Superman should be the anti-batman

Superman should be the anti-batman

Relentlessly cheerful and upbeat, even in the most desperate situations

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/PC0-rxyI3ik
youtube.com/watch?v=0PlwDbSYicM
youtube.com/watch?v=Wo2KB1dEDdk
dropbox.com/s/hkm66foj914rn2b/Superman - Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow Deluxe Edition Vol.2009 #01 (July, 2010).cbz?dl=0
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Said no one, ever.

He already is.

Not "cheerful", that's Captain Marvel. Superman is morally incorruptible. Optimistic. Hopeful.

Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow is the ultimate incarnation of who Superman is.

...

He's the most ridiculously OP hero of all time, when would he be in a tough situation?

I will always post this comic when requested or when the thread calls for it, it's just that good and everyone should read it whether they like superheroes or not.

You sound like you're trolling, but the answer is "when the writer says he is".

Superheroes are not about being stronger or better than the other guy. They're about being heroes and saving people, and doing what's right.

Late 90s. Jurgens has superman quitting around here and having a son.

The classic way to handle Superman is to challenge him morally-- he has all this power, what does he do with it? Should he be telling people what to do? Should he be executing criminals who might deserve it?

But there's a reason Lex Luthor is Superman's greatest foe. He challenges him mentally, morally, and psychologically, not physically.

t. casual

Luthor's greatest vision of victory is not killing Superman, but putting him in a situation where he has to compromise his morals or make an impossible choice.

No Superman should be a guy doing as much good as he can with the power he's given

We should all be

>no Superman: The Brave and the Bold cartoon

But Superman is the other side of the Ditko-ian coin that is Rorschach, as Moore intends to demonstrate with this comic.

He doesn't compromise his morals. He always does what's right, and he always chooses to go for the complete victory, not half-measures.

That hasn't stopped many writers from forcing situations on Superman that he CAN'T have a complete victory. Some of these are done well, including a part of this very story. Some of these are not. A classic point of contention is John Byrne having Superman execute General Zod and his cronies in the Superboy pocket universe.

This is an attempt to "bring Superman into the modern world", where morality is more complex. Is this misguided or is it necessary? That's up to interpretation.

...

That's kind of the point.

Why can't he do both?

This past decade has seen a general movement to restore Superman to a simpler morality, to be an example that things don't always HAVE to be complex in the modern world.

Inspired by stories like What's So Funny About Truth, Justice and the American Way? and Morrison's All-Star Superman, we've seen probably the biggest swing in this direction with Superman's depiction in Rebirth.

Something interesting to note is that Superman has NOT classically been depicted as such.

In the Golden Age, Superman was a power fantasy for the downtrodden. He was a huge asshole towards corrupt businessmen, politicians, and gangsters, because he had the power to do so. This was following the Great Depression where the lower class felt more powerless and victimized than ever.

During WWII, Superman became, for a short time, an almost propaganda character. This is where "the American way" was stressed and imagery of Superman waving a flag began. This is also where All-Star Superman drew its inspiration.

>Batman's Whatever Happened was a salute to the various flavors of Batman, Gotham and his supporting cast
>Superman's is a few dozen pages of his entire supporting cast dying

God damn it.

After the war and into the decline of superheroes, Superman was one of the few cape comics to survive. During this era Superman had a focus on sci-fi plots, and still being written by Jerry Siegel, his creator, he still had that almost assholish-vibe that you've probably seen showcased on various memetic covers from the era of Superman getting up to wacky shit.

This was probably the most creative era of Superman, where the Legion of Super-heroes was introduced, we got Superboy, Supergirl, Krypto, and even Superbaby, classic stories involving Brainiac and the Bottle City of Kandor, Bizarro, and Mr. Mxyzptlk came from, and is what inspired Superman's depiction in the Brave and the Bold cartoon.

>almost
>propaganda

youtu.be/PC0-rxyI3ik

During the 60's, Superman was definitely a more kid-focused comic, with zany covers and plots. Mort Weisenger was the editor and was very serious about creating and curating a mythos and continuity for the character.

In 1971, Julius Schwartz, who had already pretty much single-handedly put superheroes back on the map throughout the 60's, became the new editor of the Superman line.

In regards to the modern "optimistic" theme of the character, this is the most important era of his history.

I love when classical liberals like Moore and Bendis slut shame skanks.

Schwartz reduced Superman's powers from the insane planet-moving levels, removed Kryptonite, removed all the gimmick characters, ditched the zany bait covers and plots, and focused on Superman being the "grandaddy" of superheroes, an idealistic and hopeful role model.

Third-wave feminism was the hot new thing in the 80's and was full of contradictions and splinter groups.

>Do you know what radio waves look like? Because I do."

Lines like this are why "Superman turns heel" is so overdone. Because done right, it can be genuinely scary.

Unfortunately, DC was in kind of a bad place at the time, and adults just weren't interested in Superman. The older DC fans of the time were into the revamped Batman/Detective Comics series and DC was pushing two contradictory directions throughout their line: more soap-opera-y Marvel-inspired stories, and campy, wacky stuff targeted at kids and stoners inspired by the Batman and Wonder Woman TV series.

DC desperately went back to pushing Superman as a kid-targeted series until the 1978 movie finally restored some moderate interest in the title.

I don't think it's good to define a character based on him or her being the anti of anything.

Finally in 1985 Superman was given the massive overhaul people had been asking for with John Byrne's Man of Steel. This more morally-complex Superman was a huge hit and set the stage for more superhero revamps of the same nature, and eventually became the inspiration for the movie of the same name, including the infamous General Zod execution.

Unfortunately for DC, that movie coincided with the movement to restore Superman to the 70's hopeful and less-morally-complex direction and this was not received very positively.

That's a pretty dumb idea, for one "anti-Batman" would be Joker. Someone reveling in the horror of things. The word you're looking for is foil.
Two, there already is a character like your second description.

The Byrne direction set the tone for how Superman would be depicted for the next two decades at least.

In the 90's, more attempts at drawing in readers were made, perhaps nowhere more exemplified than the infamous Death of Superman and Reign of the Supermen storylines.

>the most ridiculously OP hero of all time

The TV show Lois & Clark and DC's increasingly corporate structure following the incredible success of the Batman film interfered heavily with Superman's comics.

Despite the inaccuracies and exaggerations in this video, and my general problems with Max Landis, it does a good job at humorously summing up this storyline:
youtube.com/watch?v=0PlwDbSYicM

I also recommend the documentary "The Death of Superman Lives" and the following video for a great look at the handling of WB's attempt at making a "Batman: the Movie" for Superman:
youtube.com/watch?v=Wo2KB1dEDdk

In 1996, WB and Bruce Timm produced an animated Superman cartoon to replicate the success of Batman: the Animated Series.

This show also comes highly recommended by me. It takes inspiration from both John Byrne's edgier Man of Steel and the 70's Julius Schwartz direction, lifting entire stories and characters directly from Adventures of Superman. It also of course took inspiration from the Batman cartoon.

I believe the animated series was another key element that lead to the movement of returning Superman to the more hopeful direction.

I wasn't really expecting to write an essay on Superman today, but here I am.

Back to the comics, the direction of edgier Superman would continue into the 21st century, despite some writers like Joe Kelly and even noted edgelord Jeph Loeb starting the pushback against this.

And thank you for doing so Texas user

Infinite Crisis would famously have Batman telling Superman "the last time you inspired anybody was when you were dead".

Of course this ignored a lot the good stories of the past decade but reflected Geoff Johns' general distaste for Superman's edgier direction.

It should also be noted that Johns was a disciple and assistant to Richard Donner, director of Superman the Motion Picture.

It's my pleasure.

This. Thank you for the essay and storytiming this.

No.

This was meant to kickstart a new direction for some of DC's comics. A Rebirth, if you will.

In addition to new directions for Batman and Wonder Woman, this was followed by an often-delayed collaboration on Superman between Johns, Donner and artist Gary Frank, highly inspired by Superman the Motion Picture.

Though this run is not that highly loved today, it also resulted in the highly praised Secret Origin, which was recently restored to mainstream continuity. Also, ironically, the massive delays in this story lead to fill-ins by Kurt Busiek which are still regarded as much superior to the Johns and Donner storylines.

Superman should be an angry socialist. Golden age Superman is best Superman.

During this time we also got some attempts at modernizing some of Superman's key villains with Superman: Brainiac and Lex Luthor: Man of Steel which I've been pretty vocal about my hatred for, despite many loving it.

Notably in the Johns and Donner comic we got Chris Kent, Superman's "son" who ended up not being his son, obviously named after the late Christopher Reeve. This would go on to be a major inspiration for Superman's son, Jon, in Convergence and Rebirth.

Also at this time came possibly one of the most important Superman stories of all time: All-Star Superman.

Despite my problems with the way the series is perceived, it without a doubt was a total hit and was the true turning point that returned Superman to the direction of being a role model and inspiration to all superheroes.

This is probably the most famous modern Superman story and I predict it heavily influencing Superman multi-media adaptations eventually in the next fifteen years (hey, it took almost thirty years for the Man of Steel to make it to the big screen).

Mind explaining why you don't like those two stories? I enjoyed them myself and am curious why you would have such strong dislike to classify it as hatred.

>Batman and Robin literally hitting the alien forcefield with sticks.

Was the best thing they could think of was to have Batman and Robin try to break in using wooden sticks?

...

Unfortunately Superman would kind of flounder around for the next few years with some inconsistent characterization, I think stemming from having both 90's writers and writers influenced by All-Star simultaneously.

Superman Returns came out, and despite being intended to lead-in to a Superman/Batman movie, ended up just being more of a "Superman the Motion Picture" wank movie, IMO.

With the turn of the decade, writer J. Michael Straczynski, at the same time that he was ruining Wonder Woman, was brought on to also ruin Superman with the infamously awful story Grounded.

I actually like Brainiac and Johns' run in general and that was just bad wording. Lex Luthor: Man of Steel I think just got Lex totally wrong by making him a character who is afraid and jealous of Superman's powers, whereas I feel he's just disdainful of him and unable to comprehend the concept of selflessness. Luthor hates superheroes and thinks they're blowhards, and no one more exemplifies this than Superman to him.

Also I mistyped Chris as "Christ" in that post originally, in a hilarious Freudian slip.

They're Bat-sticks made of Bat-wood.

With the New 52, Grant Morrison was brought on to write the new reboot of Superman. Morrison, as he is wont to do, went back to Superman's roots, in the Golden Age, as a bit of a dick, complete with "leaping tall buildings in a single bound" instead of flying and a great scene where he stops a train.

I believe this was meant to contrast directly with All-Star Superman, where Superman is depicted at the very end of his career at his most iconic and idealized, whereas Action Comics was Superman at the very start. I think it was meant to represent the same dichotomy between Action Comics #1 and this very story, Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow, which was written to be the final pre-Crisis Superman story and his final adventure aside from parenthood, of course.

I liked how The Batman flipped the usual dynamic, where Superman was the loner because he's so powerful that he doesn't generally need help and Batman was more of a team player because he was used to working with sidekicks.

Why can't Superman be his own character, instead of being defined as a foil for a character in an entirely different series?

Unfortunately, this came off as making Superman "edgy", and despite this not really being reflected in the rest of the New 52 titles aside from Justice League, which I still blame fucking Jim Lee for because Johns had literally never depicted Superman that way, the damage was done and the misconception continued on to this very day, with Rebirth being viewed by many as an "apology" for what came to be known by fans as "Superbro" (ironic, considering the term was coined during the DCYou Truth storyline to refer to how much of a cool guy he was to everybody, albeit obviously in a younger "bro" fashion than a fatherly, role-model type fashion).

Finally, we have, of course, Superman Rebirth, which used Convergence as a launching point to give Superman a longer history, a marriage to Lois Lane, and even a child, as well as probably the ultimate outcome to the movement for Superman to return to that idealized form.

This has been received incredibly well, especially Superman's son Jon, to the point DC has fully replaced the New 52 Superman with the Rebirth one, on an almost hilariously metaphysical level.

>Both characters do the same thing and fight for the same cause
>They should be against each other because one is happy and the other serious

This is the kind of autism you just find in comic book fans

All in all, I hope this rundown of Superman's history, as well as this iconic story, has helped to illuminate Superman's characterization and evolution.

And that's really all I've got to say, so enjoy the rest of the story, and thank you very much for reading!

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

>Nobody has the right to kill.
>Not Mxyzptlk, not you, not Superman.
>ESPECIALLY not Superman!
One of the most famous Superman quotes.

...

even when he gets Barbara Gordon pregnet?

>parents murdered in an alleyway behind a theater
>becomes a broadway star to honor them

...

Here's a link to the download, with foreword by Paul Kupperberg, and including Alan Moore's other famous Superman story, For the Man Who Has Everything, in which we find out what present you can get Superman for his birthday: The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion.

dropbox.com/s/hkm66foj914rn2b/Superman - Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow Deluxe Edition Vol.2009 #01 (July, 2010).cbz?dl=0

Another wonderful Superman story:

I also love it, but you kind of need to have read quite a bit of Silver/Bronze Age Superman to "get" it, given that it's basically the destruction of those stories.
God damn it, I remember being SO hype for JMS' run on Superman - his Spider-Man run helped get me into modern comics, and I was enjoying reruns of Jayce & The Wheeled Warriors, which he helped write (yes, really).
Something about these pages always gets me.

I'm new to the Superman mythos, but does the Gold Kryptonite room depower him or something? So that he could life live as a mechanic? That's a pretty humble end if so, I like it.

Yeah, gold kryptonite permanently removes his powers.

Cool, that's a neat ending.

That would imply that Batman should be bleak and gloom all the time. I'd rather both be capable of full ranges of emotion.

Superman has always represented optimism in contrast to Batman's pessimism. people are just too stupid to not realize that being optimistic isn't the same thing as being a happy faggot about everything

This ones pretty funny.

>false alarm, you can stop hating the Japs now. Turns out the people who immigrated here years ago aren't connected to Pearl harbour in any way shape or form. Oops. Superman says to stop harassing them.

Every other day when he fights someone that can fuck him up. Basically, whenever a villain shows up. Superman doesn't exclusively fight purse snatchers, you mong. He fights villains on his level.

To quote Teddy Roosevelt, "Optimism is a good characteristic, but if carried to an excess, it becomes foolishness."

Superman needs to epitomise hope, not naivety

Why?