quote:
Originally posted by King Krypton:
First off, the S-shield as the House of El crest had its genesis in the 1978 movie, not in the comics.

I'm sorry, did I imply that I was talking strictly about the comic books, or, was I talking about the era in which the Silver Age existed, up to and including the year 1978? Let's see...

"What's so great about 48 years of silly, silly concepts that's worth trying to bring back? A Super-Dog? The "S" being the family crest?!"

Well, the wording is a bit vague, so, I'll give you that one.

Secondly, the idea of the S-shield as the El crest is brilliant.

According to whom?

What better way to explain where the emblem came from,

Well, you could explain the way it was explained in Man of Steel. Lois dubs him "Superman" after his first public appearance (sans costume). Thus, his mother sews an "S"-crest to stand for his public name. How's that? Pretty simple, and straightforward. Easier and a bit more logical than having to pause the DVD and go into detail about how the Kryptonians "see" the "fishy-shapes" of yellow around, what is obviously, a big, red "S" as the actual crest of El. This is pretty common sense, you know?

and what better way to show Superman's link to his heritage by having it be the centerpiece of his uniform?

His heritage? Oh, you mean the fact that he's from Kansas? Well, his mother did sew it on there for him. And she's from Kansas.

Or, do you mean the Kryptonian genetics that constitue his physical design? Does that mean that Batman must have a human DNA symbol on his outfit to show his link to his "heritage"?

Clark's genetics are Kryptonian. His heritage is American farmboy.

Besides, several alphabets have the same letters in common, but they all have different meanings in each language/culture. Just because WE see the shield as an "S" doesn't mean it's an "S" to the Kryptonians.

I think I answered this above. Either way, a perfect example of "too complicated for it's own sake".

But than again, I guess the only valid version of Superman is the 1986-1999 vision and that all others are inherently evil and worthless.... [no no no]

Jaysis christ....it's called "Paxil". Look into it.

What an absurd and overly-dramatic display of creating entire fiction around what I said.

The Silver Age of Superman was great.......IN the Silver Age! Didn't Mark Waid's godawful Silver Age mini-series prove anything? There is no way to recreate the Silver Age as you remember it. It is gone. Kaput. Done.

But, even if it weren't, and they DID bring it back...it still wouldn't be the same. It's hard to digest, I know. Trust me, I'm a Doctor Who fan. And, as any Who-fan will tell you, it's hard to realize that the series is gone. And, if brought back, it would be a completely different animal, just due to the natural passing of time.

I enjoyed the Silver Age. Curt Swan's Superman is what got me hooked to the character. But, like me, the character has to change...or die. He has grow, or become stagnant. Evolve, or perish. It is a simple rule of the universe, and one that you are seemingly intelligent enough to understand.

If Superman is to get another reboot, then, so be it. But, it has to be a progression....NOT a retread of used ideas.

So, understand?