Jekylhyde14

@lvenger:

Simple, because the New 52 emphasised this version of Superman was more angry, aggressive, frustrated, violent and a loner.

I've heard this before, but I just don't buy it. I don't think the New 52 Supes was particularly angry, frustrated, or violent. At least no more than Post Crisis Superman is/was.

Like when he attacked Batman and Green Lantern for no reason.

Okay, let's take a look at the build-up to that:

So, Superman was in the middle of fighting a parademon when, suddenly, a superhuman he doesn't know bursts in to try and restrain him. Also, keep in mind, that Bats and GL were tracking him because they suspected him of being a part of the parademon invasion. I doubt Hal was very polite about trying to restrain him. That sounds like relatively good justification to respond a bit violently. I would probably lash out a bit too if someone I didn't know decided to waltz in and grab me. I think we all would.

Now, how about Post-Crisis Supes:

Here he is threatening to take down Batman because he's worried about Jon and Lois. Honestly, this is probably even more aggressive than the N52 example because this version of Superman knows and has worked with Batman. I get why he's doing it, but that's still pretty aggressive, yeah?

Or when he fried Parasite's brain whilst putting Lois in danger in the process.

Okay, let's look at that:

He wasn't trying to kill or permanently hurt Parasite, and he definitely wasn't trying to endanger Lois. He made an educated guess from what he knew about Parasite's powers and acted accordingly. There was some risk, yes, but he knew what he had to do to beat Parasite and he was right. A little reckless? Maybe. But more reckless than Post-Crisis Superman? Well...?

Here he is trying to cave Manchester Black's skull in over Black manipulating Jon. He's even yelling, "I could kill you!" Again, I understand why he's doing it, but this is a pretty angry, reckless assault from the man of steel with little regard for Black or how this must look to his young, impressionable son.

Or how in Justice League #9 Clark sits in the Daily Planet office alone eating lunch whilst remembering how he was always picked last for sports.

Okay, first off, I'm not exactly sure how feeling lonely necessarily makes you grim and gritty, but... let's accept that for now and look at some examples. Here's that moment from Justice League:

He's being left behind for a company lunch. It reminds him of being picked last for sports as a kid. Then Batman gets in touch with him to hang out and he's psyched. This is actually a theme in Superman stories that goes all the way back to the 1950's. To protect his identity and blend in, Superman had to act weak and cowardly around normal people. This lead to him being overlooked and feeling lonely until he met up with another extraordinary individual whom he didn't have to hold back around. In this case, it's Batman.

Here's a classic example to emphasize this:

Here, a young Clark is getting pushed around by some Smallville youths in front of Lana. Clark has to pretend to be weak and afraid to protect his identity. Watching on is Ultra-Boy who would become Clarks new, extraordinary friend for the story. There's another Superboy story where he meets and befriends Mighty Boy after feeling lonely on Earth (Superboy #85). This is a recurring theme that is heavily entrenched in Superman's history. I know you are fond of talking about "classic Superman." Well, this is a piece of classic Superman.

How about Post-Crisis Supes? Did he ever make himself into a loner? He sure did:

Here he is during his exile in Space. He's fleeing a planet that was starting to worship him for saving a spacecraft. He runs from them like he ran from Earth because he thought of himself as being out of control and a danger to normal people. The only difference here is N52 and classic Supes were loners to protect their secret identities and to make sure their enemies didn't target people they love. Post-Crisis Supes is doing it because he thinks of himself as dangerous. That's pretty... grim.

I didn't actually say Man of Steel Superman was like New 52 Superman at all, don't know where you got that from. I said the Injustice comic I liked was a great meta commentary on how the New 52 and MOS had made Superman darker and grittier.

I'm not familiar with the Injustice reference you're talking about or how it references either MoS or N52, but grouping them together like that to say that they were both making Superman darker is definitely equating them. Which seems ridiculous because, by your own admission, MoS has much more in common with Post-Crisis Superman:

MOS does have a lot in common with the early Bryne Post Crisis era but Man of Steel Superman is not exactly the same as Post Crisis Superman overall. He's inspired by the first 5-6 years of Post Crisis Superman stories

Of course, then you go on to say:

not the next two decades where writers made Superman more lighter, hopeful and optimistic.

And, I'm not entirely convinced of that, but, even if that's true, you can't cherry pick from Post-Crisis like that. When DC revived Post-Crisis Superman in Rebirth, they didn't just bring back the stories from 1992 on. A lot of those early 90's Superman stories are still part of his history as confirmed by "The New World" story. They are all still a part of how Post-Crisis Superman's personality developed and are a part of who he is today, so you can't just write them off.

Those aren't exactly positive traits either but I still see New 52 Superman as a moody, aggressive, angry loner. That was how he was chosen to be portrayed by several writers who gave him more of an edge compared to previous versions of the character. And this only hurt his depiction and reception with the fans.

I think I've shown that you can also say that Post-Crisis Superman is moody, aggressive, and angry. New 52 Superman was never any different and certainly not any worse in that regard. N52 Superman is different than Post-Crisis Superman, yes. I'd say N52 Supes was more charismatic and had more attitude. But grim and gritter? More grim and violent than this guy?

I cry bull on that. Here's why I think a lot of people didn't like him: He wasn't the Superman they remembered from the 90's and early 2000's. That's it. So you come up with excuses like he's angrier, more violent. But, he's not. You just didn't like him or give him a chance because he wasn't what you remembered.

@lvenger:

...Why, exactly, do you think that that New 52 made Superman darker and grittier?

Also, the Post-Crisis Superman has more in common with the Man of Steel movie than New 52 does. Kyrptonian cloning- Post Crisis from Byrne's World of Krypton. Killing Zod. Post-Crisis from Superman (vol. 2) #22. Lois being what Superman cares about more than anything else in the world- pretty much all of Post-Crisis. The self-doubt and moping- almost every Post-Crisis story up to 1992, and many afterward. I mean, hell, the movie is named after John Byrne's origin story for Post-Crisis Superman. What are the chances that Snyder didn't read Man of Steel for research? MOS Superman IS Post-Crisis Superman.

I don't really like the Injustice comics in general (the game is a lot of fun). Aside from the fact that, plot-wise, it's basically a rehash of Mark Gruenwald's Squadron Supreme, it's also way too gritty and violent. I mean, do we really need to see characters like Jimmy Olsen and Ch'p get killed in brutal ways? Do we really need to watch a pregnant Lois Lane get strangled in space? Does that kind of stuff really appeal to anyone except troubled middle school kids (and those who are troubled middle school kids at heart)?

To answer your question, yes, I hate this version of Superman. He's a complete violation of everything Superman stands for, and he's a libertarian criticism of superheroes in general. He's a boogey man for people who worry their rights are going to be trampled in the name of the greater good, so of course a billionaire and self-made man has to be the one to take him down. Cynical garbage.

I feel bad saying all this because I like some things Tom Taylor has done with the material (the Green Arrow/ Harley Quinn story was pretty charming). I think he's just hand-cuffed by the concept and the fact that he's writing a story for a game created by the same dudes in charge of Mortal Kombat. I'd like to see Taylor do other things.

@buttersdaman000: You're welcome. It's good to know that I'm not the only one who thought this.

I agree with this, Moore's other work that you mentioned was already challenging and reexamining the superhero genre before COIE concluded. Though Dennis O'Neil's work on Green Lantern and Green Arrow along with his redefining of Batman back to being a darker vengeful obsessed vigilante were prior examples of the superhero genre being redefined from the Silver Age of comics.

Sure, but Denny O'Neil was an exception to the rule. Very few writers were doing what he did back in the 70's. The Post-Crisis DCU was full of things that O'Neil was doing in the Bronze Age. He was just ahead of his time.

In the immediate aftermath with stories like Legends I suppose that's technically right. But then there were also comics like Justice League International which were light hearted and quirky even in a Post COIE/Watchmen DCU. And as time went on, the Post Crisis/Pre Flashpoint DCU started to embrace some of the light hearted aspects and characters that had defined it in the Silver Age, especially in the late 90s/2000s. To be clear, it is still darker than the Pre COIE universe but DC's heroes were still the bright beacons of optimism compared with their villain's nihilism. I also don't agree with the Post Crisis DC having a focus on social and political concerns because if it had, it would be getting the same problem fans have with Marvel's approach to politics today.

Man, I don't know. When I look back at those early Post-Crisis books, a majority of them were either dealing with global politics or social problems. The most obvious was Suicide Squad where the team would travel the world dealing with terrorists and the Soviets. Captain Atom dealt with politics and conspiracies within the American military. Flash was dating Tina McGee who had an abusive husband. George Perez's Wonder Woman starts with Ares cultists trying to start a nuclear war between the US and the USSR. Firestorm was all over the place in the USSR and... Africa (for some reason). Superman forcibly disarmed Middle Eastern country Qurac. Even Justice League International started its deal with the UN by taking out terrorists before the book eventually grew into it's lighter, funnier tone. Things like this did happen before COIE, but the Post-Crisis DCU seemed obsessed with taking on a more realistic tone. Especially if you read anything from after Crisis until about Armageddon 2001. Even after that, there was still a hangover with the more realistic, darker tone like with Toyman killing Cat Grant's son or the work of Dan Vado. When you take it as a whole, the tone of the Post-Crisis DCU was darker, and I think Watchmen and superhero deconstruction works like it had a lot to do with it.

Was that really because of Watchmen though? This issue had been raised within DC before Moore pitched Watchmen to them. The very basis of Bryne's run was to dial back the fantastical and absurd aspects of Superman's comics; the Kryptonian survivors in the Phantom Zone, his past as Superboy, the insane power level etc. Outside of his breakdown after killing Zod, I don't remember Bryne's Superman having a lot of dark personality quirks. He was just more direct, possibly aggressive, compared with how writers previously wrote Superman since the Golden Age. And like I said, Post Crisis Superman got built back up into a more familiar depiction of Superman that blended the iconic larger than life traits of Superman with the more modern human relatable aspects of the Post Crisis era.

Byrne's material was definitely darker. Pre-Crisis, Krypton was like a sci-fi paradise. It was an advanced culture with flying dragons and crystal mountains. Byrne's Krypton was a cold, emotionless place that cloned its offspring and had little to no empathy. Byrne's Smallville was also pretty grim. In the beginning, Lana Lang was destitute and resentful of Superman as she lived a depressing, realistic small town existence (which was later chalked up to the Manhunters, but... the less said about that the better). Byrne also wrote Superman in a way that was kind of self-hating. Byrne's Clark has a breakdown when he realizes that he's an alien, and really never comes to grip with not being truly human. That became a running theme in the early to late 90's stories (which are all canon again). And then there was the whole killing thing. So... yeah, Byrne's Superman material was darker. It took elements of superhero stories and made them more realistic in a cynical way... like Watchmen did.

So you don't enjoy Post Crisis/Rebirth Superman? I'm sorry you lost a Superman that you liked but to be straight with you, Morrison's Superman was lost as soon as Morrison stopped writing Action Comics. The Superman outside of Morrison's run was nothing like the character you enjoyed. He was inconsistently portrayed as well as often poorly written. That's why the Post Crisis Superman got brought back because the majority of fans, myself included, preferred him. Superman Reborn was a little messy in its execution but it was trying to reconcile the gap between Pre 52 and New 52 Superman fans. It hasn't entirely succeeded but there's less in fighting between these two groups of Superman fans.

I enjoy SOME Post Crisis/ Rebirth material, but that's usually for one of two reasons: First, the plotting is excellent. Like, I enjoyed Camelot Falls because I can read dystopian future stories all day. Also, I've really likes Tomasi and Gleason's run on Superman because they've written about the multiverse, Frankenstein, and Apokolips. Second, I can enjoy the Post-Crisis and Rebirth stories if there's a character I can focus on and relate to who isn't Post-Crisis Supes. Jon has taken a lot of that load. In both those cases, though, I'm still not thrilled with how Post-Crisis Superman is characterized. I find him boring at the best of times, and obnoxious at the worst. Especially when either John Byrne or Dan Jurgens is writing him (which is why Action Comics has been such a chore recently). So much time is spent on trying to convince the reader that Superman is really like everyone else, but it's hard to buy because he's Superman. It's annoying. Also, he never really takes a stance on any issue. He sits in the middle and gives some lofty speech that spits out mid-western platitudes. Sometimes he even comes off a bit conservative. He relied too much on his parents to support his actions. I never found his relationship with Lois (as it went down Post-Crisis) to be all that interesting. There was very little fire or tension. It was all too comfortable. I don't know... I can go on and on, and I have (just look at my blog history). I have read SOOOOOO much Post-Crisis Superman and every time I read him I run into something he does or something that happens that drives me crazy and makes me stop. I don't feel that way about any other version of the character. Just him. And Superman Reborn REALLY disappointed me because it focused on everything that kind of irks me about Post-Crisis Superman while at the same time erasing all the best stuff about New 52 Superman (the Morrison material). It ended up being like 80% Post-Crisis and 20% New 52. Not a great compromise.

And, yeah, some New 52 stuff sucked, but I also really enjoyed Greg Pak's run and a lot of Gene Luen Yang's run. The Superman they presented along with Morrison just felt more fun, and he took clear stances on issues. Honestly, there was good material and so much potential. But... it's gone and PC Supes is back... so... yeah...

@lvenger:

Watchmen did come out after COIE, yes, but superhero deconstruction was in full swing by the time COIE finished with stories like Alan Moore's Miracleman and Swamp Thing already having changed the game. The DCU after COIE was definitely a darker, more cynical place with a general focus on social and political concerns. A majority of Post-Crisis Superman's stories were told after Watchmen was finished and that had an impact on his adventures, so, yes, he is the Post-Watchmen Superman. Much like the Watchmen characters, he was given a lot of dark personality quirks and mental anguish like when he suffered a nervous break down after killing the Pocket Universe's Phantom Zone criminals. The Post Crisis stories took the myth he was in the past and broke him down until ugly bits were showing. That's superhero deconstruction 101, and Watchmen is the masterpiece of superhero deconstruction.

I have to ask because I've read you post this a few times: What exactly do you mean by a classic personality and moral code? What about Post-Crisis Superman makes you think classic?

I'm with you on a few things. Post-Crisis Superman's finest moment was when he died fighting Doomsday. I also share your concern about Doomsday Clock tarnishing Watchmen's legacy, but I think DC has already made it clear they don't care about that.

At the end of the day, I'm really bothered by the fact that I lost the Superman I genuinely enjoyed in Grant Morrison's Action comics, that he was pushed aside for the version of Superman I least enjoy, and that Doomsday Clock seems to be saying that Post-Crisis Supes is the philosophical opposite to Watchmen when he is the version of Superman that is most influenced by Watchmen. That and Superman Reborn have really felt like a slap in the face.

Alright, I'm going to be talking about Rebirth, Doomsday Clock, and current Superman stories, so if you haven't read certain things and don't want spoilers then be cautious. That being said...

Here's the plot of what's happening with Superman in Rebirth: After Flashpoint, Dr. Manhattan took advantage of time being in flux and altered the DCU to create the New 52 universe. For Superman, this changed him from the Post-Crisis version of the character into the New 52 Superman. Since Rebirth and the return of Wally West, time has been correcting itself from Dr. Manhattan's alterations. As a result, Superman has reverted to once again being the Post-Crisis version of the character (more or less). That's the basic plot of Superman in Rebirth and I think we all get that.

Now, the META plot of Rebirth is this: Watchmen altered the superhero genre and made it darker and more cynical. Okay, true story. The success of Watchmen and similar superhero deconstruction stories did make mainstream, superhero universes darker and more cynical. Here's where I disagree, though: That changing Superman back into the Post-Crisis version of himself presents a less cynical version of the character. That's because Post-Crisis Superman was created BECAUSE OF Watchmen. Crisis on Infinite Earths and Man of Steel (the original Post-Crisis Superman origin story) happened because DC was trying to make its universe more realistic, more cynical. John Byrne believed he was deconstructing Superman as he was writing Man of Steel. Post-Crisis Superman is Post-Watchmen Superman. So how are you really combating the cynicism of Watchmen by turning Superman back into who he was as a result of Watchmen? How does that Meta plot work?

You could make the argument that the New 52 was dark and cynical, and, to a point, it was. The New 52 universe had the human authorities clashing with superheroes, and the landscape of the Teen Titans was particularly grim. Can you actually say New 52 was DARKER than the Post-Crisis universe? That's hard to believe. Post-Crisis Superman was a killer and Cat Grant's young son was murdered by the Toyman. So, no, Post-Crisis Superman wasn't really bright or happy.

Also, before anyone says it, yes, I know that Man of Steel is no longer canon and hasn't been canon for quite some time. However, Man of Steel was the starting point for Post-Crisis Superman and informed everything that followed it including (and especially) the Dan Jurgens material which is now all canon again. So even though Man of Steel is no longer canon, its legacy lives on in Post-Crisis Superman and how he developed as a character.

So if Post-Crisis Superman was created as a result of the Watchmen, can you REALLY say that you're defying the cynicism of the Watchmen by bringing Post-Crisis Superman back?

Honestly, I'm having a hard time buying that.

@lvenger:

@orangebat:

Ah... Well, everyone has a right to their opinions.

@lvenger: