Superman. Some say he's so powerful he's boring, and that he has no interesting villains. In fact, a lot of people say that. Hell, I used to be one of them. And I think a lot of this hate for Supes comes from the films.
Now I'm not belittling the films, and I'm certainly not belittling Christopher Reeve's portrayal of the character, even though I've only seen the first film from the seventies. I think the late, great Mr. Reeves is the best part of the first Superman film, and I am in awe of his ability to show Clark and Superman to be two different people. No, what I'm criticising the Superman films for is the villains. Not the treatment of the villains, though I could make whole rants about how Lex Luthor got fucked over in the first film alone, but the villains used.
Look at the villains in each of the Superman films released since 1978:
Superman - Lex Luthor
Superman 2 - Zod, Ursa, Non and Lex Luthor
Superman 3 - Gus Gorman
Superman 4 - Lex Luthor and Nuclear man
Superman Returns - Lex Luthor
Thanks to this, as well as most other adaptations of Superman, people think of Lex Luthor as Superman's only enemy, not his archenemy.
Compare this with Batman. While most people will say the Joker if you ask them to name a Batman villain, odds are that you'll get someone who'll say something like the Penguin, the Riddler, Two-Face etc. whereas I imagine most non-comic book fans would be hard presed to name a Superman villain other than Lex Luthor, a character who, while immensely intelligent, is only as strong as an ordinary man. And much like Aquaman, people can't resist making simplified statements like "Superman's main villain isn't as physically strong as him, so Superman must have more power than all of his enemies."
Yet anyone who has seen Superman The Animated Series from 1996, Justice League, or Justice League Unlimited knows that Superman has a number of enemies equally as powerful as him, if not more powerful. Brainiac, Bizarro, Doomsday, goddamn Darkseid have all proven to be a physical match for Superman at various points in various incarnations. I think a film that features these vilains as well as, if not instead of Lex Luthor, Superman would get a much wider appreciation.
Also, it's not like Kryptonite is his only weakness. Yeah, it is very much a cliché to use it as a weapon against him by this point, but the big blue boy scout has more weaknesses than just some rocks. Magic affects him in the same way that it would an ordinary human, and while this isn't usually picked up on that much, it adds another weakness and flaw that many say the character is lacking. Similarly, it's not like he's completely invulnerable. Yes, he can take way more punishment than most characters in the DC universe, but if something is phsyically strong enough it can still hurt him. Hell, Doomsday killed him with nothing but brute force.
Also, I think the intention of the character shouldn't be someone that they have to relate to, but rather he should be someone to look up to. Recently, he's been written as the epitome of all that is good about humanity. I agree with this interpretation of the character, and feel that he should be the sort of shinning beackon to humanity about how they should act. As such, you shouldn't necessarily try to relate to the character, but rathe be inspired by him. Also, some writers have pushed the angle that his life isn't perfect thanks to his powers, and that thanks to them he can hear everyone who needs help but can't always get there, and that that's what makes him a hero. While I don't completely agree with this angle, I appreciate the way it shakes things up.
Without this slightly deeper knowledge of the character's history, I think many people see him as bland and boring, and see some green rocks as his only enemies without considering the physical gods that he has fought in the past. So really, TL;DR Superman has a much more interseting character than people give him credit for, with a number of flaws and a number of villains who are more interesting than chunks of green rock, it's just that adaptations of him haven't managed to capture that.
Now I'm not belittling the films, and I'm certainly not belittling Christopher Reeve's portrayal of the character, even though I've only seen the first film from the seventies. I think the late, great Mr. Reeves is the best part of the first Superman film, and I am in awe of his ability to show Clark and Superman to be two different people. No, what I'm criticising the Superman films for is the villains. Not the treatment of the villains, though I could make whole rants about how Lex Luthor got fucked over in the first film alone, but the villains used.
Look at the villains in each of the Superman films released since 1978:
Superman - Lex Luthor
Superman 2 - Zod, Ursa, Non and Lex Luthor
Superman 3 - Gus Gorman
Superman 4 - Lex Luthor and Nuclear man
Superman Returns - Lex Luthor
Thanks to this, as well as most other adaptations of Superman, people think of Lex Luthor as Superman's only enemy, not his archenemy.
Compare this with Batman. While most people will say the Joker if you ask them to name a Batman villain, odds are that you'll get someone who'll say something like the Penguin, the Riddler, Two-Face etc. whereas I imagine most non-comic book fans would be hard presed to name a Superman villain other than Lex Luthor, a character who, while immensely intelligent, is only as strong as an ordinary man. And much like Aquaman, people can't resist making simplified statements like "Superman's main villain isn't as physically strong as him, so Superman must have more power than all of his enemies."
Yet anyone who has seen Superman The Animated Series from 1996, Justice League, or Justice League Unlimited knows that Superman has a number of enemies equally as powerful as him, if not more powerful. Brainiac, Bizarro, Doomsday, goddamn Darkseid have all proven to be a physical match for Superman at various points in various incarnations. I think a film that features these vilains as well as, if not instead of Lex Luthor, Superman would get a much wider appreciation.
Also, it's not like Kryptonite is his only weakness. Yeah, it is very much a cliché to use it as a weapon against him by this point, but the big blue boy scout has more weaknesses than just some rocks. Magic affects him in the same way that it would an ordinary human, and while this isn't usually picked up on that much, it adds another weakness and flaw that many say the character is lacking. Similarly, it's not like he's completely invulnerable. Yes, he can take way more punishment than most characters in the DC universe, but if something is phsyically strong enough it can still hurt him. Hell, Doomsday killed him with nothing but brute force.
Also, I think the intention of the character shouldn't be someone that they have to relate to, but rather he should be someone to look up to. Recently, he's been written as the epitome of all that is good about humanity. I agree with this interpretation of the character, and feel that he should be the sort of shinning beackon to humanity about how they should act. As such, you shouldn't necessarily try to relate to the character, but rathe be inspired by him. Also, some writers have pushed the angle that his life isn't perfect thanks to his powers, and that thanks to them he can hear everyone who needs help but can't always get there, and that that's what makes him a hero. While I don't completely agree with this angle, I appreciate the way it shakes things up.
Without this slightly deeper knowledge of the character's history, I think many people see him as bland and boring, and see some green rocks as his only enemies without considering the physical gods that he has fought in the past. So really, TL;DR Superman has a much more interseting character than people give him credit for, with a number of flaws and a number of villains who are more interesting than chunks of green rock, it's just that adaptations of him haven't managed to capture that.
