If I wrote Superman, I'd handle him like any other Superhero, with two exceptions: one, I'd keep him powerful enough to be well-respected in the hero (and villain) community, but not immune to everything except kryptonite; and two, I'd show him as kind, but not all-knowing, as a typical American from a good family like his should be.
edited 31st Dec '11 6:22:02 AM by Sijo
Seconded. I kind of got annoyed at how Hero was supposedly written with a love for superhero stories, but throughout the novel most of what I could see was "all (these Expies of) popular Marvel and DC superheroes are boring and dumb and my characters are soooo much cooler". It also fell into "(either of my Expies of) Batman is better than everyone else", not to mention a Deus ex Machina ending. It was nice to read a superhero work where a LGBT person was treated like a human being, but it was a pity it wasn't that good a book.
Anyway, Superman gets deconstructed because...actually, I have no idea. Honestly, all the famous heroes are complex enough to be deconstructed - any of the mainliners of the Justice League, any of the Avengers, Spiderman, you name it. Superman's supposed boringness is more due to him not being written very well - you'd have to get pretty creative to make it work, but I think it's still possible.
This talk of a world with Superman being far in advance of ours...well, why Superman of all people? He's no slouch, but he's not the most powerful powered individual in the DC universe by a long shot. He's not even the most powerful member of his team - Green Lantern can do anything, the Flash can go fast enough to do anything, and there's magic in the DC universe. Any single one of the DC verse's elements would make for a world massively different from ours; why single Superman out when there are so many other characters that would also severely change the world?
(That's something I never bought about Watchmen - if you're going to deconstruct superheroes, shouldn't you give most of the team powers except one or two, like in most comic books?)
Watchmen is deconstruction of characters from Great Crusaders - Captain Atom, The Question, Blue Beetle and some guys I don't remember. Moore crafted the story for them, and when they didn't let him use them, he created tiny-veiled copis in their place.
As a person who writes one deconstruction of superman-esque superhero the answer is that he is the first, oldest and most important superhero. Plus, originally this story was supposed to be about a paladin in D&D definition, but I moved it to setting I found more fit to what I wanted to say and replaced that archeotype with the closest one the genre has - The Cape.
Ah, yes, the Dragonball Z problem. It's strange that the Flying Brick is such a popular trope despite this issue.
Currently taking a break from the site. See my user page for more information.I'm sick of Superman knockoffs. Its bad enough with just America's comics, but other countries' comics, movies, cartoons, video games, with all the Public Domain characters at their feet they choose to knockoff Superman. When will someone homage/deconstruct/parody Dr. Doom for a change?
I don't mind when a character has only mild traits in common with Superman like Dragon Ball's Goku and Piccolo or Hancock from the movie of the same name. Superman wasn't the first alien or flying brick but the glasses joke aint funny anymore. Neither are the X-ray jokes nor the woman of Kleenex ones. Underwear on the outside can be told to the end of time without making another knockoff. I'm also sick of his association with being the ultimate Paragon and or World's Strongest Man when he's not either in his own books. That's Captain Marvel and Phantom Stranger respectively.
Buldogue's lawyerSuperman has, at least count: Wind breath, laser eyes, super-speed and was at some point learning telepathic martial arts. It's not that his fights are automatically boring, they're just not written creatively enough.
Some of the problems with Superman is that he kind of is too powerful for many of his stories. Heat Vision hotter than the sun? Why isn't everything on Earth dead? Why does he even have heat vision hotter than his power source, why does he need it that hot? He moves at the speed of light? A solid, nearly indestructible object his size moving that fast should destroy the landscape, why does he need to move that fast? He can breath in space? Okay, water is somewhat believable but space? Lifting a million tons is one of his more reasonable powers.
It'd be different if he was some cosmic character like Thor or the Silver Surfer, he'd be somewhat mild then but he's not. He doesn't live in another dimension and fight the coming of Ragnarok, he doesn't doze off in space after feeding planets to Galactus. Superman lives in Metropolis, his main enemy is a guy with a lot of money in a world where Reed Richards Is Useless. So he gets a weakness to a rock, a weakness that has slowly deteriorated over the years to the point he wades through nuclear explosions on Kryptonite to emphasize how much of a paragon and strong guy he is.
Look familiar? Because I've seen more Superman homages, deconstructions and parodies than I care to remember, there is nothing left. I'll go read what Mark has to say about Dr. Doom in Empire.
Buldogue's lawyerHell, Marvel proves that it's possible time and time again with its cosmic line.
Oh, extremely powerful characters of those sort can work, but to be entertaining in the long run they almost always:
a) Have powers a little more distinctive than being really strong/fast and shooting beams of energy at their opponent; like they can manipulate ice and cold, or they can control gravity, or they can open dimensional portals, or stuff like that.
or
b) Have an unusual fighting style with very distinct attacks, like a headbutt attack where their neck stretches out really far, or an attack where they punch someone in the same place six times and do it so quickly that it feels like one very powerful punch, or spinning as they attack to rapidly hit their opponent with a flurry of blows.
Generally speaking, I just find Flying Bricks make for pretty boring fighters, at least when they're lead characters in a long-running series. Glass Cannons seem to make for far more interesting fight scenes.
Such as Superman's freeze-breath?
IMO, Superman's foes could stand to be a little more "cosmic", except for Lex Luthor which is fine as he stands. I see Superman as working best with a purposefully slightly retro atmosphere, battling Science Gone Mad and Creatures From Beyond - after all, he's heavily influenced by pulp heroes like Doc Savage or John Carter except he's more city-bound. His villains shouldn't just be literally his match in strength and power (like Doomsday, for example, who was very effective as a villain...once), but rather like some of the recent Doctor Who villains - odd things like "you can only see them in your peripheral vision" or "they're on a seperate reality wavelength to everyone else" or something like that.
No, I mean like having telekinetic control of all the ice in their surroundings, or creating a cold that gradually spreads to cover the entire area. In combat with another Flying Brick, being able to shoot a direct blast of cold at them isn't really that different from a standard attack.
I don't have too much issue with making Flying Bricks entertaining. While it's true that they usually don't stay entertaining over the "long run", I think that's a problem no matter what the level of power is. Batman is utterly boring to me whenever he takes on a gang of ordinary Mooks. What makes Batman more interesting is the interplay you can create between himself and his villains, not to mention that Batman has a supporting cast whose lives all revolve around him. (A butler, an orphan and a commissioner.) Superman's supporting cast are nearly all work associates who have outside concerns and agendas, which is hard for anyone not in that niche to relate to.
edited 1st Jan '12 7:14:39 AM by KingZeal
"Some of the problems with Superman is that he kind of is too powerful for many of his stories. Heat Vision hotter than the sun? Why isn't everything on Earth dead? Why does he even have heat vision hotter than his power source, why does he need it that hot? He moves at the speed of light? A solid, nearly indestructible object his size moving that fast should destroy the landscape, why does he need to move that fast? He can breath in space? Okay, water is somewhat believable but space? Lifting a million tons is one of his more reasonable powers."
There is an answer to that, atributted to Grant Morrison:
"People say kids can't understand the difference between fact and fiction, but that's bullshit.Kids understand that real crabs don't sing like the ones in The Little Mermaid. But you an adult fiction, and he starts asking really f****ing dumb questions like "How does Superman fly? How those eyebeams work? Who pumps the Batmobile's tires?" It's a f****ing made up story, you idiot! Nobody pumps the tires!"
(Note to the moderation - this is a quote. I don't want this post thumped for the fact that Morrison or whoever really said it was rude - I'm not quoting that guy to be a dick, just because that's how it was said and I'm not going to censor somebody else's words.)
" What makes Batman more interesting is the interplay you can create between himself and his villains"
You can have that with Superman and his villains too. Too bad that when most of people thinks "Superman villains" they thinks only "Lex Luthor" and nothing else. Which is what I hate about Holywood doing S Uperman - no matter what you just know that the villain is going to be Luthor. In the sequel too. Eventually with somebody who can play second stringer for Superman to punch like Metallo or Parasite. Meanwhile much more suited for movies villains like Sun-Eater, Tyrant Sun or Darkseid are forgotten.
edited 2nd Jan '12 2:59:13 AM by PrimoVictoria
I do think that Superman's lack of bareknuckle fighting is a problem in comic format. If you want to wound Supes, you've got to tie him up in a kryptoniste cage like a badly-dressed parrot, or hit him emotionally. The latter works best in a television, novel, or film narrative.
I'm a skeptical squirrelNote that almost every time Superman's virtues are defended in a superhero comic, the "darker" side of heroism is represented by a pathetic Nineties Antihero strawman. Be it Magog from Kingdom Come, the Elite from that awful Joe Kelly Action Comics issue, or even the Hyperclan in Morrison's JLA, the heroes who have to actually make hard decisions are turned into violent raving anarchists at best and outright villains at worst. Meanwhile, Superman's wholesomely passive form of heroism is supposed to look better by comparison.
I'm much more interested in heroes who deal with complex problems and have to make hard decisions. Superman doesn't have to do that, and every attempt to justify his place in a morally complex universe ends up as the equivalent of the author sticking their fingers in their ears, saying "la la la, not listening".
We Are The Wyrecats Needs Tropes!
You make an interesting point. While I generally support the "I vow to do no murder" bit on the part of various superheroes, the writers of those various characters almost never do a decent job of explaining that stance. It often boils down to "If I kill him, I'd be no better than him," which doesn't really hold much water (shouldn't it be more about removing the threat than being morally superior?).
One of the things I've liked about the way Spider-Man, for instance, has been portrayed is that he HAS killed, rarely. Only ever as a last resort, and each time has haunted him, but he has had to make the choice.
Yeah, I think that the ability to remain self-righteous isn't important enough to let a unrepentant serial killer with a body count big enough to be recognized by Amnesty International live.
We Are The Wyrecats Needs Tropes!It's not really letting supervillains live that's the problem, it's that the prison system is absolutely abysmal at keeping them contained. But even given that, I've got no problem with superheroes who personally choose not to kill uber-dangerous badguys; by putting their lives on the line to save the world, they're already going above and beyond what anyone could reasonably demand of them. It's when they get all disainful of and self-righteous towards people who don't feel the same way they do about the issue that they star coming across as out of touch with reality.
I think I agree with that. I have no problems with refusing to kill a villain because they believe that appropriate punishment/justice is something for the legal authorities to decide, not an individual, it's just that comic-book worlds combine both vigilantes with completely incompetent jails and justice systems. Also: the complete lack of cops or civilians who manage to do the jobs themselves.
There could actually be an interesting moral story in trying to deal with what happens after someone who lost a loved one to a supervillain actually succeeds in killing said villain. But that would require a level of moral complexity and thought few comics are willing to provide.
The owner of this account is temporarily unavailable. Please leave your number and call again later.Because Superman is extremely strong, and coming up with a non kryptonite weakness is difficult. So, we deconstruct him to come up with some neat storytelling. It usually doesn't go over to well.
Also, Firefox recognizes Krypton as a word but not kryptonite. Weird.
“My body is ready. I’m gonna take your names, take your ass, and then we’ll be making games”. - Reggie Fils-Aime, CEO of Nintendo America

Well, when I wrote my personal take on why Superman would be horribly, horribly bad for the world in reality (though, granted, my version was mixed with some Iron Man, Captain America, and Doctor Manhattan), it was because of this: