Marv Wolfman was a hack who ruined DC and especially Superman

No bro. Even in a story he controls with his own self insert his wife leaves him and takes the kids. It's so pathetic and sad.

He was tolerable on Tomb of Dracula but absolutely shit with everything else he touched.

"I didn't do anything they didn't approve of" is not a good excuse. Bronze age Superman was great under Maggins and Bates and then Wolfman comes along to drag his nutsack across everything they built. Pic related. It's the first time Wolfman got his hands on Superman and it pretty much sums up everything he did to the character and his mythology.

Attached: Superman under Wolfman.jpg (1024x1591, 829.14K)

>"I didn't do anything they didn't approve of" is not a good excuse.
I mean it is when you're saying he's worse than the guy who made the status quo he had to work with in the first place. Wolfman wrote a few bad Superman stories, Byrne is the one who fundamentally broke the Superman mythos in a way that wouldn't be fixed for decades.

Businessman sucks because it stretches incredulity how he can do evil scientist stuff and never get busted for it even when his foes include the world's greatest detective and the world's greatest superhuman. Silver age Lex cut the bullshit and was an evil scientist 24/7.

Even if you like Businessman Lex, everything Superman's lore had to sacrifice during MOS was hardly a compromise. Superman sales went into the toilet FAST after MOS and the reason was because the lore was irreparably fucked.

>One punched by a fucking vampire that strips him
Jesus Christ post-crisis Superman was such a dumpster fire.

His She-Hulk was just pages of cheesecake with lame humor.
His Fantastic Four was pretentious rubbish, only worth remembering because Byrne himself has the perfect temperament to write DOOM.

>Jesus Christ post-crisis Superman was such a dumpster fire.
That was Pre-Crisis.

No. It's from Superman 422. It's post-crisis.

There is a reason why "business Lex" was very quickly replaced with "mad science business Lex." Being a businessman and mad scientist gave him multiple layers of separation between himself and whatever he was doing to kill Superman, allowing him to pin everything on others, while giving a handy explanation of how Lex affords all those schemes to kill Superman. It also opens up new avenues of how Lex can strike at Superman and how Superman can counter Lex (albeit through Clark primarily). It also answers the "why doesn't this supervillain just go legit with his amazing technology?" question, Lex does go legit, he just dumbs down his tech because fuck you, Lex Luthor flies to the moon on his private space shuttle while you pay $10k for window seat on a joyride to low orbit. The real issue is that writers played too hard into it and made LexCorp nothing more than an infinite money and tech source for Lex that never suffered any repercussions for him devoting all its resources to killing Superman.

>Byrne is the one who fundamentally broke the Superman mythos in a way that wouldn't be fixed for decades.
Infinite Crisis was a mistake.

He married his waifu in the comics, he is ahead of its time.

He used a comic character as a proxy for his estranged wife, and "rewrote" his personal relationship catastrophe so that he "won" this time.
Its sad as fuck.

It was a failed attempt to fix an even bigger mistake.

Oh shit, you're right. Yeah, Post-COIE, but before Byrne/Wolfman era revamp.

>Its sad as fuck
Its the comics industry, pathetic to the bone.

John Byrne work on Superman, the character, and as well his powers, not to mention the Daily Planet cast is still the best thing to happen to the character.

Bullshit. He torched the mythology so hard the numbers went into freefall.

Gonna have to disagree on that. He's basically the guy who did synergy before synergy was a thing, and his changes to Superman and most of his supporting cast were retarded and contributed to Superman being shit for a solid decade.

I don’t get this, didn’t Morrison and Waid fixed this in the late 90s with the “Hypertime” concept or whatever was called? Everything is continuity, they’re trying to fix something that didn’t need fixing.

Hypertime was basically just Morrison wanking himself silly in his own corner until he got to actually make it canon in Final Crisis. Until then Superman's history and more of his mythos was a complete clusterfuck that nobody wanted to have to make sense of.

Clark Kent before John Byrne was nothing but a disguise. Byrne was the one who actually created the idea of "Clark Kent is who i am, Superman is what i do". Byrne decision to keep the Kents alive, to place focus on Lana and Pete, to develop the Daily Planet cast of characters, and to actually give Lois some characterization will forever be the best changes the franchise ever had. Him donwplaying Superman's powers and give them some logical explanations was good too.

That was just Morrison and Waid creating their own head-canon while DC editorial paid them no mind. The ones to fuck the mythos for good was Loeb who brought back all the silver age concepts because hurr durrp silver age good. This is why now Superman is this meta-wank fast.

Bullshit.
Superman before Byrne: Strange visitor from the Planet Krypton whose personality was informed by the untimely passing of his race. His struggle to balance the human and alien parts of himself endeared him to audiences and made him a fixture of Americana.

Superman after Byrne: Fuck Kryptonians, they were just asshole Vulcans without feelings. LOL BIRTHING MATRIX I'M JUST A DUDE LIKE YOU BRO. He tried to turn Superman into Spider-Man and it was disgraceful.

Do people not know that Wolfman also wrote pre-crisis Superman?

Fuck you. Superman is an immigrant story. He's Kal-El and Clark Kent. Byrne tried to make him all-Clark because he's autistic.

Take your birthing matrix and shove it up your ass apologist.

>Superman before Byrne: Strange visitor from the Planet Krypton whose personality was informed by the untimely passing of his race. His struggle to balance the human and alien parts of himself endeared him to audiences and made him a fixture of Americana.
He was what Bill described him as in Kill Bill. There was no struggle between any personas. Superman was Kal-El, and that was it. Clark Kent was a mockery of humanity.

The argument isn't 'who was the worse writer', it's 'who ruined Superman'.

Wolfman wrote a bad Superman, Byrne ruined Superman. It's not really a comparison.

>Byrne ruined Superman
TAS beg to differ.

boards.fireden.net/co/search/image/eRu6WZ06uO6yjF22BoGQ5w/
I'm sure not all of these are you but I'm willing to bet a lot of them are from you.

TAS is literally just Byrne Superman except slightly lamer.

No he was not. He went to ludicrous, insane degrees to protect his Clark Kent persona because he felt he fit in better with people that way.

This to be honest.

>boards.fireden.net/co/search/image/eRu6WZ06uO6yjF22BoGQ5w/
OP here. I got the image by googling Marv Wolfman Terry Long and finding the picture that was most humiliating.

google.com/search?q=Marv Wolfman Terry Long&rlz=1C1CHBF_enUS831US831&sxsrf=ALeKk03K8VEXfPgUsB84vY8p_7xo92NDjg:1584157029195&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwia9fjnhJnoAhXmna0KHcd5DZ0Q_AUoAXoECAsQAw

First result

TAS was the best Superman in a long time, even the comics brought Ed Mcguiness to make with more similar to TAS.

Go kiss Tarantino's feet faggot. Clark was important to pre-crisis Superman.

Attached: Superman 420.jpg (1200x1790, 712.57K)

>H-HOW CAN ANYONE HATE WOLFMAN-SAMA? IT MUST BE A SAMEFAG?
Blow it out your ass.

>Clark Kent is Superman's demon—I said that specifically in the second book. I've always thought of him that way. Superman is the real person and Clark is the construct. Clark is a brilliant character and the creation of Superman. My take on Clark is a lot like what Chris Reeve said Clark was when he did the first movie: "Either Superman is a consummate actor or Lois Lane is an idiot. I don't want Lois to be an idiot, so Superman must be a good actor."
>Everybody has a demon, everybody has a hobby, a habit that is part of his character and he can't break. Superman's is Clark. Mine is writing, Bill Clinton's is the saxophone, Jimmy Carter had to teach Sunday School, even when he was president. Luthor's demon is Superman. Superman needs Clark the way most of us need dreams.
>I think the idea that Clark is the real character and Superman is a device is completely wrong-headed—because at some point, Clark has to die... and probably Superman won't, at least not permanently. I did a prose story for Martin Greenberg, for one of the anthologies he's putting together, that explores the triangle among Clark, Lois and Superman, over the course of about 150 years. Lois lives to be about 125 in my continuity and Luthor lives another 50. Superman tells the story hundreds of years in the future, as a great grey eminence flying through space, looking for a world to live in. It's the Superman/Lois love story... and Clark is an addendum to it. I think that's the way it is. Clark is there to make Superman accessible. Not the other way around.
>--- Elliot S. Maggins
The above is how Maggins, who wrote most of the pre-CoIE bronze stories, saw the character.

That's the best way to see the character.

>I did a prose story for Martin Greenberg, for one of the anthologies he's putting together, that explores the triangle among Clark, Lois and Superman, over the course of about 150 years. Lois lives to be about 125 in my continuity and Luthor lives another 50. Superman tells the story hundreds of years in the future, as a great grey eminence flying through space, looking for a world to live in. It's the Superman/Lois love story... and Clark is an addendum to it. I think that's the way it is. Clark is there to make Superman accessible. Not the other way around.

Does anyone know where this story is?

Oh, yes. Lets take the thing that makes the character human and relatable, and make it so the whole thing is fake and just a hobby the hero engages in. Even the idea that Superman should live forever because MUH POWERS is idiotic.

How in the fuck did you read what Maggins wrote and get "Clark is just a hobby?" "Superman needs Clark in the way most of us need dreams."

That pic actually came from a very good Maggins story.

>Have a writer that gets the poignance of Superman's character
>Discard him so that Byrne and Wolfman can drag their nutsacks across the character
DC deserves every bad thing that's happened to it post-crisis.

Attached: Dissapointed_Specter.jpg_large.jpg (376x823, 72.93K)

Because Maggins himself compared Clark Kent to a pass-time.
>Superman's is Clark. Mine is writing, Bill Clinton's is the saxophone
Sure, Superman loves to play Clark Kent on his down-time, but that's it.

You stupid nigger read the rest.

>Everybody has a demon, everybody has a hobby, a habit that is part of this character and he can't break.
>Mine is writing.

>Superman needs Clark the way most of us need dreams

I wish I could strangle you through the computer you absolute drooling retard.

It's clear Maggins is describing Clark as an essential and uplifting component of the character. He says its a critical to Superman as writing is for him or Superman is for Lex Luthor. He's not describing Clark Kent as just a disguise Superman puts on, he's clearly more than that.

Still the same thing. You and Maggins can offer some platitudes, but it's clear what you guys want out of Superman. You want the lonely alien, the troubled god, the eternal other. You guys see Clark Kent as nothing but a well-built disguise and maybe a good opportunity for some "me time" to decompress.

>It's clear Maggins is describing Clark as an essential and uplifting component of the character.
>Clark Kent is Superman's demon

No. Clark is the bridge between the eternal other and the socialization he and all humans desire. Maggins described Clark as import to Clark as writing is --for himself--. Process that for a momment.

In the Roman sense. Did you even read the whole thing?

COIE being a mistake is the biggest DC redpill.

It still shits all over the Kents, Lois, and everyone else in Superman's life. It makes Clark Kent out to be a lie that someday will cease to serve any purpose. In Maggins view Superman could very well one day create another identity and it would be interchangeable of that of Clark Kent. You can call Clark Kent a hobby, a habitat, a profession, and whatever else, but all you're doing is giving adjetives to the fact that Clark Kent is convenient creation and nothing more.

John Byrne at least tried to make Superman human first and foremost. And i'm with Byrne on this one.

Indeed.

>It sits all over the Kents, Lois, everyone else in Superman's life
You never read a Maggins story.

>It makes Clark Kent a lie
Was writing a lie to Maggins? Was Superman a lie to Luthor? Was church a lie to Jimmy Carter?

>In Maggins view Superman could very well one day create another identity
If he outlived the planet he would have to.

>And I'm with Byrne on this one
Then you are lost.