Why did the people behind the Superman 2000 pitch hate their marriage?

Sure, but this was Hippolyta and Philippus, who had been in a relationship for decades at that point, and them getting hitched made perfect sense.

I agree, I'm just explaining why I have mixed feelings on how Simone handles relationships.

The irony considering Waid is less evolved than the average human.

>Hippolyta and Philipus are never going to get married or even portrayed in a relationship now that Poly has cucked her with Zeus

Yea Forums hates lesbians and wants them all dead in the real world. What's the point of these posts?

He got a point.

Superman relationship with Lois is pretty much like a man fucking a talking monkey.

Attached: mean man.png (1440x1076, 1.27M)

>Doctor Strange is cheating on Clea with literal prostitutes
>have to suggest constantly that Sue is on the verge of two-timing Reed
>Quicksilver is abusive and Crystal screws around behind his back
>Cyclops abandons his wife and child on a whim
>everything about One More Day

Does any superhero marriage actually work and remain even somewhat functional?

Barry?

are there any nice Yea Forums things that star a committed couple and it doesn't have tons of relationship issues?

it's more like fucking a cavewoman really.

The comparison wasn't drawn between an human and a monkey, but actually a human and A FUCKING ANT. That's how low Lois was viewed.

>muh silver age

Mark Waid is the fucking reason.

Godless faggot never forgave DC for rebooting Superman and modernizing him. Faggot ass psycho legit compares the Byrne reboot to rape and the marriage of Lois and Clark to be an abomination.

Faggot even tried to pull a Spider-Clone Saga in the late 90s; his first draft for The Kingdom was supposed to reveal that Sandman Superman replaced the "real" Superman and it got the book delayed because DC point blank told Waid "we will NEVER let you do that storyline" and he was forced to change it to a variant of Golden Age Superman on some variant timeline in Hypertime).

Hellfire, he also gets super fucking butt-hurt that Lex is now a competent villain that does shit other than get the crap beaten out of him by Superman.

Ten will get you twenty, DC would have hired Morrison, Millar, and whoever the fourth guy was if not for Waid screaming that they had to approve getting rid of the Superman marriage or else they wouldn't take the gig.

Yeah, i remember The Kingdom shit. I also remember that Waid used to bully John Byrne with the idea that Superman and Wonder Woman would be a couple with baby in KC.

forums.millarworld.tv/t/a-special-millar-marvel-or-dc-project-next-year/7028/246

>Lois finding out is Charlie Brown successfully kicking the football. It’s just something very long and very hardcore readers need to see because they’ve read all the permutations before and desperate for something a little different. I get why it happened and it creates some interesting stories, but your leads falling in love and/ or getting married is like when Maddie and David got together on Moonlighting.

>As Alan Moore once pointed out, heroes get married at the end of their stories. That’s when they settle down and we get a big THE END and everybody feels great. But the adventure’s over, which isn’t what you want with an ongoing periodical that’s already in eighth decade of publication. Imagine Batman getting married. Yes, it’s very interesting story, but the long-term consequences would be disastrous in terms of the fundamental dynamics of what makes a story work.

>The Flash and GL could be married (even to each other!!) because they’re legacy characters. The power is the star whereas it’s the character with the primary DC characters like Supes, Bats and WW. A married GL would be interesting and then when he isn’t working you replace him with a successor. Characters who are primary like Spidey too just don’t work married as their stories suddenly seem very finite.

>Mark "Why have matrimony when you can watch Magic Friendship Ponies" Waid
>Mark "Fake Geek Girls make me wanna hurl" Waid

Ugh... can’t you just go back to your EVS threads???

Reminder that Alex Ross and Mark Waid stopped talking with each other because of Kingdom Come.

>Spidey too just don’t work married as their stories suddenly seem very finite
There is something wrong about this but i can't figure out what.

I like the marriage but to be far, he somewhat has a point. Not fully, but I can see where he's coming from.

Ralph and Sue Dibny. Tornado Man had a good thing going too.

Attached: Waid and his Superfaggotry.jpg (940x420, 230K)

Some of Superman's worst villains are in fact his fans, and they work for DC.

What are you talking about? Waid's always said Superman's one true love is Lois.

Waid only said this once as a defense when he was getting flak for his characterization of WW in KC.

Counterpoint: If it's well known and established that no romance can or is ever going to be allowed to go anywhere, why should I care about it, and why even bother writing it to begin with since it's ultimately pointless filler?

>some prefer Superman to be single for forced relationship drama
That's literally all there is to it, the rest is fluff, excuses and delusions.

>are there any nice Yea Forums things that star a committed couple and it doesn't have tons of relationship issues?
Is that really a thing in any media with *ongoing* stories? Conflict is necessary to stories and if you're going to have a couple as your leads, you're going to delve into their couple issues at some point. Every couple has issues.
It's not exclusive to couples either, every relationship, from friends to coworkers to family, there's always some amount of conflict, some issue that actually has something happen in the story. Yes, even in the most wholesome, comfy shows that you like, there are issues, because that's what stories are made of.

Why make this point about romance when it's true of literally everything in cape comics?
Batman is never going to definitely stop the Joker and make Gotham durably safe, Spider-Man will never entirely get over his guilt, Reed Richards will never actually apply his whole equation to solve everything. Really the closest is Tony Stark getting over his alcoholism, and even that gets undone periodically.
Characters die and "get better", legacies pick up mantles and relinquish them back, villains reform and then go back to villainy, characters age and de-age, world-shattering revelations are made and then ignored forever.
Literally nothing matters outside of the story you're currently reading, expecting durable closure from an ongoing comic is a fool's errand, it only ever ends when you die.

This is the curse of forever ongoing stories. The only saving grace are out-of-continuity stories (including adaptations) because they're allowed durable resolution. Resolution means ending.

Attached: garbage delivery.png (356x384, 75K)

This constantly only works when you expect to get a new audience every three years as you get actual new readers and the old ones leave getting fed up with nothing going anywhere. When your reliant on cultivating a long term audience you need to have actual change and development.

Dumbasses, Millar is the one who sees Superman as being so highly evolved that him having sex with Lois would be like a normal human having sex with a chimp. He also is the one who analogizes Superman with Jesus.

See

Bullshit, long time readers are the biggest enablers of that shit, they hate change, they hate their favorite character possibly retiring after fucking 60 years worth of stories. Just look how they reacted to the legacy onslaught at Marvel between 2010 and 2016. For fuck's sake just look at the MJ thing: readers don't just want Peter to be married as development for him, they literally want the status quo from 20 years back when he was married to [iconic character]. You know how many Joker fanboys there are who would get angry about him being durably dealt with? Enough to justify a writer thinking bringing him back would boost sales (and he'd be right too), and certainly way more than the autists on Yea Forums who still haven't realized the limitations of this icon-driven, corporate-owned genre in forever ongoings. Forever ongoing stories shouldn't be a thing, the only way for these characters to evolve durably is for their stories to be allowed to point towards an ending and that ending actually happening at some point.

Attached: 1515280150411.gif (300x225, 1.71M)

Not him but there's no Jesus analogy or mention of Lois there. Clearly Waid is an autist, but this doesn't follow.

Basically everything about superhero comics is broken and unsustainable. It doesn't work if the characters stay static and it doesn't work if you allow change.

To recap this was how it went:

The initial pitch had Lex and Braniac teaming up and learning Superman's identity on their own, then set off all the villains against him. Then whatever it is they're doing starts affecting the fifth dimension and Mxy gets involved. Villains get defeated but Braniac does one last revenge and affects the memory molecule of Lois that has to do with Superman's identity and she's dying. Mxy offers to help, but with a catch. He can only do it mischievously, which means making it so that Superman never revealed his secret identity to Lois.

Then the story goes is that at some point they decided this didn't make sense because it means technically the villains won against Superman without him knowing. So for the second pitch they took out the whole mindwipe, memory molecule thing and reluctantly kept the marriage in.

I believe Morrison, Waid, and Millar all object to the marriage being done in the first place; I think Waid's objection comes from a similar view as Elliot S! Maggin's, and Millar's is the one who said he doesn't feel Superman should marry/fuck Lois because it would be like a human fucking a chimp, and that Superman is analogous to Jesus. Morrison I know he felt it wasn't a good idea to marry them off but I remember a CBR video from 2011 that's no longer up that he did point out Kurt Busiek wrote a good married Superman. But I can't find that damn video because whichever dumbass changed the CBR site got rid of the videos.

I still don't know what Peyer's contribution is, I mean I love his Hourman but I still don't know what he added to the discussion since he never talks about it.

Basically.
But hey, they allow for a very nice background for good stories out of continuity or at its periphery, most of which build on what is already established to the audience about the iconic character's story. Of course whether that justifies an industry mostly working on meaningless fluff is debatable.
And sometimes you get an enjoyable run here and there, you just have to pretend that it's self-contained because it'll be largely undone at one point or another.

Attached: 5181SewrorL._SX337_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg (339x499, 37K)

That's not Jesus enough.

Anyway someone managed to save Millar's quotes that he'd posted on his forum (and had gotten deleted):

fanboyrampage.blogspot.com/2004/11/#110149228576306005

On Lois Lane: "Superman doesn't love Lois. Clark loves Lois and Superman tries HARD to love Lois, but he can't because she's the wrong species. But he tries. Again, Maggin sums it up beautifully. It doesn't have to be complicated... Clark loves Lois, Lois loves Superman, Superman loves Clark [...] Perfect. This is also one of the reasons Superman shouldn't be married to Lois. It's just stupid. It makes no sense and destroys the whole dynamic. Superman is God, Jor-El is the Holy Spirit and Clark Kent is Jesus. The Kents are Mary and Joseph and Lois is Mary Magdelene. She's the NYC girl who's fucked her way around the city and found nobody who measures up. She's just had it with men and is focusing on her career... then Superman shows up. This is why Margot Kidder was perfect for the role and why Lois should be played by someone around 30 even if Supes is being played by a 25 year old. You'll see what I mean when we fix it."

On the current version of the character: "[Kingdom Come] is close to perfect. Waid gets it. None of the other American writers do, though Loeb comes close. His only weakness is getting caught up in the whole farmboy thing. The farm is where he grew up and knew he was NOTHING LIKE THESE PEOPLE. He affects it for the Clark persona, but that's it. He's as Kryptonian as Jesus is divine. Did Jesus shag Mary Mag? I don't think so. Superman should never shag Lois. It's insane and what happens when artists start touching tyoewriters. Jimmy is the reader-identification figure and the comedy relief. PS I'm saving everything else for the launch. No other ideas from me here, I'm afraid, in case some cunt nicks em."

On Lois Lane: "Superman doesn't love Lois. Clark loves Lois and Superman tries HARD to love Lois, but he can't because she's the wrong species. But he tries. Again, Maggin sums it up beautifully. It doesn't have to be complicated... Clark loves Lois, Lois loves Superman, Superman loves Clark [...] Perfect. This is also one of the reasons Superman shouldn't be married to Lois. It's just stupid. It makes no sense and destroys the whole dynamic. Superman is God, Jor-El is the Holy Spirit and Clark Kent is Jesus. The Kents are Mary and Joseph and Lois is Mary Magdelene. She's the NYC girl who's fucked her way around the city and found nobody who measures up. She's just had it with men and is focusing on her career... then Superman shows up. This is why Margot Kidder was perfect for the role and why Lois should be played by someone around 30 even if Supes is being played by a 25 year old. You'll see what I mean when we fix it."

On how close Superman is to humanity: "Humans were apes less than 50 million years ago. Kryptonians are what we'd be like in 20 billion years. I have this all worked out as part of the proposal. In the last two years, I've filled two entire ring-binders with the plan. There's some AMAZING stuff in here. Hitch has also been doing little design doodles for the last five years. It's fate that we met."

This reads like a rant by Bill from Kill Bill, but at least that guy was supposed to be a sociopathic villain.
>Did Jesus shag Mary Mag? I don't think so.
How naive.

Honestly though while I prefer SuperMAN to Superalien and lowkey hate Krypton-related shit, the people leaning on Superman's alien-ness have brought some nice silver-age style shenanigans.

But they've nothing against Wonder Woman. Funny how that works.

Something else interesting from that post that I completely forgot Millar also said:

On the previous pitch Millar had made with Grant Morrison, Mark Waid and Tom Peyer: “The pitch we did was very late 90s and all the things I WOULDN’T do if Superman was being revamped now. It was nice, but it was the whole retro 60s thing that Grant’s into as opposed to what I’d want to do myself. This thing was pretty good, but would be absolutely wrong for now. It still had Superman married to Lois and all that ____. There was another draft Mark Waid added with Earth getting a mind-wipe to forget that stuff and it had some nice touches, but I’d just start from scratch.”

Then there was what Grant Morrison said in:

sites.google.com/a/deepspacetransmissions.com/site/interviews-1/2006-2010/newsarama---all-star-superman-and-much-much-more

>I’ve read a few speculations over the years about how we were going to use that proposal to end the Supeman/Lois Lane marriage. In fact that was actually something we decided we didn’t want to do. I remember Mark Waid and the guys and all of us sitting around thinking of ways to end the Superman marriage – and we talked about it for a long time, and we got to where we were talking about things like “memory molecules,” and we finally said, “This is ridiculous! The only way to do this is to keep the marriage and make it work!”

>It was the only thing we could do with what I still think was a bad idea. The marriage damaged the dynamic of Superman comics quite severely, but if we broke up the relationship of these two great fictional lovers, Superman would immediately seem ineffectual and ultimately beaten by his foes, walking around for the rest of his life not knowing Lois was ever his wife or whatever.

I also remember that nearly two decades ago, people were speculating on what was going on and were saying that the four were going to erase the Super-marriage, until Waid came by some message board and said that wasn't what they were going to do. And then when Millar brought that whole thing up people thought Waid had lied... But it makes more sense when you realize that there were two drafts, and the marriage erasing one came first, and the marriage intact one came later.

So it seems that Morrison original speech was more of a soft revamp that still had the marriage intact, and the later ones were mostly done by Waid and Millar, and those did away with the marriage because they dislike the marriage,

Nah, the first draft had the marriage ending, and the later draft had the marriage intact.

That could be possible too, but we won't know unless someone can find both drafts and find out what the dates on them are.

Most writers have nothing about Wonder Woman, she's just kind of there.

I don't think so. Millar just wordied strangely. The final draft seems to be the one that keeps the marriage as a compromise. It's pretty clear the 4 of them hated the marriage and like the more alien and oh so superior Superman. They just realized eventually that undoing the marriage wasn't going to work.

Why DC never approved the pitch, is the real mystery.

Seems like a weird dichotomy, either keep the marriage or use memory erasing bullshit.
You could also have ended it in a non-retarded way.

I'm talking more about them having so many issues with Superman being with Lois, but then praising the heck out of Kingdom Come, a comic one of them did, and that ended with SMWW shenanigans. Millar praised KC for having a perfect Superman.

Because it was a stupid status quo for tv synergy. All the post marriage Superman stories sucking is enough evidence for that.

Like divorce. But heroes can't divorce, for some reason.

>Why DC never approved the pitch, is the real mystery.

The story goes is that they pitched to someone, probably Eddie Berganza, who was assistant editor at the time while his superior (some have said either Carlin or Levitz) was on vacation. So then when the superior came back and found out about that, he thought they were trying to go over his head to get approved and rejected the pitch and told them they weren't allowed to write the main Superman books.

Having read Ted McKeever's comic I almost think it could be Carlin, but Levitz could also be a possible choice too.

My guess is the reasoning in the case of this think-tank about Superman is that divorce is a defeat and Superman shouldn't lose. Which I would say is retarded on at least 3 levels. First divorce doesn't have to be framed as a defeat (although I'm sure some people would take issue with that), second Superman loses sometimes, third if there's anything Superman should lose at it's human shit where his superness isn't relevant (like Jon dying of a heart attack). But again we're talking about writers who apparently think Superman isn't human at all.

>Clark loves Lois, Lois loves Superman, Superman loves Clark
Superman and Clark Kent are the same person. It's not even suppose to be a split personality thing. This makes no sense.

Because obviously being imbued by the wisdom of Anthena makes her Superman's intellectual equal

Which guess means Jesus should shack up with Hercules or Thor in his mind.

Because they give as little credit to WW as a human as they do to Supes, they're both Gods to them so it fits their autism.

>tv synergy
Wait for Smallville? Or Lois and Clark? Neither really makes sense.

> is the real mystery.
That's not a mystery at all. At the TIME, DC didn't want their top people working on Batman and Superman. Both were editorially mandated crossover shit.

The irony of what Millar said of the love triangle is that he misremembered what Elliot S! Maggin wrote:

“Superman loved Lois Lane.
Lois Lane loved Clark Kent and ached in vain
to believe he was Superman.
Clark Kent loved Superman.
No one understood this.”

Scott and Barda

Actually the writers wanted them to marry earlier but had to delay it until the tv show did it. The Lois and Clark people came up with the same idea to marry them on their own. And there are plenty of good stories with them married.

Mind you, even though this was McKeever's first impression of Carlin, McKeever did note that Carlin did aggressively argue against Roy Thomas to have McKeever work on the German Expressionist Elseworlds comics

Attached: RCO008_1463054543.jpg (1041x1600, 415K)

That's way cleverer. Even Clark Kent aspires to be Superman.

He said that because he believed Clark Kent was a construct, right?

Which one? Because Maggin sounds more like he's saying Superman is a construct, an ideal that both Clark and Lois desire in their own way.

I think Lois Lane should be Bruce Wayne's concubine and they should have Clark congratulate him

Nah, he seems to say that Clark Kent doesn't exist and only serve to live for Superman. So it's stupid of Lois Lane to love Clark Kent.

not comics but zack snyder definitely saw him as a jesus metaphor

“Superman loved Batman.
Lois Lane loved Clark Kent and ached in vain
to believe he was Superman.
Clark Kent loved Superman.
fixed it

>Plenty of good stories
Lol no. The quality of your average Superman book is so bad that Kelly's, Johns'and Tomasi's runs get treated as revelation.

Snyder also loved to put Superman through the ringer and have Lois be the be all, end all of Lois Lane.

Of Superman. I meant Superman. The Maggins post left me confused.

I don't know about that. Clark loving Superman makes me think of a man aspiring to be the perfect man. Lois loves Clark but wants him to be the perfect man, the best version of him he can be. The perfect man loves Lois Lane, the woman who loves him for his imperfect self, but wants him to be perfect.

But I guess it's vague enough to interpret it in a number of ways.

Man, DC writers really don't like mah boi Clark, huh?

Attached: 1395627383180.jpg (400x400, 34K)

And i thought Bruce Wayne had it bad with writers writing that Bruce is nothing but a mask.

You know I hate those movies but I find interesting how hard they tried to build on what Snyder thinks people think of Superman.

>Because half of them view Superman as Jesus (seriously) and that Superman/Jesus can’t be married.
Which is funny because Jesus was almost certainly married.

What's wrong in that though? It's always the Batfamily/Devin Grayson autists who oppose this.

The alpha male Superman running around pretending to be a Beta Clark Kent disturbs their sense of masculinity. Even more so the idea that the beta clark kent is the real personality and he only pretends to be the alpha clark kent. This is why they prefer WW to Lois. With WW Superman can be the alpha male bringing the uppity feminist in her place. With Lois, Clark is her beta sub.

Bruce is a mask. Batman/Bruce is just a brooding autist.

Snyder liked to make Superman suffer and fail because Jesus Christ suffered and questioned himself a lot. Snyder is all about that martydom and gorefest.

These comic writers, when they think of Jesus Christ, they are mostly thinking of a perfect being who's super nice and never err.

Attached: death.jpg (1280x798, 250K)

ITT: Superfags who don't even read Superman, and have never touched a single silver age or a Bronze age issue, decide how writers who are responsible for 99% of good modern day Superman stories and have a lot more Superman than them, how they're wrong for not following the current shitty Marvelized version.

Bruce Wayne is a person with a full range of emotions. He has to have some level of charm, or else he wouldn't be able to pull the "Brucie" act. Characterization Bruce as an autist that genuinely believe he is an humanoid bat and constantly speak with a grow needing to be reminded to stop with that shit IS very stupid.

Bruce Wayne should start out as a mask, and then at some point he finds enough humanity in the people he frequents to allow himself to become human, and eventually he stops being Batman.

Attached: 1238408638_superman_drinking_.gif (302x347, 2.18M)

Silver age Superman was easily the least interesting character in his story. The main appeal were the wackiness of the situations and supporting characters. Superman himself was an off-putting cunt.

that makes sense

t.another Superfag who has never read a silver age story
Silver age Superman was a better character than modern daywhite bread and flanderised version.

Batman: The Animated Series' Bruce >>>>>>> The New Adventures of Batman and Robin' Bruce.

>He has to have some level of charm, or else he wouldn't be able to pull the "Brucie" act.
He's rich

I've said it before itt and I'll say it again: while I enjoy Superman's more human side more, I can't deny that some people who treat him as more of an alien have brought some good shit to the table.
I just don't think Clark and Superman have to be a dichotomy.

because it means the character ages and for writers who grew up with him that they can't write THEIR take on Superman

apparently, their plans for Superman never involved him being married

youtube.com/watch?v=Al_q5GmFHj4

Has there ever been a Superman depowered arc?

being married means having kids
then having kids means that the kids will eventually need to age
then that means the characters grow older and you can't write your story about your characters who you only envisioned as being in their 20s-30s!

Goddamn, i miss TAS. I miss when DC was quality.

Yes. It's just an excuse to show Superman is just as great and perfect even without his powers. There's never an interesting exploration, Just more character wank

Lots.

Attached: 9Fu97eV.jpg (852x728, 191K)

Bruce really became an ass in The New Batman Adventures. No clue why they changed his character so much

Pre crisis Superman wasn't an alien deprived of any human emotions. For the man who has everything was a pre crisis Bronze age story and was more emotional than the modern day perfect Superman. Same can be said of silver age stories where he visits Krypton, Pa and Ma die, the story where Pa and Ma return, where he goes back to visit pa.
Tomasi's Superman didn't even have any heartfelt emotions. All he did was stare at his family in the name of emotions.
Why do you even try to argue if you haven't read shit. Go back to reading your blogs about what Superman means.

Like is there one where he just chills as Clark Kent for a while? I just find slice of life comfy and it's rarely a thing in comics

Hell, you can see this in Seagle's "It's a Bird."
He feld dread when he was offered Supes

How would that even work?

Dude, what the fuck is this pointless rant against strawmen, I've read some Silver Age Supes and I've read maybe 1 issue of Tomasi's run which didn't make me want to read more. I just don't enjoy Krypton being too relevant in who Superman is.

Silver age and Bronze age Superman are different. Silver age Superman wasn't that interesting. He was basically a Kryptonian in everything. He only cared about Krypton and the Kryptonian way of living. Pa and Ma were nothing but those nice old people. His real KRYPTONIAN parents were the one he had a bigger connection to. He was also a huge cunt.

During the silver age, Superboy was the more interesting version of the character.

Because Batman SHOULD stop the Joker. There should be a definitive storyline about Batman v Joker that ends with the villain being put to rest until a legacy character is developed for them. Comics SHOULD progress. It's literal assholes that prevent some of the longest running serial stories in US canon to loop back on themselves and drive their stories into the ground as they perpetually ruin storylines.
It vaguely made sense in the 60s and 70s when the research said that most people read 3-4 issues of a comic in a year. It doesn't make sense in the 90s and 2000s. Let the stories progress, make people understand that there's a start and and endpoint to different characters. Retire old characters, introduce new ones.
It can only result in more readers.

Uh I guess him losing his powers but only for a little while and he also knows exactly when so he just takes a break and gets someone else to fill in for him

I've always liked the idea that Clark Kent isn't so much a 'mask' as it is who Clark probably would've been if he were born and raised just a regular human. I see him as being a genuine element of Superman's character, even if the 'true' Superman is probably the superhero, if not Kal-El. It's like how you act a certain way at work or school, then you go home or go out with friends, shed the mask off, and act a different way. So it's not the 'real' Superman but there's definitely a bit of him in there at least.

The problem is when writers treat Superman being alien and feeling unable to relate to humanity as him being emotionless. The thing is, EVERYONE feels that way at some point, and in that sort of irony, it makes him all the more human (except for the part where he really is an alien who's stronger than any human will ever be and will likely live far longer than any of them ever could as well).

At least he wasn't devoid of any character like post Byrne. How were Kents other than stereotypical old country folks in modern versions?

They were his parents, and not just some nice strangers.

>writers treat Superman being alien and feeling unable to relate to humanity as him being emotionless.
This has never happened. Pre crisis Superman was a lot more humane. He had a wider show of emotions than the modern day stoic version. Someone not being American doesn't make them devoid of feelings.

Neither were they strangers in pre crisis version. Stop making shit up. At least silver age had good stories. It's embarrassing how the best run after the reboot is from a Liefeld knockoff.

Superman in the old comics care more about his kryptonians parents than anything else.

Attached: Its_a_Bird_-_GN_p049.jpg (947x1489, 389K)

>This has never happened. Pre crisis Superman was a lot more humane. He had a wider show of emotions than the modern day stoic version. Someone not being American doesn't make them devoid of feelings.
Tell that to Snyder.

Personally, I fucking love it when Superman emotes and doesn't mind showing his feelings.

I'm not sure it would actually be the good business decision, at this point the characters are too big of cultural icons and the only readers left are too autistic, but from a purely artistic point of view I can only agree with you.
Look at legacies that have been introduced in the 2010s, how many of them actually showed to be succesful with readers compared to their parent characters? afaik only the much maligned Femthor managed to. And yeah there are arguably other factors (like the quality of the sendoff, the quality of the legacy characters themselves, and the writers who introduced them, looking at your benis) but some fans feeling personally attacked by their childhood hero being replaced by some black kid is a factor too.

Attached: 1477016570273.gif (419x237, 1.36M)

He cared about both his parents.

What does Snyder have to do with pre crisis Superman?

>What does Snyder have to do with pre crisis Superman?
I was just pointing out that Snyder (and Goyer as well to be fair) have fallen for the pitfall of writing a Superman who feels distant from humanity by making him effectively near emotionless, sterile, and monotone instead of still being rather human via emotion.

In the silver age it was Krypton this, Krypton that. He spent more time going back in time to hang with Jor and Lara than visiting John and Martha. John and Martha were seen only as those nice folk that helped him out, not as his legit parents. Those were Jor and Lara. Even as a baby, thanks to his super-intellect and super-memory, he could still remember his past back in Krypton as an infant. Hell, the Fortress had a monument to Jor and Lara, not John and Martha.

>I've always liked the idea that Clark Kent isn't so much a 'mask' as it is who Clark probably would've been if he were born and raised just a regular human. I see him as being a genuine element of Superman's character, even if the 'true' Superman is probably the superhero, if not Kal-El. It's like how you act a certain way at work or school, then you go home or go out with friends, shed the mask off, and act a different way.
The thing is he first grew up as some kid who was the son of Jon and Martha Kent. He didn't grow up as Kal-El (depends on the version, depends at what age you consider "growing up" is) so Clark Kent being the one who's his least sincere version seems ass backwards. Especially when he's been shown to know what he represents to people as Superman, showing that's at least partly a facade, that's part of his "work mask".

>Why does this adopted alien who can never truly fit in care about his lost home and his lost parents

So you conceid to my point that the Kents were treated as nice strangers, Thank you.

>it's about immigration
>He's after our WOMEN!
Not exactly subtle but I chuckled, what's this from?

nvm, filename, me am smart

Being a Kryptoboo doesn't mean he didn't love Ma and Pa. Superboy was completely set around Kents.

I'm a different guy but if an adopted kid has the ability to see his dead parents then they would go for it. You act like Superman is insulting the Kents for caring about his old home

An Eisner winning fictionalised account of why Steven T Seagle didn't want to write Superman.
Spoiler it's because he has memories of a family member dying of Huntingtons and being given Superman comics at the hospital
He did end up writing a pretty mediocre Superman for about a year (Cir-El)

Attached: Its_a_Bird_-_GN_c01.jpg (1040x1564, 388K)

I'm saying the silver age comics placed a far too large importance on the kryptonians parents. Everything was about Krypton.

That's why Superboy > Superman back then.

It's been theorized that there's really 3 different personas: mild-mannered Clark Kent, Superman, and Kal-El, with the last one being the most sincere personality, being who Clark was raised to be by the Kents, but also having an intense fascination and longing for Krypton and his birth parents, and even feeling some stress from having to be Superman all the time. Basically no one gets to see that persona aside from the Kents, Lois, and I guess Jon.

Why is Superman stronger than other Kryptonians?

Character wank.

Superman's been soaking up yellow sun radiation for a LOT longer.

It's actually a bit of a plot hole that evil Kryptonians like Zod are able to fight him on an even level despite not being exposed to our yellow soon for only a few days at most.

He was a natural son of Krypton and not a pathetic test tube baby who would grow up and become a nerd

The Kal-El bullshit is that, bullshit. It's something to make Superman sound even more alien.

Isn't that all of us though? We all have numerous facets, which show different with basically every different person we interact with. His parents and son don't know his sexual kinks, Jon might not know of his most violent or borderline thoughts, even Lois isn't privy to all his inner thoughts.
Also seems kind of pointless to name all 3 specifically as different personas when they're not going to correspond with Id, Ego and Super-Ego. And that would be gay too.

>When writers only have Diana refer to him as "Kal-El"

Attached: ConstantinePukeCroppedTrans.png (459x210, 228K)

He's the protagonist. He has the American version of shonen resolve.

You don't act differently depending on your environment? I actually think it's something that humanizes him pretty damn well. Not only is wearing a public persona something that everyone does, but I'd imagine an inspirational leader like him has a more drastic split between the way he carries himself in front of the world to see and the way he is in private. Look at any celebrity, look at politicians like Barack Obama or any American president sans maybe Trump.

That's the point I'm getting at, sans that last part. Idk, I see it as being a bit more muddled anyway but that's the gist of his personas at least.

>KALEEEEEEEEEEEL NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!
I fucking knew that came from Geoff Johns.

bluntly speaking its a consequence of deeply insecure people unable to cope with the idea that stories end period. Spidey chooses a lady, settles down, has a kid. Does his hero shit, juggles responsibilities. Gets old, passes the torch to Mayday or Spidercat or Spidergwen or any variant kid you can come up with.

Their story doesn't even necessarily end. But a major component of it now is their wife, their kid, maybe their extended family. Its literally a case of a writer saying 'This scares me on a deep fundamental level and rather than cope with the idea that Superman makes time to have dinner with Lois Lane and help raise his kid I'll scream about it until I get my way."

It actually makes no sense in Snyder's DC movies that Diana calls Supes Kal-el. Why does she know or care about his space name?

But the Kal-El name is stupid to use in that context. I can see you're basing your view of the character on the John Byrne's take. Why would his Clark Kent, that grew up as a normal kid and only started to develop his powers as a late teen, which is when he learned the truth about his origins, identify himself as Kal-El? He might be aware that this is the name his biological parents gave him and even feel a bit of association with it since it is also HIS name, but he would identify himself way more with that of Clark Kent.
I, for example, am aware of the first name my parents wanted to give me, before deciding on my actual name which is actually an a gift to someone they knew. So i've two names i associate myself with, but if anyone asks my current name is the one i most associate with. The other one is mostly a personal curiosity.

>came from Geoff Johns.
This was Jimenez back in 2001. I don't think Johns started it

Attached: Wonder Woman 170 (2001) (digital-Empire) 020.jpg (1977x1281, 702K)

IIRC I think Morrison was the one who said there were three personas... but he names them as Superman, City Clark, and regular Clark.

I don't know who had the idea that it was Clark, Superman, and Kal-El, though. Do you remember where you read that?

That came from Johns. DCEU Diana met Superman as... Superman, and then later knew more about him during his funeral when she could see his family mourn him as Clark Kent. She could even be aware of his alien name because Zod's actions in MoS, but intimately she would see that everyone that truly knew him knew him as Clark. So why use Kal-El thinking that was resonate with him?
Geoff Johns helped write some drafts of the Justice League movie, before fighting with Joss Whedon. You're right that this Kal-El nonsense happened many times before in comics, also for a real stupid reason, but in the movie it was because of Johns.

And? (Even though most stories didn't revolve round Krypton as you claim)

Perez started it, with Clark introducing himself to Diana using his Kryptonian name.

God, Diana used to be such an obnoxious cunt whenever paired with Superman. Both pre and post Flashpoint.

Attached: Superman-Wonder Woman 008 (2014) (2 covers - weird order) (1988px) (digital-Empire).cbr-Superman-Won (1987x1091, 627K)

And it is for the exact reasons anyone might be guessing at.

Attached: i1RNruv.jpg (1988x3056, 784K)

I think the idea is that Diana, as a part-god, respects Superman as a fellow "demigod" in some ways, and so uses his "royal" name. But it doesn't make sense for this version of Clark to see himself that way.

Nah, the reason was for mere shallow comic book fan service. It doesn't matter if it makes little ense. Justice League is plagued with this shit sentimentality.

I don't think writers are the issue as much as editorial, and ultimately, since it's a business, fans. I know it's fun to project that way, but it's not the core issue, the core issue is the
>Gets old, passes the torch to Mayday or Spidercat or Spidergwen or any variant kid you can come up with.
No suit is going to be okay with you making Peter Parker get older and eventually retire for good.

In the comics, that's sort of the reason why. Some writer once said, forget who it was, that in the trinity Batman is there to remind Superman of his human origins, which is why he always calls him Clark Kent, or Kent, and such. And also to humble him, so you've Batman constantly teasing him about Smallville or for being a boyscout. Meanwhile Wonder Woman is there to remind Superman of his alien heritage. So that's why she calls him Kal-El. She also there to emphasize his "otherness". So that's why they always discuss while flying up in the clouds or are always meeting in the Fortress of Solitude in the Arctic. He even said that Wonder Woman would never be friends with Clark Kent, and that Batman will always be wary of Superman.

Fuck I'm cringing pretty hard here, it's like fucking Lex Luthor wrote Diana's dialogue.

My personal headcanon is that he's doomsday's descendant and had a little atavism

It's not cool for Diana but this dynamic does serve to humanize Bruce to some extent, although the self-serving paranoid part kind of undoes it.
Fuck why are writers such bitches?

George Perez back then wanted to write an arc where Superman and Wonder Woman have an one-night stand, and his reason for why the pitch was never accepted by DC no matter how hard he fought for it is because in the story Wonder Woman be left slightly disappointed, thinking she would lay with a veritable god only to find Superman average in bed.

DC writers have issues, see Mark Millar constantly low-calling Lois Lane a whore.

Attached: Superman-Wonder Woman 008 (2014) (2 covers - weird order) (1988px) (digital-Empire).cbr-Superman-Won (1988x3056, 1.06M)

Is that a weird form of cuckoldry fetishism or just an also weird hommage to Marston?

Attached: why.png (323x454, 327K)

52 I guess.

Who the fuck knows, Superman taking Wonder Woman's virginity was also weirdly important for Perez.

But literally Zero modern comic artists, even the good ones, can do panel to panel action decently. That's why people still dig silver and bronze age after all this time

>Why don't you ever ask me to help with YOUR problems?
Because writers are terrible at writing her, you douchebag.

I agree. Space Redneck > Spaceman > Redneck. Hes best as a synthesis of his upbringing and his genetics. Although personally I think its absolutely silly that Clark would *try* to be Kryptonian like he used to, aside from during an immature phase when he was just starting the superhero gig

The one thing i'm thing i'm getting from this thread is that the Superman mythology is a goddamn mess. Like Jeff Bush.
youtube.com/watch?v=i6uMV4fCVuw

Sorry to double post but I really feel like these comic writers don't even consider how IRL orphans are, when they're adopted that young.

Actually the simplest solution to the Joker problem is to BAN WRITERS FROM HAVING JOKER BE A MASS MURDERER.......

Go back to Silver Age Joker who never killed and who basically was all about the caper being the expression of his sense of humor. The one that was in all of the various Batman cartoon shows, Batman '66, and BTAS.

Fuck, do a hard retcon even and say Joker rarely if ever kills too and retcon pretty much EVERY Joker story that involves him murdering someone as not happening, outside a few outlier incidents like him killing Jason.

Remember when the Green Goblin was dead for over 20 years? That there are legitimately people that enjoy Hobgoblin & Harry Goblin better? It's not impossible to retire Joker

But at a certain point of that Batman wouldn't take Joker seriously beyond stretching his detective brain muscles. And Riddler is better for that.

>Remember when the Green Goblin was dead for over 20 years?
And remember how one of DC's best-selling series right now is a fucking Batman Who Laughs solo?

I would seriously be interested in a one-off from the standpoint of a writer who is actually documented on orphans and willing to write a Superman story about it.

That solves the Joker, who's a poster-child, but that doesn't actually solve anything at all. Most reoccuring villains have done shit that's completely beyond anyone's no-kill rule who doesn't have an editor who would bring back the character from the dead.
Really the late 80s deconstruction destroyed any possibility of going back to that at large anyway.

...and then he came back. And he's still more popular than Harry or Kingsley.

>chimp girls are more faithful than human girls
Wut?

Nobody during the legacy shit at Marvel was ACTUALLY GROWING OLD AND RETIRING you fucking imbecile, they were getting killed horribly and in unflattering ways with no dignity or reward to clear the way for new characters.

Morrison doesn't like married Superman because he felt the cat-and-mouse dynamic was part of what made the character what he was. Waid doesn't like married Superman because he's a fucking lunatic that doesn't get the character.

>Some of Superman's worst villains are in fact his fans, and they work for DC.

Coulda fooled me...

What Snyder forgot is that Jesus pulled off a shitton of miracles before he died, and his Superman couldn't even stop a fucking villain without snapping their neck.

There is also pushback from the pros against the marriage simply because they all saw it as corporate meddling when WB said "Oh yeah Superman is marrying Lois in a few weeks on Lois & Clark so have them get married in your little cartoon magazines!" and they had to have an emergency summit meeting of the entire Superman teams, and come up with it a plan to get them hitched.

That's actually decent though, Diana's being laser-focused on the part of Superman she's familiar with, but she's not obnoxious about it when she realizes her error in neglecting the other side of him.

That's absolutely true, you're right, but it's not like growing old is even an option in cape comics, legacies only happen after "dramatic" "deaths".
Have they ever actually attempted a major character growing old and retiring in continuity? For more than 2 years, without the injury shit like Knightfall, all that jazz.

The problem is that it wasn't a matter of familiarity, though. Diana sometimes would actively push Superman to accept his "godlike" nature and status, even when shown as visibly uncomfortable by the idea. Not to mention the MANY moments where she tries to push him to sorta-y take over the world just because he's powerful enough to actually pull it.

Basically, writers like to portray Wonder Woman as his Lady Macbeth.

Attached: Justice League 019 (2013) (3 covers) (1988px) (digital-Empire).cbr-JusticeLeague_19_TheGroup-015.jpg (1988x3056, 1.77M)

After what McKeever wanted to do to Captain America? I would tell him to stay the fuck away from Superman as well.

>Superman's been soaking up yellow sun radiation for a LOT longer.

There was a 70's story where the entire Phantom Zone breaks out and Superman discovers that he really IS a little more powerful that the rest since he's spent nearly his entire life on Earth.

Attached: 5964819-8826311108-39746.jpg (839x1280, 521K)

Honestly they both look bad there, and Diana's dialogue makes up a false dichotomy between dictarorship and laissez-faire.
One issue is it makes it look like Superman indeed does see himself as above it all. Only Gods choose to not interfere. It makes it look like Clark's stance is the anti- great power/responsibilities.
Also an issue is Diana superposing that with American interventionism/imperialism, it seems to frame any action as "meddling with the savage's ways" and her arguing against herself. Rewrite that shit so that she doesn't look like completely like a dumb bitch.

>>Quicksilver is abusive and Crystal screws around behind his back

Quicksilver was neglecting his wife and child, not being abusive. The irony being that he felt like an unwanted outsider amongst the Inhumans, and was putting all of his focus and energy into trying to get them to like and accept them, and taking his family for granted. Crystal cheating was written as being justified because of this, and because Quicksilver became violently insane when he found out.

>Cyclops abandons his wife and child on a whim

It wasn't written that he intended to permanently abandon them, and after she had told him that if he left civilian life to go back to the X-Men, it was over between them, that marriage was always living on borrowed time.

>Doctor Strange is cheating on Clea with literal prostitutes

When did this happen? Who wrote that?

>women are unattainable prizes
>marriage is the death of excitement in a relationship
gee i wonder why this medium attracts so many incels

you know what i mean. people who love each other and don't throw bricks at each others head every other issue.

Tbh you're being too hard on Diana when Lois was hugely shallow ignoring Clark for Superman. At least Diana formed a relationship with Clark. Lois was simply hero worship and Clark married a groupie.

They had planned to get them married for years but were told to hold off to coincide with the show. They had to "rush it" a little when the time came because the tv people decided to do it at the beginning of that season instead of the end. Everybody who was involved in getting them married was totally for it. Morrison and Co were a bunch of pre-crisis fanboys wanting to come in and fix things that weren't broken.

>you know what i mean. people who love each other and don't throw bricks at each others head every other issue.
That was the whole deal with the Dibnys (even though Sue commented on other men's attractiveness, but mostly as a joke), which is why Identity Crisis hit so hard.
Scott Free and Barda were a cute couple for so long, that King's Mister Miracle is betrayal for many of their fans.
Sometimes post-Golden Age Jay Garrick and Joan are presented that way, but I haven't read enough of JSA-adjacent stories to be completely sure about that.
Mera once got crazy and tried to murder Aquaman, he thought he murdered her instead, but actually she only fucked off for years - after she returned, they were a quite nice couple, but right now they have the forced drama of him having lost his memories and her having to remarry for political reasons because everyone thinks he's dead.

>Wonder Woman would never be friends with Clark Kent
This is absurd.

Well you do have Wondyfags like Cranky who claim that Diana is too good of a person to be friends with Clark.