View Single Post
Old 10-12-2011, 06:02 AM   #44
Clark Kent > Superman
hopefuldreamer's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: South West, UK
Posts: 11,849
Default Re: The Official Costume Thread - - - - - - - - - - Part 19

Originally Posted by Kurosawa View Post
Anyone who thinks Superman is not massively disrespected in DKR is reading it wrong. he's a government stooge, a sellout, and Batman makes him his personal *****. Why is him having a daughter with Wonder Woman so great? It's not like he hasn't had children in other Imaginary Stories/Elseworlds. It doesn't matter-DKR is what started it all. It's where Superman went from being the patriarch of the superhero fraternity to being Batman's personal ***** and a loser. For the next 25 years, variations of Miller's Superman permeated DC's comics as Superman was a whiner, an establishment stooge, and of course Batman's eternal inferior. Superman went from being the greatest superhero of all time to DC's designated jobber. And that, along with the abandonment as Superman as the real persona and Clark as the disguise, is exactly why Superman sales went in the toilet. DKR started Batman's ascension to the top spot in DC, and began Superman's fall from grace.

Every Superman fan should read it, so as to see what we are up against with people who either hate, dislike, or don't understand the character. And it's also a great example of how one ******* who becomes a popular artist can ruin a character that has been around since 1938, reducing them to a point of ridicule and near-irrelevance. Because that is what DKR started.

Miller's hatred of Superman comes from his Randian personal beliefs-it is simply part of the core of who he is and what he believes in to hate Superman. Superman stands for what Miller is against. Any hardcore objectivist (which Miller is) will find a pure altruist like Superman appalling. Superman lives his life for others; what things he does for himself are mostly only to allow him to better serve others; and the one thing he DOES do for himself (Clark Kent) is not exactly a high indulgence. His Batman follows Ayn Rand's philosophy to the letter, so Batman is him. Superman is his foil and of course in his series he uses Superman to show how his beliefs are superior and how he is right. Miller is incapable of portraying Superman in any sort of favorable light-it literally goes against his personal philosophy.

This is why the responsible thing for DC to do would have been to never let him touch the character. Frank Miller should never be allowed to write Superman under any circumstances. Not if they give a damn about Superman, that is.
I agree with all of that.

Just last night found myself up against an arguement with two TDKR loving friends, who genuinely think it's an accurate portrayal of Superman, and think Batman would always kick Superman's ****.

Doesn't matter that I try and point out what Superman should really be, or how he used to be portrayed.

They are just laughing and laughing, superman got beat the **** out of, it's great!

So why did DC allow that to happen. Why did they allow a story like this to even see the light of day? And why did they suddenly think that because the book was a success, that meant Superman would be more of a success if they kept showing him getting beaten...

Where they simply trying to appeal to people who hate Superman's sadistic side?!


Superman: "I can only tell you what I believe, Diana. humankind has to be allowed to climb to its own destiny. We can't carry them there."
Flash: "But that's what she's saying. What's the point? Why should they need us at all?"
Superman: "To catch them if they fall."
hopefuldreamer is offline