View Full Version : Did anyone get Superman/Batman 30 this week?
JoshuaB
11-30-2006, 03:53 PM
I was flipping through it and saw a big scene with Starfire...is this a spoiler for 52, or is this arc out of continuity?
Jack Zodiac
11-30-2006, 04:00 PM
It isn't Starfire. Something's been creating/shapeshifting forms that look like other aliens, like Martian Manhunter or the Kryptonian Caveman.
JoshuaB
11-30-2006, 04:31 PM
Oh....well...okay, then. I was sort of hoping.....
MaxofSteel
11-30-2006, 05:20 PM
How's the issue? Any good?
Jack Zodiac
11-30-2006, 07:00 PM
Better than the past three have been. If it came out on time, it'd be easier to follow, I'm sure, but it all seems to be falling into place, now.
brundlefly
12-01-2006, 08:44 AM
I'm digging Verheiden/Van Sciver much, much more than Loeb's S/B run. This one was their best yet, imo, if for no other reason than the welcome return of super-smooth, Machiavellian manipulator Luthor. I figured that there would be some form of DC editorial edict to use the raving nutcase version from UP UP AND AWAY from now on (as is being done currently in ACTION), but looks like it's up to individual writer interpretation instead, which made me a very, very happy man with this issue. And it's set in current continuity to boot (the references to Supes' two different Fortresses, Bats' line to Lex about "I can't believe you used to be President") so I don't have to worry about "oh, see, this story actually happened between 52 and UP UP AND AWAY" or whatever. Plus I love Van Sciver's artwork here, too.
Kilowog made for a pretty menacing bad guy here, under the control of our mystery threat from space, and I'm sure Supes will do the same next issue now that he's in its thrall. I'm really enjoying this current team and story arc and finally look forward to reading this title, while with Loeb I was just kind of enduring S/B because of my love of both Bats and Supes, hoping the book would eventually improve.
This issue feels like it was shoehorned into current continuity without the writter being familiar with the stories in JLA, or what Lex' current situation is.
The bits between Batman and Plasticman seemed to ignore all of their history of being teammates in JLA. So either the writter isn't familiar with their history or we have a crappy superboy wall punch.:mad:
Jack Zodiac
12-01-2006, 01:03 PM
As far as how Lex is being used goes, I don't give a crap that he's a manipulative businessman in this but a mad scientist in Action, because his role in this issue was great. Once more, a good idea trumps continuity.
And it didn't feel as though Batman was ignoring the time spent with Plas on the League. Plas was a crook. Low-rent, sure, but still a crook, and Batman don't like him some crooks. Even during Kelly's run on the book, Bruce was always giving Eel crap, so I thought it fit right in.
brundlefly
12-01-2006, 01:39 PM
As far as how Lex is being used goes, I don't give a crap that he's a manipulative businessman in this but a mad scientist in Action, because his role in this issue was great. Once more, a good idea trumps continuity.
Totally agreed, but then I'm biased since LexCorp CEO Lex handily trumps Nutty Scientist Lex, imo, so any interpretation that ignores his regression to the latter in UP UP AND AWAY is tops in my book. No gripes from me about continuity on that. Plus, the LexCorp version of Lex works perfectly for the role Verheiden gives him here, that of "I told you that aliens were a threat to Earth, Batman, and your boy Superman is no exception."
Jack Zodiac
12-01-2006, 01:42 PM
I like both versions of Lex (I'd say I even like the mad scientist Lex more), but in this situation, I agree, the sly, cunning Lex was a better role than the mad scientist Lex, while in Action, the mad scientist Lex unleasing Bizarro to kidnap Super-Kid was more fitting.
Sean Whitmore
12-01-2006, 03:52 PM
As far as how Lex is being used goes, I don't give a crap that he's a manipulative businessman in this but a mad scientist in Action, because his role in this issue was great. Once more, a good idea trumps continuity.
And it didn't feel as though Batman was ignoring the time spent with Plas on the League. Plas was a crook. Low-rent, sure, but still a crook, and Batman don't like him some crooks. Even during Kelly's run on the book, Bruce was always giving Eel crap, so I thought it fit right in.
Agreed on the former, disagreed on the latter. Batman may not like Plas personally, but to say he doesn't trust him after all the evidence to the contrary is b.s.
Good stories trump continuity, but completely mediocre ones do not. Especially ones that wallow in the writer's personal continuity (the boring blackrock plot from Superman).
SEAN
Guts/Batman
12-01-2006, 11:39 PM
I wanted to, but my wallet disagreed. I'll be picking it up next Friday, if it is still in stock. I'm liking the direction that the story is going so far.
dupersuper
12-02-2006, 03:04 PM
He got the events in Kellys' Justice league right ("I have a son now", Lex mentioning them knowing each other, etc.), but seemed to ignore the tone. Bats seemed to at least respect Plas by the end of the run...don't know where this Batman not trusting him thing came from.
ScottDMSimmons
12-02-2006, 10:15 PM
He got the events in Kellys' Justice league right ("I have a son now", Lex mentioning them knowing each other, etc.), but seemed to ignore the tone. Bats seemed to at least respect Plas by the end of the run...don't know where this Batman not trusting him thing came from.
What???? I don't have this issue of SM/BM, but it was established in Plastic Man that the kid was really Martian Manhunter hypnotized and in disguise. So Plas never had a kid, it was all a lie set up by the villainous ex of his.
Scott
Jack Zodiac
12-02-2006, 11:00 PM
I think everyone's gonna' ignore Baker's book. :( So far, on top of this, Plas's kid's also appeared in Teen Titans as Offspring, the name he had in the Kingdom Come books.
CaptainAwesome
12-03-2006, 01:38 PM
I think everyone's gonna' ignore Baker's book. :( So far, on top of this, Plas's kid's also appeared in Teen Titans as Offspring, the name he had in the Kingdom Come books.
I think Baker's book, good as it was, is out-of-continuity. I know that phrase gets thrown around alot nowadays, but if you remember at the end of that book a certain magic-wielding boy/man was killed, and he is now very much alive.
As for SM/BM: I only stayed on after Loeb left because I had read in Wizard that Plas was coming back all-new and all-different. Now that I have finally seen him, I think this book is off my pull list. I havent been very happy with it since about the middle of Loeb's last run, but I didnt have the heart to cut it. This was the last straw, though, and it just has to go.
And it didn't feel as though Batman was ignoring the time spent with Plas on the League. Plas was a crook. Low-rent, sure, but still a crook, and Batman don't like him some crooks. Even during Kelly's run on the book, Bruce was always giving Eel crap, so I thought it fit right in.
It still seems to me the writter just went off a few character notes from the editor and not the actual history.
Why would Plas have to mention to Bats that he has a son now...Plas brought Batman in to keep the kid on the right path.
Why would Batman not trust Plasticman?...hell, he revealed his identity to him to gain Plasticman's (and the rest of the league's) trust of him back. If batman didn't trust him, plas would never have been in the league, period. Batman knows Plas has evolved past that of being a crook and that he is a powerful ally, though his joking around is grating to him.
Guts/Batman
12-04-2006, 11:25 AM
If batman didn't trust him, plas would never have been in the league, period.
Batman over the last few years hasn't trusted anyone, with the exception of Alfred. Dude didn't even trust Superman. Why does him not trusting Plastic Man surprise you?
Joe Acro
12-04-2006, 02:54 PM
To save myself some time, I'll just post the same thing I put somewhere else.
The plot is starting to make sense, I suppose, but where these characters are coming from has yet to be explained. Superman could potentially go out of control. Again. Batman apparently has access to the Fortress. I wonder when Supes put that into the security. He needs to improve it considering an enemy got inside. And why does Luthor call in Plastic Man? I don't know. Considering Luthor stopped being the head of Lexcorp shortly after One Year Later and Supes created the Fortress after defeating him, the continuity of this title clearly doesn't match up with the rest of the universe.
Gotta say I really am enjoying this book a lot. I think it's the dialogue that's roped me in. I don't normally like sciencefictiony superhero books. But Verheiden is really holding my attention.
Batman over the last few years hasn't trusted anyone, with the exception of Alfred. Dude didn't even trust Superman. Why does him not trusting Plastic Man surprise you?
Because this story is post crisis, and post paranoid Batman. He's over that and it doesn't fit in a story writen for the time it takes place in.
I'm not trying to start fights with fellow posters with direct arguments, but this quote matches my feelings...
...the continuity of this title clearly doesn't match up with the rest of the universe.
That is my biggest frustration with the title right now...these glaring incongruities take me right out of the story. I really want to like the story but it's not happening.
Jack Zodiac
12-06-2006, 09:32 AM
That's a shame. It's a great story, with a really great cast of cameos (I mean, really, when else were we gonna' see Kilowog and Superman throw down?), and the only thing holding you back from enjoying it is when in the world it could've happened to make it fit into continuity.
Guts/Batman
12-06-2006, 12:04 PM
That is my biggest frustration with the title right now...these glaring incongruities take me right out of the story. I really want to like the story but it's not happening.
This title has never fit with continuity. Whether the issues were late, or story elements were congruent with the rest of DCU, it has never been consistent with DCU continuity. Especially after the first arc. Loeb's writing of the book was nonsensical, as far as continuity goes.
The only way I can think of it is like I think of an Elseworlds.
brundlefly
12-06-2006, 12:47 PM
This title has never fit with continuity. Whether the issues were late, or story elements were congruent with the rest of DCU, it has never been consistent with DCU continuity. Especially after the first arc. Loeb's writing of the book was nonsensical, as far as continuity goes.
Exactly. Anyone who didn't complain about all the continuity and characterization gaffes in Loeb's run but then gets upset with some mild loose continuity in Verheden's story is being a little hypocritical.
Sean Whitmore
12-06-2006, 02:47 PM
Exactly. Anyone who didn't complain about all the continuity and characterization gaffes in Loeb's run but then gets upset with some mild loose continuity in Verheden's story is being a little hypocritical.
Is there ANYBODY who didn't complain about the continuity and characterization in Loeb's run? ;)
SEAN
Exactly. Anyone who didn't complain about all the continuity and characterization gaffes in Loeb's run but then gets upset with some mild loose continuity in Verheden's story is being a little hypocritical.
I'm hoping you are not referring to me since I have been equally critical of Loeb's run.
I'm not attacking anyone who likes the book; that's great that they do. I'm just stating how close this particular arc could be to meeting what I'm personally hoping for.
I will say i like the art though:p Always have.
PatrickG
12-06-2006, 04:45 PM
Batman over the last few years hasn't trusted anyone, with the exception of Alfred. Dude didn't even trust Superman. Why does him not trusting Plastic Man surprise you?
What is funny though is that Batman was obviously the one who RECRUITED Plastic Man into the JLA during Morrison's run.
PatrickG
12-06-2006, 04:46 PM
Is there ANYBODY who didn't complain about the continuity and characterization in Loeb's run? ;)
SEAN
Me.
I think the books that contradicted SUPERMAN/BATMAN were the ones that were "wrong". ;)
Jack Zodiac
12-06-2006, 06:34 PM
Is there ANYBODY who didn't complain about the continuity and characterization in Loeb's run? ;)
SEAN
Sans the winky face, I honestly didn't give a rat's ass if Loeb's run wasn't in-continuity. Superman/Batman was being written well, it was fun and all over the place, and had a great Silver Age storytelling quality to it not unlike World's Finest, which it was trying to emulate. If it didn't fit perfectly into continuity but still told a great story, tough crap. I'll take good storytelling and art over continuity any day.
Sean Whitmore
12-06-2006, 06:50 PM
I'll take good storytelling...over continuity any day.
I will too, it's just that that rarely applied to Loeb's storytelling.
SEAN
Jack Zodiac
12-06-2006, 07:00 PM
I liked it. Him and McGuinness got me to buy Superman again.
Guts/Batman
12-06-2006, 08:51 PM
Loeb being the writer killed it for me. I dislike Loeb's storytelling, hence why I will never support a Loeb book again for awhile. McGuiness's art makes my eyes bleed.
The only reason why I have tried this run is because of the writer change. Namely to a writer that I like, and an artist I like.
brundlefly
12-07-2006, 09:23 AM
I'm hoping you are not referring to me since I have been equally critical of Loeb's run.
I'm not attacking anyone who likes the book; that's great that they do. I'm just stating how close this particular arc could be to meeting what I'm personally hoping for.
I will say i like the art though:p Always have.
No, j3h; I wasn't referring to any one person in particular by that statement. Sorry, didn't mean to make you think I was singling you out or attacking you.
Loeb being the writer killed it for me. I dislike Loeb's storytelling, hence why I will never support a Loeb book again for awhile. McGuiness's art makes my eyes bleed.
The only reason why I have tried this run is because of the writer change. Namely to a writer that I like, and an artist I like.
Agreed. PUBLIC ENEMIES put me off S/B right off the bat, as Loeb wrote the most anticlimactic and absurd finale humanly possible to the "Superman & Batman versus President Lex" feud and just used it as a teaser for Infinite Crisis instead. I thought ABSOLUTE POWER was OK (it was a good story and set outside of continuity, so Loeb couldn't do any more damage to the DCU with junk like Lex's psychotic meltdown and the 'new' Supergirl), but his other arcs were just terrible. Which is a shame, since I've liked a lot of his work with both characters before (FOR ALL SEASONS, THE LONG HALLOWEEN, DARK VICTORY) and was really looking forward to SUPERMAN/BATMAN initially, and then PUBLIC ENEMIES started and I could see that the writing quality just wasn't there.
Back on topic: how long is the current team of Verheiden / Van Sciver to stay on the title?
PatrickG
12-07-2006, 09:58 AM
If you read the last arc, it becomes pretty clear that Loeb wanted to revisit Lex knowing that Clark Kent was Superman and THIS TIME got editorially vetoed before it even happened.
The original last line of #6 was Luthor saying, "Clark Kent is Superman", remembering when he learned before.
But it looks like that got vetoed AFTER McGuinness drew the page and they needed a new last line. So the Crisis teaser was added.
brundlefly
12-07-2006, 10:33 AM
If you read the last arc, it becomes pretty clear that Loeb wanted to revisit Lex knowing that Clark Kent was Superman and THIS TIME got editorially vetoed before it even happened.
The original last line of #6 was Luthor saying, "Clark Kent is Superman", remembering when he learned before.
But it looks like that got vetoed AFTER McGuinness drew the page and they needed a new last line. So the Crisis teaser was added.
Ugh, what a mess.
I thought I remembered reading that Loeb's plan was for Lex to find out Clark was Superman while he was President (which he did) and then pull a "DD: Born Again" on him and dismantle his life, culminating with killing Lois and the Kents, which would eventually lead into Supes making a deal with Mxy to go back in time and put everything right. Instead, Manchester Black erased the knowledge after "Ending Battle," so Lex never really did anything with it, barring that cool scene with him and Supes in ACTION #795 where he gloated about knowing Clark's secret ID.
So was Loeb's plan instead that Lex learned Superman's ID, then "forgot" it, then freaked out/lost the Presidency in PUBLIC ENEMIES, and then suddenly remembered it again, then went on to kill Lois and the Kents? That seems rather unnecessarily convoluted. Plus, I thought that Infinite Crisis was the explanation for Lex's freakout in the first place (Alex Luthor's presence on Earth was disrupting the real Lex's brainwaves) so the Crisis line was relevant, since this was the first effect that the players of Infinite Crisis were having on the DCU (along with Superboy off moving planets around and whatnot). Without that explanation, Lex's meltdown just comes off as extremely poor writing and characterization from Loeb. A lucid, un-brainwave scrambled Lex shoots up with Venom and Kryptonite, the same substance that gave him terminal cancer before? And hasn't been paying any attention to his LexCorp assets while President? I think not. But if the line was added at the 11th hour, after the story was already written, that means Loeb had no real explanation initially for Luthor's meltdown, which makes me loathe PUBLIC ENEMIES even more....
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.