War of the Supermen

[Kitsune]

No what Im saying is, why would SUPERMAN let anybody kick his ass. silver-age superman would never let batman or any other hero talk down to him or make him look a fool. Hes freaking superman,a living al Legend, the greatest hero earth will ever know.

Silver Age Superman SUCKED. He was boring and overpower because he had to be tougher than anyone else.

 

[hippie_hunter]

Granted, but I do think that post-Crisis they underpowered him somewhat. The current incarnation of Superman feels more like a perfect balance IMO.

 

[TheCorpulent1]

The current power levels are great. Superman's basically among the top-tier characters in strength, speed, and durability, but he doesn't overshadow the Flashes, he's still vulnerable to plenty of things, and he doesn't randomly develop new powers on the fly.

Except for that weird spectral vision thing he had a little while ago, but I think that's been mostly forgotten.

 

[Spike_x1]

I don't see how they underpowered him. He was still effortlessly lifting spaceplanes that were the size of buildings, as well as Luthor's HUGE luxury yacht, all without any "Hmph" sound effects to show that he was straining to lift it at all. I don't even notice a difference between his current strength level and the level that Byrne had him at during MOS. From the evidence I see, it's actually been pretty consistent since the late 80's, except for one instance that I can recall in the 90s, where Superman was struggling to drag a beached tanker ship along the ground, and bring it back out to sea. That was too weak for my liking, but otherwise his strength looks to be pretty much the same as it was since MOS.

 

[Kurosawa]

The power cut was nowhere near as harmful as the elimination of his previous personality. Jerry Siegel established in 1938 that Superman was independent, confident, and was the true persona, with Clark as the disguise. For years, Superman's powers and history changed, but the core personality of the character remained consistent. When Byrne created his version in MOS (all post-Byrne versions have the same basic personality), he completely threw all vestiges of what Siegel and Shuster created out of the window apart from names, settings and visuals. In 2009, Batman is still a brilliant detective driven by vengeance who operates with his fists and his wits. But Superman is no longer the confident man who is completely mature, doesn't run to his momma for advice, and knows who he is and what his mission is. When Byrne and DC killed off what Siegel created, they went away from the core concept of the character. I wouldn't care if Superman was at a 1938 power level if he acted like himself, didn't take **** from anyone, and he was Superman in reality and not Smallville Clarkie. Byrne didn't take the Super out of Superman. He took the MAN out of Superman and that's why we now have Batman's *****.

I thought a great example of how Siegel saw HIS character was in the K-Metal story, the story that DC rejected and finally took control completely from Siegel and Shuster. Upon losing his powers, forever as far as he knows, Superman immediately decides to press on with his mission regardless of being powerless. THAT is how Superman should be depicted...that even powerless, he is going to push on because he believes that strongly is what he is fighting for.

 

[Spike_x1]

He still seems pretty confident and mature to me, and except for when a writer comes along who wants to show off the Bat-god, he hasn't really been known to take much guff from anyone without a fight.

 

[SouLeSS]

I have no idea what Kurosawa is talking about.

He seems like the same confident badass superman as always. He stops in with his mom/dad to talk with them, and is a bit confused over the whole "well my entire race just came back so now what the **** am I to do?" but then again...he should be.

 

[Spike_x1]

I have no idea what Kurosawa is talking about.

He seems like the same confident badass superman as always. He stops in with his mom/dad to talk with them, and is a bit confused over the whole "well my entire race just came back so now what the **** am I to do?" but then again...he should be.

Agreed.

 

[Kurosawa]

There are countless examples of him running home to momma whenever times get rough, scenes of him doubting his purpose, scenes of him humiliated by Batman and other characters. The evidence is there to the point where a humiliation by a Bat-character is a required part of a major storyline, as the writers of this story are promising. Don't delude yourselves.

As I have often said, I understand people aren't interested in seeing DC questioned, nor are they likely to agree with my views about the purity of creator's visions, or the importance of the history of comics. I know to most modern readers anything older than 20 years ago is garbage and the most current revision is almost always right. I know that names like Siegel and Kirby have little relevance to today's readers, and they certainly do not care if characters are changed and their versions of the characters are all but eliminated. I know that. I realize that I am extremely radical in my views...all I ever wish to do is state my piece.

Today's readers and comics do not need a Superman who is confident, assured and respected anyway. They got the character that they wanted and they deserve it.

 

[Spike_x1]

There are countless examples of him running home to momma whenever times get rough, scenes of him doubting his purpose, scenes of him humiliated by Batman and other characters. The evidence is there to the point where a humiliation by a Bat-character is a required part of a major storyline, as the writers of this story are promising. Don't delude yourselves.

Today's readers and comics do not need a Superman who is confident, assured and respected anyway. They got the character that they wanted and they deserve it.

Yeah, yeah, sure.

 

[Kurosawa]

It's the truth. But I understand denial, and I know modern fans don't know Siegel, Binder, Boring, Swan, Maggin, etc, from Adam and they could care less how Superman used to be, except to depict it all like it was Turtle Boy stories or other silly stuff.

 

[Spike_x1]

Believe what you want.

 

[SouLeSS]

It's the truth. But I understand denial, and I know modern fans don't know Siegel, Binder, Boring, Swan, Maggin, etc, from Adam and they could care less how Superman used to be, except to depict it all like it was Turtle Boy stories or other silly stuff.

That's exactly why they don't know/care about those names. Because most of those old stories are boring as hell.

 

[Anubis]

If Supes was like he was back then, then he'd be Hal Jordan. And Hal's a c**t.

 

[Kurosawa]

Believe what you want.

It's more like knowing what I'm talking about,

That's exactly why they don't know/care about those names. Because most of those old stories are boring as hell.

Wow, that's so ****ing clever. Especially coming from a guy who has an avatar from a Judd (Hack) Winick story.

Don't have much to say for a supposed comics fan who has no respect for Siegel or Kirby...that's like people who claim to like music but say the Beatles suck. Ignorance is bliss I guess.

 

[Kurosawa]

If Supes was like he was back then, then he'd be Hal Jordan. And Hal's a c**t.

I like Hal fine, but he's never been much like Superman apart from being confident and sometimes cocky. He had brothers...lots of comrades, etc, whereas Superman had a more solitary existence-no one completely understood just how heavy his responsibility was to him, how sentimental he was about the people he loved...luckily All-Star Superman showed just how interesting that character was. Hal had a whole core that goes through the same kinds of issues as he does, while Superman has no real peer.

 

[taskmaster]

It's more like knowing what I'm talking about,



Wow, that's so ****ing clever. Especially coming from a guy who has an avatar from a Judd (Hack) Winick story.

Don't have much to say for a supposed comics fan who has no respect for Siegel or Kirby...that's like people who claim to like music but say the Beatles suck. Ignorance is bliss I guess.

You know, it is possible to respect something and still not like it. The Beatles were talented musicians to be sure, that doesn't mean I have to like them(and I don't) in order to like music. And the news story as I recall didn't even say anything about Batman beating up Superman. It was more along the lines of him fighting the Kryptonians that are going to be at war with Earth.

 

[Spike_x1]

It's more like knowing what I'm talking about,

See, almost everything you've said here has been opinions, rather than "knowing" facts. And they're pretty pessimistic and stupid opinions too, coming across as hating something for the sake of hating on it. So I'm reasonably content in my belief that anything you say is essentially worthless in any conversation, since conversing with a brick wall isn't too much fun.

 

[SouLeSS]

Wow, that's so ****ing clever. Especially coming from a guy who has an avatar from a Judd (Hack) Winick story.

Don't have much to say for a supposed comics fan who has no respect for Siegel or Kirby...that's like people who claim to like music but say the Beatles suck. Ignorance is bliss I guess.

I never said that I personally didn't respect the names you mentioned. I said that I know for a fact plenty of people can't stand the older writing/comics because they're boring as **** and filled with wayyyyy to much dialog that's dated as all hell.

Also, just because I have an avatar of Todd - which I put up pre-Battle of the Cowl in response to many peoples avatars and "I AM BATMANs" or "the real batman" - doesn't mean ****. It has nothing to do with it being a Winick story (hell, I didn't even realize that's where it was from, I found it off corp or darth's livejournal that has a bunch of avatars on it. I think it was Darth's. One of those two, thats for true.

Also, I get a kick out of how everytime you come into a thread you shove down our throats "omg i know I have radical ideas and people dont agree with me!" But you've time and time again used your personal opinions on things and stated them as fact, so who knows how your brain works.

 

[Kurosawa]

See, almost everything you've said here has been opinions, rather than "knowing" facts. And they're pretty pessimistic and stupid opinions too, coming across as hating something for the sake of hating on it. So I'm reasonably content in my belief that anything you say is essentially worthless in any conversation, since conversing with a brick wall isn't too much fun.

I believe if you are discussing any topic, then knowledge of the subject is vital. It is not an opinion that what Superman has become is radically different from what Siegel intended. Now if being told that offends people, that is their issue, but the proof is in the material itself. Of course to understand that, you would need to study the stories, the history of the character and it's creators, and then weigh the evidence and decide for yourself: is what DC have turned Superman into good or bad, and has it been such a radical change that it's not really the same character, except on a superficial level? Were these changes made for financial reasons, because DC had control of Batman's rights, and so did they bury Superman and elevate Batman as their flagship character/franchise because they owned it outright, with no legal challenges coming? I do feel that within the fictional DC Universe and in the reality of DC's marketing that Superman's position and prestige has taken a downturn, and IN MY OPINION a lot of the decline is because they have strayed too far from what Siegel and Shuster meant for Superman to be. Batman is still for the most part, pretty close to the Kane/Finger model besides him being an absurd Bat-god. I think they've changed Superman too much and they have hurt his appeal. Not his powers, not his history, but the character himself. They took what Siegel established and completely reversed it.

I never said that I personally didn't respect the names you mentioned. I said that I know for a fact plenty of people can't stand the older writing/comics because they're boring as **** and filled with wayyyyy to much dialog that's dated as all hell.

Also, just because I have an avatar of Todd - which I put up pre-Battle of the Cowl in response to many peoples avatars and "I AM BATMANs" or "the real batman" - doesn't mean ****. It has nothing to do with it being a Winick story (hell, I didn't even realize that's where it was from, I found it off corp or darth's livejournal that has a bunch of avatars on it. I think it was Darth's. One of those two, thats for true.

Also, I get a kick out of how everytime you come into a thread you shove down our throats "omg i know I have radical ideas and people dont agree with me!" But you've time and time again used your personal opinions on things and stated them as fact, so who knows how your brain works.

Yet you just stated old comics had too much dialogue and are dated and boring as hell just like that was a fact too, so I guess your brain works the same as mine, at least when you think you're right.

 

[SouLeSS]

I said that I know for a fact that people can't stand the oldering writing or comics because of the way the dialog is and how its wordy and dated as hell.

Which, to be honest, is true. It's not "me saying my opinion is fact". There are even people on these boards who will back me up and say they aren't a fan of the older stuff because of that.

Don't go toe to toe with people unless you can actually keep up.

 

[Spike_x1]

I believe if you are discussing any topic, then knowledge of the subject is vital. It is not an opinion that what Superman has become is radically different from what Siegel intended. Now if being told that offends people, that is their issue, but the proof is in the material itself. Of course to understand that, you would need to study the stories, the history of the character and it's creators, and then weigh the evidence and decide for yourself: is what DC have turned Superman into good or bad, and has it been such a radical change that it's not really the same character, except on a superficial level? Were these changes made for financial reasons, because DC had control of Batman's rights, and so did they bury Superman and elevate Batman as their flagship character/franchise because they owned it outright, with no legal challenges coming? I do feel that within the fictional DC Universe and in the reality of DC's marketing that Superman's position and prestige has taken a downturn, and IN MY OPINION a lot of the decline is because they have strayed too far from what Siegel and Shuster meant for Superman to be. Batman is still for the most part, pretty close to the Kane/Finger model besides him being an absurd Bat-god. I think they've changed Superman too much and they have hurt his appeal. Not his powers, not his history, but the character himself. They took what Siegel established and completely reversed it.

See, this post right here has some intelligence behind it. I don't happen to agree with the opinion being expressed, but at least it's not coming across as closeminded and belittling to people who don't share your views, which your earlier posts were doing, saying that today's readers don't have any respect for the creators of old (you even specifically say that's the truth, not simply an opinion), and that modern readers are "deluding" themselves into thinking that Superman today is mature and confident, but that you understand their "denial." Posts like those are easy ways to get on various Ignore lists, since they come across as blindly belittling the intelligence and dedication of entire demographics without actually adding anything but smug insults to the conversation.

 

[Kurosawa]

I said that I know for a fact that people can't stand the oldering writing or comics because of the way the dialog is and how its wordy and dated as hell.

Which, to be honest, is true. It's not "me saying my opinion is fact". There are even people on these boards who will back me up and say they aren't a fan of the older stuff because of that.

Don't go toe to toe with people unless you can actually keep up.

You are seriously reaching there it you are trying to justify that as opinion and not that you stated it as a fact. You stated it as a fact because you believe it that strongly, and people do that all the time, myself included. You also added a snide comment at the end, but there's no reason for me to get into childish insults with people. I won't deny that I've done the same thing.

See, this post right here has some intelligence behind it. I don't happen to agree with the opinion being expressed, but at least it's not coming across as closeminded and belittling to people who don't share your views, which your earlier posts were doing, saying that today's readers don't have any respect for the creators of old (you even specifically say that's the truth, not simply an opinion), and that modern readers are "deluding" themselves into thinking that Superman today is mature and confident, but that you understand their "denial." Posts like those are easy ways to get on various Ignore lists, since they come across as blindly belittling the intelligence and dedication of entire demographics without actually adding anything but smug insults to the conversation.

You're probably right, it's once again just part of my frustration as I see work that I admire ignored simply due to it's age, etc. When I started reading comics, I never belittled the comics from the past because I knew they had something to offer and I was interested in the work and the development of the art form. So when I see people just look at work of people like Siegel, or Kirby, Eisner, Sprang, Wood, etc, and dismiss it..it gets to me.

 

[Eros]

I think what Kurosawa is saying, is that modern age superman is very ironically more Brandon routh superman, while silver age superman is more christopher reeve superman. Despite the fact Routh was suppose to be playing Donner superman, he had all the problems of modern age superman and then sum. Modern age superman is passive agressive at times, while silver age superman had was a almost a near perfect hero, a true superman. Im not a huge fan of silver-age DC comics, but silver-age superman along of chris Reeves was probably the best represantation of the superman character. Its like comparieng Chris Reeves superman and Dean cains superman.

 

[Kurosawa]

I think what Kurosawa is saying, is that modern age superman is very ironically more Brandon routh superman, while silver age superman is more christopher reeve superman. Despite the fact Routh was suppose to be playing Donner superman, he had all the problems of modern age superman and then sum. Modern age superman is passive agressive at times, while silver age superman had was a almost a near perfect hero, a true superman. Im not a huge fan of silver-age DC comics, but silver-age superman along of chris Reeves was probably the best represantation of the superman character. Its like comparieng Chris Reeves superman and Dean cains superman.

Reeve's character was a variation on the Silver/Bronze Age Superman, but he wasn't exactly the same, obviously. Routh was supposedly playing the same character and in a lot of ways he was, but they made some misjudgements in his characterization and it was way to much of a rehash.

Post-Crisis Superman bears little resemblance in personality to either of those or to Superman as he was written from 1938-1986. I think that has hurt his appeal, and made him less intriguing. Batman has not been drastically altered from what Kane and Finger designed him to be. Namor is still a sea monarch with a fierce temper. Cap is still a super-patriot, the FF are still explorers and adventurers. Other characters like Hulk and Spider-Man who did see changes evolved into them, they didn't have those changes retroactively forced onto them. Even Wonder Woman, who saw much more radical changes across the board than Superman, did not go under a complete reversal of character and concept. Before the Multiverse was brought back, not a single Jerry Siegel Superman story was canon anywhere in the DC Universe. That was just wrong, and I'm grateful that they at least threw older fans like me a bone there. We were starving for 20 years as everything we loved about DC was eliminated and sneered at, so we will take it.

And then came All-Star Superman, once again showing how interesting that kind of Superman really is. Morrision's writing is as close to getting it right as I've seen in years. The ideal version to me will always be Elliot S! Maggin's version, however. The amazing thing is even though I was against those fundamental changes and still am, there have still been a fair share of great Superman stories in the past 20 years. It's like DC wants to hold him back and run him down but he's so great that even when they make a conscious effort to stop him, he takes over. And even though the Post-Crisis version isn't MY Superman, it still pisses me off when they make him look bad and makes me glad when he is given the respect that he, as a Superman, deserves more than anyone.