I want to experience Batman and Superman
- Thread starter ryan123450
- Start date
I liked Birthright. I could've done without the Smallville elements, but it was an effective and imaginative take on Superman's origin story and I've never understood what people's objections to it were.
And I liked The Man of Steel too. I don't buy into the notion that if there are two versions of a story, you're required to like only one and hate the other.
And I liked The Man of Steel too. I don't buy into the notion that if there are two versions of a story, you're required to like only one and hate the other.
Interesting then that I remember her more than I remember the first meeting between Batman and Superman.
How so?
The vegan Superman just doesn't work for me. Plus, too many steps "backwards".
The thing I really like about Birthright are Clark's adventures post-Smallville, pre-Metropolis. I don't know if anything like that had ever been done in the mythos before, but I think it really shows Clark's character well, and I'd've liked to see more of it. The thing I really didn't like (aside from young-Lex-in-Smallville and Lex-as-mad-scientist) is the premise inherent in the title: that Clark becomes Superman to fulfill some kind of Kryptonian birthright. It's a fundamental misreading of his character.
Also: Yu's Lois is ugly, and his Jimmy Olsen looks like a retarded chimpanzee.
I honestly don't remember this Magpie character at all! The parts about The Man of Steel that I dig the most are 1) Clark's parents surviving into his adulthood and 2) Clark being born on Earth.
Like I said, the perfect Superman origin story doesn't yet exist. I'd cherry-pick a lot of elements from here and there to make it work.
Also: Yu's Lois is ugly, and his Jimmy Olsen looks like a retarded chimpanzee.
I honestly don't remember this Magpie character at all! The parts about The Man of Steel that I dig the most are 1) Clark's parents surviving into his adulthood and 2) Clark being born on Earth.
Like I said, the perfect Superman origin story doesn't yet exist. I'd cherry-pick a lot of elements from here and there to make it work.
There have been a lot of suggestions offered here. I can't cite specific issues in the regular series, suggest specific authors, etc.
If you want to know what Batman is all about, psychologically, try The Killing Joke. It's one of the finest Batman stories ever written. It has little to do with origins or retirement but it sums up the character perfectly. As for Superman- A Man For All Seasons is great. Try those and move on from there...
If you want to know what Batman is all about, psychologically, try The Killing Joke. It's one of the finest Batman stories ever written. It has little to do with origins or retirement but it sums up the character perfectly. As for Superman- A Man For All Seasons is great. Try those and move on from there...
The vegan Superman just doesn't work for me. Plus, too many steps "backwards".
Eh, I'd agree veggie Supes was sort of one step too far. But I think this era of mining the Silver Age for some of its good ideas is fine. Comics have always recycled and reused ideas again and again in new combinations. At least Lex didn't hate Superman for making his hair fall out!
I have a q for you - it might appear that I'm contesting what you're saying but I'm really puzzled - why do you say that The Killing Joke sums up the Batman character perfectly?
Am I not "getting" something fundamental about the story? The story is more about the Joker than Batman, right?
I think TKJ explores the relationship between Batman and the Joker effectively, but for a psychological exploration of Bats himself, try Batman: Ego by Darwyn Cooke.
I decided to reread Birthright, and he's not vegan, just vegetarian. A vegetarian is someone who doesn't eat meat. A vegan is someone who avoids using any animal products of any kind, including eggs, cheese, gelatin, and other things that are fine for vegetarians. (And Birthright does reference Superman's boots being made of leather, which is contrary to the vegan lifestyle.)
And what's wrong with Superman being a vegetarian? Lots of people are vegetarians. It's healthy, it's humane, and it's good for the environment. Seems like a good fit for Superman.
I'm curious, I've never read Birthright. Do they show Superman eating eggs or cows milk that you can say he is a vegetarian and not a vegan? And one clarification, gelatin is made from animal bones or hide, so a vegetarian would not eat it either.
He specifically states that he is a vegetarian (and as I said, he wears leather, something a strict vegan wouldn't do). This is because his senses allow him to perceive the energies given off by a living being (a concept first proposed by Elliott S! Maggin in his classic Superman novels), and the sight of dead beings feels wrong and empty to him.
And I don't understand why some people react negatively to that idea. I mean, he's Superman. He's the embodiment of reverence for life. And it's an established trope that his sensory abilities are practically limitless. It seems logical that those would be connected, that he'd value life so highly because he can perceive it -- and its loss -- on a far more profound and intimate level than humans can. And it seems logical that someone with that kind of perception, and that kind of connection to life, would be a vegetarian.
Hell, I thought he photosynthesized. Why does a yellow sun give him (physics-defying) powers but isn't capable of running ordinary biological processes?
Probably for the same reason the DeLorean's time circuits were powered by fission or fusion energy, but it still needed gas to run.
If he's the embodiment of reverence for life and his sensory abilities are practically limitless, he shouldn't be a vegetarian, he should eat nothing at all, because plants are lifeforms that are killed to be food too.
I can understand if he's against the mistreatment of animals, but as Superman he should realize that it's necessary for humans (and himself) to kill other life to survive, until we find a way to turn green and start photosynthesis.
Another thing is, if the writers want to make a difference between animals and plants Superman should be vegan, not vegetarian! Not eating meat because he can't stand the sight of dead beings and values life sooooo much but wrapping his feet into dead animal skin at the same time makes no sense at all.
^Nothing you're saying makes any sense. You're talking as if it's somehow impossible for anyone to be a vegetarian without being an extreme vegan or eating nothing at all. That's complete nonsense. The world is full of vegetarians. It's not some nonsensical fantasy like you're claiming, it's a way of life for literally hundreds of millions of people around the world. The number of vegetarians in India alone is larger than the entire population of the United States. So to claim there's something irrational or inconsistent about someone being a vegetarian is just absurd.
Besides, plants don't have nervous systems or brains, so is it really that hard to understand that a plant wouldn't be giving off the same kind of emissions that a living animal would? Although Waid left it vague in Birthright, I'm pretty sure Maggin defined it in terms of Superman perceiving the electromagnetic emissions of a living being's neural and muscular activity.
Besides, plants don't have nervous systems or brains, so is it really that hard to understand that a plant wouldn't be giving off the same kind of emissions that a living animal would? Although Waid left it vague in Birthright, I'm pretty sure Maggin defined it in terms of Superman perceiving the electromagnetic emissions of a living being's neural and muscular activity.
Last edited:
Similar threads
