Which one really defines the character of Superman?
As much as I do LOVE the animated series from the 90's, and I especially love the Justice League animated series, but I think that David Fleischer's animated Superman is the reason why we love watching Superman on screen, the reason why we enjoyed the comics, and it defines the character as being the GREATEST hero EVER!!!!!!!!!!!
The 90s version probably has the best writing out of the two. They really focused on the characters as well as the action and dynamic villains.
The 40s, on the other hand, to me was groundbreaking because of the fluid animation and unique art style. They had some great segments, but overall they weren't really 'stories'. So I'll have to go with the 90s series.
"Ignorance does not equal innocence"
Definitely the 40s. While the writing may not have been as good the animation is superior to most. It is brilliant and revolutionary. The 40s Superman and the 90s Batman are the two best comic cartoons ever.
shareare you friggin kidding me!? 90's pwwwwwwwwwnnnnnnnnns 40's
shareThe Fleischer shorts are icons. Short, simple, effective. They broke new ground, no question. The Timm interpretation cherry picked from everything that came before to make a more approachable, modern interpretation. Far as I'm concerned, it's a tie. The fans win.
shareI prefer the 40's because everything felt coherent. It bothered me that the 90's had that James Bond villain's hesitation all the time. 40's Superman always found an answer no matter how tough it got.
shareThe 90s Bruce Timm series is superior because of the great stories and perfect voice acting (to me, Tim Daly and Dana Delany will always be the representative voices of Clark/Supes and Lois Lane). The series also did a great job of exploring the dichotomy of Clark Kent and Superman and which aspect really defines his personality; this was never better done (in any visual medium if you ask me) than in the great episode "The Late Mr. Kent."
I also particularly loved how the 90s Superman series had longer story arcs (the Darkseid eps. in the last season) and that flowing sense of continuity that would run on over to Justice League. More so than any other DCAU show the Superman series felt like it had both a definite beginning (the destruction of Krypton) and a burgeoning sense that the show was developing towards a specific ending, most particularly a climactic showdown with Darkseid and the constant guest stars heavily indicating the eventual formation of the Justice League.
Wow. This is really a hard question. If I had to choose, I'd go with the '40s cartoons. As much as I loved the '90s cartoon, I loved the '40s cartoon even more because I feel that they were the perfect representations of Superman. That and the fact that they had everything you could ask for; action, violence, daring escapes, originality, etc.
They were both awesome cartoons and both played a huge part in my childhood, but I'd have to go with the '40s overall.
_
Some things have to be believed to be seen.
without the 40's cartoon, there would have never been a 90's cartoon, so I would say the 40's cartoons are the best because they started it all.
shareIm going to have to go with the 40's cartoons. They are a lot more artistic and stylised.
Infact, I actually really enjoy much of the Fleicher's animation work...From Betty Boop, through Popeye, Gulliver's Travels, and Hoppity Goes To Town to the Superman serials. They stand up so well today, which is more than can be said for many old serials (animated or not) from the 1930's and 40's.
hjl
Star Wars Episode IV.V: The Holiday Special.
what is the history behind spelling owned with a p?
shareI like both, even though the 90s cartoons offered deeper characterizations of the hero, his love interest, etc. There's no denying the influence of the 40s Fleischer shorts on the animation of the 90s series though (as well as on the Batman series that preceded it) - except for the more modern "S" insignia, the DCAU Superman character design is practically the spitting image of the Fleischer Superman.
shareI'm gonna have to go with the 1940s. Why? Because they're the closest thing we'll ever get to seeing the Golden Age version of Superman in all his glory.
I like the 1990s series, don't get me wrong, it introduced me to a lot of Supes' villains and it had great interconnecting storylines (Metallo's storyline, Darkseid, etc).
The two Superman semi-live action serials kinda came too late in the game to really be incredibly representative of the Golden Age Superman. The mix of animation and live action in order for him to fly just didn't cut it. The Captain Marvel serial in the early 1940s were able to accomplish flying without any animation, and since Supes' serials came years later the animation became a cheap cop-out.
Plus, lest we forget, if it had not been for the 1940s cartoons Superman would not have gained the ability to fly.
Superman's mythos was defined by his appearances in other media. Kryptonite came from the radio show. Flying came from the cartoons. Even the names Perry White & Daily Planet came from the Radio Show if I remember correctly. Due to Jack Larson's portrayal of Jimmy Olsen on "The Adventures Of Superman" the character got his own comic book...and the comic "Superman's Pal Jimmy Olsen" eventually brought us Cadmus & Darkseid.
If it hadn't been for the Fleischer cartoons giving Superman the ability to fly, then the character may not have survived in the magnitude that he has. Think about it, if Fawcett had won the legal battle because Captain Marvel could fly but Superman didn't, then if Captain Marvel had won the popularity battle...who knows? Maybe George Reeves would've played the Captain while Jack Larson was Billy Batson! Or Christopher Reeve as Captain Marvel while Gene Hackman was Dr. Sivana (and Marlon Brando as the Wizard Shazam)!
Seriously, if Superman never tapped the curiosity of having the ability to fly while Captain Marvel did, then the world may not be the same as it is today.
Sincerely,
Exchronos
Interesting insight exchronos.
shareThanks! It's kinda easy to forget that part of Superman's legacy because most documentaries shy away from covering the legal battle between Fawcett & DC.
The Wikipedia article on it is quite interesting though because it notes that as the 1940s went on Superman adapted more and more ideas from Captain Marvel (such as flying and having a bald scientist for an arch-nemesis...if you believe the Golden Age Lex Luthor was a knock-off of Dr. Sivana). The thing is Captain Marvel was more completely the same character today as he was in the 1940s. Also Captain Marvel was a lot more popular with younger readers because they could relate to Billy Batson, and if Billy Batson could become Captain Marvel with a magic word (SHAZAM!) in theory so could they.
Captain Marvel even beat any other superhero to the silver screen. Batman made it in 1943, Superman in 1948, and even Captain America had a serial in the 1940s. The Fliescher cartoons gave Superman the edge he needed to successfully compete.
What about the radio show? It was important of course, but with only that alone Superman could've eventually waned in popularity, especially when TV came along. The Golden Age Blue Beetle also had a radio show in the 1940s, but because he didn't make it to the big screen like other heroes he faded into obscurity until Charlton Comics revived the character in the late 1960s with new incarnations.
Without the Fliescher cartoons adding flight to Superman's powers, nobody can be sure if the serials would've later added it or not. If they didn't, and as cheaply made as they were a big special effect like that wouldn't have been added unless absolutely necessary, then the TV show with George Reeves wouldn't have been the same if it even happened at all.
The flying scenes in "Adventures Of Superman" are well documented to have had an affect on young viewers at the time, more than any other power. Take that away and what you get is "Smallville", but there wouldn't be a "Smallville" if Supes never flew to begin with-no struggle to make anybody believe a man could fly, unless Captain Marvel had usurped Superman in popularity.
Even after Captain Marvel was legally disabled from the comic book world in the early 1950s his mythos was still influential. Elvis Presley had his 1970s jumpsuits based on the costume of Captain Marvel JR.
If Superman didn't fly today he might be dismissed as just the Flash with extra powers, or be a footnote in history for being the first superhero while Batman and Captain Marvel became the big two. Now it seems like Superman was always destined for greatness, but the Golden Age was an era when DC wasn't the huge powerhouse it eventually became. Fox Features Syndicate got the Blue Beetle on radio, and he even had a newspaper strip done by Jack Kirby. The Phantom got a serial, and so did Timely's Captain America. Captain Marvel was the first superhero to tackle the silver screen and that serial is still hailed today as one of the best ones ever made-the flying was believable, the only thing changed was Billy Batson was made a teenager, and it all worked.
Hundreds of Golden Age Superheroes didn't make the cut into the 1950s. DC rose to prominence because they put Fawcett pretty much out of business, and the creation of the Comics Code Authority in answer to "Seduction Of The Innocent" wiped out tons of others. Timely survived to become Marvel.
A Superman that couldn't fly most likely would've died off in the 1950s, especially if Captain Marvel had continued. Most people complain that in the 1950s Superman was given too many powers, but if he never recieved the power of flight from Dave & Max Fliescher the Man Of Steel might never have had a legacy like the one he currently does.
Sure it's a "what if", but it's something that could've happened if the Flieschers didn't take the job, if Paramount never wanted the cartoons made, or if DC never agreed to liscensing out the character at all, or even if anybody else had done it and just stuck with comics continuity. Whoa...I just made a case for films breaking from comics continuity...that's an epiphany! Usually I'm mad when that happens, but it took other companies to do that with Superman in the media to create the Superman we know today.
Sincerely,
Exchronos
Again, very interesting post Ex. But I have to wonder, if Fawcett hadn't gone under & Captain Marvel hadn't been MIA, would his popularity have endured in the years where comics gradually became aimed more at young adults rather than kids? These days he seems to be one of those characters writers often struggle to write good stories for.
shareWell, again this is only speculation, but here's what could've happened.
If Superman had not been given the ability to fly via the Fliescher Cartoons, and Fawcett had won the legal battle and allowed to keep publishing Captain Marvel, at that time period Captain Marvel would've surpassed Superman.
Captain Marvel really had the unique edge in that kids could still identify with him because they could percieve themselves as Billy Batson, or even other characters like Captain Marvel JR or Mary Marvel. Long before Superboy's adventures came along, and before Supergirl ever came to be, the Marvel Family (heck, the first superhero series to create a "Family" cast of characters which would become the norm by the 1970s with DC Comics like "Batman Family" & "Superman Family") appealed to a wide range of readers. Handicaped children could become Captain Marvel JR, and girls could relate to Mary Marvel. Even older generations could relate to Uncle Marvel, and the Marvel mythos was sustainably rooted in mythology (SHAZAM = Solomon, Herculeas, Achilles, Zeus, Atlas, & Mercury if I remember correctly). Captain Marvel was a favorite of soldiers during the 1940s-early 1950s as well as kids.
If Fawcett did not have to cease publication there's little doubt that Captain Marvel would've survived the comics turbulance of the 1950s, even if Superman was historically as he is now. Yet with a non-flying Superman, and an added appeal to kids, if Fawcett had put Captain Marvel back into the extended media in the 1950s the popularity would've exploded via more serials, TV show, and more.
If you look at Superman comics, they didn't really change much from the 1950s to the 1960s in tone, and it wasn't until the early 1970s that things got shook up a bit. Captain Marvel would've benefitted from the campy 1960s Batman TV Show, and if a Captain Marvel show had never been cancelled from the 1950s, well, it may have been a property to give Bat-Mania a run for its money on competition (even if the live action Captain Marvel series was rebooted with 1966 camp in mind to compete). Historically, by the 1970s when Captain Marvel did return to the limelight it was too late for a successful revival of the character, in fact because Marvel Comics made their own "Captain Marvel" in 1967/1968 when DC revived the original they had to rename the property as "Shazam!", which didn't help Cap's brand identity. If Captain Marvel had been in continuous use from the 1940s on then Marvel Comics' character would've been a trademark infringement.
Despite comics getting darker in the 1970s, if Captain Marvel had been continuous and appeared in other popular media of the era, then the character would've gained the kind of ingrained status that Superman did. The older generations would be introducing the younger generations to the character without any interruption. The generation gap from the early 1950s to the early 1970s when the character returned to publication historically is a major factor in the character's current stature. He missed out on a huge chunk of the Silver Age that could've added more to the character and enriched the character's mythos in a similar manner as it did to Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman during that time. Captain Marvel always seemed to be a step ahead of Superman (flying first, first on the big screen in live action, etc.) and if allowed to weather out the Silver Age there's no telling how far he could've come as a character.
Captain Marvel might not have needed to go dark because his success could've been sustained with the overturning market of younger kids, and as those kids got older then there'd be a nostalgia factor that could help increase the money made from interpretations in other media. In theory some characters might've been killed off or dropped over time, included more social commentary, and evolved with the times in continuous publication. By the 1980s or 1990s there'd be a reboot of the character as what happened with "Power Of Shazam!", or with Superman with "Man Of Steel". In 1993 it could've been Captain Marvel's death spurring headlines as by then a flightless Superman may have only been a minor character.
The reason in real history Captain Marvel's comeback in the 1970s wasn't very big, was because when the book started back up it was like the Golden Age wasn't over. It picked up where it left off, and by the 1970s his campy TV appearances were already outdated. Batman & Wonder Woman lucked out from their comedic shows, but by the time of "Shazam!" people had moved onto the more dramatic "The Incredible Hulk" TV show. So when Captain Marvel did finally make his live action TV debut, it was like beating a dead horse. If Captain Marvel had been on TV in incarnations since the 1950s, he would've had a better chance at survival.
True, the Marvel Era could've killed Fawcett too. It's the key of other media that could've kept Fawcett alive though. Marvel didn't shine in cartoons until the late 1960s with Fantastic Four & Spiderman. Their other 1960s cartoons literally had no movement at all. If Filmation had pursued Captain Marvel as a cartoon in 1966 instead of Superman, then a lot of things might be different today. In fact, "He-Man" might not even have come to be. If Captain Marvel cartoons were successful at Filmation from the beginning, why would Filmation do another character with the similar premise of being a young person (Prince Adam) using magic words to become a mighty hero (He-Man)? It'd conflict and have two of their own shows competing against one another in a fashion that could've split viewers between the shoes resulting in both getting canceled because the audience would be split, especially if they aired on different networks.
Now, if Superman didn't get the ability to fly in the 1940s, if the character survived into the 1970s to be one of the Super Friends, then he would've gained flight. Even the Flash gained flight in that cartoon! Yet just as Captain Marvel was hampered by being out of the picture in the 1950s-1960s (in reality), by the time Superman gained flight in the 1970s the damage would be done...no George Reeves TV Show, no big budget Christopher Reeve movie, and Captain Marvel would be reveered as an American icon instead of Superman. It would've been too little too late for Supes.
Today it's hard to write Captain Marvel because he missed out on the Silver Age. There isn't any silver age workings to draw inspiration from, to update, or explore. They find it hard to translate the Captain Marvel origins into modern times, and he lacks the massive accumulated rogues galleries that Batman & Superman developed in the Silver Age. Seriously, some low-rent 1950s Batman villains actually moved up the ladder through various incarnations. The 1966 Adam West TV Show used villains that were forgetable and made them memorable (like changing Mr. zero into Mr. Freeze, who'd grow even more due to the 1990s Batman Animnated Series).
I have a feeling these posts could be turning into a college theisis and dissertation!
Sincerely,
Exchronos
[deleted]
1940s.
Courage, men! We've not sunk before, and we'll not sink now!