept at all (in fact I think he went far from it).

I think its easy for us to look back at Superman's power levels in those early issues of Action Comics and marvel at how un-powerful he is. But to the people back then I don't think that was the case. Remember that Superman was initially rejected by comics publishers because they thought he was too powerful. Back then seeing a character lifting a car over his head and bounce bullets off his chest was a big deal. I know you're into the comics a lot and I was wondering if you've gotten to read those early issues? If you haven't I suggest you check them out because they are really fun. I think he was a hero tailor made for a Depression-era audience. I think a lot of people probably felt like they were being kicked around and here was this character that NO ONE could kick around. For example: Superman Chronicles Volume One (it collects Action Comics #1-13, Superman #1, and NYWF #1). I don't recall one panel where Superman was in any danger! Contrast that with Bryne's Man of Steel series. Early on in the series Superman encounters Bizarro who is his physical equal. We see Superman actually worried about how what the outcome would be. In the 30's the format was simple. Superman would find out about some innocent person being wronged and he would teach the bad guys a lesson. The villains were for the most part the sort you could see in real life (crooked politicians, abusive husbands, etc.). You never saw him worry about the outcome. However, he would often times laugh at the villains futile attempts to hurt him. If I remember correctly kryptonite wasn't even created because they thought they needed the character to be vulnerable in order to be relatable. It was created so that the actor who played Superman on the radio show could have a vacation!

The bigger fundamental change to the original concept that Bryne made was making Clark Kent the real person and Superman the disguise. Although this was fun to see I think this was a mistake. Clark was no longer the invisible guy at the office that gets pushed around. The new Clark was nearly as perfect as his alter ego. He was successful both socially and professionally. I think in a way Bryne's attempt to make him more relatable backfired and made him more unrelatable (just my opinion). Also there was this special inside joke that Superman shared with his audience. While Lois went on and on about how much of a sissy Clark was, he'd turn to us with a grin on his face and give a wink. We were in on the joke with him! As a natural consequence of Clark being the real person, Lois inevitably fell for him. When she did he told her his secret. I think a vital element of the mythology is lost when you do that. The audience used to be the sole protecters of Superman's identity. Now Lois fills that role.

Boy that was longer than I thought it was going to be. :woot:

[The Question]

I've always felt that Clark being a complete lie is bull****. He was raised as Clark Kent. It would be incredibly disrespectful towards his parents to treat his time spent as Clark Kent as a joke.

[true316]

I've always felt that Clark being a complete lie is bull****. He was raised as Clark Kent. It would be incredibly disrespectful towards his parents to treat his time spent as Clark Kent as a joke.

Honestly, I disagree. I don't see it as disrespectful to his parents at all because Superman is the Clark Kent they raised. They played an important role in raising him to be the Earth's greatest hero. The fact that no one knows that this great man is in reality Clark Kent in no way diminishes what the Kents did. I hope I explained that in a way that makes sense.

Changing the subject a little, Question you seem to know alot about different comic characters and I could use a little help with some Superman fan fiction I'm working on. I need a stereotypical mad scientist type of villain from the comics. I vaguely remember someone named Dr. Killgrave but I don't know much about him. If you could give me a brief synopsis of his backstory or if you have any suggestions of characters that fit that description than I would appreciate it! :yay: :up:

[The Question]

Honestly, I disagree. I don't see it as disrespectful to his parents at all because Superman is the Clark Kent they raised. They played an important role in raising him to be the Earth's greatest hero. The fact that no one knows that this great man is in reality Clark Kent in no way diminishes what the Kents did. I hope I explained that in a way that makes sense.

True. But for him to use the name Clark Kent for when he isn't being him seems very disrespectful to his parents. Way I see it, neither side of him is a lie. They're just different sides of him. People are multifaceted.

Changing the subject a little, Question you seem to know alot about different comic characters and I could use a little help with some Superman fan fiction I'm working on. I need a stereotypical mad scientist type of villain from the comics. I vaguely remember someone named Dr. Killgrave but I don't know much about him. If you could give me a brief synopsis of his backstory or if you have any suggestions of characters that fit that description than I would appreciate it! :yay: :up:

I know nothing of Dr. Killgrave. However, there are a few villains who fit that mold:

1) Brainiac: He has two different versions of his origin in the comics. Pre Crisis, he was an alien artificial inteligence created as an enforcer for a Matrix/Borg kind of society with a techno/organic body. In post crisis, he was an organic alien life form who fused with a low level psionic metahuman and created a techno/organic body from fusion. I prefer a combination of the two: He's an artificial life form created to conquer and pacify other worlds that fused with a low level psionic metahuman named Milton Fine and turned his body into a techno/organic one. If you go with that version, then he's not truely veil, he simply wants to take over the world because it is in his nature to do so.

2) Emil Hamilton: He shares Lex Luthor's veiw on metahumans: They are highly dangerous, and ones not from Earth cannot be trusted. To this end, he has tried to destroy Superman a few times

3) Professor Ivo: A sociopath so fearful of death that he will go to any lengs to preserve his life, including murder. He created a super android known as Amazo to try and aquire the powers of metahumans for his own and possibly unlock the secrets to immortality. Now he is immortal through his own scientific experiments, but as a result he is horribly disfigured and in constant pain. Ironically, this has made him quite suicidal.

4) Thomas Morrow: Origionally questing for ultimate knowledge and the power and influence that would come with it, Morrow commited several crimes to gain such knowledge. Eventually, he gained access to a machien that could see into the future. Driven insane by the possible end of the world scenarios he has seen, he has done his best to try and warn others of the possible dangers awaiting. Because of his criminal record and his obvious mental instability, no one believes him.

[Andy C.]

Y'know, I've never really been able to decide what kind of power Superman should ideally have. On the one hand, if you get like the Silver Age stories where he's moving planets on a regular basis, you run out of ideas really quickly for how to make anything a threat to him. On the other hand, if he's back at the DCAU or Byrne-era levels where a couple of missiles take him down, he quickly becomes nothing special in the midst of all the other metas. After all, the old line is "this looks like a job for Superman," not "this looks like a job for any relatively powerful metahuman but Superman just so happens to be here."

Superman stories have got to feel like something particularly special, considering there are umpteen-billion different superhumans with comparable powers. Granted, one of the best ways to do this is to showcase his personality, but at the end of the day, actions speak louder than dialogue. Any cape worth his salt can slug it out with villains or stop the occasional accident. The Big Guy should be able to go the extra mile every now and then.

I'd like his power level to stay usually around urban-hero level, where someone like Metallo can still give him a good scrap, but then he can occasionally (key word: ocassionally, like after some kind of supercharge of sunlight or whatever) do something absolutely mind-blowing to cap off a major story arc. Kinda like how in SR, he was able to lift up the New Krypton continent, but doing so almost killed him. I personally like being kept guessing as to how far he can really go, since it's the only real bit of mystery left in the character.

[The Question]

I do agree, setting specific power levels for Superman is a very tricky thing. Personally, I would make his actions something special, but not necessairily by giving him huge feats. I'd basically make him out as the world's greatest hero, not because he's the most powerful, but because he serves as the moral compass of the DCU (and the League in particular). He is inspirational to them because of what he does, not what he's capable of. His adventures should reflect that. The Elite make very good villains for him in that regard. His stories should be about what it means to do the right thing, and most of his villains should be apart of that. Lex Luthor is the super genius who wants to svae the world wether we like it or not. Metallo is the very nasty killer who has some redeeming qualities that make him hard to place. The Parasite is the living embodyment of impulse, greed, hedonism, and violence, simply doing as he pleases and killing thousands in the process. You get the idea.

[Andy C.]

I do agree, setting specific power levels for Superman is a very tricky thing. Personally, I would make his actions something special, but not necessairily by giving him huge feats. I'd basically make him out as the world's greatest hero, not because he's the most powerful, but because he serves as the moral compass of the DCU (and the League in particular). He is inspirational to them because of what he does, not what he's capable of. His adventures should reflect that.

Kinda like DC's equivalent to Captain America, then (or rather, Captain America would be Marvel's equivalent of Superman, but y'know what I mean) Anyway, I definitely agree; the best thing about Superman should be his genuinely good personality (that's how I became a Supes fan in the first place). But I still think it wouldn't hurt for him to occasionally do something that shows everyone why he's the man.

The Elite make very good villains for him in that regard. His stories should be about what it means to do the right thing, and most of his villains should be apart of that. Lex Luthor is the super genius who wants to svae the world wether we like it or not. Metallo is the very nasty killer who has some redeeming qualities that make him hard to place. The Parasite is the living embodyment of impulse, greed, hedonism, and violence, simply doing as he pleases and killing thousands in the process. You get the idea.

Again, agreed. It also sort of works as a comparison to Batman, who operates primarily through fear ("obey the law or I'll come beat you up") rather than trust.

[The Question]

Kinda like DC's equivalent to Captain America, then (or rather, Captain America would be Marvel's equivalent of Superman, but y'know what I mean) Anyway, I definitely agree; the best thing about Superman should be his genuinely good personality (that's how I became a Supes fan in the first place). But I still think it wouldn't hurt for him to occasionally do something that shows everyone why he's the man.

Again, I think the reason why he's the man should be what he stands for, not how powerful he is. In the League, J'onn is the glue that binds them together, Batman is the brains that gives their power focus, and Superman is the honestly good person who inspires them and leads the charge. That, I think, is why he's the greatest.

Again, agreed. It also sort of works as a comparison to Batman, who operates primarily through fear ("obey the law or I'll come beat you up") rather than trust.

Basically. Superman wholeheartedly feels that human beings have great potential to be good people. Lex Luthor does aswell, but he thinks it needs a helping hand. That's where there's conflict between the two.