It's not a proven failure. Realize this: times change. People who started out reading superman were in the midst of the Great Depression. They had very little to look forward to except for things like comic books. The character was there hero b/c he fought the injustices they experienced. He wasn't exactly a complex character, i just re-read my reprint of action comics #1 and he reads like the average tough guy hero of the pulp serials. Like a John Wayne with super powers and tights. His powers were probably on par with Spiderman since he punched his human opponents and jumped everywhere he just so happened to also be bullet proof.
Yes, and that was also a character that stood against authority. In this day and age when we are going through a similar economic downturn (although not quite as severe or even close), a populist Superman would work well.
Times changed. As the silver age progressed the character was expanded with near limitless abilities. He faced increasingly out of this world situations and most people couldn't identify with him.
His comics at that time mostly dealt with personal issues and they sold the most they ever did. His power level and often his powers period were often not important. That period that is slammed so heavily was easily the most successful of the characters history.
Marvel comics introduced characters that were people first, heroes second and the public jumped on it. Finally there were characters they could relate to vs the over-the-top anitcs of someone like superman. Bryne was brought in to take superman back to the basics as they say in spidey the movie "take it back to formula". It included making clark a more viable part of the formula, one that you can actually relate to. He succeeded to a degree.
The problem is Byrne supposedly was brought in to take the character back to basics, but instead they ignored all previous incarnations and created a completely different character and gave it the Superman name. Had they truly went back to basics with Superman as they did with Batman, then they would have went back to the earliest stories and built on that. Instead they ignored everything that came before them.
Both Lois and Clark and Smallville have used that paradigm of Clark being the real person. L&C lasted for 4 seasons and Smallville has lasted for 9. Like it or not that is quite impressive for a television series about a comic book character. He's obviously still immensely popular or success like that of a long running show like Smallville wouldn't be there. Also the animated series focused on the same basic Byrne elements. If anything it made superman relevant for a new generation and as such he remains in the public conscious today. That's hardly a sign of failure.
Lois and Clark was
Moonlighting with Superman as a guest star. It was good at times and annoying at times. Smallville is very hit-and miss, although Rosenbaum was great as Luthor and I'm not a Welling hater. The late 80's syndicated Superboy series was better than either of them and was only canceled because WB wanted to do L&C. One way or another there's been a Superman-related TV show almost continuously since 1988, which is staggering. The animated series looked nice but Superman was always unimpressive and I don't think Timm gets Superman at all. Batman guys usually don't get Supes.
If you don't like it fine, admit it but please stop accusing this take on the character for his demise or some other nonsense.
Looks, walks, quacks like a duck, etc. Superman didn't become a joke and Batman's ***** until Byrne turned him into a Jethro Bodine half ******ed big blue boy scout.
Today people have some many other resources available to them, tv, internet, movies, video games, so no comic books aren't nearly as popular as they once were. You have generations who have been able to experience the character of superman without ever picking up a comic. And much of their experience has included the Clark as the real person while Superman is his creation.
Poor excuse. Look at the sales of Harry Potter and Twilight books. Look at the popularity of manga. Even within the way smaller market that comics now have, Superman doesn't sell like it should.
At this point in time, the movie going audience wants more from their heroes, not necessarily dark motivations or whatever, but more well developed, characters, bruce from the batman movies is a good example as is Tony Stark. You keep saying how they need to go back to the clark is the mask version, but tell me how would you translate that into a movie? How would you develop the character in a way that the audience can actually invest their emotions into? You want to kill his parents also, right? How do we as an audience get an inside look at the character with his parents out of the way and no one else to serve as his "sounding board"? Please start thinking about these very real issues from a filmmaking standpoint instead of as a disgruntled fan.
It didn't seem to hurt anything for Clark to be the disguise for 50+ years and first two Reeve movies. If it's done well, people will respond to it. If Superman is written with the heroic figure a disguise and the whining human identity the reality, then he is the same as Spider-Man or Daredevil or any number of other characters. They made Superman into a Marvel character and took away who he was. Tarantino is very close in Kill Bill when he had Carradine discuss Superman, except that Clark is more like a tribute to the human race than a critique. Bill is right until he pigeonholes Clark as nothing more than a mere coward. I like to think of Clark as Superman's vulnerable side. Keeping the Kents alive keeps Superman perpetually Superboy and makes him more fit into the Spider-Man persona, which is fine for what it is but simply is NOT Superman. What they have creates is a Colossus/Spider-Man hybrid, as their Superman is a simple farmboy with a creative side (Colossus is an artist), but is overall very simple and good. Well, that's all well and fine except Superman is NOT simple. He's the son of one of the greatest scientists in the Universe, he's a scientist himself, and he is a cerebral guy. Superman should be mature, confident and urbanized. The farmboy junk is crap and makes the character into something he's not. One can be virtuous and cosmopolitan.
What DC did was they brought in a Marvel guy to Marvelize Superman. The Post-Crisis Superman is a weak cross between Spider-Man and Colossus. The books sales, popularity and relevance have massively waned in that time, bolstered only by stunts like killing the character or marrying him off, although I will admit the Doomsday story was a pretty great story. Batman maintains his popularity and connectivity with people BECAUSE they have stuck to his roots and the core of the character. What they did with Superman was jettison EVERYTHING Jerry Siegel and the writers after him had done, keeping NOTHING but the name and visual. That character has as much in common with what Siegel created as a character like The Sentry or Supreme or any number of Superman ripoffs. They got rid of everything that had made the character a massive success.
The audience related to Superman for 50+ years because the character represents wish fulfillment and the idea that we can be more than what people perceive us to be. The audience should relate to Clark and awe at Superman. That's the forumla that worked for 50 years and that's what the character was created to do. Batman is bigger than ever because DC has stuck with what Finger and Kane created him to be. With Superman, they've screwed with the basics too much, and the results show.
t: I missed it somehow.
I'm sorry but i don't buy it. Plenty of adults have fully formed personalities and great relationships with their parents. The kents are just fine being alive. It doesn't make him superboy. He doesn't have to run to them with every proplem he has but they sure don't need to be killed off to make him a man. 
? Seriously what you're describing is spiderman to a T. He's the nerdy guy who gets powers now the world's his oyster or so he thinks at the begining. Every superhero is about wish fulfillment! Ok maybe not Batman, but pretty much anyone with powers. At least that's how i always viewed them. It's no secret i love me some superheroes 
