All Star Superman #2: Let's get it on.

[Kid Omega]

Was it better than the first? Quite possibly.

We get even more glimpses of Superman as noble, creative, good-hearted, and just plain awesome.

Plenty of super-science magic, with robots and laser guns and messages from the future.

The scene with the golden key is just about as classic as it gets, visa vis Silver Age goodness. The Unknown Superman is a fantastic concept... heck, this whole book is brimming with fantastic concepts.

Lois is sexy, smart, and exactly the kind of girl you can understand Superman falling for. Finally.

The page layouts and design were astonishing- Quitely is a master of subtle storytelling. The designs of the fortess itself were stunning, those robots were killer, and the scene of Superman recovering from (no spoilers) is a great panel. Goodness all around. Stunning.

There's more to say, here at the Dawn of the Age of Superheroes, but I'm still digesting it all. I need another few readings.

I still love it more than just about tights book going. I feel like a kid again.

-a

[KRAKABOOM!]

this comic is like vitamins. read once a day for a nutritional supplement.

it's superman, pure and undiluted. what's the street value on uncut "big blue" these days?

i thought it was even better than the first issue. i read it. finished. immediately started to flip through it again. put it down. then wanted to read it yet again right away.

grant's ideas are great of course. i might come back and do a quick run down list of the highlights as i see them after more here have chimed in.

i think frank's art is even better this issue. he hit a groove and it all seems more comfortable.

i couldn't ask for more from this book.

[Radical_dreamer]

seriously ISNT it?! we know morrsion said he had plenty of ideas beyond the 12 issues and if Quitely could be monthly (or another artist though i honestly cant see who) this might just turn out to be the greatest superman run in existence...especially with morrison having his own 'perfect' little continuity and universe.

[KRAKABOOM!]

seriously ISNT it?! we know morrsion said he had plenty of ideas beyond the 12 issues and if Quitely could be monthly (or another artist though i honestly cant see who) this might just turn out to be the greatest superman run in existence...especially with morrison having his own 'perfect' little continuity and universe.

IF grant were to continue after issue 12 without FQ, then i say get art adams started on issues 13+ right NOW!

[DarkCrisis]

How does Sueprman store that key?

[ultramandingo]

"who gzzwt..who vzzt..was j.lo?....." so crappy pop stars did what darkside could'nt in 4500 a.d.? we should stop them now!

[SuperSince92]

Simply put...

...this is what Superman comics should be.

[Kid Omega]

How does Sueprman store that key?

Leaves it on top of AWESOME MOUNTIAN in the land of AWSOMVANIA, and picks it up on a supersonic ASSKICKIN' flyby. AWESOME!!!!

He shouts "WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!" as he goes by.

[Wannabe]

While I enjoyed this issue, I wouldn't say it was better than issue one. Then again, I like the first issue of any book more than the second.

[Kid Omega]

While I enjoyed this issue, I wouldn't say it was better than issue one. Then again, I like the first issue of any book more than the second.

I like the seventh more than the fourth. Always.

Call me crazy!

[f. chong rutherford]

Man, can't wait to get issue #2!!!!!

[Radical_dreamer]

Leaves it on top of AWESOME MOUNTIAN in the land of AWSOMVANIA, and picks it up on a supersonic ASSKICKIN' flyby. AWESOME!!!!

He shouts "WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!" as he goes by.

ok. not funny but whatever.

[Kid Omega]

ok. not funny but whatever.

On the contrary, it was....

HILARIOUS.

Ask anyone.

[Wannabe]

Leaves it on top of AWESOME MOUNTIAN in the land of AWSOMVANIA, and picks it up on a supersonic ASSKICKIN' flyby. AWESOME!!!!

He shouts "WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!" as he goes by.



When did Tom Cruise get an account? hahaha ZING!

[Ed Cunard]

There's more to say, here at the Dawn of the Age of Superheroes, but I'm still digesting it all. I need another few readings.


I liked the parallel structure of Lois/Superman expressing their doubts to themselves, and how Superman orates his to himself in front of the mirror, but Lois writes hers.

[Kid Omega]

I liked the parallel structure of Lois/Superman expressing their doubts to themselves, and how Superman orates his to himself in front of the mirror, but Lois writes hers.

Superman says his in front of a Mirror of Truth, slouching like Clark and with Glasses on.... while the Mirror still shows Superman Proper.

I loved that touch, dearly, dearly.

-a

[Ed Cunard]

Superman says his in front of a Mirror of Truth, slouching like Clark and with Glasses on.... while the Mirror still shows Superman Proper.

I loved that touch, dearly, dearly.

-a

I missed that first time through, and that was my favorite part. Damn my eyes.

[stealthwise]

Good issue. I'm sure that I missed a ton, given that I've only read it once, but so far it makes me read the issue closer. It makes me watch for little hidden jokes in the art, and it makes me study the character's nuances and think hard about everything that's involved in the story.

Issues one and two only seem simple and uninspired to those who can't read closely.

I'm in Master's school after getting a BA in English, and this book still makes me a better reader. That's how damn good it is.

[Kilgore Trout]

How does Sueprman store that key?

He leaves it on the ground in front of the door...

Its so heavy no one else on Earth can lift it...

This is why I read Superman comics.

[Hellcow]

He leaves it on the ground in front of the door...

Its so heavy no one else on Earth can lift it...



What is the ground made of? Why doesn't it sink into the ground?


I enjoyed it, sort of, but I obviously don't share the same passion as almost everyone else on this board.

Is it just my imagination, or does superman look a lot different from Issue 1 to Issue 2. For that matter, superman sometimes looks different page to page and even panel to panel in issue 2. If this was animation, we would say the drawing is "off model". Or is this just my imagination?

[Jake V]

What is the ground made of? Why doesn't it sink into the ground?
Super-Rock, obviously. Duh.

[Kid Omega]

What is the ground made of? Why doesn't it sink into the ground?


I enjoyed it, sort of, but I obviously don't share the same passion as almost everyone else on this board.

Is it just my imagination, or does superman look a lot different from Issue 1 to Issue 2. For that matter, superman sometimes looks different page to page and even panel to panel in issue 2. If this was animation, we would say the drawing is "off model". Or is this just my imagination?

He looks like Superman to me.

If anything, he may be "leaner" issue, but it didn't bother me.

-a

[Ryan Day]

My only disappointment is that I wish I hadn't seen the cover to #3 - kind of took some of the surprise away from the ending.

But yet again, this is Superman. Perfectly. The most powerful guy in the world, but also the nicest and most considerate. "I picked these for you on Alpha Centauri 4" was the best of many perfect moments.

Another nice surprise: What I think is Quitely's slight modernization of the time travel machine (http://www.superdickery.com/science/4.html) in the fortress.

[joontlife]

yo that issue 2 is whats up. got it last night, couldn't put it down.

me and my friend were both reading it actually, did anyone else think that the "unknown superman" of 4500ad that she 'see's' was just a hallucination caused by the chemical superman says was leaking... we both were thinking it was just cus superman's robots do not acknowledge that its there.

either way, its hot, cant wait for number 3!

[The Shadow]

Issues one and two only seem simple and uninspired to those who can't read closely.
... what a crock of s***.

I re-read it twice. It's no better or worse than many other Superman comics out there. Gail Simone's run was just as good.

What made or makes this so "special" that those of us uninspired who can't read closely miss? It's Superman... not War and Peace.

And this comic really felt like the second Superman movie. It didn't seem all that original. The whole time I got a feeling of "I've seen this before". And talk about decompression... if Bendis had written this everyone would say it was padded and so on.

And the whole Superman dying thing was done before as well. AS Superman is nothing new.

Don't get me wrong, it was a fun (if fast) read... but it's not the greatest thing since sliced bread... that would be peanut butter.

I also think Byrne is a better penciller than Quitley because he doesn't rely on wasted space. What people call "cool layouts" I call an excuse to get the book done faster with fewer panels.

[Kid Omega]

... what a crock of s***.

I re-read it twice. It's no better or worse than many other Superman comics out there. Gail Simone's run was just as good.

What made or makes this so "special" that those of us uninspired who can't read closely miss? It's Superman... not War and Peace.

And this comic really felt like the second Superman movie. It didn't seem all that original. The whole time I got a feeling of "I've seen this before". And talk about decompression... if Bendis had written this everyone would say it was padded and so on.

And the whole Superman dying thing was done before as well. AS Superman is nothing new.

Don't get me wrong, it was a fun (if fast) read... but it's not the greatest thing since sliced bread... that would be peanut butter.

I also think Byrne is a better penciller than Quitley because he doesn't rely on wasted space. What people call "cool layouts" I call an excuse to get the book done faster with fewer panels.


HAHAHAHAHAHAAHA

You're alright Shadow.

You crack me up.

-a

[The Batman]

i really loved this book.

[Ryan Day]

I also think Byrne is a better penciller than Quitley because he doesn't rely on wasted space. What people call "cool layouts" I call an excuse to get the book done faster with fewer panels.

Never before have I heard anyone accuse Frank Quitely of trying to get a book done faster.

[The Shadow]

Never before have I heard anyone accuse Frank Quitely of trying to get a book done faster.
LOL

If he drew the book like Byrne and didn't waste his space the book would be quarterly instead of bi-monthly.



@ Wayner and Kid Omega... glad I could brighten your day! :p :D :D

[Lurker]

Superman did look a little thin in some panels which might lead me to believe that maybe Quitely was overcompensating in an answer to the complaints that big blue was too big in issue 1. Regardless, I still dug the art; the Lois in the shower panel was uber-sexy. Also, the nuances in the art really make this comic; there are very few books I reread or even feel the temptation to and the multiple viewing value of this book alone make it one of the best on the stands.

[Lurker]

If he drew the book like Byrne and didn't waste his space the book would be quarterly instead of bi-monthly.

Its not how much crap you jam into a page that defines good comic art, its how you use the space to tell an effective story.

[protonik]

Is it just my imagination, or does superman look a lot different from Issue 1 to Issue 2. For that matter, superman sometimes looks different page to page and even panel to panel in issue 2. If this was animation, we would say the drawing is "off model". Or is this just my imagination?

I'd say this issue looked more like the classic Quitley than the last one did, it was a lot nicer and seemed more nuanced...

Jason

[Jake V]

LOL

If he drew the book like Byrne and didn't waste his space the book would be quarterly instead of bi-monthly.



@ Wayner and Kid Omega... glad I could brighten your day! :p :D :D
why would anyone want to do ANYTHING like Byrne?

[The Shadow]

why would anyone want to do ANYTHING like Byrne?
Byrne, the comic creator, is a legend.

Like him or hate him his contribution to comics is undeniable.

Be honest here Jake... he may be a jerk (based on what I've heard... I've not met him) but his X-Men, Fantastic Four, Avengers, Next Men (and so on) work speaks for itself.

[pauwoo]

If Quitley wants to learn how to draw superman, he could always ask Jim Lee, in my opinion that is how superman should look. Almost a mix of Curt Swan and Wayne Boring.

[Jake V]

Byrne, the comic creator, is a legend.

Like him or hate him his contribution to comics is undeniable.

Be honest here Jake... he may be a jerk (based on what I've heard... I've not met him) but his X-Men, Fantastic Four, Avengers, Next Men (and so on) work speaks for itself.
But does it stand the test of time? Byrne is a mediocre penciler at best and an even worse writer these days. His style is largely the same as the one he started out with, and his scripts have actually gotten worse over the years. There's no point in trying to be like him if he's currently a washed up less-than-shadow of his former self.

[The Shadow]

But does it stand the test of time?
Every title I mentioned does. His FF run is considered second ONLY to Stan Lee and Jack Kirby. His X-Men run with Claremont produced someof the single greatest X-Men stories that are STILL, 25 years later, influencing stories and creators. His Avengers stuff was what kept the book afloat during the 90's... and his West Coast Avengers stuff (like it or not) is STILL having an effect on the Marvel Universe!

Sure there are dogs in there... every creator has them... especially one that's been around as long... but he's an imitated artist who has had very lasting effects on comics.

[QUOTE=Jake V]Byrne is a mediocre penciler at best
That's debatable. And your opinion.

and an even worse writer these days.
Same as above, and see my Blood of the Demon comment below.

His style is largely the same as the one he started out with
As are MOST artists' styles. Jim Lee hasn't evolved much... neither has Art Adams, Mike Grell, Marshall Rogers, Neal Adams, Todd McFarlane, Marc Silvestri and so on and so on. VERY few artists evolve and change. Hell, Jack Kirby's early Marvel work looks almost the same as his late DC work.

Also, why would ANY artist change what got them the job in the first place? Why risk alienating your fans? Byrne gets picked on more than most because of some of the stupid things he says... but it's really unfair to paint him as the only older artist who's drawing style is basically the same as when he first began.

his scripts have actually gotten worse over the years.
You must not be reading Blood of the Demon.

[Lurker]

Leave it up to some filthly Canadian ;) to turn another Superman thread into a John Bryne flame fest.

[The Shadow]

Leave it up to some filthly Canadian ;) to turn another Superman thread into a John Bryne flame fest.
Flame fest?
I'd the defender! Jake's the basher! I was making valid comparrisons between creators works.

And FILTHY Canadian?

I'll have you know MOST igloo's are equipped with a shower! We even have hot water up here in Canada! ;) We need it for after we're done trouncing everybody at hockey! :p

[Ryan Day]

Isn't Will Pfeiffer scripting Demon? I thought Byrne was only doing the plots.

Byrne was quite good before he entered his "Everything Was Better In 1968" phase. He's gone excessively retro, which is unfortunate considering how innovative he used to be. His X-Men work was great, and I'm a huge fan of Next Men.

But really, why bother comparing him to Quitely? They broke into the industry at different times, had different training and influences, and have different goals.

Maybe Quitely could draw like John Byrne... but why would he want to? He's a very different, much more detailed and more experimental artist. Byrne's fine, but I can't imagine him capturing All-Star the same way.

[The Shadow]

But really, why bother comparing him to Quitely?
I wasn't compring him to Byrne per se... but another Superman artist. I could have picked Kark Kerschl or Ed Benes.

Neither of those two artists wastes space with "grandiose" looking panels to fill the book so it ships on time... I just piked Byrne because his Action Comics has been fantastic.

You're right of course, comparing the two guys is like comparing apples and oranges... but if that's the case why make ANY comparrisons? Jack Kirby is the King. Let's not talk about artists anymore. That was an extreme example, but the point of these boards to to talk, discuss and debate!

[Lurker]

I wasn't compring him to Byrne per se... but another Superman artist. I could have picked Kark Kerschl or Ed Benes.

See, you cast the 1st stone simply by bringing up his name!

Neither of those two artists wastes space with "grandiose" looking panels to fill the book so it ships on time... I just piked Byrne because his Action Comics has been fantastic.

Incorrect sir! Byrne's Action Comics run was not fantastic--but his inker's was.

Zing!

You're right of course, comparing the two guys is like comparing apples and oranges... but if that's the case why make ANY comparrisons? Jack Kirby is the King. Let's not talk about artists anymore. That was an extreme example, but the point of these boards to to talk, discuss and debate!

Yep, but riddle me this you Canuck runamok, how many posts in this thread actually discuss the All-Star Superman #2?

signed yours truley,
A Lurker lookin for a besmirchin'

[The Shadow]

See, you cast the 1st stone simply by bringing up his name!

Yeah... that probably was a mistake... and that's too bad.

Let's try another... LIEFELD! :p

Incorrect sir! Byrne's Action Comics run was not fantastic--but his inker's was.
Ah, but the inker had to have SOMETHING to ink.

you Canuck runamok
That's clever!

how many posts in this thread actually discuss the All-Star Superman #2?
I dunno... but I'm not counting!

[Joe Rice]

Back on track, this was an excellent issue that needs some re-reading. Still a little sick from my stomach virus, and this headache makes everything less fun. But what gets me about this book is the almost impossible coexistence of nuance and wonder. There are big, big, big wonderful things, and subtle, subtle, subtle beautiful things as well.

[The Shadow]

Back on track, this was an excellent issue that needs some re-reading. Still a little sick from my stomach virus, and this headache makes everything less fun. But what gets me about this book is the almost impossible coexistence of nuance and wonder. There are big, big, big wonderful things, and subtle, subtle, subtle beautiful things as well.
What was a "big, big, big wonderful thing and subtle, subtle, subtle beautiful thing" in this book?

[Ryan Day]

Big and Wonderful: The opening shot of the Fortress of Solitude.
Subtle and beautiful: Superman talking to the Mirror of Truth.

[The Shadow]

Big and Wonderful: The opening shot of the Fortress of Solitude.
So a wide shot of the fortress is big and wonderful?
Is that applicable to every other Superman comic and artist that's drawn that same picture over the past 70 years? Byrne's, Swan's, Colan's and so on??

Subtle and beautiful: Superman talking to the Mirror of Truth.
That I gotta agree with... very cool!

[Andy S.]

What was a "big, big, big wonderful thing and subtle, subtle, subtle beautiful thing" in this book?


Where to begin?

First off, it's called "Superman's Forbidden Room". Just think of how many jokes you can get out of that alone. :D

Seriously though, this book was soaked with neat, original touches that paid homage to classic elements of the Superman mythos.

From the get-go we get a tiny gold key (a replacement for the giant one) made up of "super-dense dwarf star material"- so heavy only Supes can lift it. Not to mention some cool robots that look more sleek than anything in the regular monthlies.

We see a Fortress of Solitude chocked with goodies from his many adverntures- (probably more homages to issues I've never read). It's like Willy Wonka's chocolate factory.

Time Telescope? That was awesome! Supermen from future centuries? This one, like issue #1 has great throwaway ideas that are just backdrop here, but are inventive enough to be stories themselves.

And the Superwoman outfit at the end? Can't wait to see how that looks. Quitley's work is interesting, stylish, even disturbing.

[Lurker]

Don't feed the troll. It wants attention.

Shadow's just upset that other great Superman comics do not get the attention that this one does. I find he takes it a little too far, but then again I think a whole thread should be devoted to discuss the awesomeness of the Lois in the shower panel.

[Lurker]

*deleted*

Damn pesky Canadians; that's why I don't have a blog.

So about that Lois in the shower panel . . .

[The Shadow]

I think a whole thread should be devoted to discuss the awesomeness of the Lois in the shower panel.
I would agree with you on that!

[Joe Rice]

I can say, this is the first time in any media I've seen why Clark would like Lois. She's never been this appealing before.

[Joe Rice]

So what did you guys think was going on in the forbidden room? Even having seen the next cover, I didn't realize until the end what it was about. I thought it was some weird genetic testing thing . . .couldn't figure it out.

[Will.S]

Fantastic reading right here.

It really does make me wish the monthlies were as good as what each issue packed in detail and care but hopefully Busiek and Johns will be up to the task. Frank Quitely's art is just amazing, probably the best I've seen it thus far (barring we3). Most notable for his use of subtle gestures was the part where Superman looked into the mirror trying to slouch but the mirror reflected his true self nontheless, loved that.

I also enjoyed the part where he shrugged off the kryptonite ray, if even that doesn't affect him he must have become really powerful. Similar to his Kingdom Come version probably. It all just makes me look all the more forward to seeing him tell Lois that he's dying since Superman is just so unselfish and caring (a stark contrast to Superboy Prime in IC #4). Lois is another huge improvement with the way Morrison makes her as a bit paranoid (even if induced by the machine to a degree), sexy and weird.

This book reminds me so much of Superman the movies as well as the Paul Dini cartoons. It's pretty much a perfect fusion of the two packed together with Morrison's use of weird-yet-cool concepts. I know people around here think it's overhyped and all but I don't care, it's just pure undiluted Superman fun and straight to the core without really having to worry about a whole bunch of nutty continuity which is always a plus.

Definitely among my best reads of the week: 10/10

[Lurker]

I can say, this is the first time in any media I've seen why Clark would like Lois. She's never been this appealing before.

Assuming she's not being played by Terri Hatcher or that delectable piece of hotness on Smallville of course ;)

Actually, shower-scene aside, this All-star Lois is still a bit of an enigma to me. I didn't totally buy her paranoia or that she spent a crap load of time trying to prove Clark was Supes and then has trouble excepting that they are in fact one in the same. Then again Jimmy Olsen does comes to work on a rocket-pack so I can somewhat identify with her skepticalness.

[Joe Rice]

Assuming she's not being played by Terri Hatcher or that delectable piece of hotness on Smallville of course ;)

Actually, shower-scene aside, this All-star Lois is still a bit of an enigma to me. I didn't totally buy her paranoia or that she spent a crap load of time trying to prove Clark was Supes and then has trouble excepting that they are in fact one in the same. Then again Jimmy Olsen does comes to work on a rocket-pack so I can somewhat identify with her skepticalness.

Well, it was stated that the alien vapors were making her paranoid.

[Lurker]

So what did you guys think was going on in the forbidden room? Even having seen the next cover, I didn't realize until the end what it was about. I thought it was some weird genetic testing thing . . .couldn't figure it out.

That maybe he was tryin' to figure out he could bump uglies with Lois after the Sun incident?

I actually figured it out from the #3 cover and the female schematics along with the news that Lois' birthday was coming up, but it still made for a cool scene at the end. Girl thinks her boyfriend's the Son of Sam and all he's really doing is trying not to ruin her surprise birthday present.

[Will.S]

Actually, shower-scene aside, this All-star Lois is still a bit of an enigma to me. I didn't totally buy her paranoia or that she spent a crap load of time trying to prove Clark was Supes and then has trouble excepting that they are in fact one in the same. Then again Jimmy Olsen does comes to work on a rocket-pack so I can somewhat identify with her skepticalness.
I definitely get what you're saying.

I think it's just Grant trying to make Lois not seeing through the disguise as less stupid on her part and more of a great trick on Superman/Clark's end which went hand in hand with the slouching and the ruffled hair and stuff. I really admire that from Morrison.

[Lurker]

Well, it was stated that the alien vapors were making her paranoid.

Yeah, but she was still skeptical at the beginning before she discovered the Forbidden Room.

[Joe Rice]

Yeah, but she was still skeptical at the beginning before she discovered the Forbidden Room.

Right. I think that was more, "There's no way he could have tricked me this well."

[Lurker]

I think it's just Grant trying to make Lois not seeing through the disguise as less stupid on her part and more of a great trick on Superman/Clark's end which went hand in hand with the slouching and the ruffled hair and stuff. I really admire that from Morrison.

Yea, a lot of people really hated the idea of a "fat Clark," but it is very believable. Just ask anybody over 220 what happens to all that muscle if you start skippin' the gym and about baggy clothes have that annoying side-effect of making very-inshape people appear chubby.

[Lurker]

Right. I think that was more, "There's no way he could have tricked me this well."

Yeah, I just think if I were in that situation I would have more of "Damn, I knew I was right!" attitude, but then again I am not a Pulitzer Prize Winning Journalist or a confused woman with the hots for Superman.

[Joe Rice]

Yeah, I just think if I were in that situation I would have more of "Damn, I knew I was right!" attitude, but then again I am not a Pulitzer Prize Winning Journalist or a confused woman with the hots for Superman.

Don't deny it.

[Tom]

juicyjuicygoodgoodgood.

God, I loved this issue. Totally engaging and even charming. The best versions of these two characters I've seen in years.

[Doom Hammer]

All the reasons that this book is an amazing piece of science fiction and is shaping up to be one of the most fitting examples of superhero comics at their best have already been stated. I'll just add this:

If the universe cares about any of us comic fans, Grant Morrison will write All-Star Superman until the day he dies...at which point, his clone will take over. Because it'll be the future, and Grant Morrison makes me believe in the future. :D

[Lurker]

If the universe cares about any of us comic fans, Grant Morrison will write All-Star Superman until the day he dies...at which point, his clone will take over. Because it'll be the future, and Grant Morrison makes me believe in the future. :D

I, for one, was very happy that #2 dropped almost two months to the day that #1 did. Hopefully this reliability will keep up and we'll get at least two years worth over 12 issues.

[Kilgore Trout]

Yea, a lot of people really hated the idea of a "fat Clark," but it is very believable. Just ask anybody over 220 what happens to all that muscle if you start skippin' the gym and about baggy clothes have that annoying side-effect of making very-inshape people appear chubby.

Great Point!

It sure beats the hell out of "the hiding behind a pair of glasses" shtick...

The whole idea of Superman telling Lois his "secret" and Lois NOT believing him is just another wonderful bit of Morrison madness... It’s EXACTLy as Superman should be... And why AND HOW that disguise has worked for all these years

I DO get a certain Supreme/Majestic buzz off this Superman... Quietly's Superman seems so relaxed and slightly distracted, very MUCH as Supreme and Majestic both come off... Not sure how he does it with his pictures but to me, it’s the perfect Superman...

*Side note*

I recall the Morrison proposal of 2000 where Superman had the Titanic hanging in the FOS... Was that THE Titanic I saw briefly in a small panel?

It had 4 smoke stacks...

Did I mention, I love this book?

[StoneGold]

I don't know, it wasn't bad, but it felt like... every other issue of Alan Moore's Supreme, basically.

[Bat-Mite]

but it felt like... every other issue of Alan Moore's Supreme, basically.

And that is not good.... how?

[JulianPerez]

I almost hate to say I like it - in fact, I love this comic.

Maybe because of how boring and inane I think Morrison can be. Remember that JLA story where it reveals angels - angels from GOD - are real, and it feels just another alien invasion story? Just imagine what Alan Moore or Gaiman would do with an idea like that! Angels turn out to be REAL, but all they do is catch a blimp and Superman punches out a big monster? Yawn.

I just know the Morrison bobbleheads are going to jump on me here and tear me to pieces, but Kurt Busiek, in eight issues, totally outshone Morrison in every single way. Here's a fun trick: make a list of everything you learn about the CSA world in Morrison's "Earth-2," and compare that to the FIRST TWO ISSUES ALONE of Busiek's run. The list will be much longer. Even on something Morrison created.

But this comic I absolutely adore. The trippy concepts keep on coming, whether it is a trip to the sun, giants in zero-gee - incredible, incredible stuff. This is the one time Morrison apes the Silver Age, and it doesn't come off as patronizing or hipster self-referencial, because he does what the Silver Age did: create trippy, fascinating concepts every page.

Grant Morrison, more than any other writer working today except maybe Waid, understands who Superman IS. When it was revealed Superman was dying, what does he do? Cry? No! He made a confident statement to the effect of "there's always a way. And if not, I'll make sure the Earth is protected." Never lost heart, not even for a second. This is the indefatigable, confident Superman we know and love!

And the cover! Tres Magnifique! The best thing about the old Silver Age covers is: 1) they were done by Swan or Neil Adams, and 2) they created and aroused curiosity in a way the "fly to camera" covers of today do not. What IS the secret of Superman's forbidden room? I got antsy in my pantsy waiting to find out!

Thanks very much to Morrison, and Frank Quitely, that incredible, detailed artist, for giving a Superman comic I love to read.

By the way, self-congratulatory hipsters:

There is NOTHING there in Morrison's work that you don't see a second time. It isn't a fun comic pretending to be deep. It's a fun comic, period. Nobody thinks you're "smart" by posting that.

Jesus, if there's anything I hate more than Morrison, it's Morrison fans.

So, you can see the dillemma I'm in, getting a kick out of this book. :D

[SpartanX]

Man...I'm speechless....What a good comic book. For once I like Quitely's art (which I don't like normally).

[Johhny Blame]

The alien vapor gas that made Lois paranoid was from that room right? Then Superman mentioned it in the end as an explanation, those were the only appearences of the gas?

[Kid Omega]

By the way, self-congratulatory hipsters:

snip

Jesus, if there's anything I hate more than Morrison, it's Morrison fans.
:D

"How To Make Fans and Influence People"

[Kid Seven]

Jesus this is a great comic. The sense of wonderment and 'anything is possible' that permeates it is astounding. Loved the appearance of the DC 1,000,000 Superman and of the Unknown Superman.

Great stuff.

Art was too bad neither. ;)

[Babylon23]

What impresses me is the sense of awe and wonder that Morrison and Quitely bring to the book. Everything from the Unknown Superman to the miniature suns to the robot Supermen. For me, this is everything that a Superman book should be.

I;m also impressed by Superman being both awe-inspiring and very human.

[Bat-Mite]

"How To Make Fans and Influence People"

CHAPTER ONE: Masturbating for success and why John Lennon is an UFO God.

[StoneGold]

And that is not good.... how?
I can change the names in Tale of Two Cities, doesn't make me a great writer.

[Super Monkey]

As far as I am concern, besides classic reprint tpbs, this is the ONLY Superman comic being published, we have waited for 20 years to read a new Superman comic in which Superman actually acts like Superman, and at long last we have it with All-Star Superman, thank you.

[Babylon23]

I can change the names in Tale of Two Cities, doesn't make me a great writer.

True, but Alan Moore was trying to capture the stroytelling techniques and creative energy of the Silver Age Superman writers, much like Morrison is doing. They're both drawing inspiration from the same source material.

[JulianPerez]

As far as I am concern, besides classic reprint tpbs, this is the ONLY Superman comic being published, we have waited for 20 years to read a new Superman comic in which Superman actually acts like Superman, and at long last we have it with All-Star Superman, thank you.

My sentiments exactly.

Do I ever love to rile the Morrison fanboys (mostly because they're the same identical self parody listening to Radiohead while hanging out at Taco Bell at one in the morning), but as much as I don't want to, he understands just who Superman is. Superman was confident and fearless in his issues, underplayed instead of posing, because he's just that cool, as opposed to the directionless and self-doubting nancy that existed 1986-2003. Ditto for the near panoply of neat ideas; the zero-g giant was amazing, and it shows that Morrison, like most of the great Silver Age writers, has been boning up on his real world science.

[Bat-Mite]

I can change the names in Tale of Two Cities, doesn't make me a great writer.


And you can also compare midgets with airplanes like you are doing here.

One thing is plagiarism, which is what you get for putting your name on Tale of Two Cities, or The Sins of Lulu, or whatever book. Both books try to present a Superman story with a silver age feel, but the plots, technique and idiosyncrasies of the writers are very different.

[Lurker]

There is NOTHING there in Morrison's work that you don't see a second time. It isn't a fun comic pretending to be deep. It's a fun comic, period. Nobody thinks you're "smart" by posting that.

What you're trying to say here? I'm not sure but going by what I think you meant to say:

Like I posted before, one of the reasons I enjoy this book so much is the re-readability that comes from Quitely's nuanced art which may or may not be a direct contribution from Morrison or just all from Quitely's quirky pencils. If Jimmy wearing a rocket backpack really wasn't there the second time I went through #1, I really need to see a doctor.

[Lurker]

Do I ever love to rile the Morrison fanboys (mostly because they're the same identical self parody listening to Radiohead while hanging out at Taco Bell at one in the morning),

I thought it was Cold Play and Jack In the Box at 3AM now. ;)

[Mister Intensity]

Much better than issue one. I do think Quitely's art is more suited for more low key scenes (or as low key as you can get in the Fortress of Solitude) than super action. The real test of this series will come when the action amps back up and he could keep up with it. I'm not sure if Quitely is the right artist for this book but he's right for issues like this one.

Mister Intensity

[Joe Rice]

So, uh, because Julian doesn't see anything deeper then there isn't anything deeper? That's good to know.

If I wanted condescenscion from a regressive acting like a jerk, I'd go to the Byrne forums. Or, hopefully, slap myself.

[Joe Rice]

Seriously, do the people who enjoy the writing of any other writer have to put up with this crap? Does anyone get away with saying, "Oh, how I can't stand pun-tolerating PAD nerds" or "What on Earth is wrong with those uneducated, uncultured Chuck Dixon fans"? But if you enjoy Grant Morrison's work, it's goddam open season for insulting comments.

[Kid Omega]

Do I ever love to rile the Morrison fanboys (mostly because they're the same identical self parody listening to Radiohead while hanging out at Taco Bell at one in the morning)

Praytell, who are these mythical Morrison Hipsters you speak of?

At my shop, the Morrison fans are across the board in wide variety, and seeing that ALL STAR SUPERMAN is our bestselling book (outselling INFINITE CRISIS 3 to 1), I am loathe to believe everyone buying it and loving it is some Radiohead-listening self parody.

On the other hand, there are fans of some writers that I could categorize in one fell swoop. I mean, I could go on at length about the (name withheld) nerdy nerds, but that would be rude.

In short, why can't people discuss loving a Grant Morrison book without being called "hipster" and "sycophants" and elitists and whatever other insults get thrown out, EVERY SINGLE TIME Grant Morrison writes a book?

What's up with that?

I haven't enjoyed a Peter David comic in a long time, but I really like X-FACTOR. Notice how I don't have to throw in a disclaimer about how I'm-Certainly-Not-A-Peter-David-Fan-Because-They-Suck!

I'm getting so tired of this conversation. No other fans on these boards are so routinely generalized and insulted for their tastes. It's getting very old.

[Mister Intensity]

A lot of writers have their partisans. While the Anti-Writer X voices are often louder, there's also a loud vocal minority that cheers what Writer Y does.

Mister Intensity

[f. chong rutherford]

So, you can see the dillemma I'm in, getting a kick out of this book. :D

Yeah, if it weren't for this comic, there'd be no way for you to face that moral dilema of, 'Do I want to go on the Internet and post jerky rude things today or not?'

[Joe Rice]

A lot of writers have their partisans. While the Anti-Writer X voices are often louder, there's also a loud vocal minority that cheers what Writer Y does.

Mister Intensity

That doesn't excuse the fact that some people think it's OK to routinely insult people who enjoy a certain writer's work, especially since this would not be tolerated if directed at people who enjoy _________'s work. But people who, for whatever reason, don't enjoy Morrison's work are able to insult with impugnity. Tired of it.

[Expletive Deleted]

Seriously, do the people who enjoy the writing of any other writer have to put up with this crap?I blame the X-Men.

Seriously, was this even a problem before all the stupid flamewars over NEWXMEN? Morrison and his fans turned into flashpoints for angry comics traditionalists, and even now some folks just can't let go.

[Joe Rice]

I blame the X-Men.

Seriously, was this even a problem before all the stupid flamewars over NEWXMEN? Morrison and his fans turned into flashpoints for angry comics traditionalists, and even now some folks just can't let go.

Interesting point. But a lot of the anti-Morrison folks don't even read any Marvel books. Was it JLA? What is it?

I mean, a lot of writers have anti-fans. But those anti-fans don't usually take it out on the people who DO enjoy the work. I know Chuck Austen gets a lot of flack, but I've NEVER read anything about "those stupid Austen fans."

[protonik]

Try being a Liefeld fan...

Jason

[Paul McEnery]

*Side note*

I recall the Morrison proposal of 2000 where Superman had the Titanic hanging in the FOS... Was that THE Titanic I saw briefly in a small panel?

It had 4 smoke stacks...

Did I mention, I love this book?
See, there's another second look moment. I totally didn't see the big ship in the background of the spread until the second read. Elephant in the room, and all that...

[Lurker]

Try being a Liefeld fan...

Jason

ZING!

I don't like Liefeld or Youngblood so I'm definitely not going to waste my time telling his fans they suck when all they want to do is post with like-minds about the latest issue. For some people it seems to work the exact opposite, they don't like Grant Morrison so they're going to devote all their time telling his fans that they suck.

I think people just love being negative OR they are jealous that a particular book has more of an audience than their own favorite and feel the need to lash out.

[SuperManny]

*Side note*

I recall the Morrison proposal of 2000 where Superman had the Titanic hanging in the FOS... Was that THE Titanic I saw briefly in a small panel?

It had 4 smoke stacks...

Did I mention, I love this book?

Superman did mention during the dinner scene that the food they were having mimicked what they actually served on the Titanic....that to me was the give-away. Have to admit though, it's pretty interesting to see it was mentioned as part of his proposal, and now he was able to execute it!

Did anyone else notice how Morrison put a different twist on the Fortress of Solitude? Superman claims that the pieces in his Fortress are not for a 'museum' or his trophy room. Rather, all the items collected serve as a time capsule for future heroes to discover and note how great the "dawn of the age of superheroes" really was.

What a way by Morrison to show how self-less and confident Superman really is! He doesn't need tokens or mementoes to realize or remind himself how great he is. This is definitely one Superman who knows he's on top of his game.

Byrne's Superman, back at the beginning of his Superman run, exemplified a similar confidence as well.......

[SuperManny]

What is the ground made of? Why doesn't it sink into the ground?


He mentioned that the key weighed several million tons.

I'm sure most mountains or icebergs weigh almost as much.....

[Cei-U!]

I wanted to like All-Star Superman, I really did, if only because of the praise heaped on it by Joe Rice, Kid Omega and others whose opinions I respect. True, I’m never going to be a Grant Morrison fan but I enjoyed his and Frank Quitely’s collaboration on JLA: Earth-2 so I came in with an open mind. But I don’t, guys. Maybe I shouldn’t have been reading my Superman Showcase collection at the same time I was reading these. Maybe that unfairly magnified their flaws and minimized their virtues. But after checking out the first two issues, my only response is “That’s it? That’s all?”

Let me begin with those elements I do like. The portrayal of the Big Red S is wonderful. This is a Superman we haven’t seen in the mainstream DCU in a long time: humble, courageous, self-sacrificing. And it’s great to see timid, clumsy Clark again. Ditto Luthor the vengeance-crazed tinkerer. The basic plot is fine, intriguing enough that I want to see how it resolves. That’s huge for me these days. I like Quitely’s style and the coloring is beautiful. As in all Morrison stories, there are numerous clever ideas and great individual moments. The Ray Bradbury. “You have no right to limit my ambitions, fascist!” “Oh, it’s like Bach.” Voyager titans and nanonauts. The Fortress’ new key. The bad penny. The baby sun-eater. “Batman was standing in for me.” “Tickles.”

But jumping Jor-El on a pogostick, this book is slow!!! I f'ing hate decompressed storytelling! The entire first issue wouldn’t have taken up three pages in a Weisinger-era story. (I’m exagerrating for effect here, by the way. I find that era’s storytelling too compressed, too telegraphic.) The first three pages of #1 contain five panels and eight words. No wonder it took me less than five minutes to read the whole book. #2 took a bit longer thanks to the interminable dialogue but it still contained very little story.

Every single scene in this series is at a minimum three times as long as it needs to be. Glaciers move faster. If they’re writing and drawing “for the trade” than just publish the damn trade and quit making us shell out three bucks for 1/16 of a complete story.

Some of this is Quitely’s fault. His layouts waste huge chunks of precious space. The establishing shot of the Daily Planet offices, though nicely drawn, doesn’t need half a page. Some pages are 2/3 negative space. The minimalist backgrounds, particularly in the Planet scenes, rob the story of any sense of verisimilitude. And what genius decided the series’ first cover should feature Big Blue sitting on a cloud watching a sunrise? Yeah, *that* says “action” and “adventure” to me! What possible audience did they expect the book to attract with such an image? Of course they could put a dog food ad on the front cover and the hardcore fanboys would buy it anyway but still…

What else? Well, Morrison’s plot revives some of my least favorite Silver Age tropes—Superman’s god-like power levels, secret identity crises, hoaxes and other super-dickeries, Supermen of the future—as well as referring to DC One Million, an “event” I found overblown and underwhelming. He attempts to inject naturalistic characterization into the illogical and unnatural plot contortions of the Weisinger era and fails spectacularly. The artsy-fartsy origin recap was smug and superfluous. And Quintim, wth his jarring name and silly haircut and rainbow clothes, is the least cool character I’ve seen in ages.

There are other nits I could pick—like Chip Kidd’s hideous and unreadable cover logo (why does anyone think this guy has any design sense?)—but I’ve more than made my point. The final verdict? All-Star Superman may stand head-and-shoulders above its mainstream brethren but it falls short in approach, execution and entertainment value to any given issue of the animated-style Superman Adventures, a book that truly captured the ambiance of DC’s Silver Age while updating it for modern sensibilities. It’s a pleasant read with pretty art but I won’t be seeking out future issues.

Sorry.

Cei-U!
I summon the honest opinion!

[Mister Intensity]

That doesn't excuse the fact that some people think it's OK to routinely insult people who enjoy a certain writer's work, especially since this would not be tolerated if directed at people who enjoy _________'s work. But people who, for whatever reason, don't enjoy Morrison's work are able to insult with impugnity. Tired of it.

People really do need to learn to criticize the work not the person who disagrees with them. Then again the art of disagreement is a lost artform at this time.

It's fine not to like All-Star Superman, heck, I wasn't too crazy about issue 1 but that doesn't give anyone (I'm not saying you) to insult you or anyone else for it or vice versa.

Mister Intensity

[Michael P]

Didn't hit quite as high on the "WOW" scale for me as issue 1, but still loved it. I especially enjoyed the whole Bluebeard riff.

[The Shadow]

Some of this is Quitely’s fault. His layouts waste huge chunks of precious space. The establishing shot of the Daily Planet offices, though nicely drawn, doesn’t need half a page. Some pages are 2/3 negative space. The minimalist backgrounds, particularly in the Planet scenes, rob the story of any sense of verisimilitude. And what genius decided the series’ first cover should feature Big Blue sitting on a cloud watching a sunrise? Yeah, *that* says “action” and “adventure” to me! What possible audience did they expect the book to attract with such an image? Of course they could put a dog food ad on the front cover and the hardcore fanboys would buy it anyway but still…

What else? Well, Morrison’s plot revives some of my least favorite Silver Age tropes—Superman’s god-like power levels, secret identity crises, hoaxes and other super-dickeries, Supermen of the future—as well as referring to DC One Million, an “event” I found overblown and underwhelming. He attempts to inject naturalistic characterization into the illogical and unnatural plot contortions of the Weisinger era and fails spectacularly. The artsy-fartsy origin recap was smug and superfluous. And Quintim, wth his jarring name and silly haircut and rainbow clothes, is the least cool character I’ve seen in ages.

I agree with you... though that seems to be an unpopular opinion to have.

I'm actually a fan of Morrison's other works. Seven Soldiers is awesome, his X-Men and JLA was out of this world, I have all his Doom Patrol's and so on... I just don't get the "this is the best Superman in years" comments or the "we haven't seen a Superman like this" stuff... it's all been done before. I love Morrison for his originality... but this Superman is a rehash. I do like his Lois though.

Regarding Quitley's art... I made mention earlier about hiw the art seems to waste space... I'm glad someone else sees i as well.

It's not the worst Superman I've ever read... but it's also not the BEST. I think it's an average Superman book that is being overpraised because of the artist and especially the writer.... whom I'm a fan of! I just take off the rose coloured glasses and try and give an honest critique.

[Kid Omega]

Every single scene in this series is at a minimum three times as long as it needs to be. Glaciers move faster. If they’re writing and drawing “for the trade” than just publish the damn trade and quit making us shell out three bucks for 1/16 of a complete story.

Some of this is Quitely’s fault. His layouts waste huge chunks of precious space.

I like the pace... t's deliberate, but plenty of stuff is still packed in there. I love the layouts- it's like LITTLE NEMO or something... paced like a dream or an imaginary story... fancy that. As far as "wasting space", I'm stunned to hear you say that, Kurt. Stunned!

What else? Well, Morrison’s plot revives some of my least favorite Silver Age tropes—Superman’s god-like power levels, secret identity crises, hoaxes and other super-dickeries, Supermen of the future—as well as referring to DC One Million, an “event” I found overblown and underwhelming.

Hmm. I loved all of that stuff... in the Silver Age, and in this book.

The artsy-fartsy origin recap was smug and superfluous.

Wow! I thought it was great. Why smug?

And what genius decided the series’ first cover should feature Big Blue sitting on a cloud watching a sunrise? Yeah, *that* says “action” and “adventure” to me! What possible audience did they expect the book to attract with such an image? Of course they could put a dog food ad on the front cover and the hardcore fanboys would buy it anyway but still…



Well Kurt, more Non-Fans have bought this book from us than any other mainstream title, so they've done something right. We have the poster framed in the window, and people love it. So I guess the audience they expect to attract are new readers who see Superman as a benevolent watchman or something. I dunno. It works.
And why the jab at "hardcore fanboys"?

There are other nits I could pick—like Chip Kidd’s hideous and unreadable cover logo (why does anyone think this guy has any design sense?)—but I’ve more than made my point.

Well, Chip Kidd is the first superstar designer since Saul bass. Like him or not, his stuff resonates with lots of people. I think saying that he has no design sense is a little much.

As for the rest of your review, you make some good points, but you clearly brought your hatred of Morrison to the table... you can deny it, but I think you're digging for things not to like. You loved so many things in this book, but then pepper the rest of your review with words like "smug" and "artsy-fartsy". Where's the love, Kurt? Where are the hugs?

Open up that big ol' heart....

-a

[K'Nort]

Let me begin with those elements I do like. The portrayal of the Big Red S is wonderful. This is a Superman we haven’t seen in the mainstream DCU in a long time: humble, courageous, self-sacrificing. And it’s great to see timid, clumsy Clark again. Ditto Luthor the vengeance-crazed tinkerer. The basic plot is fine, intriguing enough that I want to see how it resolves. That’s huge for me these days. I like Quitely’s style and the coloring is beautiful. As in all Morrison stories, there are numerous clever ideas and great individual moments. The Ray Bradbury. “You have no right to limit my ambitions, fascist!” “Oh, it’s like Bach.” Voyager titans and nanonauts. The Fortress’ new key. The bad penny. The baby sun-eater. “Batman was standing in for me.” “Tickles.”

But jumping Jor-El on a pogostick, this book is slow!!! I f'ing hate decompressed storytelling! The entire first issue wouldn’t have taken up three pages in a Weisinger-era story. (I’m exagerrating for effect here, by the way. I find that era’s storytelling too compressed, too telegraphic.) The first three pages of #1 contain five panels and eight words. No wonder it took me less than five minutes to read the whole book. #2 took a bit longer thanks to the interminable dialogue but it still contained very little story.

And what genius decided the series’ first cover should feature Big Blue sitting on a cloud watching a sunrise? Yeah, *that* says “action” and “adventure” to me! What possible audience did they expect the book to attract with such an image?

The way I interpreted it -- and I could easily be totally wrong -- is that they weren't trying to say action and adventure. This book seems more like a character study. Which also makes the slow pacing and large-space art more reasonable.


And it may have just been the gas talking, but I really liked Lois's anxiety over the idea that Superman had some of Clark's personality in him and could she stand that.

[Kid Omega]

It's not the worst Superman I've ever read... but it's also not the BEST. I think it's an average Superman book that is being overpraised because of the artist and especially the writer....

Could it be that we simply really like the book? Is that so f***** hard to take? I'm so sick of you accusing us iof being sycophants (in this very thread, at our blog) just because we love this book. It's getting tired. Let it go.

I just take off the rose coloured glasses and try and give an honest critique.

Your honest review of issue one was a series of "I like it when things are X and in this book things are Y". That's why no one listens to you. Your reviews are terrible....

And it's not because we think Morrison can do no wrong. You are not "just giving an honest critique". You are trying to prove a subjective point that plenty of people obviously don't agree with.

-a

*edited by the moderator

[The Shadow]

more Non-Fans have bought this book from us than any other mainstream title
Where are you getting that stat from?

[The Wayner]

I'm not a big Supes fan, but I can dig both issues. I like the writing... I like the art... and it seems to be the Superman book for me.

The only thing I didn't like was the set-up for #3. Don't know why, just didn't set well with me. But hey, when I finally get to read the issue, it might blow me outta my socks. Here's to hoping it does just that!

[Joe Rice]

Where are you getting that stat from?


From his store that he owns and runs. Hence the "us."

[The Shadow]

That's why no one listens to you. Your reviews are terrible
Maybe if (like on your blog!) I talked in reviews about how big a hard-on I get when reading a Superman comic(!!) by Morrison my reviews would improve and I could be accepted by you and Vanilla Ice over there! :rolleyes:

[The Wayner]

I own a store, too. The first issue sold extremely well (though I now have stacks of it on the racks gathering dust), while there was a cooling off for #2. Responses are still very good, though.

[The Shadow]

From his store that he owns and runs. Hence the "us."
Gotcha!

How many copies are you selling of AS Superman vs the regular titles?

How many people are buying the regular AND the AS Superman book?

[The Shadow]

I own a store, too. The first issue sold extremely well (though I now have stacks of it on the racks gathering dust), while there was a cooling off for #2. Responses are still very good, though.
Same question for you as well then:

How many copies are you selling of AS Superman vs the regular titles?

How many people are buying the regular AND the AS Superman book?

And since I know Kid Omega's answer... are you getting a lot of NEW customers in over the AS Superman (or Batman for that matter)?

[Indigo Al]

And it may have just been the gas talking, but I really liked Lois's anxiety over the idea that Superman had some of Clark's personality in him and could she stand that.

Interesting point - especially in light of all the anti-Lois sentiment out there.
Clark Kent as the perfect turn-off, powerful enough to repel the appeal of a god like Superman!

I also wonder what "The Dawn of Superheroes" means for this particular AS reality. We know there's supes, bats and the various superhumans under design by the Gideon Stargrave-like dude. I'm willing to bet they're it, unless that Olympus forge implies Wonder Woman.

Not that I care. I like to see a world where Supes is the only superhuman.

[The Shadow]

That wasn't a review, you dolt.....
Yeah but talking about getting a hard-on over Superman ain't my idea of fun. :rolleyes:

That post is bordering on breaking the rules with personal insults... if it didn't already cross the line.

[Doug Strange]

Yeah but talking about getting a hard-on over Superman ain't my idea of fun. :rolleyes:

That post is bordering on breaking the rules with personal insults...Nope, it totally broke them.

[SuperManny]

Nope, it totally broke them.

Yeah, and let's stop there, shall we? :mad:

[Cei-U!]

I like the pace... t's deliberate, but plenty of stuff is still packed in there. I love the layouts- it's like LITTLE NEMO or something... paced like a dream or an imaginary story... fancy that. As far as "wasting space", I'm stunned to hear you say that, Kurt. Stunned!

Why stunned? It's consistent with everything I've said about comic storytelling since I first joined these boards. The pacing, in my opinion, is deliberate to the point of boredom.

Hmm. I loved all of that stuff... in the Silver Age, and in this book.

Well, there y'go. Bear in mind that while I enjoy reading the Silver Age Superman comics, the appeal is nostalgic not aesthetic. I much prefer the original Siegel and Shuster material to the Weisinger stuff. That's why I'm loving the hell out of Tom De Haven's novel It's Superman!

Wow! I thought it was great. Why smug?

Because it's showy and self-conscious. "Look, I can tell Superman's origin in eight words!"

Well Kurt, more Non-Fans have bought this book from us than any other mainstream title, so they've done something right. We have the poster framed in the window, and people love it. So I guess the audience they expect to attract are new readers who see Superman as a benevolent watchman or something. I dunno. It works.

I'll take your word for it. It seems counterintuitive to me but, oh well, I'm willing to be wrong.

And why the jab at "hardcore fanboys"?

In hindsight, I regret saying that. Chalk it up to typing fatigue.

Well, Chip Kidd is the first superstar designer since Saul bass. Like him or not, his stuff resonates with lots of people. I think saying that he has no design sense is a little much.

It may well be I'm approaching his work with outdated sensibilities. All I know is that it goes against everything I learned from my graphic design professor about clarity and subtlety and not letting design overpower functionality. I find it sophomoric.

As for the rest of your review, you make some good points, but you clearly brought your hatred of Morrison to the table... you can deny it, but I think you're digging for things not to like. You loved so many things in this book, but then pepper the rest of your review with words like "smug" and "artsy-fartsy". Where's the love, Kurt? Where are the hugs?

And here I thought I'd been digging for things to like.

Morrison is not and never will be my favorite comics writer but if I hate him so much, why is there a row of JLA trades on my shelves? Yes, I did love lots of things in the book but its faults--the same faults I've found in everything else of his I've read--outweighed them. I think Grant has a hell of an imagination. I think he writes great individual scenes. But I think his story construction is shoddy and that he could use a stronger hand in the editor's chair.

Open up that big ol' heart...

I'm sorry if my not sharing your enthusiasm for this disappoints you, Alex. But wouldn't you be more disappointed in me if I praised a mediocrity just so I can be one of the cool kids?

Look, I don't think you or anyone else is "wrong" for liking it. I don't think they shouldn't be publishing it. Like I said, it's a pleasant book with pretty art. But it definitely doesn't live up to the hype in this old fart's opinion.

Cei-U!
I summon the olive branch!

[Doug Strange]

Sorry, SuperManny, don't mean to give you grief. No more cursing, no more name-calling.

But seriously, Shadow, I really got a real hard-on reading Superman. I can't believe you would begrudge me that.

(Oh, and nice post-editing, by the way. I should have listened when Alex told me how awesome you are.)

[Doug Strange]

Actually, if I may, I'm going to agree with Kurt about the logo. I really don't care for it. It's nice to have a change from the same one we've had for decades now, but I wish it'd changed to something different.

I don't know anything about design, I'm not going to say a word about Chip Kidd, but I do not care for that logo.

[Brian Cronin]

Yeah, I'm down with that, Paul.

I will allow that Chip Kidd knows more about design than I do, but I don't like his logos.

-Brian

[Lurker]

I've gotten "killed" for it before, but I'm not a fan of the Chipp Kidd design either no matter how famous the guy may be. I just don't like it; if this comic is supposed to cross-over, there needs to be a big honkin' "S" logo on the front. Call me old-fashioned.

I love the book, but I also respect the opinions of those who find fault with the content. I think those who dislike it because of the creators involved or the readers' enthusiasm over it need to find something else to talk about.

[Kid Omega]

Well, there y'go. Bear in mind that while I enjoy reading the Silver Age Superman comics, the appeal is nostalgic not aesthetic. I much prefer the original Siegel and Shuster material to the Weisinger stuff. That's why I'm loving the hell out of Tom De Haven's novel It's Superman!

That would explain it... I love the Binder Era more than just about anything.

Morrison is not and never will be my favorite comics writer but if I hate him so much, why is there a row of JLA trades on my shelves? Yes, I did love lots of things in the book but its faults--the same faults I've found in everything else of his I've read--outweighed them. I think Grant has a hell of an imagination. I think he writes great individual scenes. But I think his story construction is shoddy and that he could use a stronger hand in the editor's chair.


Kurt, you hate him. Every time he has come up since I've known you, you have berated the heck out if him and his work. In fact, I can't think of another creator I've seen you so vehemenently criticize. You may not even realize you're doing it.



I'm sorry if my not sharing your enthusiasm for this disappoints you, Alex. But wouldn't you be more disappointed in me if I praised a mediocrity just so I can be one of the cool kids?



I doesn't disappointment me at all. I think your comment that Quitely "wastes space" is madness, but dif'rent strokes and whatnot.

But here's the crux of it... why mention "cool kids"? Is that what it really comes down to? Do you really think I love this book to be a cool kid? Why would you even throw that in there?

And I think "mediocrity" is excessive. If it's too slow paced, that's a perfectly reasonable criticism. But calling it mediocre over that is a bit much, me thinks.

Also, the origin:


Because it's showy and self-conscious. "Look, I can tell Superman's origin in eight words!"


I thought it was cool, and (dare I say it) lovely. Like a haiku. What's wrong with being "showy"? If you got it, flaunt it!

And about sales and the cover:

I'll take your word for it. It seems counterintuitive to me but, oh well, I'm willing to be wrong.


It's done well for us. The cover attracts attention.

You don't need an olive branch with me, Kurt. We're old pals at this point. I just wonder why you have to throw in comments about "cool kids" and the like... it's getting to be a sore point, due to other posters.

Didn't mean to argue... it just sounded like you liked it more than you want to admit.

-a
I summon the nudge nudge!

[JulianPerez]

Why stunned? It's consistent with everything I've said about comic storytelling since I first joined these boards. The pacing, in my opinion, is deliberate to the point of boredom.

Well, I thought the first sequence featuring a rocketship about to fall into the sun was very thrilling, but the books did seem to move much more slowly after that.

Byrne's Superman, back at the beginning of his Superman run, exemplified a similar confidence as well.......

You mean the Byrne Superman that ran home to his family crying that "they all wanted a piece of me?" THAT Superman?

Seriously, do the people who enjoy the writing of any other writer have to put up with this crap? Does anyone get away with saying, "Oh, how I can't stand pun-tolerating PAD nerds" or "What on Earth is wrong with those uneducated, uncultured Chuck Dixon fans"? But if you enjoy Grant Morrison's work, it's goddam open season for insulting comments.

There are people that read Morrison's work and like it, and then there are....the fans of Morrison, a vocal group that believes themselves to be iconoclastic but are entirely homogeneous (if you've met one, you've met them all), who are the type to post lengthy praise of the INVISIBLES but give one-star reviews on Amazon.com to ESSENTIALS of the Jack Kirby/Stan Lee FANTASTIC FOUR.

Just because you like Morrison's work, doesn't make you this variety of Morrison fan. In fact, some of the things he's done I do enjoy.

I think people just love being negative OR they are jealous that a particular book has more of an audience than their own favorite and feel the need to lash out.

This is absolutely and totally true, and I cannot for one moment deny it. In a more just world, Dan Slott would have Morrison's reputation and success.

And it's not because we think Morrison can do no wrong. You are not "just giving an honest critique". You are trying to prove a subjective point that plenty of people obviously don't agree with.

Isn't that the definition of...really, ALL opinions? They are based on subjective criteria?

[Kid Omega]

Gotcha!

How many copies are you selling of AS Superman vs the regular titles?

How many people are buying the regular AND the AS Superman book?

More than ten times.

If someone is buying a regular title, they are probably buying All Star Superman as well.

Why do you care?

You don't think the book is that great. You're opinion is well known. Why do the sales matter?

-a

[Kid Omega]

There are people that read Morrison's work and like it, and then there are....the fans of Morrison, a vocal group that believes themselves to be iconoclastic but are entirely homogeneous (if you've met one, you've met them all), who are the type to post lengthy praise of the INVISIBLES but give one-star reviews on Amazon.com to ESSENTIALS of the Jack Kirby/Stan Lee FANTASTIC FOUR.

Just because you like Morrison's work, doesn't make you this variety of Morrison fan.

Wow, that's very different than the wide brush you were painting with earlier.

Let me add that I have never met this type of Morrison fan. Ever. And I spend my days meeting comic fans.

Are you sure you're not just back-pedalling when you realized that you just insulted lots of folks? If you're going to insult Morrison fans, go ahead and do it... but it seems disingenuous to pop up later and say "Oh, I only meant the few Morrison fans that don't like Kirby".

Why even knock the fans at all?

Whas up wit dat?

[Kid Omega]

Maybe if (like on your blog!) I talked in reviews about how big a hard-on I get when reading a Superman comic(!!) by Morrison my reviews would improve and I could be accepted by you and Vanilla Ice over there! :rolleyes:

Don't count on it.

Here is your review:

"I re-read it twice. It's no better or worse than many other Superman comics out there. Gail Simone's run was just as good.

What made or makes this so "special" that those of us uninspired who can't read closely miss? It's Superman... not War and Peace.

And this comic really felt like the second Superman movie. It didn't seem all that original. The whole time I got a feeling of "I've seen this before". And talk about decompression... if Bendis had written this everyone would say it was padded and so on.

And the whole Superman dying thing was done before as well. AS Superman is nothing new.

Don't get me wrong, it was a fun (if fast) read... but it's not the greatest thing since sliced bread... that would be peanut butter.

I also think Byrne is a better penciller than Quitley because he doesn't rely on wasted space. What people call "cool layouts" I call an excuse to get the book done faster with fewer panels."

I will let someone else pop in and deconstruct your "reviewing" process...

Paul McEnery? You're better at this. Can you explain the Art of Critique? And also maybe how this particular look at Superman dying *is* something new in it's execution? And a bunch of other stuff that you're good at saying?

-a

[The Shadow]

More than ten times.

If someone is buying a regular title, they are probably buying All Star Superman as well.
... so if you have 10 people buying regular Superman books you are selling 100 AS Superman's? That's amazing.

You don't think the book is that great. You're opinion is well known. Why do the sales matter?
Curiousity.

My LCS has sold more as well, but it was mainly due to people wanting the Adams cover so they ordered extra copies of the regular #1 to get it. Gotta love them speculators.

[Mister Intensity]

I will say that All-Star Superman is a fast read and I'm glad a lot of you pointed out everything that I feel is wrong with Quitely's artwork. Unfortunately, such widescreen, pin-up oriented drawings (though not as detailed as Quitely's) are the norm these days in comic books.

Mister Intensity

[Lurker]

My LCS has sold more as well, but it was mainly due to people wanting the Adams cover so they ordered extra copies of the regular #1 to get it. Gotta love them speculators.

Yea, but's that's Canada. Everyone knows Canada is Bizzaro World :p

[The Shadow]

I will let someone else pop in and deconstruct your "reviewing" process...
What you don't seem to get, and I mentioned this on your blog, is EVERY review is OPINION. You can't deconstruct my OPINION because it's just that... MY OPINION.

I said what I liked, disliked, and made comparrisons to other people so others would have an idea on what I LIKE (again with the OPINION thing). My opinion is neither better or worse than yours nor is it any more valid. No matter what Paul McEnery says I can't be wrong... just like he's not wrong on HIS opinion.

[The Shadow]

Yea, but's that's Canada. Everyone knows Canada is Bizzaro World :p
LOL

:D :D :D

[Joe Rice]

Kid Omega didn't say you were wrong, he said your review was of poor quality. Opinions have more weight when they're stated well. Your reviews lack substance, so it is rather easy to disregard your opinion.

[The Shadow]

Opinions have more weight when they're stated well. Your reviews lack substance
What was lacking in substance? What "weight" am I missing?

I sit at a computer, fire off my thoughts and hit Submit Reply. Granted I don't analyze every panel on every page or take days to come up with what I write, but it's no less valid and no worse in quality than any other reviews posted here.

[Doug Strange]

What you don't seem to get, and I mentioned this on your blog, is EVERY review is OPINION. You can't deconstruct my OPINION because it's just that... MY OPINION.We're not talking about your favorite color or flavor of ice cream. Literary criticism SHOULD be open to deconstruction. If it isn't, you're doing it wrong.

Notice how the reactions to Kurt are completely different from the ones you get.

[The Shadow]

Literary criticism SHOULD be open to deconstruction.
I disagree... I think the LITERATURE itself should be open... but how can what I, Paul, Joe, Doug, Brian or anyone else say be wrong or open? You can critique the source... but not the reviewer.

You can disagree with the reviewer... I disagree with a lot of what Ebert says about movies, but what he likes and I like are very differet. What he says is a FANTASTIC movie might bore the living hell outa me... and not seem so fantastic.

You can also use other critics to back up your argument and help your case... but the reviewers that disagree with you can't be wrong.

[Kid Omega]

... so if you have 10 people buying regular Superman books you are selling 100 AS Superman's? That's amazing.


It's more than that actually, but yes, amazing. More like 5 regular, 125 All Star, if my math is right...

And sold to people who don't usually buy monthlies or even read comics at all! Amazing!

-a

[The Shadow]

Notice how the reactions to Kurt are completely different from the ones you get.
Wait... you mean the Kurt Kid Omega knows and calls his "old pal"?
We're old pals at this point.
Yeah... I see how an old pal and someone new like myself at your blog are comparable. :rolleyes:

Sorry to drag you into this Kurt.

[Cei-U!]

Kurt, you hate him. Every time he has come up since I've known you, you have berated the heck out if him and his work. In fact, I can't think of another creator I've seen you so vehemenently criticize. You may not even realize you're doing it.

That's entirely possible. It's also possible that I subconsciously resent Morrison for having an appeal I don't get. And as a result, I come across as disliking him more than I do. There are a whole lot of writers I dislike more than Morrison.

I doesn't disappointment me at all. I think your comment that Quitely "wastes space" is madness, but dif'rent strokes and whatnot.

And again, I have the same criticism of lots of other artists I like, up to and including Jack Kirby.

But here's the crux of it... why mention "cool kids"? Is that what it really comes down to? Do you really think I love this book to be a cool kid? Why would you even throw that in there?

I think your and Joe's liking for the book is sincere and unaffected. I think a lot of other folks like it because they think they're supposed to. God knows I saw plenty of that attitude in art school. But that observation doesn't contribute anything to the discussion and I'm sorry I said it.

And I think "mediocrity" is excessive. If it's too slow paced, that's a perfectly reasonable criticism. But calling it mediocre over that is a bit much, me thinks.

I thought about editing that out to avoid overstating my case. Shoulda listened to the little voice.

Also, the origin:

I thought it was cool, and (dare I say it) lovely. Like a haiku. What's wrong with being "showy"? If you got it, flaunt it!

I don't agree with this as a general rule. It's just like when I catch Dustin Hoffman or Meryl Streep acting or Quentin Tarantino directing. Don't interrupt the story to show me how clever you are. A good artist should make you forget he's even there.

At any rate, you liked the origin recap. I didn't. Nowhere else to go there.

And about sales and the cover:

It's done well for us. The cover attracts attention.

Then it's doing its job. Criticism withdrawn. And I will say the cover of #2 was much more successful at making me want to find out what's going on.

You don't need an olive branch with me, Kurt. We're old pals at this point. I just wonder why you have to throw in comments about "cool kids" and the like... it's getting to be a sore point, due to other posters.

That's my fault for not reading the rest of the thread before I posted. I would've taken a much softer approach had I known it had become a sore spot.

Didn't mean to argue... it just sounded like you liked it more than you want to admit.

I liked it well enough to check out the trade when it's released but not enough to buy the individual issues. The pacing aside, I don't think it's a bad comic by any means. But I don't think it's a great comic either. Fair enough?

Cei-U!
After you, Alphonse!

[Kid Omega]

Wait... you mean the Kurt Kid Omega knows and calls his "old pal"?

Yeah... I see how an old pal and someone new like myself at your blog are comparable. :rolleyes:

Sorry to drag you into this Kurt.

Kurt wrote out a long, thoughtful post, considering, design, storytelling, plotting, and characterisation to detail what he thought worked and what he thought didn't work.

You said it was too much like Superman II.

All opinions are valid, but some are better argued than others.

There is a reason that you like to read what Roger Ebert has to say.

-a

[The Shadow]

Kurt wrote out a long, thoughtful post, considering, design, storytelling, plotting, and characterisation to detail what he thought worked and what he thought didn't work.
And he said a lot of what I did... he just used more words.

You said it was too much like Superman II.
It was. What more neesd to be said?


There is a reason that you like to read what Roger Ebert has to say.
Actually I don't... I just used him as an example of a well known and famous reviewer.

[Mister Intensity]

Superman: Strength was better. :D

Mister Intensity

[Super Monkey]

what the fudge has happen to this thread, gees, typical Internet pissing contest, I thought you all were better than that? :confused:

this is what happens when people think that their OPINIONS are somehow better than other people's OPINIONS or that if they read an OPINION that is different than their own, that person must be a moron who is out to get them, somehow :confused: .

can we all have a thread like normal people and just agree to disagree and respect each others opinions even if you 100% disagree with them?

now watch someone try to flame me now ;)

[The Shadow]

what the fudge has happen to this thread, gees, typical Internet pissing contest, I thought you all were better than that? :confused:

this is what happens when people think that their OPINIONS are somehow better than other people's OPINIONS or that if they read an OPINION that is different than their own, that person must be a moron who is out to get them, somehow :confused: .

can we all have a thread like normal people and just agree to disagree and respect each others opinions even if you 100% disagree with them?
You're right... I apologise to all for the big derail.... but I won't be be silent on a book I dislike. And I refuse to accept that my opinions are any less valid than anyone elses though. I'll just have to debate this at a certain blog.

now watch someone try to flame me now ;)
Nah... too easy! :p

[Super Monkey]

You're right... I apologise to all for the big derail.... but I won't be be silent on a book I dislike. And I refuse to accept that my opinions are any less valid than anyone elses though. I'll just have to debate this at a certain blog.

I have no problem with that, why must you like anything that I or anyone else likes? It's all about taste, which is very personal. It's all good, I don't care.

[The Shadow]

It's all about taste, which is very personal.
I said that 2 or 3 pages ago... and was told I was wrong because my opinions didn't have any "weight" to them.

Anywhoo... moving on...

[Super Monkey]

I said that 2 or 3 pages ago... and was told I was wrong because my opinions didn't have any "weight" to them.

Anywhoo... moving on...

It's the internet, what can I say, just let it go and move on.

[The Shadow]

It's the internet, what can I say, just let it go and move on.
Fair enough!

I don't remember seeing it over the course of 10 pages, but did YOU like it? I am guessing so by your avatar... but what did you like about it? What didn't you like?

[Paul McEnery]

Because it's showy and self-conscious. "Look, I can tell Superman's origin in eight words!"
I'm surprised to hear you say that, Kurt.

(And what's wrong with showy, anyway? Better than pedestrian, surely!)

I think it's one of the most poetic things I've seen in a comic for ages, with great rhythm. The simple set up of four long panels -- a set up for this issue, but for the entire series, which is, after all, supposed to be a boil down to the core of the character, if you'll excuse the mixed metaphor -- takes us from extreme condensation of the past into a huge, broad, blockbuster shot of the present.

That, in itself, is a nifty way of saying two things at once:

1) That was then, this is now; and despite the massive luggage compartment of the past, the present moment is of necessity bigger -- more present -- as the anterior cingulate gyrus takes in all the information needed to handle the instant before us, of which the past is only a small piece of the puzzle.

2) Don't just look at the foreground; look at the background. Same thing going on in issue 2, where the backdrop of the Titanic goes unnoticed at first, because it's so big, and you're looking at the details in the foreground. It's just a big blank background -- that negative space you complain about with Quitely's art; and yet the negative space -- the backdrop -- is also meaningful; space is rhythm, is the void into which details move to create change, action and relationship. And the backdrop of this issue is what? The Sun -- the big deal on which the entire plot turns.

Compare and contrast with Seven Soldiers, and you see the idea connecting the two: the big picture in the background none of us attend to, or can attend to; the unspoken and unspeakable G-d. What is the Sun, if not the prototype of G-d to the Human Race? And now what is Superman, if not Icarus? Icarus the Son to Luthor's Dedalus the maze-maker?

(Compare and contrast: clever-clever bald git and the Time Tailor; both Mephistolean Demiurges who get the story going; i.e. stand-ins for Grant, who is himself here a stand-in for the narrative urge in each of us that (re)creates the universe with every life.)

---- And that's just the meaning of the panel layout!

Zooming in to the captions:

Geez, all the complaints about decompression, and you get the entire origin story in 8 words! Well, 9/10, actually. But I'm coming to that.

Rule number 1 of rhythm: Even numbers in a list call for closure in an odd number.

Couplet couplet couplet couplet... couplet.

The fifth couplet is right there in the picture, and in the big S on his chest: Super Man.

So again, we've got double duty, and then some:

1) The first four panels set up a question. What is the closing couplet? What is the answer to this set up? The fifth (double page spread) panel provides the answer.

2) And of course, it's a litany that echoes the old one from all of our childhoods: It's a bird, it's a plane, it's...

3) While we're at it, the quiet refusal to put a girt big Chip Kidd "Superman" all over the spread makes a point about iconography: the picture does more work on its own than any word could do. And there it is on his chest, too: the icon that tells us what's going on.

(And yes, Chip Kidd is an overrated showboater -- ah, I see what you mean about showy, now; except it doesn't apply to GM+FQ, whose flash technique always serves the story)

4) Oh, and while we're at it, let's go back to that couplet thing. Every one of the couplets is modifier + noun. So too is Super Man. Considered as two words rather than one, we return to the German uber-mensch concept -- the man who triumphs over convention to create his own (moral and physical) reality. We think of the name as one word: Superman -- a one-off, a unique character in his own right. But as two words, we have Super Man -- an option for all of us.

So overall, what at first glance seems like a waste of time recap plus spread is a massively dense tone poem of an overture that tells us what Superman is in this series, how Grant thinks of him, and what he means to us.

Not bad, for three simple pages.

[Kid Omega]

The pacing aside, I don't think it's a bad comic by any means. But I don't think it's a great comic either. Fair enough?


But of course!

I would never argue with your reaction to the book- you had plenty of valid points... I just thought you had some extreme words here and there.

i'm just glad you enjoyed at all!

-a

[Cei-U!]

You make a helluva good argument for Morrison's approach to the origin, Paul, and I'll go back and look at it again in that light. But was the sequence necessary at all? Is there anyone out there likely to pick up this book who isn't already intimately familiar with Superman's backstory? Then why retell it, especially in a way guaranteed to confuse anyone who might *not* know the story? That's why I described it as superfluous.

Cei-U!
Just asking!

[Kid Omega]

You make a helluva good argument for Morrison's approach to the origin, Paul, and I'll go back and look at it again in that light. But was the sequence necessary at all? Is there anyone out there likely to pick up this book who isn't already intimately familiar with Superman's backstory?

That would explain why it's only one page long... everyone knows it, so why waste time going on at length?

Then why retell it, especially in a way guaranteed to confuse anyone who might *not* know the story? That's why I described it as superfluous.

Cei-U!
Just asking!

I'm not sure why it would confuse people... it's so simple and direct and iconic... damn near perfect...

-a

[CaptMagellan]

But was the sequence necessary at all? Is there anyone out there likely to pick up this book who isn't already intimately familiar with Superman's backstory? Then why retell it, especially in a way guaranteed to confuse anyone who might *not* know the story?


Think of it as an invocation of the past to reestablish the mythic paradigm of Superman in the present.

In cross-cultural animistic ritual structure (which Morrison as a Chaos magician knows and practices) a standard practice is to revisit deeds and stories of the entity to be summoned in the rite - paving the way for a successful invocation/evocation.

Whether meant metaphorically or literally (and with Morrison I think both probably apply based upon interviews about his intent with Superhero fiction as active magic) I wouldn't be surprised if this informed his decision to include the origin story at least a little bit.

[f. chong rutherford]

You make a helluva good argument for Morrison's approach to the origin, Paul, and I'll go back and look at it again in that light. But was the sequence necessary at all? Is there anyone out there likely to pick up this book who isn't already intimately familiar with Superman's backstory? Then why retell it, especially in a way guaranteed to confuse anyone who might *not* know the story? That's why I described it as superfluous.

Cei-U!
Just asking!

I thought it was necessary for a different reason. In some ways, the story encapsulates not only 60 years of Superman but also gives nods to the influences on Superman (science-pulp fiction stories, ala Ray Bradbury), and of Superman (on every comic book character that came after--Quintum's very 'Fantastic Four'-esque group, all the superbeings, and Quintum's statement about owing his existance to Superman). By the time the story ends, the last beat of the story moves the story into the present version of the mythos, where Lois Lane knows that Clark Kent is Superman. It encapsulates everything about the publishing history and the mythos in one story. Instead of asking a new reader to check out all the 'important' Superman stories from the past, Morrison puts it all into one story as a series of beats.

Plus, doing the origin in one page is a nod to the VERY first version of Superman's origin (which was one page). However, the new version does so with a new spin--four cinematic panels. So, the origin sets the tone for the rest of the story, which is going to start out as a new take on some old ideas, and by the end (likely) move things past current DC stories and introduce some new ideas.

EDIT: Here's the first time the origin was done, all in one page, but with much less detailed drawings, AND well before Jor-El, Lara, even Ma and Pa Kent ... all of which were later added.

The Origin of Superman (1938)!
http://theages.superman.ws/origins/1938.php

I don't think anyone since Morrison has managed to get all of that information into one page, let alone do it so well.

To sum all of that up in one page manages (for me) to be an homage AND something new.

[Cei-U!]

That would explain why it's only one page long... everyone knows it, so why waste time going on at length?

Then why waste a whole page on it when a two sentence caption could accomplish the same thing, like back in the 80s?

I'm not sure why it would confuse people... it's so simple and direct and iconic... damn near perfect...

Four random images (plus a quartet of two word descriptors) whose interconnection can only be understood if you already know the story is simple and direct? Can you see the enormous assumption you've made?

Cei-U!
I summon the bafflement!

[Kid Omega]

You're right... I apologise to all for the big derail.... but I won't be be silent on a book I dislike. And I refuse to accept that my opinions are any less valid than anyone elses though.

A) Some opinions can be less valid than others. If Jimbo thinks that Toby Kieth is a better musician than Mozart, Jimbo is an idiot.

B) It's not your opinion that anyone has a problem with. It's that you constantly want to argue, accuse us of being "Morrison sycophants" and imply that we only like the book to be "cool kids". It's that your review has no content; it's not an examination of why you like or dislike the book, it's just a list of observations that make no sense and are easily discounted....

Too much like SUPERMAN II? That's not a critique... that's something you said that makes no sense.

Your comments read like the caption under a WIZARD photo. This is why we have no respect for your opinion.

And BTW- if you do come to our blog to "debate", don't start crying, like last time, that we're too mean and you only wanted to tawk a widdle 'bout comics. You showed up trolling for a fight and it's irritating.

-a

[Cei-U!]

The new version does so with a new spin--four cinematic panels.

Comics aren't movies. I wish to hell they'd quit trying to be. But that's a bugbear for another time.

Cei-U!
I summon the pet peeve!

[Kid Omega]

Four random images (plus a quartet of two word descriptors) whose interconnection can only be understood if you already know the story is simple and direct? Can you see the enormous assumption you've made?

Cei-U!
I summon the bafflement!

Yes- I assume people are smart enoigh to figure it out. I don't think you need to already know the story... but even if that was the case, I think EVERYONE ON EARTH knows it by now. I would wager that more people know Superman's origin (in broad strokes) than know the Nativity.

Maybe I'm crazy.

-a

[f. chong rutherford]

Comics aren't movies. I wish to hell they'd quit trying to be. But that's a bugbear for another time.

Cei-U!
I summon the pet peeve!

Maybe that's what's bugging you about the opening?

I choose 'cinematic' because the aspect of the panels reminded me of the aspect of a wide-screen film. But what the page accomplishes couldn't be done on film as well, or even as succintly. The whole comic was the opposite of a film. The panels and the pacing wouldn't make good structure for a film, or even very good storyboards.

Although without doubt, at some point this stuff will get used as concept art for a future Superman movie.

[Cei-U!]

Yes- I assume people are smart enoigh to figure it out. I don't think you need to already know the story...

Of course you do! Your familiarity with the story has blinded you to the obscurantism of this imagery. You've assumed someone who doesn't know the story can intuit there is an infant in that spacecraft, that the first couple are its parents, etc, etc. To me it's like being shown four randomly selected two-second snippets of film and expecting me to derive the plot of Casablanca from it.

but even if that was the case, I think EVERYONE ON EARTH knows it by now. I would wager that more people know Superman's origin (in broad strokes) than know the Nativity.

Which brings us right back to my point of why it was including at all if everybody knows it.

Cei-U!
I summon the stubborn streak!

[The Shadow]

Some opinions can be less valid than others.
You're assuming Jimbo has the exact same likes and dislikes as everyone else (or you). You're assuming Jimbo is as fluent with Mozart as he is with Toby Keith. You're assuming Jimbo has even HEARD Mozat and can regognize his work verses Handel.

Someone who grows up in Nashville will almost definatly have a higher opinion of Toby Keith.

This is why your assinine views on validating peoples opinions is flawed. You can't disprove Jimbo's opinion that Toby is better. You can have YOUR OWN ideas and state them... but they are no more valid than Jimbo's.

This is why we have no respect for your opinion.
Thankfully I don't give a sh!t what you think.

I said I would move on and I will. Please do the same.

You showed up trolling for a fight and it's irritating.

No, I showed up because Gene Ha drew Sue Richards like a man.

[stealthwise]

My sentiments exactly.

Do I ever love to rile the Morrison fanboys (mostly because they're the same identical self parody listening to Radiohead while hanging out at Taco Bell at one in the morning),

Hey! I WISH I had a Tacobell! As far as Radiohead, I only have Ok Computer, and that's dandy with me.

But yeah, sometimes his fans go a bit overboard, considering that not everything he touches is instant gold. But he after reading his trilogy of works from last year (WE3, SeaGuy, Vimanarama) and a few other pieces of genius, I'm starting to understand why he gets so much acclaim.

[stealthwise]

Maybe if (like on your blog!) I talked in reviews about how big a hard-on I get when reading a Superman comic(!!) by Morrison my reviews would improve and I could be accepted by you and Vanilla Ice over there! :rolleyes:

"I get an extra three inches from All-Star Superman, it's THAT GOOD!"

Feel free to use that review. ;)

[Kid Omega]

You're assuming Jimbo has the exact same likes and dislikes as everyone else (or you). You're assuming Jimbo is as fluent with Mozart as he is with Toby Keith. You're assuming Jimbo has even HEARD Mozat and can regognize his work verses Handel.

Someone who grows up in Nashville will almost definatly have a higher opinion of Toby Keith.

Seriously? Because I DID grow up in Nashville, and I know that Mozart is EMPIRICALLY better than Toby Kieth.

This is why your assinine views on validating peoples opinions is flawed. You can't disprove Jimbo's opinion that Toby is better. You can have YOUR OWN ideas and state them... but they are no more valid than Jimbo's.

Seriously? So no work of art can ever be judged by any standard, and any idiot that can form words in his mouth has just as valid an opinion as James Agee? Okay!

And if this is the case, and all opinions are equal, howcum mine are "assinine(sp)"?



Thankfully I don't give a sh!t what you think.


Obviously you do, or else you wouldn't be flirting with me so much.

..... I'll move on if you can!

-a

*edited by moderator

[The Shadow]

I'll move on if you can!
Done!

*edited by moderator

[Paul McEnery]

Of course you do! Your familiarity with the story has blinded you to the obscurantism of this imagery. You've assumed someone who doesn't know the story can intuit there is an infant in that spacecraft, that the first couple are its parents, etc, etc. To me it's like being shown four randomly selected two-second snippets of film and expecting me to derive the plot of Casablanca from it.



Which brings us right back to my point of why it was including at all if everybody knows it.

Cei-U!
I summon the stubborn streak!
Yes, anyone can figure out there's an infant there. It's present in panel 4.

Stubborn streak there certainly is, Kurt.

I've told you what the point is: as an overture with all the tone poem aspects I detailed.

[Lurker]

accuse us of being "Morrison sycophants" and imply that we only like the book to be "cool kids"

Well your bio does say you are from Cool Town. :D

[Lurker]

Man, I have never seen a single comic book page dissected this much.

[Kid Omega]

Well your bio does say you are from Cool Town. :D


That's the actual name of my town!

-a
(so busted)

[redlantern2051]

Personally, I really enjoyed it. I think Morrison is hitting it out of the park this time!

[Jaye]

So what did you guys think was going on in the forbidden room? Even having seen the next cover, I didn't realize until the end what it was about. I thought it was some weird genetic testing thing . . .couldn't figure it out.

I never saw the cover to issue 3 (still have not seen it, actually). Anyway, I figured he was doing genetic research related to his dying.


I recall the Morrison proposal of 2000 where Superman had the Titanic hanging in the FOS... Was that THE Titanic I saw briefly in a small panel?
It had 4 smoke stacks...


Very nice.


I love this issue more than the first one. The mood was sweet, I love how patient he was with Lois' questions. They were a believable couple. The art was filled with wonder and intention. An incredibly difficult balance to acheive. Well done all around.

-13th

[Paul McEnery]

I've said it many times... I don't have to defend my OPINIONS.


Done
Shadow --

There's no such thing as an opinion, and anyone who says there is is participating in a lie, and a very important lie at that.

Statements of taste are not statements about the object in question. "Paul McEnery doesn't like Brian Bendis's work" says nothing about Bendis's work. I could fall off the planet, and New Avengers 13 would still be there on the shelf (as indeed it should be :D). However, it is still an objective statement -- about "Paul McEnery". I could be lying, or I could be deluding myself, or I could be not taking into account my ambivalence, since there are certain aspects of his work I do enjoy. So there's that.

By contrast, critical evaluation is not a statement about subjective reception, but rather about the quality of the work itself. Does Richard Thompson play guitar better than me? Unquestionably. Does Grant Morrison write better than Frank Quitely, or Frank Quitely draw better than Grant Morrison? Certainly. And so on. These judgements are not tricky to make.

Equally, we can say that Morrison's writing has improved over the years, in terms of technique, and in his ability to write honestly, directly, and imaginatively; though we might also wonder if he has exhausted his thematic material. For instance, 7 Soldiers has greater breadth and depth than Zenith, even as it approaches the same general theme of the tyranny of a future/more-evolved humanity over the current state of play; or that opening sequence of ASS is something he wouldn't have been able to do when he was starting out with Doom Patrol or Animal Man (both of which took about five issues before he figured out how to do a 24-page book, or step out of the shadow of Alan Moore, or his other influences).

None of these things are issues of taste, but are objectively demonstrable; just as it's objectively demonstrable that The Invisibles is currently his great work. It simply is better than everything else he's done to date; although The Filth is also an impressive work, it's a much slighter effort, some of which fails to rise above satire to become a statement in itself.

I've always loathed the word "opinion" because it blurs the distinction between the two domains.

Making a statement of taste imposes a dual ethical obligation: to be honest both to oneself and to the person you're talking to, and to be open to change about what you're willing to enjoy.

Making a statement of critical evaluation imposes a similar obligation: again, to be honest about the qualities of the work in particular (i.e. suppressing one's own taste in order to allow the work in itself to speak), and to develop one's critical arsenal so as to better appreciate (or indeed criticize) the various levels of the work (i.e. its formal construction, its technical proficiency, its emotional and representational honesty, etc.).

To say "it's just my opinion and I don't have to justify it" ducks all those obligations, so that's none too impressive. However, it's suckier behaviour than that, because it also denigrates those who actually do have the stones to live up to their obligations.

[Kid Omega]

Shadow --

There's no such thing as an opinion, and anyone who says there is is participating in a lie, and a very important lie at that.
snip.

Thank you Paul. I knew you could explain this thing.

The statements "I love this book" and "This book is great" are very different things.... Explaining each becomes thornier, and the lines may blur, but the distinction is still there.

Either way, Mozart is better than Toby Kieth, and All Star Superman is about far more than "Superman Dies."

-a

[Paul McEnery]

Seriously? Because I DID grow up in Nashville, and I know that Mozart is EMPIRICALLY better than Toby Kieth.
Poor example for several reasons.

Firstly, you have to demonstrate that, say, there's a level of excellence in both apples and oranges; then you've got to demonstrate that Mozart fits the bill as an excellent apple; then you've got to demonstrate that Kieth fails as an excellent orange; then you've got to demonstrate that excellence is in some way a transcendental category so that you actually can compare apples and oranges.

Secondly, you've got to take in mind Tolkein's dictum when asked about comparing pulp fiction and "classy" fiction: "better for what?".

[Lurker]

Shadow --

There's no such thing as an opinion, and anyone who says there is is participating in a lie, and a very important lie at that.

Statements of taste are not statements about the object in question.

Let me offer another spin on this statement by saying that there IS such a thing as an opinion, but that there are different types. I believe what you are debating here is what qualifies as critical opinion and what qualifies as personal opinion.

[Paul McEnery]

Let me offer another spin on this statement by saying that there IS such a thing as an opinion, but that there are different types. I believe what you are debating here is what qualifies as personal opinion and what qualifies as personal opinion.
I think I know what you meant to say. :D

But I still disagree.

The word "opinion" always means at best laziness and at worst dishonesty. Moreover, it's an ideological phrase. Not necessarily in the terms of being used by entrenched power to put one over on the suppressed masses -- though it certainly is that -- but also just by regular folks when they want to hide from the fact that:
1) someone else is either more-informed or more critically skilled than they are;
2) they've got a taste for something that's objectively dodgy.

Now me, I'm proud of my guilty pleasures, I'm willing to admit when I don't know what I'm talking about, and I'm happy to either learn from someone who does, or yield to their expertise (there's only so many hours in the day, and I'm never going to make a great auto mechanic, to name just one thing that I suck at).

But getting back to ideological oppression: I'm nauseated by the way that critical evaluation of politics is shunted off to the so-called "op ed" pages. It's a way of downgrading analytic work -- which is what a newspaper ought to be doing in order to speak truth to power; not to mention ghettoizing it; not to mention concealing the fact that regular news coverage is chockablock with sins of both commission and omission enforced by the editorial policies of the publisher.

Exactly the same, now I think of it, when it comes down to aesthetic judgement. (Take the word "judgement", for example; Americans are used to spelling it without the first e, and by God American editors will get on your case about it; but that's just a matter of sentimental attachment to usage -- how in God's name do you justify getting rid of that e when its purpose is well-defined, and in fact the "dge" complex stands in for a phoneme that isn't represented in the English alphabet. There really is no argument here. Or should that be arguement?)

[Lurker]

I think I know what you meant to say. :D

But I still disagree.

A quick edit to personal and CRITICAL, but I guess I wasn't fast enough.

[Paul McEnery]

A quick edit to personal and CRITICAL, but I guess I wasn't fast enough.
*muntz*Ha ha!*/muntz*

Putting it another way: opinion is always a weasel word. On occasion, as with "IMHO" it's okay to use the weasel word as social lubrication (or as a face-saving way to say "I don't know what I'm talking about). But, generally, it's bogus.

[Lurker]

*muntz*Ha ha!*/muntz*

Putting it another way: opinion is always a weasel word. On occasion, as with "IMHO" it's okay to use the weasel word as social lubrication (or as a face-saving way to say "I don't know what I'm talking about). But, generally, it's bogus.

That's a rather unique highbrow *philosophy* you have there. ;)

[Michael P]

That's a rather unique highbrow *philosophy* you have there. ;)
Paul's had a lot of unique experiences. Most of them while high.

[Kid Omega]

Poor example for several reasons.

Firstly, you have to demonstrate that, say, there's a level of excellence in both apples and oranges; then you've got to demonstrate that Mozart fits the bill as an excellent apple; then you've got to demonstrate that Kieth fails as an excellent orange; then you've got to demonstrate that excellence is in some way a transcendental category so that you actually can compare apples and oranges.

Secondly, you've got to take in mind Tolkein's dictum when asked about comparing pulp fiction and "classy" fiction: "better for what?".

I was using extreme examples to make a point....

(Notice I didn't say Mozart is a better musician than Hank Williams... because I don't think that argument could be effectively made. And let us not forget, that Mozart was "pulpy", populist fare for his day... I think the comparison is maybe not so bad...)

(I also don't think that the two are apples and oranges... A country album serves the same purpose as a low opera, and they both use essentially the same tool in musical composition...)

Either way, I was just trying to use a blunt object to make a fine point.

It didn't seem to work so I recant all of it... recant! recant!

-a

[Cei-U!]

Yes, anyone can figure out there's an infant there. It's present in panel 4.

No, it isn't. I have the book open right in front of me. There is a man, a woman, a caption box, three fingers and a thumb holding a piece of red cloth, nine blades of grass and a caption box. No baby. Nothing that looks like a baby or even implies a baby. Maybe you should have your facts straight before you "correct" me next time.

Stubborn streak there certainly is, Kurt.

Especially when I'm right.

I've told you what the point is: as an overture with all the tone poem aspects I detailed.

You've told me what *you* think the point is. I don't see it. Make of that what you will.

Cei-U!
I summon the... aw, screw it.

[Kid Omega]

No, it isn't. I have the book open right in front of me. There is a man, a woman, a caption box, three fingers and a thumb holding a piece of red cloth, nine blades of grass and a caption box. No baby. Nothing that looks like a baby or even implies a baby. Maybe you should have your facts straight before you "correct" me next time.

Cei-U!
I summon the... aw, screw it.

To test your theory, I took the comic next door to a posh salon.

There were eight girls working... three Japanese, one Korean, One Israeli, One Italian, and Two Russian.

I showed them the page, and they all said "Superman!" Then they turned the page and cheered at the image of him flying. Then they wanted to read the rest of the book.

I can keep up the test if you like, but I'd say the page is a pretty clear intro, and an engaging one at that... Maybe that's the point.

I'd say that at this point we're splitting hairs. Whether or not the origin sequence is *effective* is isn't what you complained about to begin with.

-a

[Jaye]

I wonder what Lois will do during her 24 hours.

[Adam Crocker]

No, it isn't. I have the book open right in front of me. There is a man, a woman, a caption box, three fingers and a thumb holding a piece of red cloth, nine blades of grass and a caption box. No baby. Nothing that looks like a baby or even implies a baby. Maybe you should have your facts straight before you "correct" me next time.

Imagery ripped straight from the story of Moses...which is hardly obscurantist.

Nor is Superman's origin for that matter, especially from the stories I heard way back when of the trailer for the Smallville series was being aired in theatres. Apparently it mostly showed his ship crashing on Earth, which elicited great cheers from the theatre because the patrons knew what the scene meant.


Do I ever love to rile the Morrison fanboys (mostly because they're the same identical self parody listening to Radiohead while hanging out at Taco Bell at one in the morning)...

Care to name some examples Julian, because I don't listen to Radiohead. I listen to Can. :D

[Cei-U!]

To test your theory, I took the comic next door to a posh salon.

There were eight girls working... three Japanese, one Korean, One Israeli, One Italian, and Two Russian.

I showed them the page, and they all said "Superman!" Then they turned the page and cheered at the image of him flying. Then they wanted to read the rest of the book.

I can keep up the test if you like, but I'd say the page is a pretty clear intro, and an engaging one at that... Maybe that's the point.

I'd say that at this point we're splitting hairs. Whether or not the origin sequence is *effective* is isn't what you complained about to begin with.

-a

I give up. You win. It's a sparkling model of storytelling clarity and I'm just an ignorant Philistine.

[Jaye]

When Lois talks with Hush-Superman from the future, he implies he is one of their descendants, and its terrible? Is that what he meant? The whole "the terrible answer is before you thing"... I'm just not sure I'm reading that part right. -Of course it could all be her halluciantion too I guess, what with the J.Lo thing.

[SuperManny]

Re: the philosophies of an opinion: Let's stay on topic, fellas.

We've strayed from the discussion too much in this thread.

Anyone else wonder if Krypto All-Star might be showing up eventually?

:cool:

[Lurker]

I wonder what Lois will do during her 24 hours.


Dude, I totally hear ya.

[Lurker]

When Lois talks with Hush-Superman from the future, he implies he is one of their descendants, and its terrible? Is that what he meant? The whole "the terrible answer is before you thing"... I'm just not sure I'm reading that part right. -Of course it could all be her halluciantion too I guess, what with the J.Lo thing.

I think the J. LO bit was the dead give-away that Lois was on da Super-peyote. Given that suit though, she will be able to voice her concerns about the way Superman is acting and their future together on "equal footing."

[Lurker]

I give up. You win. It's a sparkling model of storytelling clarity and I'm just an ignorant Philistine.

At least you're not Canadian.

[The Shadow]

Re: the philosophies of an opinion: Let's stay on topic, fellas.
Sorry... didn't see this until after I posted my definition.

I'll move on.

[The Shadow]

At least you're not Canadian.
LOL

;) :D

You're just jealous!

[Kid Omega]

I give up. You win. It's a sparkling model of storytelling clarity and I'm just an ignorant Philistine.

*sigh*

First you said it was "artsy-fartsy", "smug and superfluous", and when someone defended it you said it was confusing. When we say it isn't confusing, you go back to saying it's superfluous.

I certainly don't think you're an "ignorant philistine", and I wonder why you would put that implication in my mouth.

You said people wouldn't understand it, and I thought they would, so I asked as random a group as I could get to in ten paces. Also, they have a cappucino machine.

I'm sorry if you feel slighted. You seem very defensive. I'm sorry for whatever caused that.

-a

[Michael P]

To test your theory, I took the comic next door to a posh salon.

There were eight girls working... three Japanese, one Korean, One Israeli, One Italian, and Two Russian.

I have *got* to visit that salon.

[Adam Crocker]

You said people wouldn't understand it, and I thought they would, so I asked as random a group as I could get to in ten paces. Also, they have a cappucino machine.

Alex...we've all gone out for a hit of that sweet Italian magic on odd hours be it under the cover of ogling Japanese girls or proving comic-book theories. There's no need to feel ashamed.

[Ultraman Max]

Just got the issue today, and haven't read it fully yet, but from the flip through I have to say that I really like the design for the Super Robots.

I just wanted to quickly point out:


his scripts have actually gotten worse over the years
You must not be reading Blood of the Demon.


Byrne doesn't script Blood of the Demon, Will Phiefer does.

[Sabrinaset]

Honestly, I didn't even know Mr. McEnery read comics until I saw this thread!

[The Shadow]

Byrne doesn't script Blood of the Demon, Will Phiefer does.
Yeah I know... it slipped my mind and someone mentioned it already.

[Ultraman Max]

Yeah I know... it slipped my mind and someone mentioned it already.


Sorry, a tad quick on the reply button.

[The Shadow]

Sorry, a tad quick on the reply button.
LOL

No problems!!!

I do it too.

[ERoy]

Was it better than the first? Quite possibly.

We get even more glimpses of Superman as noble, creative, good-hearted, and just plain awesome.

Plenty of super-science magic, with robots and laser guns and messages from the future.

The scene with the golden key is just about as classic as it gets, visa vis Silver Age goodness. The Unknown Superman is a fantastic concept... heck, this whole book is brimming with fantastic concepts.

Lois is sexy, smart, and exactly the kind of girl you can understand Superman falling for. Finally.

The page layouts and design were astonishing- Quitely is a master of subtle storytelling. The designs of the fortess itself were stunning, those robots were killer, and the scene of Superman recovering from (no spoilers) is a great panel. Goodness all around. Stunning.

There's more to say, here at the Dawn of the Age of Superheroes, but I'm still digesting it all. I need another few readings.

I still love it more than just about tights book going. I feel like a kid again.

-a

I couldn't disagree more. It's simply another example of Morrison ruining YET ANOTHER mythos with his nonsense.

[Matt Algren]

I couldn't disagree more. It's simply another example of Morrison ruining YET ANOTHER mythos with his nonsense.
How so?

_____

[ERoy]

How so?

_____

Do you want examples of why I dislike this series, or how Morrison has ruined other Mythos? I can give either.

[The Shadow]

Do you want examples of why I dislike this series, or how Morrison has ruined other Mythos? I can give either.
Make sure they have "weight" and aren't "wizard captions"

On a more serious note... post both.

[Matt Algren]

Do you want examples of why I dislike this series, or how Morrison has ruined other Mythos? I can give either.
Your call. Any information is better than no information. Considering that the thread is about Superman, that'd be a good place to start.

[Adam Crocker]

Honestly, I didn't even know Mr. McEnery read comics until I saw this thread!

I have saved on the word processor on my computer these huge posts by him where he tears Bendis and Azzarello a new one, calling them hacks and pastiche artists and comparing their works to guys like Alan Moore, Lee and Kirby in the 60s, Frank Miller's Daredevil, Steve Englebert, Gerry Conway, and Steve Gerber as well as throwing in references to literature, television and popular music. And all it is one big discussion on how to use realism properly in art, corporate goals stifling creativity, and where referencing the past is either hack swiping or reorganizing well known symbols to create something new.

He knows a lot about comics, particularly how to apply sophisticated criticism to them.

[Matt Algren]

Make sure they have "weight" and aren't "wizard captions"

On a more serious note... post both.
You have a weird definition of "moving on".

[jaguarshark]

Originally posted by Paul McEnery
There's no such thing as an opinion, and anyone who says there is is participating in a lie, and a very important lie at that.

If you honestly believe that, then you are a fool. In my opinion. Of course, you're entitled to your opinion. That is, in my opinion, you're entitled to your opinion. My brain hurts.
Honestly, you seem like a really intelligent guy and with the amount of posts on this thread talking about you and your scholarly criticism in hushed reverant tones, you seem like someone I should listen to. But I've read over everything you said a couple times to see if I missed something, and as far as I can tell, you're just wrong. Of course, according to my side of the debate, you could never be INDISPUTABLY wrong, which is where the brain hurtage recommences.

Anyway, All-Star Superman # 2. OMG, this is rocksome. F*$% cautious objective reviewing, I'll get as breathless and worked up over this thing as I want to. I read the Superman Showcase fairly recently, and this is the direct descendant of those brilliant stories. The imagination is turned up to 11 and any and all restrcitions are nowhere to be seen.
I keep hearing people say that they don't like how decompressed this series is. True. So far, we've only seen the origin, Superman rescuing a spaceship from the sun, the introduction of a modern-day space-faring scientific genius in the tradition of Reed Richards and Willy Wonka, Luthor's ultimate victory, the news that Superman is dying, space giants, bizarro worker drones, Superman saving kids from vehicles and jerks from mufflers (floating monorail mufflers!), the new-look (yet iconic) Clark Kent, Superman revealing his identity to Lois Lane (yes, it's been done before, but never this way, never in the way they would've done it in the Silver Age, sprinkled with modern naturalism), keys fused from dwarf-star materials, the Fortress of Solitude, the Titanic, Superman robots, Supermen from the future, baby sun-eaters, an anvil from Olympus, any number of references to past adventures (both those that happened in the Silver Age, and in the style of ones we saw in the Silver Age) that looked to have been completely forgotten, Lois getting high, and the new Superwoman (for one day only!). And I've probably forgotten stuff. Yep, damn that Morrison. Can't he just write a comic with some actual ideas and creativity, and none of this decompressed filler!

[The Shadow]

You have a weird definition of "moving on".
LOL

I was just giving him fair warning.

[The Shadow]

One thing I don't get and maybe it was mentioned earlier... but why was the Space Shuttle and the (I'm guessing) Titanic in the Fortress of Solitude?

[Paul McEnery]

If you honestly believe that, then you are a fool. In my opinion. Of course, you're entitled to your opinion. That is, in my opinion, you're entitled to your opinion. My brain hurts.
Honestly, you seem like a really intelligent guy and with the amount of posts on this thread talking about you and your scholarly criticism in hushed reverant tones, you seem like someone I should listen to. But I've read over everything you said a couple times to see if I missed something, and as far as I can tell, you're just wrong. Of course, according to my side of the debate, you could never be INDISPUTABLY wrong, which is where the brain hurtage recommences.

Anyway, All-Star Superman # 2. OMG, this is rocksome. F*$% cautious objective reviewing, I'll get as breathless and worked up over this thing as I want to. I read the Superman Showcase fairly recently, and this is the direct descendant of those brilliant stories. The imagination is turned up to 11 and any and all restrcitions are nowhere to be seen.
I keep hearing people say that they don't like how decompressed this series is. True. So far, we've only seen the origin, Superman rescuing a spaceship from the sun, the introduction of a modern-day space-faring scientific genius in the tradition of Reed Richards and Willy Wonka, Luthor's ultimate victory, the news that Superman is dying, space giants, bizarro worker drones, Superman saving kids from vehicles and jerks from mufflers (floating monorail mufflers!), the new-look (yet iconic) Clark Kent, Superman revealing his identity to Lois Lane (yes, it's been done before, but never this way, never in the way they would've done it in the Silver Age, sprinkled with modern naturalism), keys fused from dwarf-star materials, the Fortress of Solitude, the Titanic, Superman robots, Supermen from the future, baby sun-eaters, an anvil from Olympus, any number of references to past adventures (both those that happened in the Silver Age, and in the style of ones we saw in the Silver Age) that looked to have been completely forgotten, Lois getting high, and the new Superwoman (for one day only!). And I've probably forgotten stuff. Yep, damn that Morrison. Can't he just write a comic with some actual ideas and creativity, and none of this decompressed filler!
Given that I'm on the same page as you with the rest of your post...

Huh?

[PatrickG]

One thing I don't get and maybe it was mentioned earlier... but why was the Space Shuttle and the (I'm guessing) Titanic in the Fortress of Solitude?

The Titanic was in Superman's Pre-Crisis fortress. He tended to brood a lot back then (hence Fortress of SOLITUDE) and I seem to recall that he had personally (and secretly?) dug up and reassembled the Titanic's remains to remind himself what happens if he fails...

Plus, Superman was the kind of guy that looked at the Titanic and thought of Krypton. He connected with people aboard the Titanic, emotionally, because he sees his own tragedy mirrored in other people's.

[jaguarshark]

Originally posted by Paul McEnery
Given that I'm on the same page as you with the rest of your post...

Huh?
'Opinion' is a wonderful word which, as well as being great for smoothing over arguments, as you so rightly noted, is also a very real and accurate way of describing your viewpoints. In my opinion, this is a great comic. But in someone else's opinion, it might not be. That's cool. Good for them. They probably like a whole bunch of stuff I don't know about, and maybe they can turn me on to that stuff and suddenly I'll have some newfound appreciation for the work of a past master or a new indie title. Whatever. That's the beauty of humanity's diversity.
The point is, 'opinion' isn't a lie. The mere fact that you can say it is, without everybody eliciting a collective WTF, is because you're entitled to your opinion. But ultimatley, that's what your grand statement is... an opinion. Maybe that was your point, maybe that was the big joke behind it all. But otherwise, it was a fairly pompous way to reject other people's opinions. I totally agree with you and Kid Omega and Joe Rice about damn-near everything in this thread, but when you say things like (and I'm obviously paraphrasing here), The Invisibles is Grant Morrison's greatest work, and nobody can disagree with that, that's just bogus. In much the same way, I disagree with nearly everything The Shadow says, but I don't begrudge him his opinion at all.
There's probably a million flaws in my logic. I'm much closer to being an idiot than I am to being perfect. But I hate the way you guys threadjacked this thing into some sort of intellectual rap battle, while at the same time trying to deny that the possibility for such an argument exists. Which makes my participation in it all the more foolish, sure. But I'm a fool with an opinion, and so is everybody on these boards (well, they're not all fools, but you know what I mean), and you can't take that away from any of us.
Anyway, getting back to something we can probably agree on... let's keep Grant Morrison on All-Star Supes forever. Hell, let's keep Morrison on All-Star Supes, Batman, Flash, Green Lantern, Jimmy Olsen, whatever, forever. Of course, he won't stay forever, because other writers with other ideas will come onboard and keep the comics world turning, but we can dream!

[The Shadow]

Let's give it the real definition:

Opinion: what people spout off when they don't know bupkis.

Paul... you seem like a nice guy and I respect your OPINIONS ( :p ) but we're gonna have to agree to disagree and just move on. I also think that's what jaguarshark was talking about in his previous post.

[The Shadow]

The Titanic was in Superman's Pre-Crisis fortress. He tended to brood a lot back then (hence Fortress of SOLITUDE) and I seem to recall that he had personally (and secretly?) dug up and reassembled the Titanic's remains to remind himself what happens if he fails...

Plus, Superman was the kind of guy that looked at the Titanic and thought of Krypton. He connected with people aboard the Titanic, emotionally, because he sees his own tragedy mirrored in other people's.
Interesting.

Offhand, do you (or anyone else) happen to know of an issue # with the Titanic in a Superman comic?

Thanks.

[jaguarshark]

I can't remember anything about this whole Titanic business from Pre-Crisis, although I don't doubt it was there. I do remember that Superman was quite partial to visiting the wreckage of ships for buried treasure. Considering the Titanic itself is a buried treasure, it's in keeping with that, although Superman would normally use the treasure for some sort of benevolent means, not store it in his fortress. It totally fits in with all the other crazy stuff in there, though.

[miss5050]

wth is goin on here???
is this about superman?
ontopic: he seems more like bat (psycho mind) to me

[Doug Strange]

he seems more like bat (psycho mind) to meI find myself forced to agree with this.

[PatrickG]

Interesting.

Offhand, do you (or anyone else) happen to know of an issue # with the Titanic in a Superman comic?

Thanks.

The story that introduces the arctic Fortress from 1959?

I'm fairly sure it shows up both in THE GREATEST SUPERMAN STORIES EVER TOLD and SUPERMAN IN THE FIFTIES.

[chicainery]

he seems more like bat (psycho mind) to me
I find myself forced to agree with this.

This was my favourite post of the thread.

[Super Monkey]

Webster is the John Bryne of dictionaries (no, that not a good thing).

Get yourself a copy of The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language

[miss5050]

he seems more like bat (psycho mind) to me

I find myself forced to agree with this.


This was my favourite post of the thread.

yay :) and thread looks way better now ;)

[Kid Omega]

snip
In much the same way, I disagree with nearly everything The Shadow says, but I don't begrudge him his opinion at all.


Hey Brother...
No one is begrudging him his opinion, but we're asking fro a little more explanation than what he keeps giving. If you want to say "this book ain't all that" in a room full of people who really thought it was something special, you should be able to back things up. See Cei-U's post. He made some very valid points, and backed it up with a sense of history, design, and cultivated taste for superhero books. We can debate the finer points, but he made a well-reasoned argument.

There's also a history here with the Shadow... After Issue One, he pooped up saying that we only liked AS Superman because we're Morrison Sycophants (which he reiterated in this thread. He kept asking for people to explain why it was so great, in a thread FULL of such explanations. Basically, we explain why we like it, he says "I don't like it- why is it so good?", we explain it again, he says "I don't like it- why is it so good?", and repeat ad nauseum. Then the same thing happened at our blog, when he showed up there, trolling along. So we're sick of having to defend these books, while he (and others) makes opinionated assertions and expects them to go unchallenged.

snip
But I hate the way you guys threadjacked this thing into some sort of intellectual rap battle, while at the same time trying to deny that the possibility for such an argument exists.

I think the argument exists. Here in the shop, a huge Morrison fan recently explained why he thought it was a lesser work. He had many valid points.

The point here is that we keep getting asked to explain ourselves, and when we demand the same in return, some people get huffy.

Again, there is a history. Sorry for the thread derailment, but I hope you start to see why we're a little more irritated than seems necessary...

thanks!

-a

[The Shadow]

You have a weird definition of "moving on".
So does Kid Omega it seems :rolleyes:

[Kid Omega]

So does Kid Omega it seems :rolleyes:

Do explain.

[The Shadow]

Do explain.
OK... you said to me...
I'll move on if you can!
Let's just let it go!

We'll never agree. Despite your "weighted" opinions you have yet to change my mind or even alter it in the slightest. Just as I'm sure my "Wizard caption" opinions have failed to sway you. Hell, even Cei-U!'s thoughts aren't enough to sway you and you guys are "old pals" as you put it.
Let's just move along shall we?

[Kid Omega]

OK... you said to me...

Let's just let it go!

We'll never agree. Despite your "weighted" opinions you have yet to change my mind or even alter it in the slightest. Just as I'm sure my "Wizard caption" opinions have failed to sway you. Hell, even Cei-U!'s thoughts aren't enough to sway you and you guys are "old pals" as you put it.
Let's just move along shall we?

I'm not trying to change your mind.

Cei-U was not trying to change my mind. (And we are old pals. No quotes or "as you put it" needed)

I had moved on.

I was not talking to you.

You only came up when I was trying to explain to jaguarshark what the crtiticism discussion was about.

I have no need to parlay with you any longer. I have a girlfriend, and your flirting is tiresome.

Now, are you *actually* "moving on", are you going to keep throwing witty little barbs around? (Note sarcasm.)


-a

[Sabrinaset]

I'll try to move it along.

I like this book because the art is really nice.

I like this book because of the quirky ideas in it that I have never seen before, i.e. the key that weighs half a million tons. I also like the fact that Superman casually lifts it up, softly telling the reader that this the most powerful hero of them all. The Superman with a question mark instead of an "S".

I also like this book because it presents Superman as human, with human feelings like curiosity, human worries of his own death, human concerns of others (Robots? Lois' car needs to be repaired.), his friendship with Batman and Robin, which point out that, despite his powers, it's the man inside the costume that makes him special.

I like the humor in the book. I really laughed with that "Who is...J-Lo?" line!

I also like this book because of what it is not. It is NOT a celebration of the psychopath as hero. (Read: Wolverine). It is not about Heroes doing villainous things and yet still somehow still believing themselves heroes (Read: Mind-wiping, neck-snapping, etc.) It is, in short, not a dark book, although perhaps some dark things may happen in it.

Okay, I'm not going to go into the deeper aspects that you guys are going into. All I am gunna say is that I like THIS book, and for THOSE reasons!

[Ed Cunard]

I have no need to parlay with you any longer. I have a girlfriend, and your flirting is tiresome.



...

My flirting is still ok, right?

[The Shadow]

I have a girlfriend, and your flirting is tiresome.
So many comments... must not get banned... ;)

[Kid Omega]

...

My flirting is still ok, right?

As long as it is tender.

[Kid Omega]

I also like this book because it presents Superman as human, with human feelings like curiosity, human worries of his own death, human concerns of others (Robots? Lois' car needs to be repaired.), his friendship with Batman and Robin, which point out that, despite his powers, it's the man inside the costume that makes him special.

That's a key to this book, and this issue especially... it's a Love Story.

The casual asides about how Robin is a "great kid" and how the Fortress is more for posterity than for himself... it shows Superman as a very giving, gentle person.

There are other moments; the way he touches Lois' shoulder as she tries to lift the key, the way he flies light years away to bring her flowers, the way he cooks dinner in the state room of the Titanic... just to do something special for her. I love how he still wants to impress her... the tour of the Fortress and the pride in his voice. And he dresses up for dinner... the Kryptonian version of black-tie, ya know.

Ane when he feeds his Sun-Eater, there's the nostalgic and sincere "Look out, Lois!"

The premise of this issue is that he doesn't want to ruin Lois' surprise present. All the implied danger and confusion all comes down to him trying to do something special for her, while he still can.

It's great.

Not only is Superman's love for her totally real here, but Lois is finally the kind of girl wecan understand him falling for. She's uber-sexy, and cpable and smart, but also vulnerable and sweet... notice her body language when he reveals her present.

Very subtle, very sweet.

Touching, in fact.

-a

[f. chong rutherford]

This thread is like bad college theatre.

Okay, getting back to the comic, Leo Quintum. I've read a lot of comments that equate him with Willy Wonka. Why does the character seem to remind people of Willy Wonka? Is it, Willy Wonka makes candy, Leo Quintum makes genetically altered beings? If so, I certainly do NOT want to eat a handful of nanonauts.

I'm curious about what corner of Grant Morrison's brain decided to give the character a latin name, also.

[The Shadow]

but Lois is finally the kind of girl wecan understand him falling for. She's uber-sexy, and cpable and smart, but also vulnerable and sweet...
*sigh*

I gotta ask Alex... but how is this any different from the Lois Gail Simone wrote? Or Byrne? Or anyone else?

I'm NOT attacking or wanting an uber-explanation, asking you to defend your decision/opinions or even challenging your views (phew!)... I'm just curious how this representation of Lois is different from the current Lois of the regular DCU. who (despite being married) still gets in trouble and who Clark loves unconditionally.

She does (especially in this issue) remind me of the Lois from the old Fleisher (sp?) Superman cartoons of the '40's... always going where she shouldn't.

[stealthwise]

That's a key to this book, and this issue especially... it's a Love Story.

The casual asides about how Robin is a "great kid" and how the Fortress is more for posterity than for himself... it shows Superman as a very giving, gentle person.

There are other moments; the way he touches Lois' shoulder as she tries to lift the key, the way he flies light years away to bring her flowers, the way he cooks dinner in the state room of the Titanic... just to do something special for her. I love how he still wants to impress her... the tour of the Fortress and the pride in his voice. And he dresses up for dinner... the Kryptonian version of black-tie, ya know.

Ane when he feeds his Sun-Eater, there's the nostalgic and sincere "Look out, Lois!"

The premise of this issue is that he doesn't want to ruin Lois' surprise present. All the implied danger and confusion all comes down to him trying to do something special for her, while he still can.

It's great.

Not only is Superman's love for her totally real here, but Lois is finally the kind of girl wecan understand him falling for. She's uber-sexy, and cpable and smart, but also vulnerable and sweet... notice her body language when he reveals her present.

Very subtle, very sweet.

Touching, in fact.

-a

Great post, you hit the nail on the head.

[Kid Omega]

*sigh*

I gotta ask Alex... but how is this any different from the Lois Gail Simone wrote? Or Byrne? Or anyone else?

I'm NOT attacking or wanting an uber-explanation, asking you to defend your decision/opinions or even challenging your views (phew!)... I'm just curious how this representation of Lois is different from the current Lois of the regular DCU. who (despite being married) still gets in trouble and who Clark loves unconditionally.

She does (especially in this issue) remind me of the Lois from the old Fleisher (sp?) Superman cartoons of the '40's... always going where she shouldn't.

Are you serious?

Way to "move on", there.

-a

[The Shadow]

Are you serious?

Way to "move on", there.

LOL

100% serious. This IS a discussion board after all!

And I just KNEW you'd say that... but I would have asked ANYONE who posted that reply... unfortunatly (and I can't stress that enough) it happened to be you.

So I'll instead direct my question to stealthwise who agreed emphatically with you.

stealthwise?

[stealthwise]

Me? Really? What are we talking about?

*scans thread above*

Ah, Lois. Right.

Well, given that we've only seen two issues of her in Morrison's run, and that I've only read one issue of Simone's Action, it's hard to compare fairly.

However, I will note that Byrne's Lois was... a bit uneven at times. She came across as a hard-nosed, determined reporter, but she also seemed like a complete bitch at times too.

I agree somewhat with the comparison to the Fleischer Lois, but I can see elements of those other Lois's of the past in their as well. Not the nosey, "I'll make you marry me one day Superman!" Lois from the Silver Age, but the one that combines the inquisitive and gentle elements of Lois from that era with the strong qualities of the Margot Kidder Lois, and the modern age Lois.

It's not a leap ahead by any means, but she seems to suit the story well.

[Kid Omega]

LOL

100% serious. This IS a discussion board after all!

And I just KNEW you'd say that... but I would have asked ANYONE who posted that reply... unfortunatly (and I can't stress that enough) it happened to be you.

So I'll instead direct my question to stealthwise who agreed emphatically with you.

stealthwise?

Here's the thing Shadow, the thing that is so maddening.

I just explained why I think this Lois is different. It should be implicit in my post, that if I see those qualities in this version of Lois, I haven't seen them in the others. So I've already answered your question.

But you keep coming back... I (and others) explain things we like about this book, and you ask us to expalin some more. If we do, you ask for us to explain that some more.

But the minute you're asked to explain your points, you get huffy with a "I don't have to justify my opinions!" This is thread number two where this has happened, three if you count trolling at our blog.

Dude, you don't think this book is that great. You can't expound any deeper than that, but you keep demanding justifications from everyone else. What is your obsession with this book?

There are a ton of popular books that I don't care about, but you don't see me ass-deep in the INFINITE CRISIS threads asking people to defend their views.

This is getting ridiculous.

[The Shadow]

I just explained why I think this Lois is different. It should be implicit in my post, that if I see those qualities in this version of Lois, I haven't seen them in the others. So I've already answered your question.
No you haven't in any way shape or form answered MY QUESTION on why you think this Lois is different than any other incarnation. In fact your whole post talks about Superman and HIS love for Lois.

That's a key to this book, and this issue especially... it's a Love Story.

The casual asides about how Robin is a "great kid" and how the Fortress is more for posterity than for himself... it shows Superman as a very giving, gentle person.

There are other moments; the way he touches Lois' shoulder as she tries to lift the key, the way he flies light years away to bring her flowers, the way he cooks dinner in the state room of the Titanic... just to do something special for her. I love how he still wants to impress her... the tour of the Fortress and the pride in his voice. And he dresses up for dinner... the Kryptonian version of black-tie, ya know.

Ane when he feeds his Sun-Eater, there's the nostalgic and sincere "Look out, Lois!"

The premise of this issue is that he doesn't want to ruin Lois' surprise present. All the implied danger and confusion all comes down to him trying to do something special for her, while he still can.

It's great.

Not only is Superman's love for her totally real here, but Lois is finally the kind of girl wecan understand him falling for. She's uber-sexy, and cpable and smart, but also vulnerable and sweet... notice her body language when he reveals her present.

Very subtle, very sweet.

Touching, in fact.

All you described in that very last sentence was... well, a generic Lois that could be applied to ANY era or comic (or even the movies and now Smallville). You said NOTHING about what makes THIS Lois different or special from other Lois's... and that's what I asked.

I think you're getting in a huff and defensive when all I did was ask a simple straight forward question.

[Tom]

All you described in that very last sentence was... well, a generic Lois that could be applied to ANY era or comic (or even the movies and now Smallville). You said NOTHING about what makes THIS Lois different or special from other Lois's... and that's what I asked.
Shadow, for Chrissake, he gave an answer. It's an answer you don't like. So what? WHat is the point in hammering away at people demanding that they explain why they like a book that you don't like? It's retarded.

[The Shadow]

Shadow, for Chrissake, he gave an answer. It's an answer you don't like. So what? WHat is the point in hammering away at people demanding that they explain why they like a book that you don't like? It's retarded.
But he didn't give ma an answer at all.

And I have NEVER said it's a book I don't like... anywhere EVER. Kid Omega said it as well, but it's not true. I just don't think this book is anything better or worse than any other Superman book on the shelves and I'm trying to understand the IMMENSE appeal. stealthwise gave a good answer.

Anyway... I SWEAR I'm moving on!

[Tom]

But he didn't give ma an answer at all.Yes he did. He explained why he likes this Lois. That you don't see anything remarkable about this Lois does not require him to expound further and it does not mean that you didn't get a response.

You didn't like the response. That much is evident.
You don't like the book. That much is evident
You don't like Joe and Alex. That one is increasingly evident.

You are not "trying to understand" anything. You're trying to wind people up. You embarrass yourself when you try to claim otherwise. I told you once in PM but now I will make it public: State your likes and dislikes and allow others to state theirs. What you're doing is trolling and harrassment.

[PatrickG]

I think the argument exists. Here in the shop, a huge Morrison fan recently explained why he thought it was a lesser work. He had many valid points.

The point here is that we keep getting asked to explain ourselves, and when we demand the same in return, some people get huffy.


I actually agree... so far. This series isn't moving nearly fast enough for the expectations I had built up from the interviews. The plot structure itself seems a bit formulaic. Making a character terminally ill in order to explore their life is a pretty stock idea for mining drama out of situations. Morrison is capable of writing stories that are far more innovative and far more compressed.

I like that the second or third time I read All-Star Superman, I catch new details. But some of Morrison's other work, I could read twenty times without catching all the details. MARVEL BOY dropped concepts at a much faster rate than ALL-STAR is so far.

Based on the hype from Morrison and DC, I expected this book to brimming over with concepts, cramming a year's worth of stories into single pages. Morrison can do that and based on the advance hype for this book, I expected that Morrison would do that.

As of yet, I don't feel like he is.

He is being clever and crafting an enjoyable read. And any issue could change my mind. Perhaps he's playing a conscious game wherein something that seems irrelevant now will BECOME relevant when #7 comes out, prompting us to reread the older issues. Perhaps we're on the slow, uphill part of the roller coaster before the real fun begins. #2 is better than #1, IMO.

But as of yet, this story is simply at the level which I think the AVERAGE Superman comic should be in terms of inventiveness and pacing. I was expecting considerably MORE from Morrison.

[Kid Omega]

I actually agree... so far. This series isn't moving nearly fast enough for the expectations I had built up from the interviews. The plot structure itself seems a bit formulaic. Making a character terminally ill in order to explore their life is a pretty stock idea for mining drama out of situations. Morrison is capable of writing stories that are far more innovative and far more compressed.

I like that the second or third time I read All-Star Superman, I catch new details. But some of Morrison's other work, I could read twenty times without catching all the details. MARVEL BOY dropped concepts at a much faster rate than ALL-STAR is so far.

Based on the hype from Morrison and DC, I expected this book to brimming over with concepts, cramming a year's worth of stories into single pages. Morrison can do that and based on the advance hype for this book, I expected that Morrison would do that.

As of yet, I don't feel like he is.

He is being clever and crafting an enjoyable read. And any issue could change my mind. Perhaps he's playing a conscious game wherein something that seems irrelevant now will BECOME relevant when #7 comes out, prompting us to reread the older issues. Perhaps we're on the slow, uphill part of the roller coaster before the real fun begins. #2 is better than #1, IMO.

But as of yet, this story is simply at the level which I think the AVERAGE Superman comic should be in terms of inventiveness and pacing. I was expecting considerably MORE from Morrison.

That's all pretty solid reasoning... I agree that the pace is far more deliberate than expected, and the crazy-crazy idea-flow that we get from ither books is reigned in here...

That said, I think that there is a straightforwardness to the plotting that I love, and a sincerity to the character work that is lacking in works like MARVEL BOY (which I loved).

It's a very different type of tone than we expect from GM, closer to VIMANARAMA than say, THE FILTH. But I think it works incredibly well.

I read so little of the pre-release press that I came in with no expectations... I can see being disappointed if more was promised...

-a

[stealthwise]

I really have to say that I prefer the pacing here to that of Vimanarama. They're both really good works imo, but Vimanarama, like SeaGuy, moved at an almost breakneck speed that really took me by surprise. I'm not a fan of most decompressed comics in general, but I'm liking what I'm seeing so far. What bothers me most is that the issues are taking two months to come out. At least DC's being honest about it though, and not soliciting a monthly schedule that they can't possibly keep up.

Btw, is Marvel Boy available via trade? I keep hearing good things about it.

[Kid Omega]

Btw, is Marvel Boy available via trade? I keep hearing good things about it.

It was at one point, but I think it's out of print currently...

Don't worry ... there are diligent retailers out there begging Marvel to bring it back if possible...

-a

[Justin D.]

I haven't had the chance to read the book yet, but . . .

Superman did mention during the dinner scene that the food they were having mimicked what they actually served on the Titanic....that to me was the give-away. Have to admit though, it's pretty interesting to see it was mentioned as part of his proposal, and now he was able to execute it!

Did anyone else notice how Morrison put a different twist on the Fortress of Solitude? Superman claims that the pieces in his Fortress are not for a 'museum' or his trophy room. Rather, all the items collected serve as a time capsule for future heroes to discover and note how great the "dawn of the age of superheroes" really was.

What a way by Morrison to show how self-less and confident Superman really is! He doesn't need tokens or mementoes to realize or remind himself how great he is. This is definitely one Superman who knows he's on top of his game.

that also reads like a very arrogant Superman. A Superman who thinks that he is the "dawn of the age of superheroes". I love Superman when he's confident. I'm not so sure about liking him when he's arrogant.

A little sidenote, if I can. I do think that Joe and Alex are drooling, obsessive fanatics when it comes to Grant Morrison. That said, I don't think they like the book because it's written by Grant Morrison, but because it's Grant Morrison's writing. There's quite the distinction between the two.

At the same time, I don't see too much wrong in Shadow's question about what the difference is between this Lois and other Lois appearances. Those who are falling all over themselves with how much they love Lois now, how much have you read with Lois in it in the last few years? Past 10 years? It's perfectly fine and valid to say you like this Lois more than any other you've ever read, but how much of her have you read before? I don't just mean reading about her, but actually reading books she's in.

Also, I do hope Quitely's Superman is somewhat different in the second issue like some have said. At least, I hope he toned down that massive jawline some. By the way, am I the only one who sees blatant sexual imagery in the cover for issue number three?

Just read the solicits for numer three too. "Meanwhile, Lex Luthor's plans simmer as the criminal mastermind exerts his charisma and intellect over the hardcore inmates who share his maximum-security prison." Who wants to bet we meet some revitalized and revamped familiar faces in that prison?

[Matt Algren]

Do you want examples of why I dislike this series, or how Morrison has ruined other Mythos? I can give either.That's odd. ERoy posted this, read my reply...Your call. Any information is better than no information. Considering that the thread is about Superman, that'd be a good place to start....(yes, I was watching), and then signed off without responding. I wonder why.

[Jaye]

Sexual imagery?

http://images.comicbookresources.com/solicits/dc032006/batman_superman/big/AllStarSupermanCv3.jpg

Is that your opinion?

[PatrickG]

that also reads like a very arrogant Superman. A Superman who thinks that he is the "dawn of the age of superheroes". I love Superman when he's confident. I'm not so sure about liking him when he's arrogant.


It's not quite as arrogant when you realize that some of THIS Superman's best friends are from the 31st century. The Superman in this comic was Superboy as a young man, after all, and a member of the Legion of Super-Heroes.

If you know, factually, that he IS the "dawn of the age of heroes" and you're friends from the future have told (and shown) you so, saving them a few treats might be a nice gesture.

Anyway, I have little problem with an experienced Superman saying this because he's witnessed hundreds upon hundreds of heroes debut... and he likely expects a day to come when every good and decent person in the universe is a super-hero.

If he said this on his first day on the job, it might be arrogant however.


Just read the solicits for numer three too. "Meanwhile, Lex Luthor's plans simmer as the criminal mastermind exerts his charisma and intellect over the hardcore inmates who share his maximum-security prison." Who wants to bet we meet some revitalized and revamped familiar faces in that prison?

Speaking of blatant sexual imagery... That solicit sounds like a porno. I have this bizarre notion of Brainiac being Luthor's prison "girlfriend" and the villains using Kryptonite-laced cigarettes as currency to smuggle Kryptonite around the prison...