>>117710576>Why is an evil Superman copy more popular than Superman himself? Is Superman outdated?
I mean no, as everyone here will rush to point out, even in DC and even in the main DC storyline, there's nothing new at all obviously about the idea of an evil Superman (there are multiple evil Supermans), how Superman might become evil, how he's really always been evil etc. it's been a cliche probably for nearly as long as Superman has been around.
Superman is thought of as more boring than Batman generally during the last few decades, partly because he's OP, partly because there's not either an internal conflict or a sense of humor or any of that shit in a lot of writers' stories and characterizations of him.
What you're reacting to may be the path from at least the 1980s where Superhero stuff is either a deconstruction where the heroes are jerks, or it's got a lot of ironic and satirical elements like the MCU does. A more bright and positive tone is only okay if it's partly played for laughs, not serious. And of course The Boys is both (edgy and meant to be a comedy).
I think part of it is what's been repeated often, cynicism that anyone who wound up with superpowers wouldn't become a jackass and sociopath even if they started out decently because pretty much everyone who gets power turns out to be a huge jackass. Part is realizing how questionable and silly the idea is in real life, they're vigilantes which are seen as bad in real life, real life attempts wind up being bored hobbyists and fetishists because there's not really enough interesting crime happening "on the streets" so a hero running around on patrol has nothing better to do, they wear silly bright colored leotards, if they did have real powers why wouldn't they do something more interesting then sulking around outside waiting for a mugger, etc. and just the tropes having worn out their welcome.
Just the most famous example of the things that have seemed ridiculous for at least a few decades.