Wertham lied

[Trekker4747]

It sort of is. A lot of those covers were "shock covers" to get people to buy the book. In a lot of them Superman is acting like a dick in order to teach a greater lesson.

[sojourner]

Or because some supervillain forced him to react that way to save whoever's life.

[Trekker4747]

sojourner wrote:

---

Or because some supervillain forced him to react that way to save whoever's life.

Let's just face up to it, the Silver Age was weird.

[junxon]

so the old covers where superman is being weird and/or nasty represents a better time or something? and society has regressed to the point where a little character development is required and thats a bad thing? eh? whaa?

OP's point has escaped me.

[Trekker4747]

His "point" seems to be that

A) Those old comic covers and panels are now being read into my modern minds to find different contexts and stuff in them. They're made so clean they're like the Match Game. Hence him pointing out the Superdickery site. Which ignores that that site is poking FUN at the the concept, purposefully taking the comics out of context and that some of those panels don't need help to read in an odd way.

B) On a grander scope, the concept became a self-fulfilling prophecy. The CCA forced main stream comic companies to get overly, squeaky, clean. By the mid/late 80s independent comic companies got more and more popular by not adopting the CCA and breaking boundaries. The independent companies became more popular and were threatening the big companies.

As a result the big companies over-compensated for decades of repression and trying to "out do" the independents by going to far, possible marring the "clean" images of the characters that had been popular for decades. It only got worse as the CCA became less and less of an influence and main-stream companies dropped it.

Really, I think we've still come out ahead.

[TREK_GOD_1]

RandyS wrote:

---

No, it doesn't, and that's exactly the point. Everything HAS become grim and gritty, and anything that isn't is automatically (and incorrectly) written off as "campy".

And that's just sad.

You are spot-on; the obsession with everyone being "dark," "grim and gritty" offers no contrast--the very thing which exists in real life--ironic, since the advocates of "grim and gritty" believe their content is realistic. They ignore how audiences--contrary to Hollywood's wish--are not expecting all characters to be dark, psychologically damaged or morally bankrupt, or view them as normal.

[Admiral Buzzkill]

TREK_GOD_1 wrote:

---

They ignore how audiences--contrary to Hollywood's wish--are not expecting all characters to be dark, psychologically damaged or morally bankrupt, or view them as normal.

What they are not ignoring is a track record of audiences paying to see this and not that.

I don't know where fans get this notion that some fad or fashion just runs riot through the entertainment industry for no better reason than that these people are somehow disconnected from popular enthusiasms and feel like amusing themselves by burning huge wads of cash to prove how clever they are. That business is as Darwinian as you can imagine - people make big mistakes (and everyone remembers them for quite a while), but when something fails big just about everyone draws one conclusion: don't do that again. The reverse is also true.

[TREK_GOD_1]

My Name Is Legion wrote:

---

What they are not ignoring is a track record of audiences paying to see this and not that.

I don't know where fans get this notion that some fad or fashion just runs riot through the entertainment industry for no better reason than that these people are somehow disconnected from popular enthusiasms and feel like amusing themselves by burning huge wads of cash to prove how clever they are.

On a personal note, I have quite a number of old friends woking in that industry, and they are not shy about stating --point blank--how social agendas like the push for more dysfunctional/odd characters hold much power in that business in how/why content is produced. To the point of the OP's reference to Man of Steel, before Nolan's Batman movies, no one--other than the equally dysfunctional Tim Burton--wanted to turn Superman into a candidate for anti-depression meds.

Post Nolan, Superman cannot be the contrast he used to be in the so-called DC universe. The differences between Batman and Superman--dark and light, respectively--added to the color of the overall superhero dynamic, as it--like personalities real life--do not swing in one direction. Even after Nolan, there's no public demand for a dark Superman--to be "Nolanized," as the expression goes, but WB is forcing agenda over reality. That--i'm guessing--is the bigger message of the OP.

[junxon]

also superman has the problem that he's a bit boring due to being unbeatably 'super'. a little personal anguish might add some interest.

[Robert Maxwell]

junxon wrote:

---

also superman has the problem that he's a bit boring due to being unbeatably 'super'. a little personal anguish might add some interest.

Yeah. There has to be something about him that makes him interesting and relatable, as a character. We have a morally upstanding guy who always makes the right choices and is virtually invulnerable. Wow, how exciting.

How do you make it interesting? By giving him and flaws and foibles.

Conceiving of Superman as a contrast to Batman is cool and all, except that people like Batman because he's flawed, brooding, and complex. Superman is none of those, which is why he's not very interesting.

[TREK_GOD_1]

Robert Maxwell wrote:

---

Conceiving of Superman as a contrast to Batman is cool and all, except that people like Batman because he's flawed, brooding, and complex. Superman is none of those, which is why he's not very interesting.

Brooding 24/7 leads to disinterest, as it may inspire some to say "get over it," or "here we go again with the 'oh how dark my world is' routine."

Part of the charm of The Avengers movie is that Captain America can be as upright/"light" as a character can be, but he plays well against sour Tony Stark, struggling Banner and noble/arrogant Thor. In other words, the contrasts offer a chance for each character to show what he's made of against someone who sees life in a very different way. If all of the Avergers were bitter, brooding and dark (i.e. a gang of Nolan Batmen), there would be no appeal, as its a one note character trait only a few can relate to.

[junxon]

so how come batman is so popular?

[Robert Maxwell]

TREK_GOD_1 wrote:

---

Brooding 24/7 leads to disinterest, as it may inspire some to say "get over it," or "here we go again with the 'oh how dark my world is' routine."

Part of the charm of The Avengers movie is that Captain America can be as upright/"light" as a character can be, but he plays well against sour Tony Stark, struggling Banner and noble/arrogant Thor. In other words, the contrasts offer a chance for each character to show what he's made of against someone who sees life in a very different way. If all of the Avergers were bitter, brooding and dark (i.e. a gang of Nolan Batmen), there would be no appeal, as its a one note character trait only a few can relate to.

Your argument would be more appropriate in a discussion of a Justice League movie, not the next Superman film--which will not have any of those other heroes in it.

[RandyS]

junxon wrote:

---

also superman has the problem that he's a bit boring due to being unbeatably 'super'. a little personal anguish might add some interest.

As long as it doesn't change who and what Superman is, then fine. If it serves the story, then fine. But if it just "dark for the sake of dark", which is what alot of TV and movies have been for the last decade, then it's silly.

But, I'll reserve judgement on MAN OF STEEL until I actually see it.

[Kelthaz]

Robert Maxwell wrote:

---

Conceiving of Superman as a contrast to Batman is cool and all, except that people like Batman because he's flawed, brooding, and complex. Superman is none of those, which is why he's not very interesting.

Yes, Batman is cool because he's flawed, brooding, and complex. I love the archetype too, but if you turn every character into that it's going to lose its appeal. We all remember the 90's Anti Hero craze, right? What I want from a Superman film is something that's tonally different from The Dark Knight trilogy. I want movies that give me different experiences rather than my favourite thing over and over again. Chocolate ice cream is way better than vanilla ice cream, but I still enjoy vanilla for the variety.