Superman, C/D?

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
THE THREAD TO END ALL THREADS! Might as well be Comics, C/D?

Now of course, Superman = Classic to the power of Classic, but he's also got dud elements (e.g. he's a square). It's his secret identity, naturally, and a big part of his power.
I've just read the chapter in Men of Tomorrow about Superman's debut in print and I wish I had the book with me to quote at length certain passages about what it was that made Superman such a smash hit.
Jones talks about the scene with Superman carrying a gangster while running along power lines and cracking a joke about how the gangster won't get electrocuted unless Superman ACCIDENTALLY lets him touch a pole and get grounded. It's the first of many GIANT WINKS from Superman, and it's that, as much as the robust manliness borrowed from Doc Savage and Philip Wylie's Gladiator that charged the kiddies. Not only is Superman a power fantasy, but he ENJOYS the power!
Jones talks about how Siegel & Shuster, as grown men clinging to the safety raft of youthful imagination in the storm of adult consequences and responsibilities, got what more mature writers couldn't, in regards to KIDS LIKE FUN, as well as Adventure/Danger/Leggy Women.
Obviously, the material in Showcase Presents Superman Vol. 1 is, like, the apex of this, with Superman constantly goofing on Lois and Jimmy (and getting goofed on by Batman, ho ho!), and THE REST OF THE WORLD!!!
Which is maybe where Superman's gone WRONG (outside of GM's JLA) for the last generation or so. He's no longer the Winking Strongman, he's (especially since his death and return) BURDENED by his power, and the Cross-Publisher Uncle Bennian caveat has weighed him down like a Kryptonite Necklace. Where is Miss Tessmacher to jump in the pool (in a translucent white dress, no less!) and return him to a planet where the gravity is indeed LESSER than on Krypton?

Huk-L (Huk-L), Wednesday, 1 February 2006 15:59 (twelve years ago) Permalink

And, despite the many travails of Siegel and Shuster and the copyright/ownership of Superman, the Showcase Presents volume makes a case for corporate ownership--or at least shared responsibility for fictional characters, as Superman was refined over the years (though obviously Batman makes an even better case for this). The collaborative imagination of the National Periodicals/DC editorial staff and stringers surely trumped "creative control" of the character's creator--though Siegel continued turning out good stuff, and generally improved as time went on and played a role in bring Superman from THE FAD OF '38 to AMERICAN ICON.

Huk-L (Huk-L), Wednesday, 1 February 2006 16:11 (twelve years ago) Permalink

I've only seen a few of them (& I don't know if there are many more than that), but the Fleischer Superman cartoons (from the early 40s) seem to epitomize what makes Superman work better than anything else I can think of - Lois romance on the backburner, big pulpy villains, cliffhanger-type danger & derring-do, lots of big-city grandeur & splendor (matched by Supes' grandeur & splendor) (& the splendor / grandeur of the US, of course).

Or maybe I shd say: what CAN make Supes work - as Showcase shows, he also works as an amped-up sitcom character.

David R. (popshots75`), Wednesday, 1 February 2006 16:24 (twelve years ago) Permalink

Okay, in the spirit of Comics C/D then...

It's all very well to say that the great appeal of Superman is that he was fun and he enjoyed his power and there was all this goofiness etc, and that's why he appealed to the kids BUT do you think that if Superman became fun again and etc and so on, the kids would be rushing to the shops to buy Superman comics?

Two things - The cross-publisher Uncle Bennian caveat was imposed because it worked - whiny indecisive Peter Parker was what the kids wanted. Teen angst fantasy was more popular than innocent-enjoyment-of-superpowers fantasy. And in the last couple of decades, what have the big sellers been? Dark Knight, Watchmen, Spawn, Sandman - the 'gritty' stuff.

The other thing is, we could argue about whether the chicken or the egg came first with those changes, whether the stories changed to attract the new audience or the audience changed because of the new stories, but neither one is going to fit back into the shell. The medium isn't suddenly going to appeal to kids again (and the distribution channels won't suddenly change), so even if 'the kids' out there would much prefer stories about happy winking Superman to stories about angsty Alex-Rossy Superman, they're not going into a comics shop, and they're not interested in comics as such.

So when you/we talk about what Superman SHOULD be (and what comics SHOULD be) - what does this really mean? That stories like this get to the heart of the appeal of comics (to who?) That they exemplify the strengths of the form? That Superman wouldn't have been such a hit _then_ if he was written like Superman _now_? (Making Superman stories different from other stories... how exactly?) That the iconic power of Superman rests on this early incarnation, perhaps?

Ray (Ray), Wednesday, 1 February 2006 16:25 (twelve years ago) Permalink

Wow. Great points, Ray.

Huk-L (Huk-L), Wednesday, 1 February 2006 16:30 (twelve years ago) Permalink

Obviously, you've exposed (to me, at least) certain blinders I had on (w/r/t looking almost exclusively through SPS and Men of Tomorrow).
David R. also raises the great Cross-Media Adventures of Superman: The newspaper strip and radio show launched within a couple of years of Action Comics #1, and the Fleischer cartoons hot on those heels.
AND, Jimmy Olsen and Perry White both had their starts in the radio show, which is like, in today's weirdo Bizarro comix microverse BLASPHEMY. People (i.e. Internet People) (NB: internet people /= PEOPLE, not really) (except us, cuz we're better) get incensed when elements of OTHERMEDIA superhero stuff gets pulled into ComicsLand, which is a real shame. Cuz non-comics people sometimes have great ideas.


Huk-L (Huk-L), Wednesday, 1 February 2006 16:37 (twelve years ago) Permalink

I don't think I was saying anything new or original, (and it wasn't meant as a slap-down) I guess I'm just interested in whether you mean "This (goofiness, enjoying power, winking) is what makes Superman great" or "This is what made Superman a huge success when he appeared."

Ray (Ray), Wednesday, 1 February 2006 16:45 (twelve years ago) Permalink

"This is what made Superman a huge success when he appeared." is what G. Jones suggests in Men of Tomorrow, though admits that there's no way of knowing just why the kids were asking for "the comic with Superman in it" (since sales figures took several months to come in, the publishers didn't put Superman on the cover of Action again until #7 and Supes didn't become the regular COVER STAR until #19).

"This (goofiness, enjoying power, winking) is what makes Superman great", to ME, I should cop to.
Obviously, this very stuff (and the perception of its perpetuity) is exactly why Superman has fallen out of favour since at least the mid-Sixties, while the angst of Spider-Man and Hulk, the grim solitude/vengeance of Batman/Punisher, and sheer violence/male hormonalism of Wolverine have eclipsed him.

Huk-L (Huk-L), Wednesday, 1 February 2006 16:53 (twelve years ago) Permalink

And certainly the shift from looking up to fantastic heroes to identifying with heroic figures was not isolated to comic books in the sixties.

Huk-L (Huk-L), Wednesday, 1 February 2006 17:00 (twelve years ago) Permalink

http://www.archive.org/details/superman_1941

s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 1 February 2006 17:03 (twelve years ago) Permalink

Sweet, thanks!
So by 1941, within three years of his public debut (and I don't know what the lead time was on cartoons back then) Superman was INESCAPABLE.

Huk-L (Huk-L), Wednesday, 1 February 2006 17:49 (twelve years ago) Permalink

People (i.e. Internet People) (NB: internet people /= PEOPLE, not really) (except us, cuz we're better) get incensed when elements of OTHERMEDIA superhero stuff gets pulled into ComicsLand, which is a real shame. Cuz non-comics people sometimes have great ideas.

Is this so true, though? Batman fans don't seem all that outraged about Harley Quinn. When Marvel makes the X-Men and Bullseye start dressing like they did in the movies, nobody really freaks out. I think there are more examples from the Bruce Timm Batman/Superman/Justice League cartoons too, but I can't think of any right now. Wikipedia claims that Mr. Freeze's current origin comes from the cartoon, but I don't know if that's true. I also find a claim that Gotham Central's Renee Montoya is from the Batman cartoon.

The Yellow Kid, Wednesday, 1 February 2006 20:33 (twelve years ago) Permalink

Okay, the Batman:TAS-through-JLU might be an exception to the rule (and perhaps I made more of this than it deserved). But I seem to recall a fair amount of bemoaning and bewitching over the alignment of Superman: Birthright with Smallville vs. John Byrne's MoS.

Huk-L (Huk-L), Wednesday, 1 February 2006 20:37 (twelve years ago) Permalink

OMG Correctly Linked Ben Affleck is Earth-2 Superman!

Chuck_Tatum (Chuck_Tatum), Wednesday, 1 February 2006 20:50 (twelve years ago) Permalink

Written by Ann Coulter!!!

Huk-L (Huk-L), Wednesday, 1 February 2006 20:51 (twelve years ago) Permalink

they shoulda stuck with the original casting--kyle machlachlan!!

s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 1 February 2006 21:08 (twelve years ago) Permalink

It's kind of a tough question with a very easy answer, and the answer, of course, is a huge "CLASSIC".

To me, Superman is like ABBA; the moment when he rips open his shirt to reveal the "S" being the equivalent of the piano line from the beginning of "Dancing Queen"; a signal telling that you have just arrived into this amazing wonderland of illusion and from now on anything can happen. Both of them are so innocent in essence (and I believe the essence of Superman goes far beyond from being an political american icon or something like that) it almost breaks my heart whenever I see the rest of the world turning away from them.

One thing that amazes me from the both of them is how they inspire such great work from such talented people. I'm thinking about the superb posts Marcello Carlin wrote about ABBA and stuff like "Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow?". Both of them made me feel like they were trying to recapture some of the innocence they lost at some point but the characters/music still keep.

iodine (iodine), Thursday, 2 February 2006 04:20 (twelve years ago) Permalink

And even when they are not happy, it's hard not to empathise with them; I do when I listen to "The Visitors" (because they didn't deserve to go through this) or when I read the crap superman stories Huk mentions (because he also deserves way better than this)

iodine (iodine), Thursday, 2 February 2006 04:23 (twelve years ago) Permalink

The average story of the burdened Superman by Rucka or whoever would be the equivalent of,I don't know, James Blunt making a cover version of "Me and I".

iodine (iodine), Thursday, 2 February 2006 04:30 (twelve years ago) Permalink

three months pass...
Gaiman says C:
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.06/myth.html

Huk-L (Huk-L), Wednesday, 24 May 2006 16:53 (twelve years ago) Permalink

I totally just ordered that book.

Huk-L (Huk-L), Wednesday, 24 May 2006 17:14 (twelve years ago) Permalink

You know, I totally understand the point Gaiman's trying to make when he says Luthor is Supes' only memorable bad guy, and I also mostly agree with the point. Still, the inner fan-nerdling that I mostly try to repress wants to scream out, "whattabout BRAINIAC?" Dude's pretty memorable to me.

barefoot manthing (Garrett Martin), Wednesday, 24 May 2006 17:27 (twelve years ago) Permalink

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/3/36/Billdavecarradine.jpg/250px-Billdavecarradine.jpg

Other heroes are really only pretending: Peter Parker plays Spider-Man; Bruce Wayne plays Batman. For Superman, it’s mild-mannered reporter Clark Kent that’s the disguise – the thing he aspires to, the thing he can never be. He really is that hero, and he’ll never be one of us

Jordan (Jordan), Wednesday, 24 May 2006 17:28 (twelve years ago) Permalink

Dude's pretty memorable to me.

Forgot to mention that I've never followed the Superman comics ever, until the last few months. I'm sure Huk can remember like 8 billion Superman villains, but, to this mostly non-Superfan, Brainiac stands out as his only really classic major/serious nemesis, outside of Luthor. And of course my entire comment is nothing but pedantic nerdliness, and totally unnecessary since I do mostly agree with Gaiman's point.

barefoot manthing (Garrett Martin), Wednesday, 24 May 2006 17:34 (twelve years ago) Permalink

And the "best" (most interesting, most inviting to introducing new story possibilities, to contemporize the character and make him relatable) thing about the Byrne revision, was to reverse that, make Clark Kent the real guy and Superman the whatever, and we (we who read the superman books of the late 80s) got to see the Superman persona become MORE of a real guy, because, even though Clark Kent was more likable post-Byrne he still kinda sucks.

xpost

No, no, it's Luthor and Brainiac and that's it.

Huk-L (Huk-L), Wednesday, 24 May 2006 17:39 (twelve years ago) Permalink

AND BIZARRO!!!

I mean, everybody else is pretty one-note (though some are awesome, but hardly iconic): Parasite, Toyman, Prankster, Terra-Man, Vartox (awesome), Titano (awesome), Zod (never as awesome in the comics as Terrence Stamp was--except one comic, but I can't say which).
If you wanna get down to it, Superman's biggest, most iconic and enduring antagonist is Lois Lane, AMIRITE???

Huk-L (Huk-L), Wednesday, 24 May 2006 17:55 (twelve years ago) Permalink

I grew up with Byrne's Superman, and I can't believe he wasn't always like that, so yay Byrne.

On the other hand, Byrne's villains are generally craptastic whatever comic he's writing, so maybe it's all his fault.


Chuck_Tatum (Chuck_Tatum), Wednesday, 24 May 2006 17:59 (twelve years ago) Permalink

XPOST!

mr mxyzptlk! bizarro (a word that has steadily crept into the language)! terence stamp!

i suppose gaiman means that luthor is the only superman villain that the gen pub might've heard of - but then only cos of the movies, tv etc

these days in the comics, batman seems to be superman's biggest nemesis - is this a post-Dark Knight trope? i think so

superman is classic because he is the FIRST ie he is elvis (who, i think elaine dundy in her bk abt elvis and his ma sez, was TOTALLY into Captain Marvel comics - Captain Marvel was modelled on Fred MacMurray - if you kinda hook all that up, well done!)

Ward Fowler (Ward Fowler), Wednesday, 24 May 2006 18:00 (twelve years ago) Permalink

Tho brainiac and bizarro beat Luthor in that they've actually made it into the language.

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Wednesday, 24 May 2006 18:07 (twelve years ago) Permalink

yeah, supposedly the King fashioned his hair after Cap'n Marvel, or whoever Marv's boy sidekick was. What a different world it'd be if it was Captain Monica Rambeau Marvel instead of Batson.

I know all the villains who popped up in the cartoons and movies, like Bizarro and Mxyzptlk and the Phantom Zone fellas, but those first two are pretty damn goofy and harmless seeming, and with the latter, well, I've never known if Zod was actually in the comic or a Hollywood original. And, man, those movies can screw you up when you're a DC novice. As a kid I never got why Luthor was some corny used car salesman type in the movie, but then some super evil bad-ass in a Ralph Lauren Phantom suit in the cartoon.

barefoot manthing (Garrett Martin), Wednesday, 24 May 2006 18:10 (twelve years ago) Permalink

likewise kryptonite (ie, "chocolate is my kryptonite", etc)

xpost

Huk-L (Huk-L), Wednesday, 24 May 2006 18:11 (twelve years ago) Permalink

and his earthly parents were originally named "Mary" and "Joseph"

uh, this kinda ain't true, I believe.

barefoot manthing (Garrett Martin), Wednesday, 24 May 2006 18:39 (twelve years ago) Permalink

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truthiness

Huk-L (Huk-L), Wednesday, 24 May 2006 18:43 (twelve years ago) Permalink

Superman est de retour!
http://www.dailyplanet.fr/

Huk-L (Huk-L), Wednesday, 24 May 2006 19:34 (twelve years ago) Permalink

When I think back to how I liked Superman when I was small, it was the hugeness of it all that appealed - the city of Kaldor, the fortress of solitude, the larger than life nature of everything he did and interacted with. I am not so fond of the goofy stuff, apart from the Lois-spanking robot.

DV (dirtyvicar), Wednesday, 24 May 2006 22:20 (twelve years ago) Permalink

three years pass...

SO, is it possible that Warners made a bad Superman movie a few years ago on purpose?
http://www.newsarama.com/film/090917-superman-movie-no-plans.html

there's a better way to browse (Dr. Superman), Thursday, 17 September 2009 19:53 (nine years ago) Permalink

two years pass...

The Chronological Superman http://thechronologicalsuperman.tumblr.com/ KINDA rips off http://polmanning.tumblr.com/ but has real (good) analysis

like working at a jewelry store and not knowing about bracelets (Dr. Superman), Sunday, 20 May 2012 02:25 (six years ago) Permalink

four months pass...

booming: http://www.comicsreporter.com/index.php/that_superman_thing/

fistula-la-la (sic), Monday, 8 October 2012 05:58 (six years ago) Permalink

Superman's sheepish grin and shrug in the last panel later became the subject of a 1958 Jules Feiffer essay in Holiday called "Stop Smiling, Superman," which itself was appropriated by Quentin Tarantino for an elevator speech given by priest/hitman Lawrence Hilton Jacobs in the director's little-seen 2009 Norm MacDonald-starring remake of Charley Varrick.

wait waht

stop swearing and start windmilling (Shakey Mo Collier), Monday, 8 October 2012 16:40 (six years ago) Permalink

man do I wish that had really happened

stop swearing and start windmilling (Shakey Mo Collier), Monday, 8 October 2012 16:41 (six years ago) Permalink

eight months pass...

The points made in this article aren't necessarily new or original, but I think it's a nice summation of what Superman is and why he keeps coming back:

http://www2.macleans.ca/2013/06/07/dont-mess-with-superman/

Tuomas, Wednesday, 12 June 2013 06:35 (five years ago) Permalink

The last point is interesting, but I'm not sure if it's entirely true? Has Superman ever had a grim & gritty reimagining, besides Elseworlds type of stories (like Red Son), where the change of premise is the whole point? Even in Superman: Earth One, though it started with an emo Superman, he was pretty much the classic Superman by the end of the story.

I haven't read that many DC comics of the 90s, did they ever try to revamp him to be 90s style gritty hero back then?

Tuomas, Wednesday, 12 June 2013 06:46 (five years ago) Permalink

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/3a/Justice_Society_of_America_v3_10_art.jpg

The previous, Brandon Routh, Superman film as well I suppose.

Andrew Farrell, Wednesday, 12 June 2013 11:25 (five years ago) Permalink

Where is that pic from?

Tuomas, Wednesday, 12 June 2013 11:52 (five years ago) Permalink

That's the older Earth-Two Superman, right? I don't know what comic you're talking about, but what I meant was whether the "official" Superman has ever been grittified? I know it's been done to various alternate Supermen, but what about the main guy? (And yeah, I know the Earth-Two dude is canonically the original Superman of the Golden Age, but whatever has been done to him to make him "dark" must be after the Earth-One dude became the official Superman, and he became an alternate version.)

Tuomas, Wednesday, 12 June 2013 12:01 (five years ago) Permalink

i don't know where that image is from either, but it looks like it's by alex ross, who i thought was pretty philisophically opposed to grim-and-gritty

Ward Fowler, Wednesday, 12 June 2013 12:05 (five years ago) Permalink

That is a hell of an impression to have, particularly since he's the original source of Kingdom Come, the Superman from which is above.

Andrew Farrell, Wednesday, 12 June 2013 12:07 (five years ago) Permalink

well as tuomas sez, the image is a variant on the old earth 2 superman (with a bit of george reeves thrown in for good measure.) my definition of a grim and gritty superman would be one where he's holding a big gun and acting in a morally dubious fashion - not something i get from that particular image, where he just looks a bit broody (i haven't read the comic.) And in general. ross' work deliberately represents a return to old school values of heroic, noble characters rendered in a realist style, and usually framed as an overt repudiation of the post-dark knight school of superheroics (dark night being the ur-text for all things grim and gritty)

Ward Fowler, Wednesday, 12 June 2013 12:14 (five years ago) Permalink

A fine and noble view, unburdened as it is by dull facts!

Andrew Farrell, Wednesday, 12 June 2013 12:31 (five years ago) Permalink

I mean, theoretically the in-continuity Superman book should be a coathanger for different one-off genre stories, with the Metropolis characters in the background for more long-form soap opera stories - like Doctor Who or X-Files etc.

Chuck_Tatum, Wednesday, 12 June 2013 14:56 (five years ago) Permalink

^^^ superman should be combo of smug alien and corny all-american boy scout; the 'lo a god walks amongst us' stuff that the recent movies focus on (apparently; haven't seen the new one but i hear it's pretty humorless supes) should be at most color for the climax. if yr superman isn't smiling, making quips, more likable and approachable than batman then you're doing it wrong.

balls, Wednesday, 12 June 2013 15:13 (five years ago) Permalink

wld def prefer to see a movie derived from all the nutty 60s weisinger stuff - bottle city of kandor, bizarro, the works - than yet more hohum mythic seriousness, although i don't think of superman as being a 'quipster', esp - that's more like a stan lee character trait.

Ward Fowler, Wednesday, 12 June 2013 15:30 (five years ago) Permalink

Quips are for last panel laughter freeze frames.

Andrew Farrell, Wednesday, 12 June 2013 15:36 (five years ago) Permalink

yeah quipster's the wrong phrase, more bemused, reeves had this down.

balls, Wednesday, 12 June 2013 15:38 (five years ago) Permalink

Basically he should be Christopher Reeve.

Chuck_Tatum, Wednesday, 12 June 2013 15:57 (five years ago) Permalink

Matt Bomer for Superman?

they are either militarists (ugh) or kangaroos (?) (DJP), Wednesday, 12 June 2013 16:00 (five years ago) Permalink

wld def prefer to see a movie derived from all the nutty 60s weisinger stuff - bottle city of kandor, bizarro, the works - than yet more hohum mythic seriousness

agree %1000

Bathory Tub Blues (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, 12 June 2013 16:00 (five years ago) Permalink

always felt John Hamm would've been a great Superman but he's a few years too old now

Bathory Tub Blues (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, 12 June 2013 16:01 (five years ago) Permalink

Martian hammhunter

Philip Nunez, Wednesday, 12 June 2013 16:03 (five years ago) Permalink

Jon Hamm should be Deadshot

they are either militarists (ugh) or kangaroos (?) (DJP), Wednesday, 12 June 2013 16:03 (five years ago) Permalink

Spider-Hamm, naturally

Nhex, Wednesday, 12 June 2013 16:17 (five years ago) Permalink

Matt Bomer for Superman?

― they are either militarists (ugh) or kangaroos (?) (DJP), Wednesday, June 12, 2013 12:00 PM (20 minutes ago) Bookmark

he looks exactly like cavill!

i wanna be a gabbneb baby (Hungry4Ass), Wednesday, 12 June 2013 16:24 (five years ago) Permalink

"did they ever try to revamp him to be 90s style gritty hero back then?"

Does giving him a mullet count?

http://www.unwinnable.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/SuperPowers.jpg

earlnash, Wednesday, 12 June 2013 21:35 (five years ago) Permalink

was the mullet dan jurgens' fault? i feel like it was

i wanna be a gabbneb baby (Hungry4Ass), Wednesday, 12 June 2013 22:22 (five years ago) Permalink

i would be down with asshole supes but never gonna happen

i didn't even give much of a fuck that you were mod (forksclovetofu), Thursday, 13 June 2013 01:27 (five years ago) Permalink

It's already happened!

http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x5/MacGizmo/Animated/drunk_superman.gif

bizarro gazzara, Thursday, 13 June 2013 10:04 (five years ago) Permalink

what's that from? i managed to avoid the last supes movie but that looks hella older

i didn't even give much of a fuck that you were mod (forksclovetofu), Thursday, 13 June 2013 14:42 (five years ago) Permalink

superman 3, which was terrifying to me as a kid

i wanna be a gabbneb baby (Hungry4Ass), Thursday, 13 June 2013 14:45 (five years ago) Permalink

the robot lady gave me nightmares

Nhex, Thursday, 13 June 2013 14:48 (five years ago) Permalink

wow, that does not look like christopher reeve

i didn't even give much of a fuck that you were mod (forksclovetofu), Thursday, 13 June 2013 14:49 (five years ago) Permalink

the robot lady gave me nightmares

― Nhex, Thursday, June 13, 2013 10:48 AM (1 minute ago) Bookmark

she was so scary! also, richard pryor synthesizing kryptonite and using tar as the secret ingredient really grossed me out for some reason. i think because he got the idea from a pack of cigs and i was always nagging my parents not to smoke

i wanna be a gabbneb baby (Hungry4Ass), Thursday, 13 June 2013 14:52 (five years ago) Permalink

Robot lady scared me too. I think a whole generation was scarred by the sight of Annie Ross being swallowed by wires.

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lwm11goF531qagpnjo1_400.gif

bizarro gazzara, Thursday, 13 June 2013 14:59 (five years ago) Permalink

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/9f/Superman_III_poster.jpg

Poster = none more eighties

Andrew Farrell, Thursday, 13 June 2013 15:40 (five years ago) Permalink

i think because he got the idea from a pack of cigs and i was always nagging my parents not to smoke

Poster = none more eighties

http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4058/4587230373_d04142cbe5_o.jpg

Chuck_Tatum, Thursday, 13 June 2013 15:51 (five years ago) Permalink

It's already happened!

Superman III is bad, but at least the way the Good/Evil Superman split is handled is in the spirit of the Weisinger/Silver Age stuff and not as some SERIOUS SUPERMAN IS SERIOUS bullshit

Bathory Tub Blues (Shakey Mo Collier), Thursday, 13 June 2013 15:56 (five years ago) Permalink

Yeah, absolutely. Reeve is really, really great as Asshole Superman.

bizarro gazzara, Thursday, 13 June 2013 15:57 (five years ago) Permalink

Nick O'Teen!

i didn't even give much of a fuck that you were mod (forksclovetofu), Thursday, 13 June 2013 16:02 (five years ago) Permalink

Shakey OTM

Chuck_Tatum, Thursday, 13 June 2013 16:42 (five years ago) Permalink

"did they ever try to revamp him to be 90s style gritty hero back then?"

Does giving him a mullet count?

Did the mullet coincide with any changes in his personality? In the mullet stories I've read, he's pretty much the same guy except for hair length.

I guess the electric blue Superman was an attempt to make him more of a 90s style hero? Though I'm only familiar with that through Morrison's JLA, so I don't really know what the heck it was all about...

Tuomas, Friday, 14 June 2013 06:57 (five years ago) Permalink

Anyway, it's a perfect example of how well superhero writers/artists are keeping up with the current trends, that when they wanted to make Superman more "cool" in the 90s, they gave him an 80s hair.

Tuomas, Friday, 14 June 2013 07:00 (five years ago) Permalink

Anyone seen the movie and/or read Superman Unchained, then?

Unchained read like a Roger Stern/Dan Jurgens story gone widescreen -- actually, that's not a bad thing -- but was more like a solid issue #341 rather than a BIG FIRST ISSUE. It's a lot more trad than Snyder's work on Batman, but again, that's not actually a bad thing.

The costume is still dreadful though - much worse than the mullet! And Jim Lee's back doing those horrible diagonal frayed panels that are his wont.

Chuck_Tatum, Friday, 14 June 2013 09:21 (five years ago) Permalink

They gave Superman the "mullet" because Dean Cain had long hair at the time he won the job to play Superman. By the time Lois and Clark aired he cut of the hair to look more like Superman. So a long story short DC didn't want new fans to get confused, so they jumped the gun. When the studio was planning on having Dean cut his hair to begin with.

according to some dude online. doesn't explain why they stuck with the mullet for four years though...

fit and working again, Friday, 14 June 2013 17:34 (five years ago) Permalink

can anybody else get that to load/summarize it

Bathory Tub Blues (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, 14 June 2013 21:47 (five years ago) Permalink

bleeding cool seems to be down

fit and working again, Friday, 14 June 2013 21:53 (five years ago) Permalink

Yeah, absolutely. Reeve is really, really great as Asshole Superman.

― bizarro gazzara, Thursday, June 13, 2013 11:57 AM (

he was also for the first and last time sexy as fuck

A deeper shade of lol (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 14 June 2013 21:54 (five years ago) Permalink

sorry, don't know why that isn't loading

seems to be an excerpt from a larger esay by alan that links the shady nature of pulp publishing w/ the theft of rights etc from creators like siegel and shuster.

Ward Fowler, Friday, 14 June 2013 21:56 (five years ago) Permalink

i wonder if it will contain an ambivalent screed about his role in the Marvelman saga

Nhex, Friday, 14 June 2013 21:58 (five years ago) Permalink

Wasn't dead Superman In Space a bit g&g? He had a beard, at least.

Oh, and a few years ago (just before Johnsiverse) didn't he fuck off to Kandor for like a year or something because he'd had enough of humans? (From memory this led to Silver Age shenanigans instead though, so is probably not a god example.)

Troughton-masked Replicant (aldo), Wednesday, 19 June 2013 19:20 (five years ago) Permalink

are you thinking of when he thought he was out of touch with the common man, so walked across America for a year?

(in a story that JMS originated and bailed out on after six issues, but collected half the royalties on replacement Chris Roberson's scripts out of sheer dickishness iirc)

pink, fleshy, and gleeful (sic), Thursday, 20 June 2013 00:39 (five years ago) Permalink

Wasn't dead Superman In Space a bit g&g? He had a beard, at least.

This was before the Death, I think? He had to execute some Kryptonian criminals, because otherwise they would've killed more people, but breaking his "thou shall not kill" code caused a moral crisis, so he flew off to space to think about stuff. At least that's what I remember about those stories, it's been 20 years since I read them... Yeah, I guess that could be seen as an attempt to grittify Supes, but IIRC the storyline didn't end up changing him that much, and when he came back he was just as ethical as he was before.

Tuomas, Thursday, 20 June 2013 10:35 (five years ago) Permalink

five months pass...

I'm not really a huge Supes fan tbh, but I like this article:
http://comicsalliance.com/superman-a-celebration-of-75-years-review-dc/?trackback=twitter_top

Nhex, Friday, 22 November 2013 19:01 (five years ago) Permalink

hmmm 2/3rds of those stories are exactly the same ones printed in my Best Superman Stories collection from the late 80s (Byrne issue being the final entry in that one)

dunno if that undercuts his argument or not

Ayn Rand Akbar (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, 22 November 2013 19:29 (five years ago) Permalink

nah, that actually makes sense, the late 80s was when the dark, "realistic" edgy superhero themes took off. it's more surprising now that the wheel has turned back around

Nhex, Friday, 22 November 2013 19:32 (five years ago) Permalink

yeah that occurred to me too

altho I didn't think my collection was about failure/sadness - there is that, but it also has the first appearance of Mxtylplyk, Superman's bday/Fortress of Solitude introduction, what if Krypton hadn't blown up etc. it has its share of fun.

Ayn Rand Akbar (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, 22 November 2013 21:19 (five years ago) Permalink

two years pass...

Martha Kent fanfic. Someone, get this woman a job at DC.
http://archiveofourown.org/works/6447187

Nhex, Monday, 4 April 2016 20:32 (two years ago) Permalink

heh, that's a fun read

a lad of balls (bizarro gazzara), Wednesday, 6 April 2016 14:06 (two years ago) Permalink

two years pass...

introduced 80 years ago today

the ignatius rock of ignorance (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 19 April 2018 00:37 (seven months ago) Permalink


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.