Christopher Reeve's Superman did. Obviously this wasn't something Henry Cavill could emulate, as his Clark is just Superman with glasses. Reeves would change his posture and way of speaking and everything to make him seem sort of like Milton from Office Space.
So I guess one could argue the evolution of the Superman character no longer has his alter ego as a submissive beta anymore. This new adaption would be a return to that idea, perhaps. But generally that seemed to have been phased out.
well i mean i think Christopher Reeve's Supe/Clark combo is still the gold standard.
as much as like Cavill, those movies were... can you even call the superman movies? Supes to me always was the boy scout, angst and depression is batmans or wolverines territory.
Truly. That's pretty much the whole point of the Justice League is to cover the full array of hero personalities. Having everyone trying to be the dark mysterious one is stupid, even Wonder Waman pretty much has that going on. Even if it's a super hero thing it still needs to have a strong array of compelling characters. Batman is pretty much the only interesting one in the Snyder films because he's the only one that's actually in character (and watching him fight is by default more entertaining since he's not overpowered).
I like the Christopher Reeve "clumsy but not stupid" version. His first scene at the Daily Planet in the first movie was priceless and had me laughing half the time.
I also preferred his Superman fighting for "Truth, justice and the American way;" and not the woke garbage of today. That kind of thinking would get a comic book author blacklisted and probably harassed these days.
very much agreed. Clark was timid and meek and easily bossed around but he was still very much a good reporter, well spoken and good enough at this job that he was still competition against the firebrand louis lane at their work.
True on clark but he has this girl trying to pee posture, just replace his notepad with a purse, looks like they go overboard with the clumsy, naive alter ego for some unknown reason.
no i agree 100% that they wont overboard in the art, Lois is supposed to be a consumate professional for a multinational respectable paper, not the university hobby blog look or whatever the hell they are going for
It's actually a problem in comics too. Artists apparently don't know how to draw non caucasoid features (or are too lazy to actually change up their style for different characters), so they just draw a white person/the same features for everyone and color them whatever skin tone they want.
Because if you DO draw blacks accurately, you get cries of racism, and it's nothing new.
Ever wonder why (American) Dennis the Menace lived in an all-white world? Because the cartoonist tried to introduce a black friend for him once, and got cries of "racist". So he decided to never try to draw anything but whites again. Or so the story goes.
Any HINT of lips will get you lynched.
Oh, and it feeds into the fantastical "all humans are the same" worldview that is being sold. Because these baby-brains think that legal equality = biological equality somehow.
Unfortunately, the best source of the history and images of "Jackson" the memory-holed Dennis the Menace character were from a biased and editorialized Snopes article.
The author, Hank Ketcham, tried to introduce a new black character in 1970 to make social commentary, and of course, protests broke out overnight in multiple US cities over a comic strip.
The first comic strip is a little shocking looking at how "Jackson" is drawn, but seems pretty tame to have people ranting in the streets.
The second attempt OTOH, which Snopes claimed was also widely denounced, is much more tasteful and it's harder to imagine what anyone would have to complain about.
If you draw non caucasoid features, it comes across as caricatures. Because they literally look like walking stereotypes in real life, but we are in denial about it.
So we have to pretend they totally look normal and like everyone else, and they don't have these protruding jaws and mega lips a large amount of the time.
And now that it's been continued into an animated series, we won't be able to get an actual faithful depiction of Jimmy Olsen without cries of erasure and whitewashing.
I would love to be one of those people in those meetings where they get test audiences to watch something and when they ask you questions just go all "Uh you guys didn't even make Jimmy Olson look like Jimmy Olson, did you guys even look at the comics before making this?"
You will then be beaten to an inch of your life and thrown out in the street as a hateful test audience member.
That would actually be good, because the Japanese are still not cucked enough to only draw feminazis, soy boys and unthreatening femmie blacks. Their stories are also more varied, instead of just the same rehashed, libtarded crap.
I mean, All Might was pretty close. At least in broad strokes, his hero persona felt like it was directly ripped from Superman. And that's from basically one of the biggest shows in the weeb world.
MHA is actually managing to make superheroes make a huge comeback as superheroes with all their wierd and wacky shit. After the MCU made them all super serious and American comics became a joke.
Stronger than a locomotive, faster than a speeding bullet, able to leap tall buildings in a single bound... He's All Might!
...The anime X-men was also better than the modern woketrash comics, before we go too far aside. Japan's got a pretty decent track record of making Western heroes, because it isn't afraid to make them heroes.
While I hate black washing characters in general, minor characters do not upset me as much, I can overlook that.
However they do have something with gingers, why do they insist to replace all ginger characters. I thought it was somewhat funny coincidence at first but now it looks intentional.
Well its because those races have no power in Hollywood. The racial hierarchy is Hollywood is #1 Jewish (see what happened to Michael Richards and Mel Gibson), #2 black, #3 other "POCs", #4 whites. So you end up seeing black people everywhere.
Jimmy’s been around for over 80 years and had his own series that ran for 163 issues. He may be a supporting character, but he’s hardly a minor character.
Yeah I would agree. He isn't a super hero with powers.... but he IS a big character in Superman. I mean it is basically Superman, Lois Lane, Jimmy Olson ->>>> everyone else including all the villains.
Here's a rule of thumb that will help you out in the future (because a lot of people here seem too stupid to understand what they're doing using cultivation theory).
First time you can chalk it up to coincidence (I don't believe this but better the benefit of the doubt, etc.)
The second time is deliberate. There's no such thing as lightning striking twice in the same place.
Third time it happens means it's a pattern at play. Stop making excuses at this point and assume the worse. It makes it easier to understand what's going on and why.
I see a lot of idiots here still saying "W-why?! What are they doing?! Maybe it's a mistake?!" For crying out loud they've been at this for almost a decade now and people are still asking why?! Really?! This is the reason we've already lost our culture to the Rainbow Reich and these degenerate Leftist, our side isn't even smart enough to be aware that it's happening deliberately.
He was black in the Supergirl tv show on the CW, in the movies he was in the opening of Batman Vs. Superman as a white CIA agent who is killed trying to do spy stuff when Lois Lane goes to interview those terrorists. Basically just a cameo appearance.
If you showed me just the picture and no context, I'd guess it was a Netflix show, it has their art style, but I would NOT have been able to guess that it was Superman in a million guesses.
A year later, the executives will ask "why wasn't it as successful as predicted?" and never once think to question my first paragraph observation, that looking at their promo shot, not only is it not obviously Superman, it goes beyond: It clearly isn't Superman.
I don't think I've seen an instance of gingercide/blackwashing in a cartoon before, so I think this one is particularly egregious, especially since he clearly has a white dude's features.
This Lois looks like someone I would gladly give a shotgun enema to. Why do they replace women with bugs? Seriously, the art design for its flatchested body is based off a preying mantis. Lois Lane is not a neurotic cunt who gladly assaults everyone within reach to act like she's on coke and shrooms and can share her vision through fucking osmosis.
He looks strange, like he is suppose to be a white character but they just put in a different skin color?
And Lois Lane I assume will be the star of the show, somehow.
You don't have to assume. Who is being portrayed as weak and who is being portrayed as strong in that promotion image.
i mean, the art is awful, and Lois is just missing a pink hat in that picture...
but clark kent is supposed to be a clumy beta male, thats part of his alter ego right?
I would argue mild mannered and beta are two different things.
mild mannered still brings the image of someone who doesnt start fights but finishes them,
clark always gave off the complete submissive vibes
Christopher Reeve's Superman did. Obviously this wasn't something Henry Cavill could emulate, as his Clark is just Superman with glasses. Reeves would change his posture and way of speaking and everything to make him seem sort of like Milton from Office Space.
So I guess one could argue the evolution of the Superman character no longer has his alter ego as a submissive beta anymore. This new adaption would be a return to that idea, perhaps. But generally that seemed to have been phased out.
well i mean i think Christopher Reeve's Supe/Clark combo is still the gold standard.
as much as like Cavill, those movies were... can you even call the superman movies? Supes to me always was the boy scout, angst and depression is batmans or wolverines territory.
Truly. That's pretty much the whole point of the Justice League is to cover the full array of hero personalities. Having everyone trying to be the dark mysterious one is stupid, even Wonder Waman pretty much has that going on. Even if it's a super hero thing it still needs to have a strong array of compelling characters. Batman is pretty much the only interesting one in the Snyder films because he's the only one that's actually in character (and watching him fight is by default more entertaining since he's not overpowered).
The 1940s animated series portrayed Clark as mild mannered. Than again he didnt have a lot of screen time.
I like the Christopher Reeve "clumsy but not stupid" version. His first scene at the Daily Planet in the first movie was priceless and had me laughing half the time.
I also preferred his Superman fighting for "Truth, justice and the American way;" and not the woke garbage of today. That kind of thinking would get a comic book author blacklisted and probably harassed these days.
very much agreed. Clark was timid and meek and easily bossed around but he was still very much a good reporter, well spoken and good enough at this job that he was still competition against the firebrand louis lane at their work.
100% agree on your 2nd point
Haven't they already removed "The American Way" from superman? I am no expert so I could be wrong...
Clark Kent is a journalist, so beta male cuck is an accurate representation of journalists in 2021.
True on clark but he has this girl trying to pee posture, just replace his notepad with a purse, looks like they go overboard with the clumsy, naive alter ego for some unknown reason.
no i agree 100% that they wont overboard in the art, Lois is supposed to be a consumate professional for a multinational respectable paper, not the university hobby blog look or whatever the hell they are going for
It's actually a problem in comics too. Artists apparently don't know how to draw non caucasoid features (or are too lazy to actually change up their style for different characters), so they just draw a white person/the same features for everyone and color them whatever skin tone they want.
Because if you DO draw blacks accurately, you get cries of racism, and it's nothing new.
Ever wonder why (American) Dennis the Menace lived in an all-white world? Because the cartoonist tried to introduce a black friend for him once, and got cries of "racist". So he decided to never try to draw anything but whites again. Or so the story goes.
Any HINT of lips will get you lynched.
Oh, and it feeds into the fantastical "all humans are the same" worldview that is being sold. Because these baby-brains think that legal equality = biological equality somehow.
Archived Snopes link
Unfortunately, the best source of the history and images of "Jackson" the memory-holed Dennis the Menace character were from a biased and editorialized Snopes article.
The author, Hank Ketcham, tried to introduce a new black character in 1970 to make social commentary, and of course, protests broke out overnight in multiple US cities over a comic strip.
The first comic strip is a little shocking looking at how "Jackson" is drawn, but seems pretty tame to have people ranting in the streets.
The second attempt OTOH, which Snopes claimed was also widely denounced, is much more tasteful and it's harder to imagine what anyone would have to complain about.
If you draw non caucasoid features, it comes across as caricatures. Because they literally look like walking stereotypes in real life, but we are in denial about it.
So we have to pretend they totally look normal and like everyone else, and they don't have these protruding jaws and mega lips a large amount of the time.
And now that it's been continued into an animated series, we won't be able to get an actual faithful depiction of Jimmy Olsen without cries of erasure and whitewashing.
Nowadays race swaps are companies telling me that I shouldn’t watch. So I don’t.
I would love to be one of those people in those meetings where they get test audiences to watch something and when they ask you questions just go all "Uh you guys didn't even make Jimmy Olson look like Jimmy Olson, did you guys even look at the comics before making this?"
You will then be beaten to an inch of your life and thrown out in the street as a hateful test audience member.
This pseudo anime bullshit. Imagine an animated superman made by the japanese.
That would actually be good, because the Japanese are still not cucked enough to only draw feminazis, soy boys and unthreatening femmie blacks. Their stories are also more varied, instead of just the same rehashed, libtarded crap.
I mean, All Might was pretty close. At least in broad strokes, his hero persona felt like it was directly ripped from Superman. And that's from basically one of the biggest shows in the weeb world.
MHA is actually managing to make superheroes make a huge comeback as superheroes with all their wierd and wacky shit. After the MCU made them all super serious and American comics became a joke.
"Ah hah hah! Never fear! Why? Because I am here!"
Stronger than a locomotive, faster than a speeding bullet, able to leap tall buildings in a single bound... He's All Might!
...The anime X-men was also better than the modern woketrash comics, before we go too far aside. Japan's got a pretty decent track record of making Western heroes, because it isn't afraid to make them heroes.
Wasn’t Jimmy already black in recent movies?
While I hate black washing characters in general, minor characters do not upset me as much, I can overlook that. However they do have something with gingers, why do they insist to replace all ginger characters. I thought it was somewhat funny coincidence at first but now it looks intentional.
Because gingers are always white.
And they tend to be the whitest of whites.
My favorite is still overweight black prostitute Starfire.
Well its because those races have no power in Hollywood. The racial hierarchy is Hollywood is #1 Jewish (see what happened to Michael Richards and Mel Gibson), #2 black, #3 other "POCs", #4 whites. So you end up seeing black people everywhere.
Jimmy’s been around for over 80 years and had his own series that ran for 163 issues. He may be a supporting character, but he’s hardly a minor character.
Yeah I would agree. He isn't a super hero with powers.... but he IS a big character in Superman. I mean it is basically Superman, Lois Lane, Jimmy Olson ->>>> everyone else including all the villains.
Lex Luthor is right with them.
Another ginger!
It was never a coincidence.
Here's a rule of thumb that will help you out in the future (because a lot of people here seem too stupid to understand what they're doing using cultivation theory).
First time you can chalk it up to coincidence (I don't believe this but better the benefit of the doubt, etc.)
The second time is deliberate. There's no such thing as lightning striking twice in the same place.
Third time it happens means it's a pattern at play. Stop making excuses at this point and assume the worse. It makes it easier to understand what's going on and why.
I see a lot of idiots here still saying "W-why?! What are they doing?! Maybe it's a mistake?!" For crying out loud they've been at this for almost a decade now and people are still asking why?! Really?! This is the reason we've already lost our culture to the Rainbow Reich and these degenerate Leftist, our side isn't even smart enough to be aware that it's happening deliberately.
He was black in the Supergirl tv show on the CW, in the movies he was in the opening of Batman Vs. Superman as a white CIA agent who is killed trying to do spy stuff when Lois Lane goes to interview those terrorists. Basically just a cameo appearance.
If you showed me just the picture and no context, I'd guess it was a Netflix show, it has their art style, but I would NOT have been able to guess that it was Superman in a million guesses.
A year later, the executives will ask "why wasn't it as successful as predicted?" and never once think to question my first paragraph observation, that looking at their promo shot, not only is it not obviously Superman, it goes beyond: It clearly isn't Superman.
Oh look, a feminized black male purse-puppy.
I don't think I've seen an instance of gingercide/blackwashing in a cartoon before, so I think this one is particularly egregious, especially since he clearly has a white dude's features.
A plenty. Even the super-Irish April O'Neil now.
Gross enough that they made Jimmy Olsen a negro in Supergirl, they made him a sex object while Jimmy is supposed to be dorky comic relief.
Why's he purple?
That's not Jimmy. It's a young Rudy Jones.
Anagram character. I like it.
Why does Lois look like a teenage boy?
This Lois looks like someone I would gladly give a shotgun enema to. Why do they replace women with bugs? Seriously, the art design for its flatchested body is based off a preying mantis. Lois Lane is not a neurotic cunt who gladly assaults everyone within reach to act like she's on coke and shrooms and can share her vision through fucking osmosis.
adapt it faithfully or don't adapt it at all. established characters are not yours to change.