Do You Think DC has Lost Its Way with Superman?

[Eternity_TARO]

I can't help but feel like DC has lost their way with Superman

If you watched the Justice League the Animated Series, I feel they were spot on, but watching the various movies over the years, it feels like they have no clue who Superman really is???

What are you thought?

 

[BAYLOR]

I can't help but feel like DC has lost their way with Superman

If you watched the Justice League the Animated Series, I feel they were spot on, but watching the various movies over the years, it feels like they have no clue who Superman really is???

What are you thought?

Disney would actual don a much better job with Superman and Justice league live action.

 

[Bren G]

I feel the same way. DC's Superman has the same problem as Marvel's Captain Marvel. Both are invulnerable. There is no weakness, nor flaw presented that defines their humanity (note: yes, they aren't human, but we humans want to see ourselves reflected in them). Unlike Superman (1978), where Lex Luthor's genius (brilliantly played by Gene Hackman), pitted brain vs brawn, and showed Superman's limits, the new stories have not found a way to utilize Superman's weakness and take us on a journey as to how he overcomes them. So there is little to identify with, and so audiences are disinterested.

 

[CupofJoe]

I can't see how any lasting film franchise can be built off Superman. The 1978 film brought us a relatively unknown [to the general public] character to screen with the tag line "You will believe a man can fly". We had not seen the like before. And across the next 3 or four films we discovered Superman, his life and loves, and the world he live in and came from.
The trouble is now, that we know that before the film starts and yet every Superman film seems to need to include the origin story and all the other attached baggage.
About the best bit of Man of Steel is that Jimmy Olsen is introduced, is revealed a CIA agent [or equivalent thereof] and then promptly killed. 2-3 minutes tops. It was something new.
Then comes @Bren G points. Superman is just too good, strong, fast, smart etc. There is no jeopardy.
Even when he dies in Dawn of Justice, the last frame or two robs us of even that small moment of "truth".

 

[Foxbat]

I think the DC animated movies and various series is where they have been strongest.
The movies have been generally disappointing and after fairly decent Flash and Supergirl series, we have the dull as dishwater Batwoman. As for Superman and Lous, I’ve watched two episodes but don’t think I’ll be watching any more.

I’m not sure if DC have lost their way but I do think they’ve run out of ideas on how to put a fresh slant on their superheroes/heroines.

I always felt that Superman’s powers made him a fairly one dimensional character. If you look at Marvel’s Hulk as another overpowered character, the big difference is in how the world sees him and, because of that, Hulk carries a pathos similar to the Frankenstein monster. This depth, in my opinion, is what Superman lacks and makes it difficult to develop him any further.

 

[Wayne Mack]

The problem with the Superman character is that he has become too well known. I grew up watching reruns of the old George Reeves TV series and I can't say that I see any character differences in the newer portrayals. The latest TV series, which I admit that I do not really follow, has tried to shift the focus and have Superman being retired and focuses on having sons, one of which has inherited powers and one of which has not.

For a long term solution, DC should copy what Marvel did with Spiderman and throw away all of the Superman canon and rebuild the story.

 

[BAYLOR]

The problem with the Superman character is that he has become too well known. I grew up watching reruns of the old George Reeves TV series and I can't say that I see any character differences in the newer portrayals. The latest TV series, which I admit that I do not really follow, has tried to shift the focus and have Superman being retired and focuses on having sons, one of which has inherited powers and one of which has not.

For a long term solution, DC should copy what Marvel did with Spiderman and throw away all of the Superman canon and rebuild the story.

There was a very old superman comic that I recall , It was in book form. In a future world Superman traveling in space gets caught by an energy Vampire and is rendered almost lifeless, . They take his body, clone , transfer what life of his life-force into it and amplify it up to fun power. In second incident , Superman vista a Colony contain inhabitants who suffer from incurable and very contagious Space born diseases . He contracts a disease which causes his body to melt into protoplasm and again, rather then lest him dies , they clone him. Each clone created did know they were clone . But third and final one did learn the truth Basically. the people of the future didn't want to let go of superman.

I can't remember the title of the story but though . It would make a terrific Superman movie.

 

[Spade]

I liked Man of Steel. I didn't care for Justice League at all. And I don't think the character has been in another DC movie other than the bottom half of an actor in Shazam, so they haven't had anything to really screw up in a while. I don't know what's keeping another Superman movie from being made.

 

[Please Be Nice]

Disney would actual don a much better job with Superman and Justice league live action.

Disney partnered with Marvel. Disney is not in charge of Marvel Studios. Same thing with Lucasfilm and Fox and their other acquisitons.

 

[Please Be Nice]

I feel the same way. DC's Superman has the same problem as Marvel's Captain Marvel. Both are invulnerable. There is no weakness, nor flaw presented that defines their humanity (note: yes, they aren't human, but we humans want to see ourselves reflected in them). Unlike Superman (1978), where Lex Luthor's genius (brilliantly played by Gene Hackman), pitted brain vs brawn, and showed Superman's limits, the new stories have not found a way to utilize Superman's weakness and take us on a journey as to how he overcomes them. So there is little to identify with, and so audiences are disinterested.

I'm sorry but I have to disagree. Superman is never invulernable or flawless. That's a major misunderstanding of the character. Clark Kent becomes Superman. He never stops being Clark Kent who is as human as human come.

I feel like you have not had exposure to many Superman stories. There are quite literally thousands upon thousands of them and Superman is never invulernable or flawless in any of them.

 

[Please Be Nice]

I think the DC animated movies and various series is where they have been strongest.
The movies have been generally disappointing and after fairly decent Flash and Supergirl series, we have the dull as dishwater Batwoman. As for Superman and Lous, I’ve watched two episodes but don’t think I’ll be watching any more.

I’m not sure if DC have lost their way but I do think they’ve run out of ideas on how to put a fresh slant on their superheroes/heroines.

I always felt that Superman’s powers made him a fairly one dimensional character. If you look at Marvel’s Hulk as another overpowered character, the big difference is in how the world sees him and, because of that, Hulk carries a pathos similar to the Frankenstein monster. This depth, in my opinion, is what Superman lacks and makes it difficult to develop him any further.

Superman and Lois was an incredible well made show with a solid understand of Superman all throughout. He is constantly being reminded how hard it is being Superman and has to fight for his life in almost every episode.

 

[Bren G]

I'm sorry but I have to disagree. Superman is never invulernable or flawless. That's a major misunderstanding of the character. Clark Kent becomes Superman. He never stops being Clark Kent who is as human as human come.

I feel like you have not had exposure to many Superman stories. There are quite literally thousands upon thousands of them and Superman is never invulernable or flawless in any of them.

I think you make a good point relating to Kent's humanity as a vulnerability. This of course is the key to every good story and I think Superman (1978) gets this right. It's a masterpiece in so many ways but no movie that's followed can replicate the magic. However, the relative lack of physical harm that can befall him limits the story. In the first movie, it's Lex who outwits him and chains kryptonite on him and dumps him in the pool. What a humiliating way to kill a demi-god! But now that you see that trick, what else can you do in subsequent films but that same thing in other low rent locales?

Spiderman, Batman etc have the same human frailties (Spiderman gets this right most) AND can be harmed in innumerable ways physically, and we cringed each time as we feel their pain. This adds another layer to their struggle but also opens up many different avenues for them to creatively plan or take action given their physical limitations and frailties.

Where I cannot grant you is the notion that one must read thousands of stories to understand a character. Sorry. You get a might get a thousand seconds to grab the audience's attention at best. You don't get a thousand minutes let alone stories.

 

[Please Be Nice]

The problem with the Superman character is that he has become too well known. I grew up watching reruns of the old George Reeves TV series and I can't say that I see any character differences in the newer portrayals. The latest TV series, which I admit that I do not really follow, has tried to shift the focus and have Superman being retired and focuses on having sons, one of which has inherited powers and one of which has not.

For a long term solution, DC should copy what Marvel did with Spiderman and throw away all of the Superman canon and rebuild the story.

I think you make a good point relating to Kent's humanity as a vulnerability. This of course is the key to every good story and I think Superman (1978) gets this right. It's a masterpiece in so many ways but no movie that's followed can replicate the magic. However, the relative lack of physical harm that can befall him limits the story. In the first movie, it's Lex who outwits him and chains kryptonite on him and dumps him in the pool. What a humiliating way to kill a demi-god! But now that you see that trick, what else can you do in subsequent films but that same thing in other low rent locales?

Spiderman, Batman etc have the same human frailties (Spiderman gets this right most) AND can be harmed in innumerable ways physically, and we cringed each time as we feel their pain. This adds another layer to their struggle but also opens up many different avenues for them to creatively plan or take action given their physical limitations and frailties.

Where I cannot grant you is the notion that one must read thousands of stories to understand a character. Sorry. You get a might get a thousand seconds to grab the audience's attention at best. You don't get a thousand minutes let alone stories.

Wait, is this thread exclusively looking at live action films or something?

I honestly don't like Batman and superman much because I believe in their portrayal of relatabilty they become worse caracitures of human ideals than Superman does. Batman is literally one of the most insane characters in all of comics and fiction and the mental gymnastics to rationalize his actions is not realistic at all. Spiderman is just silly. Superman has countless threats that don't use kryptonite, he loses over and over and is often part of the probelms that he has to help solve. There is tons of relatable humanity in every superman story imo.

Regarding the plethora of stories I would say consider this. When Superman '78 came out Superman had been well known for nearly 40 years already. No one had to read every superman story, but audiences at least had some familarity with the character prior to film. I mean with there being so many stories that whie none are required to understand a film adaptation any exposure to any of the many stories would enhance a viewer's understanding of the character in the adaptation.

So, regarding the modern live action films. If someone did not have a wide understanding of the character from reading many comic stories then It would make sense to me for the viewer to easily dislike the modern live action portrayals. For those who are well acquainted with the character all of the live action films have been wonderfully beautfiul-because they can know that Superman has numerous characterizations from numerous authors and is not at all a one-dimensional character. So, if a viewer doens't like "Man of Steel" they could understand that maybe thats not the George Perez silver age superman on the screen but another version of the character like the mid-90s version or the 2012 rebirth version or one of the multiverse versions or something.

No matter Superman doesn't think of himself as Superman, he is always just Clark Kent trying to do what he can.

*Superman fanboy