Tom Brevoort on Superman

[Flash Gordon]

I think he believes in the institution of Drama. I agree with him. It has nothing to do with liking or not liking marriage in general.

What does that even mean? Drama can come from anything. It doesn't have to be angst driven; if a proper writer wrote Lois and Clark you can sure as hell bet there would be drama. You can't just assume that the only 'drama' can come from a man being infatuated with a woman he can't have. Sure, that's what drives many great stories, but Superman has already been there and he's done that. He won over Lois in the end. Let's move forward.

We've just been in such a creative down slide with Big Blue. The only way something like this would EVER work would be a total reboot.

[nightwing45]

I agree with Flash Gordon. You can only go to the well so many times.

[Hamdinger]

Great, so another big name in the industry wants to retcon crap back to when he was a kid and tell the same frickin' story over and over. Is there any talent left in comics? Is Morrison the only guy who wants to take characters forward without pissing on them and their history? Why the hell do they want to revomit what has been done hundreds of times for over 70 years? The Lois/Clark/Superman and the origin stories have been vomited up in every comic book, movie and TV show hundreds of times everyone has seen it. Here's an idea why doesn't anyone move the Hell forwards with a character for frak's sake?!

[Dubbilex]

I don't know what Brevoort is thinking. Look at the last time DC tried to do an unmarried version of Superman: ALL-STAR SUPERMAN. What a disaster that was. That series only received... both tremendous acclaim and sales. Hey, waitaminute.

[Hamdinger]

Yeah, sure. That's the only reason that series succeeded. Sure. By the way Dubbilex this is sarcasm. I thought I'd clarify since you must be high, drunk or otherwise impaired.

[Dubbilex]

It certainly didn't hurt it. And it proves there are still great stories that can be told about a single Superman.

[carabas]

I think he believes in the institution of Drama. I agree with him. It has nothing to do with liking or not liking marriage in general.

What possible drama could you get from removing the mariage, unles you are serious about it and decide to kill off Lois for keeps.

There are literally decades worth of multiple Superman comic series prior to MoS based on the premise that Kal-El is who he is, and that Clark is a disguise he wears. This isn't something Brevoort made up or pulled out of nowhere.

Oh, sure. Pre-Crisis Superman. The guy that got kicked out of continuity some 30 years ago. Brevoort is obviously very much living in the past.

Wow. Brevoort's ideas are depressing. Both Kents dead. The marriage gone. I supposed he'd want to off Conner and Kara as well?

Well, there was a Kara in the silver age, so she'd probably be safe; Conner's doomed though. Especially with classic Superboy back in continuity.

Brevoort's ideas just don't work, not unless the whole DC universe was rebooted and many characters removed from existence. Even if Lois and the marriage was magically removed, Superman has friends who understand his situation. Clark isn't the only alien living on Earth. He's hardly the only character with near god-like abilities. Many of the heroes cope with secret identities. Many to most of them have tragic pasts, many of which are far more traumatic than Clark's. As things stand now, how much of an outsider can he realistically be portrayed?

Have you read the last couple of years of Spider-man?

[nightwing45]

Clark is very much grounded by his relationships. Without Lois, etc - he would become like Supershock from Powers, Sentry from Marvel, etc. He would become too aloof and unfeeling. Clark would think that he need not be guided by human morals, and would go down the path of a raging god. Why some creators, and editors want Superman to be a raging god - I seriously don't understand. That simply isn't Superman.

[Mr. Holmes]

It certainly didn't hurt it.

Writers should look for something that will help, not just "not hurt." Besides, the All Star Superman already told Lois is secret so the Clark-Lois relationship was closer to the marriage in terms of the kind of stories you can tell than the love triangle.

[stk]

The only way something like this would EVER work would be a total reboot.

If you read back through the thread, you'll see I said the exact same thing. I agree that "removing" the marriage just isn't an option.

[godzilla2099]

"There have been several recent articles on why Superman has not been a very successful character is recent years. In print and in the theaters. From "too powerful" to just plain ole boring. Do u have an opinion on the matter...?

TB: Yeah, I think it's all crap. I think Superman is just as relevant and interesting today as at any other time in the character's history, and it only takes good creators with proper insight and skills to be able to bring that out. I think that most people who wave this opinion around have only a cartoonish viewpoint on Superman, what he does and what he stands for--but any character considered in such a cartoonish way won't be relevant. I would love to edit Superman at some point (though that's not likely.)"

This I completely agree with.

It's not the Boyscout Attitude or his Power Levels that hold Superman Down.

Look at All-Star or Superman: The Movie. Two of Superman's most incredible stories. You had a Powerful Superman with a good heart and you got two incredible tales out of it.

Why do people think Superman has to be weak? In fact, I think its the opposite, he is way too damn weak right now. Thats one of the reasons I can't read his book. Writers who aren't creative enough to tell a good story will just have Superman have his but kicked to make some other hero or bad guy look hard core.

Look at Marvel. Their heroes like Thor, Hulk and Sentry are popular because they're getting stronger!

When I was growing up, the movies and Superfriends were my versions of Superman. He was the inspiring character. The one that saved the day. Because he was the toughest but also had the best attitude and followed justice. Bad guys were scared of him because he didn't put on some scary act! It was because he's Superman!!

Holy crap, why is it so tough for writers at DC to have such a challenge with him? I swear, I could write better stories. He was great in the past.

[Zero Hunter]

But then you get Superman so powerful that NOTHING can actully be considered a threat to him with out being written so ridiculus that it just ruins the story. I always hated planet pushing Superman back before Crisis and thought it was just dumb. That the same reason I think Sentry over at Marvel was the biggest mary sue plot device ever created. If nothing is actully a threat to the hero then whats the point?

[Mat001]

I don't know what Brevoort is thinking. Look at the last time DC tried to do an unmarried version of Superman: ALL-STAR SUPERMAN. What a disaster that was. That series only received... both tremendous acclaim and sales. Hey, waitaminute.

That was also a story that had a beginning and an end. The point was that Superman would become a godlike being and thus left everyone behind. Ergo there would be no wedding and no long lasting relationship. The main books are a different entity all together. Thus we can go forward and have the marriage and have stories come out of that.

As to the notion of drama, there can be all kinds of drama even with the marriage. Starting back to just after getting engaged and Lois finding out, we had about a year's worth of stories where Lois had to come to grips with the truth being out there. Then we had Lois dealing with life without Clark when he was dead and the feeling that she failed him. Then after a while we had the whole broken engagement arc where we had conflict for a few months. Then we had the wedding and afterwards we had stories like "King Of The World", "Til Death Do Us Part", "Critical Condition", "Our Worlds At War" and it's aftermath, "The Wrath Of Gog", "In The Name Of Gog", "Unconventional Warfare", "That Healing Touch", "Ruin Revealed", "For Tomorrow" and "The Coming Of Atlas". All where we see drama with Lois and Clark who are married. Granted, some of those stories weren't that great, but at the very least there was drama.

On the opposite end, we had stories where that wasn't the case. "The Battle For Metropolis", "The Death Of Clark Kent", "The Wedding & Beyond", "Transformed", "No Limits", "Up, Up & Away", "Camelot Falls", "Redemption", "Last Son", "The Third Kryptonian", "Brainiac", "Nightwing & Flamebird", "Who Is Superwoman?", "War Of The Supermen" and "Grounded". All where the relationship/marriage proves to be strong despite the odds. Those stories had the marriage being strong, but we got to see them tackle individual threats that affected them both.

[Silver_Leopard]

But then you get Superman so powerful that NOTHING can actully be considered a threat to him with out being written so ridiculus that it just ruins the story. I always hated planet pushing Superman back before Crisis and thought it was just dumb. That the same reason I think Sentry over at Marvel was the biggest mary sue plot device ever created. If nothing is actully a threat to the hero then whats the point?

This will make you feel better,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfelKkYeyag

[Alex Dragon]

Great, so another big name in the industry wants to retcon crap back to when he was a kid and tell the same frickin' story over and over. Is there any talent left in comics? Is Morrison the only guy who wants to take characters forward without pissing on them and their history? Why the hell do they want to revomit what has been done hundreds of times for over 70 years? The Lois/Clark/Superman and the origin stories have been vomited up in every comic book, movie and TV show hundreds of times everyone has seen it. Here's an idea why doesn't anyone move the Hell forwards with a character for frak's sake?!

This I totally agree with. It's so much easier for writers to rewrite old stories, shoehorn stuff into old stories and recon stuff. I've always felt to many writers spend waaaay too much time in the past retelling stories we've already seen/read. Some writers want to only write the character they grew up with so they can do their version of stories they read back then. I've only read one issue of Spider-Man since OMD because that first issue felt like I was reading an old 70s Spider-Man story and I have no interest in going back in time to read what's been done before.

Having an unmarried Superman and having the parents dead doesn't do much to change the character overall. Quite frankly the whole Lois trying to figure out who Superman is and the whole Clark-Lois-Superman triangle was played for all it was worth and had gotten incredibly boring and stale. Yes, it works better in movies or new series where your exploring the beginnings of the characters relationships but for the comics that have been around for many decades it lost it's strength many years ago. Having the parents around is nice for Clark to have to back and talk about his doubts and fears and to just get some advice from. It doesn't hurt the character in any way to have his parents alive because he's not Batman where his parents death tie into him becoming a hero or affect the type of hero he becomes.

With the whole Kal-El is the "real" person the only way that works or makes sense is if you handle it like in the movie where Jor-El teaches him all about Kryptonian ways and prepares him to be Superman after spending months(?) in the Fortress being schooled. In the comics and in most tellings of the Superman tale it's the Kents who shape and form what Clark becomes and Clark knows next to nothing about Krypton or his Kryptionian heritage.