How would 'Superman vs. the Elite' have played out in the new 52 continuity?

[Lokimaru]

What happen to leading by example. The Superman I know would only use force as a very last resort. Two wrongs never make a right and never should.

I guess I like the Boy Scout who used his head and not his fists to get a point across.

Funny how a guy calling himself Lexrules is against Superman actually doing something and being proactive.

[manofsteel1979]

Funny how a guy calling himself Lexrules is against Superman actually doing something and being proactive.

It's not about being proactive, it's abusing of power.

People were all excited about the Superman in Morrison's ACTION #1, but I thought,( and still think ) that that depiction of Superman isn't at all in character (i've described him as an arrogant immature punk), although it is forgivable when he is just 19 or 20 and his power is at a fraction of what it is when we get to the Superman of "today" who can cave mountains with his fists.

I have no problems with the younger and less powerful Superman making mistakes and using physical force against mortals to get his point across...AS LONG AS HE GROWS OUT OF IT. When he gets more powerful and older, He should hold back and be responsible, because his abilities are of an entirely different level. he should use his brain more and leave the fisticuffs for galactic threats like DARKSEID and DOOMSDAY.He should be different when he's older.

[Mr. Holmes]

Funny how a guy calling himself Lexrules is against Superman actually doing something and being proactive.

It all makes sense now, supporting whatever keeps Superman from being successful.

[Luck911]

I think this should be noted that Elite are suppose to version of the Authority and the Authority are in Nu52 called Stormwatch.So people might get their answer when they eventually meet in DC

[bat39]

It's not about being proactive, it's abusing of power.

People were all excited about the Superman in Morrison's ACTION #1, but I thought,( and still think ) that that depiction of Superman isn't at all in character (i've described him as an arrogant immature punk), although it is forgivable when he is just 19 or 20 and his power is at a fraction of what it is when we get to the Superman of "today" who can cave mountains with his fists.

I have no problems with the younger and less powerful Superman making mistakes and using physical force against mortals to get his point across...AS LONG AS HE GROWS OUT OF IT. When he gets more powerful and older, He should hold back and be responsible, because his abilities are of an entirely different level. he should use his brain more and leave the fisticuffs for galactic threats like DARKSEID and DOOMSDAY.He should be different when he's older.

True enough. But I think the problem a lot of people had with the pre-Flashpoint Superman is that he took the restraint a bit TOO far and eventually became a pacifist and a moralizer. No one's saying Superman should go around beating every criminal to a pulp, but most people don't want him to be a guy who just stands around and talks about wanting to inspire a better world without actually using his powers to fight for it in some proactive way.

[manofsteel1979]

True enough. But I think the problem a lot of people had with the pre-Flashpoint Superman is that he took the restraint a bit TOO far and eventually became a pacifist and a moralizer. No one's saying Superman should go around beating every criminal to a pulp, but most people don't want him to be a guy who just stands around and talks about wanting to inspire a better world without actually using his powers to fight for it in some proactive way.

...and THAT was the fault of writers and editors writing Superman in that way. Not the continuity that existed or the costume he was wearing or the fact he was married. I still maintain this reboot wasn't needed, at least one not this drastic. The books just needed better creators who avoided making Superman into an overly passive, moralizer. Had they done a softer reboot (as was done with Batman and Aquaman) where they tweaked and simplified the continuity a bit (goodbye Mullet, Electro Supes and New Krypton!!) and MAYBE kept the visual update with the costume, and replaced SECRET ORIGIN (whose place in continuity was problematic anyhow) with Morrison's first ACTION arc, I think the books would still be doing as well, and they wouldn't have to have dumped a quarter century's worth of stories and development because the last four years or so were terrible overall.

I am still troubled by a contigent of the New 52 fandom who wants the Superman of today in SUPERMAN and JL to act like the guy who was putting people through walls, headfirst into pianos, always on the run from the cops and threatening to break people's necks. I don't think the "angry and rougher" Superman is intended to exist in the modern DCU beyond the arc Morrison wants to tell. If you look at the glimpse of the the Superman of today that Morrison showed us in ACTION #5 & 6, he acts MUCH closer to the Pre-Flashpoint Superman. In fact if it wasn't for the suit, I wouldn't have known the difference. Morrison's intent seems to be telling the story of how he grew from the gawky, arrogant bully of his youth into the Superman we know. This is shown in ACTION #10 when he confronts the child killer. The Superman of issue #1 would have thrown him out the window or smashed his head into a wall, but instead the Superman we saw here, presumably just a few months later, just merely scared the $h!t out of him, then turned him over to the police. Knowing this is the direction Morrison is taking him, I've now bought into this take and I am starting to enjoy seeing Clark grow and learn.

Which is why I hope Lobdell's talk of shaking things up and doing risky things isn't merely carrying forward the violent, rough and arrogant characterization into the modern SUPERMAN. I don't mind him being a little snarkier or a bit less of the "Hello, citizen! Hey kids! Drink your Orange Juice!" type of attitude. However, I want the Superman of today to still be the rolemodel of all the other heroes, and the guy people can trust to do the right thing. The guy who will avoid violence until a point, then if he reaches that point, God help you. The guy who will take the time to rescue a little girls kitty from a tree, while on his way into space to face down Darkseid in a knuckle to granite brawl amongst the fire pits of Apokolypse. I want the real SUPERMAN to act like himself and not either the moping emo guy we got much of the last few years leading to the reboot, or some "Kewl" and "badass" guy who has a perpetual chip on his shoulder. I just want Superman to be Superman.

[ascended]

And looking at the Superman title, I think that's what we're going to get. No wait its what we're getting. Superman has been very Bronze Age in his own title; active and willing to step in and be a bit proactive, but is holding himself in check a lot more than Action.

Now, Lexrules made a point that the younger, more reckless version in Action is fine so long as he grows out of it. And Lex, this right here has been a blindspot for you since this whole thing started. As soon as issue 3 we started to see that Clark's approach was starting to backfire on him. And he started toning it back months ago. I dont know if you're still reading the book or not, but it was clear to me as soon as Superman #1 hit the stands that the Golden Age-ish brawler is merely going to be a stepping stone on his path to a All-Star style Superman. And personally that works for me. DC is never going to actually evolve the status quo or let their characters age/change beyond a certain point, but this adds in the illusion of a character arc and in-universe growth. And I love it. Yes, its superficial because we'll never see Clark get beyond the "now" power levels or mindset but we can look back and see where he was, and make the assumption that in the theoretical "someday" he'll grow even better.

And I agree with ManofSteel that Superman didnt need a hard reboot, just better creators. But that can be said of just about anything, in DC, Marvel, or anywhere else. The new status quo is basically the same as the old one except for the marriage (still angry about that!) and Clark still has a little bit of an edge to him, thank god.

Problem with the way Superman has been handled for years is that he became this uber pacifist, he worried about his actions so much he did not take any. He was not inspiring, he was embarrassing.

Batman once told Clark the last time he inspired anyone was when he died. All Clark did was pout. He proved the truth of the statement by his reaction. The New52 Superman would have punched Batman in the face, because while Batman has been dealing with a bunch of owls, Clark has stopped multiple alien invasions, helped negotiate a cease-fire between higher dimensions, fought a few gods, and still managed to get his article in on time for Perry. And Batman would have deserved getting punched.

World's greatest hero, and he questioned his judgment about everything, he got his ass handed to him by lesser characters, the list goes on and on. No, he was not inspiring. He was not even entertaining. Thank god Superman got his balls back. I want a hero who is actually going to do something.

I mean, does anyone find Congress to be inspiring? Of course not, because they've done nothing at all but spout off at the mouth about what should be done. Superman was much the same way. He had a lot to say but actually did very few things. I say to hell with that. Im glad Superman has his swagger back. I dont want some establishment man telling me how to live my life. I want a hero who is going to actively go out and fight for a better tomorrow, and fight for the people, not the status quo.

Morrison gave us that, and I am thankful to him for it. Even if we had to accept Jim Lee's terrible costume design to get it.

[bat39]

And looking at the Superman title, I think that's what we're going to get. No wait its what we're getting. Superman has been very Bronze Age in his own title; active and willing to step in and be a bit proactive, but is holding himself in check a lot more than Action.

Now, Lexrules made a point that the younger, more reckless version in Action is fine so long as he grows out of it. And Lex, this right here has been a blindspot for you since this whole thing started. As soon as issue 3 we started to see that Clark's approach was starting to backfire on him. And he started toning it back months ago. I dont know if you're still reading the book or not, but it was clear to me as soon as Superman #1 hit the stands that the Golden Age-ish brawler is merely going to be a stepping stone on his path to a All-Star style Superman. And personally that works for me. DC is never going to actually evolve the status quo or let their characters age/change beyond a certain point, but this adds in the illusion of a character arc and in-universe growth. And I love it. Yes, its superficial because we'll never see Clark get beyond the "now" power levels or mindset but we can look back and see where he was, and make the assumption that in the theoretical "someday" he'll grow even better.

And I agree with ManofSteel that Superman didnt need a hard reboot, just better creators. But that can be said of just about anything, in DC, Marvel, or anywhere else. The new status quo is basically the same as the old one except for the marriage (still angry about that!) and Clark still has a little bit of an edge to him, thank god.

Problem with the way Superman has been handled for years is that he became this uber pacifist, he worried about his actions so much he did not take any. He was not inspiring, he was embarrassing.

Batman once told Clark the last time he inspired anyone was when he died. All Clark did was pout. He proved the truth of the statement by his reaction. The New52 Superman would have punched Batman in the face, because while Batman has been dealing with a bunch of owls, Clark has stopped multiple alien invasions, helped negotiate a cease-fire between higher dimensions, fought a few gods, and still managed to get his article in on time for Perry. And Batman would have deserved getting punched.

World's greatest hero, and he questioned his judgment about everything, he got his ass handed to him by lesser characters, the list goes on and on. No, he was not inspiring. He was not even entertaining. Thank god Superman got his balls back. I want a hero who is actually going to do something.

I mean, does anyone find Congress to be inspiring? Of course not, because they've done nothing at all but spout off at the mouth about what should be done. Superman was much the same way. He had a lot to say but actually did very few things. I say to hell with that. Im glad Superman has his swagger back. I dont want some establishment man telling me how to live my life. I want a hero who is going to actively go out and fight for a better tomorrow, and fight for the people, not the status quo.

Morrison gave us that, and I am thankful to him for it. Even if we had to accept Jim Lee's terrible costume design to get it.

^This

As far as the reboot goes...well I think that argument applies to all reboots. A franchise isn't rebooted only if the franchise was bad from day one. No...a franchise is rebooted when its latest installments are bad, irrespective of how good the earlier installments were.

There was nothing wrong with the bulk of the Silver/Bronze Age Superman stories...at one point of time, they were DC's greatest stories. But in the last few years of that continuity, things got stale, and even stupid...hence, the entire continuity was wiped out after COIE.

Likewise, the Post COIE Superman continuity was going great. But eventually, it got stale and stupid as well...so that entire continuity was wiped out.

The death knell for the Pre COIE Superman was gimmickry and sci-fi silliness...for the Post COIE Superman it was Superman's characterization as a pacifistic wimp and moralizer as well as an overall lack of drama due to bad storytelling.

[manduck37]

And looking at the Superman title, I think that's what we're going to get. No wait its what we're getting. Superman has been very Bronze Age in his own title; active and willing to step in and be a bit proactive, but is holding himself in check a lot more than Action.

Now, Lexrules made a point that the younger, more reckless version in Action is fine so long as he grows out of it. And Lex, this right here has been a blindspot for you since this whole thing started. As soon as issue 3 we started to see that Clark's approach was starting to backfire on him. And he started toning it back months ago. I dont know if you're still reading the book or not, but it was clear to me as soon as Superman #1 hit the stands that the Golden Age-ish brawler is merely going to be a stepping stone on his path to a All-Star style Superman. And personally that works for me. DC is never going to actually evolve the status quo or let their characters age/change beyond a certain point, but this adds in the illusion of a character arc and in-universe growth. And I love it. Yes, its superficial because we'll never see Clark get beyond the "now" power levels or mindset but we can look back and see where he was, and make the assumption that in the theoretical "someday" he'll grow even better.

And I agree with ManofSteel that Superman didnt need a hard reboot, just better creators. But that can be said of just about anything, in DC, Marvel, or anywhere else. The new status quo is basically the same as the old one except for the marriage (still angry about that!) and Clark still has a little bit of an edge to him, thank god.

Problem with the way Superman has been handled for years is that he became this uber pacifist, he worried about his actions so much he did not take any. He was not inspiring, he was embarrassing.

Batman once told Clark the last time he inspired anyone was when he died. All Clark did was pout. He proved the truth of the statement by his reaction. The New52 Superman would have punched Batman in the face, because while Batman has been dealing with a bunch of owls, Clark has stopped multiple alien invasions, helped negotiate a cease-fire between higher dimensions, fought a few gods, and still managed to get his article in on time for Perry. And Batman would have deserved getting punched.

World's greatest hero, and he questioned his judgment about everything, he got his ass handed to him by lesser characters, the list goes on and on. No, he was not inspiring. He was not even entertaining. Thank god Superman got his balls back. I want a hero who is actually going to do something.

I mean, does anyone find Congress to be inspiring? Of course not, because they've done nothing at all but spout off at the mouth about what should be done. Superman was much the same way. He had a lot to say but actually did very few things. I say to hell with that. Im glad Superman has his swagger back. I dont want some establishment man telling me how to live my life. I want a hero who is going to actively go out and fight for a better tomorrow, and fight for the people, not the status quo.

Morrison gave us that, and I am thankful to him for it. Even if we had to accept Jim Lee's terrible costume design to get it.

Very well said and pretty much my feelings on the whole thing. SO ascended and MOS1979, you both manage to say exactly what I was thinking.

[Flash Gordon]

The Elite weren't exactly 'championing the oppressed'. I don't think the story would play out any different really. I think Superman might be a bit quicker to kick their respective rear ends, but still, same outcome.

[Neutrino]

The Elite would be right at home in the New 52. They could give them their own title, maybe call it "Manchester Black and the Elites" and have Lobdel write it. If they ever fight Superman, they'll make him look incompetant and shake his beliefs to the core because he's not from the streets and he doesn't know what it's like. All other heroes will then turn a blind eye to all the people they casually murder.

[Mr. Holmes]

And I agree with ManofSteel that Superman didnt need a hard reboot, just better creators. But that can be said of just about anything, in DC, Marvel, or anywhere else. The new status quo is basically the same as the old one except for the marriage (still angry about that!) and Clark still has a little bit of an edge to him, thank god.

No, he definitely needed it. Superman continuity became vague and contradictory as hell with so many soft reboots in a single decade. Earth comitting genocide on New Krypton is also something that just had to go.

Also, I'll take Morrison's opening arc over Johns's awful Secret Origins.