Is the Superman who never fail more inspiring?

[Spaceman Spiff]

Maggin said in Miracle Monday that Superman, realizing or not, could do no mistake.

I think you are referring to the passage where Superman had just defeated C. W. Saturn (Chapter 23).

Miracle Monday[/i]"]What Superman did not realize—it did not matter whether he realized this or not—was that in this extended instant he could do or say no wrong.  There was a right and a wrong in the Universe, and Superman was no more capable of erring here and now than C. W. Saturn was capable of defying him.

Maggin didn't say that Superman never made mistakes, only that in this particular situation he could not. As a matter of fact, in Chapter 6 Superman did make a mistake. He (as Clark Kent) cued the wrong videotape. Maggin even says that it was "just a touch horrifying" that Superman had made the mistake.

Regarding the topic question, I think there are several examples of Superman's failures in the pre-Crisis comics. But Superman never failed to try. He persevered. He never quit. He was Superman.

I can enjoy reading about a hero who fails, picks himself up, and tries again. I can't enjoy reading about a hero who fails, mopes about, and gives up.

[NotSuper]

I don't have a problem with Superman failing--as long as it's not common and he always makes up for his mistakes.

[Permanus]

I meant displaying a uncompromising nature when fighting villians, i.e. putting them down mercilessly - no mr. nice-guy.
Of course he shouln't go and off innocent bystanders. There's a distinction.

Oh, well, I quite agree with that. I always like it when Superman shows everybody who's the man. You have to love the dialogue he would be given back in the thirties: "You're not fighting a woman now!" and "You little vixen!" (I actually once said that to an old girlfriend of mine, and I'll be goshdarned if it didn't stop her in her tracks. I was still wrong, of course.)

There seems to be this perception among scriptwriters that in order to be a thoroughly good and decent human being, you have to be pretty sappy. Well, needless to say, I disagree with that. The man should have a bit of gumption. I like Grant Morrison's take on Superman: he is so powerful that he doesn't need to posture or stand around arms akimbo; he is completely cool and relaxed all the time, and he doesn't take any, er, crap.

[chris6909]

Well said, Permanus!

[Superman Forever]

Thanks for the correction about Miracle Monday. I kind of agree with what you all said. About the edgier Superman, we've seen some of that int the Superman II movie, Alan Moore's For the man who have everything, and post-Crisis Superman stories by Jurgens, Joe Kelly (Action 775), Mark Waid (Birthright) and Geoff Johns (the story with Major Force).

Any comment about the Donner movie scene when Superman turn back time? It was established in comics that Superman could time travel, but not alter history. Therefore, with the ability of reverting death and all, you just loose the tension of his stories. If anything can be undone, what's the point? It was beautiful in the movie, and seen it just one time was OK, but I don't think it's the way to go. A fail he had to live with in post-Crisis comics was the destruction of the moon and it's human civilization in Time and Time Again (Dan Jurgens), a story about Superman being incapable of solving everything. I had no problem with that.

[MatterEaterLad]

Turning back time in the movie was a kind of sweet idea, it doesn't ruin it, other than the knowledge of reversing the Earth's rotation would not only not turn back time, it would destroy the planet and everything living on it...

[Spaceman Spiff]

Here's an earlier forum thread -- Movie Questions -- that includes some nitpicking about the movies.

The "turning back time" scene was one of the "nits" that got picked. Some think that the scene depicts Superman reversing the Earth's rotation (and therefore, time). Nightwing suggested that the force required to do this would likely wreck the planet.

My opinion was (and still is) that the moviemakers were showing Superman traveling backward in time. The "time reversal" effect showed the events "unhappening" from Superman's POV.

Don't know what the writer/director really meant to show. Maybe they didn't know either.

[Spaceman Spiff]

In that earlier thread, it was Valdemar (not me) who first suggested that Supes was time-traveling rather than turning back time. I did add my 2-cents, tho.