You all are making me bummed. :(

[nightrider]

One Superman only used guns and had a black costume for one storyline. Two just because something isn't accepted in American Culture doesn't make it right or wrong. Acceptable is not the same as right or wrong. Slaves were acceptable even though it was wrong, and people knew it. What you think slavery being thought of as wrong started with America and Lincoln and the Civil War?

You're still not replying to the essence of what I'm saying. There are tons of fans here arguing about who is the real superman. We've seen some of the argue about Silver age versus Bronze age. We've seen new 52 vs pre new 52. Arguably, the biggest difference is Golden age to Silver age. So it is not true that Superman has always stayed the same.

Half of the population still thinks that homosexuality is wrong. US and Europe are more already more liberal than the rest of the world, which homosexuality is still a taboo over there. In certain middle eastern countries, so much as showing some skin is considered unlawful and punishable. The people in these countries believe it as moral standards and anything else is wrong. Weed is prohibited in certain countries and it is considered wrong but not other countries. Until certain time in US, homosexuality is punishable by law, the reason it exist is because back then people feel that it is wrong, homosexuality is still punishable in certain countries even till today. So which moral code should we use as what is right and wrong?There is just no way to have a standardisation and everybody adhere to their own moral ethics by faith, their personal standards or by law.

You miss the parts where I said the costume change isn't keeping me away. I'm still collecting. Though honestly the stories are IMO not interesting and I may drop soon if they don't fix. To throw your argument back at you... What's wrong with keeping him the way he is? He's always been like that, and the fans who have supported him for years prefer him that way. The fact that they think they have to make silly changes like that is what bothers me, because as you say the fans that stay are the ones not interested in superficial changes. That implies that they are trying to cater to the fans that aren't going to be sticking around anyway, or are fickle enough as to only read Superman now because he doesn't have trunks anymore

.

With regards to your question, I would say that there is nothing wrong with the way he was because it is only superficial changes like his costumes, it would be fine if they had kept his costume, nothing would have changed. But Superman is overdued for a reboot due to the convoluted history. A fresh start showing him less powered up and more of social justice would be a great start for a reboot to re introduce his origins. DC could have done all that and still kept his costume and nothing would have changed. The only difference now is he is wearing a different suit, it is not silly because it reflects an era we live in. Sure this is a way of getting new fans because older fans are getting old and they will not be here forever. If some superficial changes and modern stories can bring in new fans that will grow to love Superman, I say why not.

Take the new film for instance, it seems like the film will embrace Superman and give us someone that believes in the truth, justice and the american way. The difference is it would be set in a world where we live in, where aliens do not exist and any aliens would be viewed as hostile. This is a story that will related to the general audience, people will believe a story like this would exist. So yes, this is DC and WB's way of getting in a new generation of fans but yet at the same time, they're still retaining the essence of Kal el. How this could be seen as silly, I do not know. Because if DC is unwilling to budge and to evolve, their fans would only get older and there will be nothing left after this generations. Ultimately sales is important to them, if nobody is buying books, merchandise and watching movies on Superman, then there is no point investing in this character.

[R0NIN]

Half of the population still thinks that homosexuality is wrong. US and Europe are more already more liberal than the rest of the world, which homosexuality is still a taboo over there. In certain middle eastern countries, so much as showing some skin is considered unlawful and punishable. The people in these countries believe it as moral standards and anything else is wrong. Weed is prohibited in certain countries and it is considered wrong but not other countries. Until certain time in US, homosexuality is punishable by law, the reason it exist is because back then people feel that it is wrong, homosexuality is still punishable in certain countries even till today. So which moral code should we use as what is right and wrong?There is just no way to have a standardisation and everybody adhere to their own moral ethics by faith, their personal standards or by law.

I'm not going to talk about the rest of your post because you're arguing character and I'm talking about costume.

As to this in particular you realize the US isn't the world? And that U.S. Laws aren't necessarily what defines morals? And that for millenia homosexuality was a common and accepted thing? The people you are referring to ARE TAUGHT to believe it is wrong. And for the history of humankind that's a relatively recent development against the thousands of years where it was perfectly normal. Your weed argument is ridiculous as that has nothing to do with morals. Again laws do not equate to morals. Faith doesn't dictate or equal morals.


You want a quick moral code to follow? How would I feel if this action was taken against me or my loved ones?

[Mat001]

Maybe, but still. Man of Steel trailer came out, nobody gives a crap about the removal of the trunks. Point remains. Maybe turning Superman into a freakishly blue guy was just going too far.

Most people today see it as a gimmick and not a major change, compared to sixteen years ago.

No, the only thing I hate about Electric Blue is that it spilled out into other DC books where it didn't belong. Any time I re-read that Morrison JLA run, I wish he'd been able to tell some of those great stories with the real Superman. I mean, right off the top of my head, Superman wrestling the angel should have been the real Superman. Having it be Electric Blue undermines the moment, especially for new readers who discover the story now.

When you have a shared universe, things bleed over. You know that.

Agreed, Rock of the Ages is really tainted by having to use Electric Superman. It really dates what could have been a classic.

Yeah, because having a story reflect the time it was made doesn't make it a classic.

But I'm talking about the perspective of a kid new to comics today. Instead of being a timeless classic, it becomes a "wtf who is this guy?" situation for a new reader.

They'd have to be A) a ****ing idiot and B) illiterate to not know that's Superman. Someone could easily say the same thing about the black Spider-Man costume, while reading Bendis' Avengers run during "Back In Black".

[Auguste Dupin]

Most people today see it as a gimmick and not a major change, compared to sixteen years ago.

Yeah, I really don't think the average guy on the street follows enough what's coming out in comics to"learn" about these kind of gimmicks. If they did, we wouldn't have people talking about Captain America's death, Spider-Man unmasking, Superman renouncing his American citizenship and all that.
No, it's just that people don't care.

[Mat001]

Yeah, I really don't think the average guy on the street follows enough what's coming out in comics to"learn" about these kind of gimmicks. If they did, we wouldn't have people talking about Captain America's death, Spider-Man unmasking, Superman renouncing his American citizenship and all that.
No, it's just that people don't care.

We have those gimmicks today because the industry relies on them like a crutch. The fact is that DC and Marvel kept doing gimmicks in the 90's, which turned off the readership and resulted in the speculator market going bust. The big two rely on them to try and drum up sales, hence all the big stink about them. People thought that Superman was going to stay dead forever, but missed out on DC saying that it was only going to be temporary. Spider-Man's unmasking was going to be permanent and then a year later, it was all undone. And so on.

[stk]

They'd have to be A) a ****ing idiot and B) illiterate to not know that's Superman.

Except it's NOT Superman. Not really. Spider-Man in a black costume is still Spider-Man. But Superman within the context of a JLA story with different powers is not Superman.

Look, Electric Blue Superman in the Superman comics was a story ABOUT Superman gaining these alternate abilities, how Clark and Lois deal with them, Clark's adjustment and attempts to revert to normal, etc. It's a story ABOUT that. We see the characters, their ongoing development, etc.

But Electric Blue in JLA is just some guy. There's no reason and no explanation for him to be like that. Some new fan interested in reading Morrison's JLA TPBs today gets none of the context. He just gets to read some great stories which unfortunately are not timeless because they are undermined by the Electric Blue BS.

Yeah, because having a story reflect the time it was made doesn't make it a classic.

Sorry, but it's true. Not a timeless classic, at least.

When you have a shared universe, things bleed over. You know that.

You say that like it's a foregone conclusion we all like or appreciate that. I don't. In some cases, like this one, it hurts the comics long term.

[Auguste Dupin]

We have those gimmicks today because the industry relies on them like a crutch. The fact is that DC and Marvel kept doing gimmicks in the 90's, which turned off the readership and resulted in the speculator market going bust. The big two rely on them to try and drum up sales, hence all the big stink about them. People thought that Superman was going to stay dead forever, but missed out on DC saying that it was only going to be temporary. Spider-Man's unmasking was going to be permanent and then a year later, it was all undone. And so on.

You seemed to miss my point, which was that people talked about these gimmicks I just quoted. Captain America's death made the news in France (with hilarious "No I didn't read the story" comments about Cap representing the Death of America's ideologic supremacy due to the Iraq War and dumb shit like that, but still). Superman renouncing his citizenship was huge, you had republicans being angry at DC "crapping on such an American icon", people anazyling what it means for such a character to disregard his American identity. Nobody talked about Superman getting rid of his trunk in France. Nobody tried to analyze the reasons behind such a change. Nobody got angry, appart from a few traditionnalists here and there. The gimmicks I mentionned made people react, just like they reacted to Superman dying or turning into a Smurf. But the trunk.....didn't make that big of a reaction. It's not people being tired of gimmicks, they reacted strongly enough to other gimmicks. Just....not here. And with reason, because there's nothing to react about. Superman lost his trunks. Big f.cking deal.

[Dr. Hurt]

I mean The classic look of Superman is returning and all we can talk about is the ass writing the first 2 issues. Well I have had enough and I'm getting my mojo back. In this thread we do nothing but celebrate the fact that the classic look is returning so we will skip two months and believe issue 1 and 2 will never happen.

HE IS BACK.......

Because I for one think Superman should always be the one character that should never be updated in the manner he was look wise. he was the blueprint for all to follow. The last real change of the character was made back in the 1940 by Joe Shulster looking over the change. What was changed after words was very small in that you either have a bigger shield or longer cape but the basic look and scheme always stayed the same.

I just feel there somethings from the past like Superman that need to be preserved. So much of the great things of the past have either been changed for all the wrong reasons or have been forgotten because of our owe stupidity.

Oh look, it's this childish thread again.

[ascended]

Superman lost his trunks. Big f.cking deal.

Exactly. This was not a gimmick. This was just a costume re-design.

The reboot itself, the New52, was in part a gimmick. Well, insofar as DC required a lot of media attention to get the word out and achieve their goals of renewed interest and higher sales. So in that regard, the reboot was a gimmick. But at the same time, gimmicks are shallow, short lived things that are all shock/awe and no meat. The New52 is different in that its looking long term and the intent is to keep things as they are now and build upwards from here, rather than going backwards into nostalgia. DC tried that through most of the 2000's and it didnt work.

Clark's costume getting changed around is not a gimmick. Its a change of clothes. And most people just dont care. The powers are the same. The supporting cast and the world he inhabits is largely the same. All the basics are there, all the things that makes Superman Superman. He just lost the trunks and got a few extra seams in return. And most people dont consider that a big deal. Especially when the classic suit is still around.

[Kurosawa]

The whole thing including the costume change is a gimmick. For the most part the nu52 Superman goes back to his roots, excepting the lack of a relationship with Lois, but the thing that has gotten the most attention is the costume change. And a costume change for Superman is not like a costume change for other characters because he kept the same costume for so long, plus it was his costume and his visual that launched the superhero genre in the first place. Plus changing the costume is a complete sell-out to people who think superheroes and superhero comics are stupid, but unfortunately although he was created by artists, Superman is owned and controlled by a corporation and selling out is what corporations do because they exist to make money and nothing else. Ironically, DC's lack of understanding of their own characters is why they always fail and will always trail Marvel, but that will never change.

[Mat001]

Except it's NOT Superman. Not really. Spider-Man in a black costume is still Spider-Man. But Superman within the context of a JLA story with different powers is not Superman.

Oh, don't give me that bullshit. Superman is Superman, regardless of powers and abilities. That was the point of the energy powers and later on with "Infinite Crisis".

Look, Electric Blue Superman in the Superman comics was a story ABOUT Superman gaining these alternate abilities, how Clark and Lois deal with them, Clark's adjustment and attempts to revert to normal, etc. It's a story ABOUT that. We see the characters, their ongoing development, etc.

But Electric Blue in JLA is just some guy. There's no reason and no explanation for him to be like that. Some new fan interested in reading Morrison's JLA TPBs today gets none of the context. He just gets to read some great stories which unfortunately are not timeless because they are undermined by the Electric Blue BS.

We live in the digital age where people can look up information with a few clicks on their phone and tablet. They'd know that that is Superman because of the S-Shield, that he's called Superman and talks like him. Again, unless they meet the above criteria, they'd know it's Superman. Same way that they open up the book and see a Kyle Rayner instead of "Black Lantern" and Ryan Reynolds.

Sorry, but it's true. Not a timeless classic, at least.

Timeless, shimemeless. It's a classic.

You say that like it's a foregone conclusion we all like or appreciate that. I don't. In some cases, like this one, it hurts the comics long term.

No, it doesn't. Any potential new reader knows that these characters have been around for years and have gone through all kinds of stuff.

You seemed to miss my point, which was that people talked about these gimmicks I just quoted. Captain America's death made the news in France (with hilarious "No I didn't read the story" comments about Cap representing the Death of America's ideologic supremacy due to the Iraq War and dumb shit like that, but still). Superman renouncing his citizenship was huge, you had republicans being angry at DC "crapping on such an American icon", people anazyling what it means for such a character to disregard his American identity. Nobody talked about Superman getting rid of his trunk in France. Nobody tried to analyze the reasons behind such a change. Nobody got angry, appart from a few traditionnalists here and there. The gimmicks I mentionned made people react, just like they reacted to Superman dying or turning into a Smurf. But the trunk.....didn't make that big of a reaction. It's not people being tired of gimmicks, they reacted strongly enough to other gimmicks. Just....not here. And with reason, because there's nothing to react about. Superman lost his trunks. Big f.cking deal.

France is France. There's still the rest of the world. Captain America got talked about because Quesada hyped the death and then people found out that he wasn't dead and went, "Bullshit". Same with Superman's citizenship which got glossed over six months later by the reboot. No one even remembers that he gave up his citizenship, much less care.

The whole thing including the costume change is a gimmick. For the most part the nu52 Superman goes back to his roots, excepting the lack of a relationship with Lois, but the thing that has gotten the most attention is the costume change. And a costume change for Superman is not like a costume change for other characters because he kept the same costume for so long, plus it was his costume and his visual that launched the superhero genre in the first place. Plus changing the costume is a complete sell-out to people who think superheroes and superhero comics are stupid, but unfortunately although he was created by artists, Superman is owned and controlled by a corporation and selling out is what corporations do because they exist to make money and nothing else. Ironically, DC's lack of understanding of their own characters is why they always fail and will always trail Marvel, but that will never change.

I wouldn't say it was a sell out, but it just goes to prove that people know the difference between a gimmick and not a gimmick. And Marvel is no better either.

[Kurosawa]

Electric Superman was a lot more different in look and feel from classic Superman than black suit Spidey ever was from classic Spidey. Spidey still had the same powers, the same look and the same sorts of poses, etc. Electric Superman was so drastically different from classic Superman that it feels off.

Electric Superman was actually cool for what it was, it just shouldn't have lasted as long as it did and they should have given the look and powers to another character.

[MFitzH2O]

Timeless, shimemeless. It's a classic.

[ascended]

Electric Superman was a lot more different in look and feel from classic Superman than black suit Spidey ever was from classic Spidey. Spidey still had the same powers, the same look and the same sorts of poses, etc. Electric Superman was so drastically different from classic Superman that it feels off.

Electric Superman was actually cool for what it was, it just shouldn't have lasted as long as it did and they should have given the look and powers to another character.

They did, she was called Strange Visitor.

What got me about that whole thing wasnt the length of time it lasted, but how it ended. Clark almost dies (I think it must have been the Millenium Giants storyline?), and wakes up at the farm, once again a perfectly *normal* Kryptonian. And the reason is "Kismit did it"? Like, the universe itself basically said "screw the electric thing, we're going back to the way it was." Wow. I mean, at that point, clearly the creative teams just stopped giving a f*ck.

[ascended]

The whole thing including the costume change is a gimmick. For the most part the nu52 Superman goes back to his roots, excepting the lack of a relationship with Lois, but the thing that has gotten the most attention is the costume change. And a costume change for Superman is not like a costume change for other characters because he kept the same costume for so long, plus it was his costume and his visual that launched the superhero genre in the first place. Plus changing the costume is a complete sell-out to people who think superheroes and superhero comics are stupid, but unfortunately although he was created by artists, Superman is owned and controlled by a corporation and selling out is what corporations do because they exist to make money and nothing else. Ironically, DC's lack of understanding of their own characters is why they always fail and will always trail Marvel, but that will never change.

Okay, Im tired of arguing the same point, especially in a thread that was started as a celebration of the character. (Again Lex, sorry!) So Im gonna say this last bit here, and Im done with this part of the conversation. This is all opinion after all. You're not wrong and Im not wrong. This is just a difference of opinion and nothing wrong with that. Though personally I think your definition of "gimmick" is a bit strict. If the DCnU gets rewritten next year back into the old continuity, I'll agree with you; it was a gimmick. As it stands right now, the New52 is how it is. That means its not the shallow shock/awe gimmick you seem to think it is. At least not anymore so than I already elaborated on in a previous post, and thats more about media attention, which you sort of need in order to tell people whats going on with your work. Know why the best books out there always get cancelled after ten issues? Because they dont get any media attention. Thats why Dial H is barely surviving but Avengers vs X-Men sold like mad.

In regards to people complaining about the costume, that has certainly gotten attention in this neighborhood of the internet, yeah. But it seems to me that the Golden Age, reckless, heavy handed attitude has gotten just as much attention, both good and bad, as the costume. Honestly I would say its gotten more attention, but benefit of the doubt yknow? And the marriage going null and void? Lots of talk about that too when it happened. Oh, Clark making the "Gd" sound when he got hurt? That got a TON of attention for a while. A sound effect, and noise on that only died out because that was a year and a half ago now and people forget.

And the new costume isnt designed for people who think superheroes are stupid. Its designed to update a look that is three quarters of a century old. (personally I think it failed, but whatever) If anything, its designed for people who think underwear outside your pants is stupid, not the superhero genre in general. Tastes change, and DC is trying to get the attention of kids now, so what we (I assume youre an adult?) like doesnt mean a thing. We know what sales were like when DC aimed their product at us alone. Can we blame them for trying to bring in new readers and tailor their product to appeal to them? Doesnt Superman change and evolve for every generation? Isnt he bigger than his trunks?

Is it a sell out or an attempt to bring the franchise, which has struggled for years now, back to life? I think this sort of may be like Star Wars. I absolutely hate Lucas for those new films. Hate the man. But as much as I hate those films, being the old bastard fan that I am, those movies created a whole new generation of Star Wars fans. My son and his peers love Star Wars in a way that they (as a collective whole) never would have if those movies had not been made. So the franchise gets to live on beyond the nostalgia of us old bastards. It gets to not only survive among uber-nerds who troll message boards, but among the general population too. Star Wars, as much as I hate to say it, is better off for the fans those films made. Are the films therefore a sell out, or has the franchise simply moved on to a younger generation than us? And do we have the right to say "Screw you kids. I dont like these new movies, so rather than let things change so they appeal to you, I'd rather see this wonderful thing just dry up and die!" I dont know about you, but Im not that selfish.

And ultimately, why are trunks even a thing? Its a costume. Be pissed about the dissolution of the marriage. Be pissed that Clark is now barely old enough to rent a car. Be pissed that Maggie Sawyer and Dan Turpin and Rose & Thorn and Gangbuster and Cadmus and Guardian are all completely different or completely gone. Why waste time being pissed about underwear when so much else has been changed and altered? Get your priorities right man! Occupy Metropolis!

Okay, done with the rant, and this part of the conversation. Feel free to get the last word in if you like, or better yet we can move on to celebrating the best gods damned character in fiction like this thread was meant for.