The Official Superman Thread

[Spike_x1]

for me, both these stories (movie and the current comic) miss the mark on something i have been hoping to see in superman for a long time for a multitude of reasons. firstly i had hoped that the comics would be the first to give him a child, not a poorly concived movie making him the ultimate deadbeat dad as well as solidifying one of the stupidest ideas about superman and lois lane in the public minds (lois and clark cant have sex because of his abilities, let alone concieve, BULL****!)

the book misses the mark for me in that it just interjects this lil kryptonian brat from the phantom zone... again, why cant lois and clark just have a kid? no cop-outs about his powers preventing it, just let them have a kid. then on top of it we get the 42nd version of zod? shoot me in the face that sucks... didnt we cover this post crisis? isnt zod dead?! what the hell... the first crisis was necesarry for the evolution of the DCU... it couldnt possibly continue the way it was because storytelling had evolved from stand alone stories, to "serial" storytelling to continuity as we now know it. but now IC is just rewriting for the sake of rewriting... oh? whats that? donner wants zod? ok, superboy-prime can just erase him from before! yay! now donner gets his wish! this sucks... change for the sake of evolution is good, but change for the sake of change just plain sucks... its stuff like this and what has been done to wally and bart over on the flash that really is just making me begin to resent IC... this whole story wreaks of cowardess... i wish a writer would grow some balls and just GIVE HIM a kid without all these lame strings attached... kurt busiek is the only writer i know of thats had the balls to say that lois and clark do actually have sex... and its pretty obvious that even though kal-el is an alien, he is still a mammal so it is concievable that a child could be born...

THANK YOU!

Hit the nail smack on the head. The original crisis actually had a reason behind the changes that it made; the DCU needed the changes to survive in the world of storytelling that its characters were developing within. So what exactly is the reasoning behind all of these new changes recently? It certainly can't be because of continuity issues, because the Superman mythos was doing excellent in that department (considering it's an ongoing comic book) before Birthright came out and started stirring things up.

And it sure as hell can't be because of character development.

So I am curious as to what the reasoning behind all of these changes is. Because from a fan's perspective, it appears that it really couldn't be anything more than change for the sake of change, as sethcohen said. But I'm wondering what the writers and executives of DC would say if someone walked up to them and asked specifically why they're making all of these changes to continuity when things were already running smoothly?

I wanna know what kind of half-assed excuse we'll be fed.

As for the topic of the kid, I'm with sethcohen and yenaled on that one. There's no reason why a writer can't have Lois get pregnant, rather than dish out this horse**** plot.

 

[The Question]

Personally, I think the best thing they could have done to give Superman a kid would have been to, in the last few issues of Adventures of Superman, have Mxy's last act before returning to the 5th dimension be combining Clark and Lois' DNA to give them a child.

 

[sethcohen]

Personally, I think the best thing they could have done to give Superman a kid would have been to, in the last few issues of Adventures of Superman, have Mxy's last act before returning to the 5th dimension be combining Clark and Lois' DNA to give them a child.

i still think even that is kind of a cop out...

 

[sethcohen]

I think it more has to do with the (probable) fact this kid won't stick around past this arc. I mean, if it was Lois and Clark's biological child, he'd pretty much have to be in the mythos forever. But this kid could fall into a kryptonite well and nobody would care.

i think LOTS of people would care... they would care so much that they would cheer loudly that this lame stunt of a plot device met its demise!

 

[CConn]

i think LOTS of people would care... they would care so much that they would cheer loudly that this lame stunt of a plot device met its demise!

You missed my point. What I'm saying is their purposes are completely different.

Clark and Lois having a child = Permanent character in the DCU, developed over literally years, and several different writers.

This kid = One-time plot device for a single arc.

 

[sethcohen]

You missed my point. What I'm saying is their purposes are completely different.

Clark and Lois having a child = Permanent character in the DCU, developed over literally years, and several different writers.

This kid = One-time plot device for a single arc.

nah i got it, i just used your point as a springboard to take yet another opportunity to bash a character i hate!

 

[Assassin]

I think after falling in love with this kid, and loosing him, lois will want to put her career on hold and want to have a child.

I dont think Superman is the kind of person to steal another mans Kid, not even Zod's.

 

[Ultimate_Superman]

I think after falling in love with this kid, and loosing him, lois will want to put her career on hold and want to have a child.

I dont think Superman is the kind of person to steal another mans Kid, not even Zod's.

I agree.

 

[The Question]

i still think even that is kind of a cop out...

Why? It gives Lois and Clark a kid without hitting the roadblock of the "how can they have a kid if they're from different speices" question.

 

[Spike_x1]

It doesn't have to be a roadblock at all, considering it's science fiction and we have no way of knowing whether or not a human and an alien are genetically compatible to conceive an offspring.

 

[Ultimate_Superman]

Why? It gives Lois and Clark a kid without hitting the roadblock of the "how can they have a kid if they're from different speices" question.

But isn't that like asking how can the Flash have kids and not have them age like Bart did or come out sooner then they were suppose to with his super-fast sperm?

 

[Eros]

everyone knows, if Lois and Clark were ever to have a kid for real, superman comic book sales would drop. Writers would not know what to do with a story like that. Hell some people still think Lois and Clark should have never gotten married. Adding a kid to a relationship that is already not that good [Lois and clark] is is not a good idea. Its the same reasoning behind why Bruce Wayne can never get married, or why spider-man and Mary Jane still dun have a kid themselves[they have been married since the late 80s].

 

[Ultimate_Superman]

Spidey and MJ had a child but Marvel killed it off. Kind of sad really. I would have loved to see where they went with that.

 

[The Caped Knight]

Spidey and MJ had a child but Marvel killed it off. Kind of sad really. I would have loved to see where they went with that.

Yeah me too .

 

[Darthphere]

Spidey and MJ had a child but Marvel killed it off. Kind of sad really. I would have loved to see where they went with that.

The kid is still alive.

 

[Ultimate_Superman]

The kid is still alive.

Since when I thought they killed baby May off but if your talking about the Spider-Girl comic that doesn't count.

 

[Darthphere]

Im not talking about that.

 

[Eros]

spider-mans baby was stillborn or seemed to be, as a woman named Mongraine took the sedated infant away with her. the kids status is unkown, which is rather weird.

 

[Ultimate_Superman]

Really I thought the GG killed her as well or made Peter and MJ think he did.

 

[Darthphere]

Nope, Eros is right. And it seems Peter and MJ never cared to find out what happened to their kid.

 

[Ultimate_Superman]

Wow thats messed up. they really should have ran with that instead of Sins of the past.

 

[sethcohen]

I think after falling in love with this kid, and loosing him, lois will want to put her career on hold and want to have a child.

I dont think Superman is the kind of person to steal another mans Kid, not even Zod's.

now THAT could be an interesting outcome... making this a catalyst for them having a child of there own could redeem this story

 

[The Question]

But isn't that like asking how can the Flash have kids and not have them age like Bart did or come out sooner then they were suppose to with his super-fast sperm?

It's really not the same thing. Bart can be chalked up to simply being a genetic abnormality. The Flash is still biologically compatible with another human being. Superman shouldn't be.

 

[Spike_x1]

Why wouldn't Superman be genetically compatible? Even in the real world, we have no way of knowing if an alien can impregnate a human.

 

[The Question]

Why wouldn't Superman be genetically compatible? Even in the real world, we have no way of knowing if an alien can impregnate a human.

Yes, we do. Because, unless the alien race in question colonized the Earth millions of years ago or vice virsa, then said alien would be a different speicese. Two different speicese cannot mate. The only thing that would make that work is if Kryptonians somehow had evolved genetically to be able to mate with almost any speicese and still get a Kryptonian child, much like the Vultrimites in Invincible or, in a much wierder way, the Aliens in Alien. And then, it would actually make sense if the Kryptonians gentically altered themselves in such a way so they could rebuild their population in the event of mass deaths. So, I guess I retract my point. If they used an explanation like that, I'd be all for it.