Bad ideas in the history of Superman comics

[dumbstruck]

Not while I was on SUPERMAN, at least.

We were in contact a lot, but we talked things over equally. If someone was "the guy in charge," it was Matt Idelson, with Dan Didio overseeing him.

kdb

I should have been a little more time specific. As I recall, the "architect" moniker came around as the Superman books were moving towards the whole New Krypton fiasco.

[Mat001]

I can't understand why you'd want to use Moore's Swamp Thing as an example of anything. He demolished the entire original premise of the character and "reconstructed" him and the series into something completely unrecognizable. Was it cool and interesting? Yes. Did I enjoy it? Yes. But his fundamental changes to the main character and core concept were a hundred times more sweeping and extreme than anything Byrne did on Superman.

And Moore had good reasons for doing that. He was able to get away from the "Gilligan's Island" syndrome and come up with something that allowed the character to grow. But that's only because of the way the character had been set up under Wein and Wrightson. When all was said and done, he was able to leave the character in a new place that became part and parcel of the lore for a long time. Superman, on the other hand, probably wouldn't have been that extreme. There would've some deconstructing, but he wouldn't change it wholesale since he had a love for what came before.


I should have been a little more time specific. As I recall, the "architect" moniker came around as the Superman books were moving towards the whole New Krypton fiasco.

The only truth in that was that he was still on Action Comics, while Busiek stepped off of Superman to work on "Trinity" full time. So Johns was using ideas that he had come up with and some of what Kurt had come up with, initially. But the rest of the ideas were flowing from Robinson and Gates during the first arc. That's why all three of them spoke out about the series. If Busiek had been able to manage to stay on Superman, the press release would've listed the two of them as the architects even though Gates was coming on as Supergirl's writer.

[stk]

I've yet to get around to reading Moore's run. Care to explain the Adam Strange story, and how it was almost an "everything you know is wrong"?

It sets up that the Rannians never thought of Adam as a hero. They thought of him as a dumb, primitive ape they resented and only tolerated because they needed to exploit him for scientific purposes. So all the decades of stories of them being grateful and treating him as a hero was an elaborate hoax they used to trick him into staying around. It threw his entire relationship with Allana into question and turned supporting characters like Sardath into something ugly.

[OldSchoolfan]

To me, it seemed like another example of, "Everything you knew about character X is WRONG!!!" I'll agree with everyone that the execution was handled very well (a couple of my favorite issues being the Adam Strange story, where it ironically could be argued Moore did the same thing to Adam and the Rannians), but that's an approach to comics I'm not always a huge fan of.

This was my take on the Conway/Garcia Lopez story arc in issues 307-309. It was essentially Supergirl lying to Superman about his whole origin. I still haven't decided if I like this arc or not.

I just read the Amazo story arc from Action 480 to 483...and Superman Special #3. I liked them, but more and more I find the Bronze age Clark/Superman's obsession with protecting his secret identity unhealthy, for himself and others.

As silly as it seemed on the surface, the SuperCar was great! I loved it!

[dumbstruck]

The only truth in that was that he was still on Action Comics, while Busiek stepped off of Superman to work on "Trinity" full time. So Johns was using ideas that he had come up with and some of what Kurt had come up with, initially. But the rest of the ideas were flowing from Robinson and Gates during the first arc. That's why all three of them spoke out about the series. If Busiek had been able to manage to stay on Superman, the press release would've listed the two of them as the architects even though Gates was coming on as Supergirl's writer.


I can only tell you I explicitly remember reading some kind of interview or quote from DC referring to Johns as the architect of the Superman universe.

[Gothos]

I'm not a regular reader of the Superbooks, but as I didn't think much of Waid's BIRTHRIGHT, I'm sorry to hear an earlier poster say that some ot its elements have been incorporated into the mainstream.

In the KRYPTON COMPANION I read a Denny O'Neil interview in which he talked about how he and Dick Giordano had tried to change up Superman by getting rid of kryptonite, but I didn't get the sense that they had any real game plan beyond, "He's too powerful, we need to make him weaker." From what O'Neil says the "no more kryptonite" schtick wasn't validated by sales, which is why it faded away (aside from not being validated in other editor-controlled Superbooks). But I'd say "NMK" was a bad idea even if sales had been favorable. Kryptonite's too big a part of Superman's mythology to toss out, especially when your only viable susbtitute is a power-sapping sand-creature who's not even going to hang around!

[stk]

The idea with the power-sapping sand creature wasn't that it would periodically show up, like Kryptonite, as a story element. It was that it had permanently reduced Superman's powers to what writers like O'Neil thought was a more manageable level... so that you could conceivably put Superman in physical peril without needing to rely on Kryptonite every time.

That said, yeah, it wasn't my favorite, either, although I love the Swanderson art.

[Mat001]

I can only tell you I explicitly remember reading some kind of interview or quote from DC referring to Johns as the architect of the Superman universe.

I didn't say that the quote didn't exist. I said that there was more to it than that. Read what I wrote and what Kurt Busiek himself said.

[Gothos]

The idea with the power-sapping sand creature wasn't that it would periodically show up, like Kryptonite, as a story element. It was that it had permanently reduced Superman's powers to what writers like O'Neil thought was a more manageable level... so that you could conceivably put Superman in physical peril without needing to rely on Kryptonite every time.

That said, yeah, it wasn't my favorite, either, although I love the Swanderson art.

Sorry if I wasn't clear, but that's why I was saying the sand-creature *couldn't* be a story-substitute for kryptonite, because he went off to some dark dimension.

The problem with O'Neil's de-powering was that it wasn't clear what his new vulnerabilities would have been, had the change taken hold. Presumably bullets would still have bounced off the hero, but would an explosive shell have wounded him? How about gas? Electricity?

One might argue that even though the change was put to one side as an actual plot-element, some de-powering happened in various versions of Superman both in comics and cartoons. You certainly can't imagine Weisinger's Superman being fazed by an opponent like Livewire!

[stk]

Sorry if I wasn't clear, but that's why I was saying the sand-creature *couldn't* be a story-substitute for kryptonite, because he went off to some dark dimension.The point I was making was that after the one-time depowering of Superman, they wouldn't need a story-substitute for Kryptonite. So there would be no purpose in bringing him back anyway.

If the change had taken hold.

The idea of depowering Superman was not unlike what Byrne later actually did. Decreasing his physical strength and making his invulnerability not be absolute. Same in the Timm animated series. He can be in a fight and get hurt and beat up before coming back to win. In Byrne and Timm's (and Siegel's original) versions of the character, Kryptonite wasn't necessary as a plot device as the only way to put Superman in physical jeopardy.

[JusticeOrigins]

Pink Kryptonite.

*for those of you who don't know, pink Kryptonite turned Superman slightly feminine, leaving us to assume "he had a thing for other men."

[PanzerMega]

Electric Superman gets a pass because Grant Morrison made it kind of cool.

I haven't read it, but the idea of Superman walking across America giving bad social advice sounds horrible.

[dumbstruck]

I didn't say that the quote didn't exist. I said that there was more to it than that. Read what I wrote and what Kurt Busiek himself said.

While I'm sure it was collaborative (I'm not saying it wasn't), the fact that DC did identify him as "the architect" implies Johns was the driving force. If it's a purely team consensus, you don't identify an individual as the person most responsible.

[Mat001]

Pink Kryptonite.

*for those of you who don't know, pink Kryptonite turned Superman slightly feminine, leaving us to assume "he had a thing for other men."

Yeah, but that was done as a joke on Peter David's part. Making fun of all the wacky effects Kryptonite had back in the day.


While I'm sure it was collaborative (I'm not saying it wasn't), the fact that DC did identify him as "the architect" implies Johns was the driving force. If it's a purely team consensus, you don't identify an individual as the person most responsible.

You do if you want to sell books and Geoff Johns sells books. It's all about marketing. Gates was brand new and Robinson was coming in fresh. The same way Johns has that label for Green Lantern, even though he's working with Tomassi and Bedard. And he's said that they're all working together. As I noted, Johns was the senior writer on the Superman books when Busiek left. So he was going over what had already been mapped out for NK and the others worked with him off that, adding their own ideas.

[OldSchoolfan]

Electric Superman gets a pass because Grant Morrison made it kind of cool.

I haven't read it, but the idea of Superman walking across America giving bad social advice sounds horrible.

I just finished reading the Electric blue period again, I don't recall Morrison having anything to do with it...what are you referring to?

Grounded has been one of the worst Superman story arcs to come along in awhile. The Robeson issues, especially his second one, was good...because it was really different. I didn't like his first issue much at all.

[Nomads1]

I just finished reading the Electric blue period again, I don't recall Morrison having anything to do with it...what are you referring to?

Grounded has been one of the worst Superman story arcs to come along in awhile. The Robeson issues, especially his second one, was good...because it was really different. I didn't like his first issue much at all.

Morrison handled electric Superman in JLA, and, among other things, made him move the moon and wrestle an angel. On the second one, though, I personally think he was off base, seeing as how electric Superman didn't have any super-strength. However, the visual effects got a lot of people excited.

Peace

[OldSchoolfan]

I thought he was a genius because his stories usually get good to great reviews and sell much higher than his peers.

But seriously, this crab mentality approach to writers who succeed really bugs me about fandom. It's the same old "bash what's popular to stand-out from the crowd" take.

Sorry, but its not a "crab" mentality. I really don't think that Johns is all that talented and this is my argument:

Where is his "Galactus Triology"? Where is his "Ronin" or "300" or "Dark Knight Returns"? Where is his "Dark Phoenix Saga"? Or his "Avengers Mansion Siege"? Where is his "Marvels" or "Astro City"? Where is his "Kingdom Come"?
Where is his "Bone"? Where is his "Death and Return of Superman"? Where is his "Man Bat Saga"? Where is his "Monster Society of Evil"?

What work in comics has he done that will stand the test of time? Every thing that I have read by him is passable...a reaction to the current state, but in that work I hear no independent voice, see nothing that will have lasting influence to the medium of comics. And for this mediocrity, he is promoted. I don't see how he stands out, in fact, I don't think he holds a candle to any thing Greg Pak has written, yet he doesn't enyoy the same buzz as Johns....and I think he deserves it.

[dumbstruck]

Yeah, but that was done as a joke on Peter David's part. Making fun of all the wacky effects Kryptonite had back in the day.



You do if you want to sell books and Geoff Johns sells books. It's all about marketing. Gates was brand new and Robinson was coming in fresh. The same way Johns has that label for Green Lantern, even though he's working with Tomassi and Bedard. And he's said that they're all working together. As I noted, Johns was the senior writer on the Superman books when Busiek left. So he was going over what had already been mapped out for NK and the others worked with him off that, adding their own ideas.

It is about marketing. It's nothing but spin. But poorly executed spin, IMO, that lessens the importance of virtually every other writer on the Super-books. But this has gotten a little far off topic. None of it changes the fact what they did with Cat Grant was a bad idea that was poorly executed.

And that's all I have to say on the subject.

[stk]

Sorry, but its not a "crab" mentality. I really don't think that Johns is all that talented and this is my argument:

Where is his "Galactus Triology"? Where is his "Ronin" or "300" or "Dark Knight Returns"? Where is his "Dark Phoenix Saga"? Or his "Avengers Mansion Siege"? Where is his "Marvels" or "Astro City"? Where is his "Kingdom Come"?
Where is his "Bone"? Where is his "Death and Return of Superman"? Where is his "Man Bat Saga"? Where is his "Monster Society of Evil"?

What work in comics has he done that will stand the test of time? Every thing that I have read by him is passable...a reaction to the current state, but in that work I hear no independent voice, see nothing that will have lasting influence to the medium of comics. And for this mediocrity, he is promoted. I don't see how he stands out, in fact, I don't think he holds a candle to any thing Greg Pak has written, yet he doesn't enyoy the same buzz as Johns....and I think he deserves it.I like Pak, but I'm curious what you think he's written that equals a "Dark Phoenix Saga" or a "Dark Knight Returns," and is superior to Johns to the point you get angry about it like this.


As far as the "where is his ______" question, in terms of story quality, I'd put Sinestro Corps War on the same level as Death and Return of Superman...at the very least. I'd also point out that a few of your examples of important works are very subjective and not universally-cherished classics, or even at this point widely remembered. For example, I had to look up "Avengers Under Siege" to be reminded what it was, and that's as someone who was actually reading and enjoying the Stern/Buscema/Palmer run back then. I'd place the better arcs of Johns' first JSA series easily on that level. In fact, I'd place them on par with any Avengers run ever published, including Thomas/Adams, the Shooter run, Stern, Englehart, or anyone else.

But I agree with you that I'd really like to see him try his hand at something creator-owned, like Bone or Astro City. Stargirl is a great creation and has become one of my favorite DC characters ever, but it would be cool to see what he came up with in creating an entire world of his own characters.

[Gothos]

I like Pak, but I'm curious what you think he's written that equals a "Dark Phoenix Saga" or a "Dark Knight Returns," and is superior to Johns to the point you get angry about it like this.


As far as the "where is his ______" question, in terms of story quality, I'd put Sinestro Corps War on the same level as Death and Return of Superman...at the very least. I'd also point out that a few of your examples of important works are very subjective and not universally-cherished classics, or even at this point widely remembered. For example, I had to look up "Avengers Under Siege" to be reminded what it was, and that's as someone who was actually reading and enjoying the Stern/Buscema/Palmer run back then. I'd place the better arcs of Johns' first JSA series easily on that level. In fact, I'd place them on par with any Avengers run ever published, including Thomas/Adams, the Shooter run, Stern, Englehart, or anyone else.

But I agree with you that I'd really like to see him try his hand at something creator-owned, like Bone or Astro City. Stargirl is a great creation and has become one of my favorite DC characters ever, but it would be cool to see what he came up with in creating an entire world of his own characters.

Speaking purely in terms of taste, I tend to agree with Oldschoolfan, though you make some valid points.

For instance, I enjoyed what I read of "Sinestro Corps Wars." It's a fairly ambitious bit of storytelling that perhaps belies Johns' reputation for mediocrity. I'd put it alongside things like Thomas' "Kree-Skrull Wars."

Still, a work can be ambitious in scope and still not be very personal, which is the vibe I get from both of those mini-epics, while the two "Darks" named above, Phoenix and Knight, have a slightly more personal touch than anything I've ever read from Johns or Thomas.

[Mat001]

It is about marketing. It's nothing but spin. But poorly executed spin, IMO, that lessens the importance of virtually every other writer on the Super-books.

It's partially spin. It's one part spin and one part truth.


But this has gotten a little far off topic. None of it changes the fact what they did with Cat Grant was a bad idea that was poorly executed.

Considering she was already turning into a bitch before Johns got a hold of her, all he and Gates did was make it relevant to the past and the present.


Still, a work can be ambitious in scope and still not be very personal, which is the vibe I get from both of those mini-epics, while the two "Darks" named above, Phoenix and Knight, have a slightly more personal touch than anything I've ever read from Johns or Thomas.

Actually, Johns does have a personal tone to his work. His entire run on Stargirl and the Monarch storyline in his first JSA run would count. Stargirl being based off of his sister, who died in 1996 in a plane crash. And then using a similar plane crash to kill Monarch and save the life of another character, was inspired by that incident.

[Daybreak_st]

Actually, Johns does have a personal tone to his work. His entire run on Stargirl and the Monarch storyline in his first JSA run would count. Stargirl being based off of his sister, who died in 1996 in a plane crash. And then using a similar plane crash to kill Monarch and save the life of another character, was inspired by that incident.

I thought Miss Martian was based on his sister? :confused:

[Jody Garland]

No, Meghan is based on the wife of a friend of his, Ben Mars. Ben's wife is named Meghan, hence Ms. Martian's name.

[OldSchoolfan]

I like Pak, but I'm curious what you think he's written that equals a "Dark Phoenix Saga" or a "Dark Knight Returns," and is superior to Johns to the point you get angry about it like this.

I thought Planet Hulk was as good as epic arc and World War Hulk was as good as any large company crossover I had ever read. I also think that Pak has done some really interesting things with Hercules and Amadeus Cho...stuff that seemed particularly unique to Pak's view of comics and characterization. I don't know if I can say that they are as good as the ones we mention above, but they are on my list of exceptional comics. My point is that I can't say that for Johns and its not because he's a newer generation writer, like Pak.


As far as the "where is his ______" question, in terms of story quality, I'd put Sinestro Corps War on the same level as Death and Return of Superman...at the very least. I'd also point out that a few of your examples of important works are very subjective and not universally-cherished classics, or even at this point widely remembered. For example, I had to look up "Avengers Under Siege" to be reminded what it was, and that's as someone who was actually reading and enjoying the Stern/Buscema/Palmer run back then. I'd place the better arcs of Johns' first JSA series easily on that level. In fact, I'd place them on par with any Avengers run ever published, including Thomas/Adams, the Shooter run, Stern, Englehart, or anyone else.

Okay, in order to be fair, you gotta understand that "The Skrull/Kree War" was something I bought off the comics rack an issue at a time when I was 11/12 years old. It's classic comics to me and I don't know if I can be objective about it. But.....I'd be willing to go back and read Sinestro Wars. The other thing I would have to get over is the fact that I blame Green Lantern for all the suckee Superman stuff we've been getting. I genuinely think that DC editorial made a conscious decission to deemphasize Superman in order to make GL look good.

As far as the JSA storyarcs go...they are one of the reasons I have the opinion of Johns that I do....nothing really stood out to me...there were some interesting character bits...but not one conflict that I recall that was particularly outstanding.

The thing about Avengers Under Siege is that you have to consider Sterns whole 80 issue run. It's pretty complex storytelling with a lot of subtlty and characterization. I feel that many people don't appreciate it enough.

Death and Return will always be classic for me. It reenergized my love for Superman and it's that time period that keeps me holding on now, hoping that things will get better.


But I agree with you that I'd really like to see him try his hand at something creator-owned, like Bone or Astro City. Stargirl is a great creation and has become one of my favorite DC characters ever, but it would be cool to see what he came up with in creating an entire world of his own characters.

I don't know if he's got the chops to write something creator owned. I don't mean that in a pissy way, I'm just being honest about my opinion. Maybe he'll prove me wrong.

[stk]

Okay, in order to be fair, you gotta understand that "The Skrull/Kree War" was something I bought off the comics rack an issue at a time when I was 11/12 years old. It's classic comics to me and I don't know if I can be objective about it.That's a weird coincidence, because I was 12 when I first read it, too, although I bought it off the stands in that Baxter reprint series Marvel put out in 1983. But yeah, I loved it, too. It's still one of my favorite Avengers stories (and creative teams) of all time. And also coincidentally, it's another run, along with the Stern/Buscema run you brought up, that cemented Tom Palmer as all-time Avengers MVP in my mind. Buscema, Adams, Buscema again in the '80s, Epting... Palmer's inking was the glue that held Avengers together and at such a consistently high artistic standard for so much of the series.

I can't agree with you about Death and Return of Superman at all, though.

[ForeverYoung8]

Was there a comic adaptation of Superman II? And if so, did it include the giant, cellophane 'S'?

If so, that would certainly be one of the more bad ideas in Superman comic history.

[Mat001]

Due to rights issues, no adaptations of the first two films were ever made. The closest is the 2006 prequel issues to "Superman Returns", which recreated scenes from the first film. Only the sequels and "Supergirl" were made into films. This is also why there were no novelizations for those films and only the two novels by Maggin.

[stk]

This is also why there were no novelizations for those films and only the two novels by Maggin.

Although I love the first two movies, I think we got the better end of the deal by getting two original in-continuity novels from Maggin, rather than movie adaptations.

[ForeverYoung8]

Due to rights issues, no adaptations of the first two films were ever made. The closest is the 2006 prequel issues to "Superman Returns", which recreated scenes from the first film. Only the sequels and "Supergirl" were made into films. This is also why there were no novelizations for those films and only the two novels by Maggin.

That's interesting, thank you!

Was it a rights issue with the Salkinds, or the screenwriters, or something else?

[Ramage]

Miracle Monday almost got comics banned in my house. Mom thought it was satanic. All those super villains and he has to fight an emissary of the devil. Thanks a lot mr maggin

[stk]

Miracle Monday almost got comics banned in my house. Mom thought it was satanic. All those super villains and he has to fight an emissary of the devil. Thanks a lot mr maggin

You'd think Superman would gain points with your mom for fighting the devil. It's not like he made friends with him or something.

[Ben D]

The only bad idea I can think of is killing Jonathan Kent...again and again

[Ramage]

I just checked Amazon and a new copy of Last Son of Kyrpton can be had for seventeen bucks. I've never read it, but dogeared my copy of miracle Monday. I'm very tempted.

--Anybody ever read that Kevin Anderson thing. I didn't mind his Star Wars books. Does he do Krypton justice?

[Ben D]

I enjoyed it to say the least.

[NotSuper]

The only bad idea I can think of is killing Jonathan Kent...again and again
I actually like the Kents dying myself. (Wow, that sounded cold, didn't it? But you know what I mean.)

I feel like too many people use the Kents as characters solely to get around having Superman do super-heroic things. MANY DON'T do this, and use the Kents well, but not enough.

That'd being said, I always thought the way they died in the Silver Age was a little too...fantastic. It kind of made the deaths seem less serious, and it should be THE most serious event in Kal's life.

[Ben D]

I actually like the Kents dying myself. (Wow, that sounded cold, didn't it? But you know what I mean.)

I feel like too many people use the Kents as characters solely to get around having Superman do super-heroic things. MANY DON'T do this, and use the Kents well, but not enough.

That'd being said, I always thought the way they died in the Silver Age was a little too...fantastic. It kind of made the deaths seem less serious, and it should be THE most serious event in Kal's life.

I agree that people use them telling Clark to be superman to much and it's too exaggerated, but when almost every story besides origins with them has them dying...it can get annoying.

Oh and changing them from their short and a little bit heavy looks as well :smile:

[NotSuper]

I think my favorite Kents were the ones in BR. Especially Martha, who rarely is written to be Jonathan's equal in importance (ditto for Lara).

I thought Johns did a good job with Martha too, having her be the one to connect him to his Kryptonian roots. Very good writing there.

[Action Ace]

I want Last Son of Krypton and Miracle Monday turned into comic books drawn by Jose Luis Garcia Lopez.

And my copies of the novels are unavailable at any price. :biggrin:

[stk]

That'd being said, I always thought the way they died in the Silver Age was a little too...fantastic. It kind of made the deaths seem less serious, and it should be THE most serious event in Kal's life.Yeah, that was pretty much my reaction to it. The craziness of it lessened the emotional resonance for me. It played better to me when I didn't know how they died, and we just had the little deathbed sequence between Jonathan and Clark, after Martha had presumably already passed. The idea that the Kents had been de-aged by some alien potion or something at some point (I have still never read that one) also seems off to me.

It's weird to me that -- I guess because of the Donner movie and then the Singer Superman Returns along with Smallville -- a lot of people seem to have the impression that Johns killing Pa Kent and keeping Ma Kent alive is some sort of "return to the Silver Age", as if Ma Kent had still been alive in the comics, pre-CoIE. The Kents are a weird subject.

Anyhow, I liked the Kents being alive. I thought they provided a great grounding influence, and it was one of the few Byrne changes I was completely in favor of. And Martha without Jonathan is now in serious danger of becoming an Aunt May, which would be the worst thing that could possibly happen.


I want Last Son of Krypton and Miracle Monday turned into comic books drawn by Jose Luis Garcia Lopez.

And my copies of the novels are unavailable at any price. :biggrin:lol I know what you mean. I could get replacement copies off amazon for probably a buck each, yet they'd be among the first things I grabbed if I ever had to evacuate my house quickly.

[Action Ace]

The idea that the Kents had been de-aged by some alien potion or something at some point (I have still never read that one) also seems off to me.

I have, stay away.

http://www.coverbrowser.com/image/superboy/145-1.jpg

[stk]

"You must change us back to normal"?

How about, "You must get us more of this wonderful drink"?

[Ben D]

I have, stay away.

http://www.coverbrowser.com/image/superboy/145-1.jpg

I don't know if it's just me, but from what little of Jonathan's face that we can see, it actually looks like it added a few winkles...

[dancj]

What work in comics has he done that will stand the test of time?
The first half of his first run on The Flash was very good.

I don't know if he's got the chops to write something creator owned. I don't mean that in a pissy way, I'm just being honest about my opinion. Maybe he'll prove me wrong.
Read Olympus or The Possessed. They'll make it quite clear that he hasn't got the chops.

[dumbstruck]

Considering she was already turning into a bitch before Johns got a hold of her, all he and Gates did was make it relevant to the past and the present.


I have no recollection of this. Following the murder of Adam, she left Metropolis after coming to terms with his death. Never to be seen again until OYL. Am I forgetting something?

[Mat001]

Although I love the first two movies, I think we got the better end of the deal by getting two original in-continuity novels from Maggin, rather than movie adaptations.

Actually, it would've been fine if we had both.


That's interesting, thank you!

Was it a rights issue with the Salkinds, or the screenwriters, or something else?

With the comics it had to do with likeness issues. Marlon Brando was already asking for a good deal of money and the Salkinds weren't going to pay more for the use of his face. Not to mention that the other actors would've been a bit pricey. The Salkinds were financing the films, whereas Warner would've paid for it in full as they did years later with Batman. The Superman sequels didn't go out of their way to make the characters look like the actors. Not until Returns.

In terms of the novelizations, I'm not sure what the deal with those were. This is why for a long time, DC never used the movie designs or characters created for the films. When Donner was working with Johns on "Last Son", he was able to put in a phone call to Ilya Salkind and was able to transfer the rights to material from the films to DC. Hence Ursa and Non debuted in the comics and Zod now bears a resemblence to Terence Stamp.


That'd being said, I always thought the way they died in the Silver Age was a little too...fantastic. It kind of made the deaths seem less serious, and it should be THE most serious event in Kal's life.

How is dying from a rare tropical disease that is nearly impossible to cure too fantastic?


It's weird to me that -- I guess because of the Donner movie and then the Singer Superman Returns along with Smallville -- a lot of people seem to have the impression that Johns killing Pa Kent and keeping Ma Kent alive is some sort of "return to the Silver Age", as if Ma Kent had still been alive in the comics, pre-CoIE. The Kents are a weird subject.

It's because too many people were comfortable with them being alive and ignorant of the comics. But in the comics, I believe that the reasoning that Johns and/or Busiek had for it was not so much because of "New Krypton", but rather that it was time to put Clark through an emotional trial that in post Crisis continuity, he's never really had to deal with. This Clark had grown up with them being alive and there for him, whereas Pre-Crisis Clark never had that since they died when he was eighteen. But because "Superman Returns", "Smallville", "Legion Of Super-Heroes" and "Superman/Doomsday" all featured a dead Jonathan within a short time span, it seemed as it DC was pandering to the media on this one.


I have no recollection of this. Following the murder of Adam, she left Metropolis after coming to terms with his death. Never to be seen again until OYL. Am I forgetting something?

That's what Johns and Gates use in reference to her. They've glazed over the stories following the revelation of why Winslow Schott became a child killer. Mainly when Jimmy quit the Daily Planet over the Arclight article that Perry rejected in favor of one by Ron Troupe, Jimmy went to work at GBS as a cameraman. Then he became a roving reporter just before the start of "Transformed". During that arc, when Superman Blue was fighting Metallo, Jimmy stopped to help a woman and was chewed out by Cat for neglecting the story. She told Jimmy that he needed to care more about the story than the little person, which was contrary to what Jimmy had done in the past and in the future. She also told Jimmy that he must do whatever it takes to get the story. This then lead Jimmy to interview Hamilton while Clark resumed fighting Corben, which then lead the latter to use the weaknesses of Clark's energy powers against him. And ultimately lead to Bibbo decking Jimmy. Throughout the rest of 1997, Cat continued to put pressure on Jimmy to go against his conscience in the name of getting the scoop and finally, Jimmy chose to refuse to reveal Superman's secret identity on live television, when Clark pointed out that if Superman had one, those that he cared about would be affected as well. Cat fired Jimmy shortly afterwards. Now, over the next year or so, we saw Cat less and less and then she vanished shortly after Lex became President.

So there was an early prescendent for Cat's personality change. She wasn't the cougar about town like she is now, but the compassionate side of Cat that had surfaced during the Intergang storyline began to be eclipsed by the kind of mentality that Perry would never favor of any of his people.

Incidently, the secret identity of Superman was thought to have been Colin Thornton, aka Satanus.

[dumbstruck]

That's what Johns and Gates use in reference to her. They've glazed over the stories following the revelation of why Winslow Schott became a child killer. Mainly when Jimmy quit the Daily Planet over the Arclight article that Perry rejected in favor of one by Ron Troupe, Jimmy went to work at GBS as a cameraman. Then he became a roving reporter just before the start of "Transformed". During that arc, when Superman Blue was fighting Metallo, Jimmy stopped to help a woman and was chewed out by Cat for neglecting the story. She told Jimmy that he needed to care more about the story than the little person, which was contrary to what Jimmy had done in the past and in the future. She also told Jimmy that he must do whatever it takes to get the story. This then lead Jimmy to interview Hamilton while Clark resumed fighting Corben, which then lead the latter to use the weaknesses of Clark's energy powers against him. And ultimately lead to Bibbo decking Jimmy. Throughout the rest of 1997, Cat continued to put pressure on Jimmy to go against his conscience in the name of getting the scoop and finally, Jimmy chose to refuse to reveal Superman's secret identity on live television, when Clark pointed out that if Superman had one, those that he cared about would be affected as well. Cat fired Jimmy shortly afterwards. Now, over the next year or so, we saw Cat less and less and then she vanished shortly after Lex became President.

So there was an early prescendent for Cat's personality change. She wasn't the cougar about town like she is now, but the compassionate side of Cat that had surfaced during the Intergang storyline began to be eclipsed by the kind of mentality that Perry would never favor of any of his people.

Incidently, the secret identity of Superman was thought to have been Colin Thornton, aka Satanus.

Ok. I remember that stuff. But I also seem to recall her realization this was all fallout from Adam's death. I remember this as a specific plot point, and she left Metropolis in order to heal. Am I imagining this? Or is it something that was conveniently retconned/ignored in favour of the b!tch on wheels Cat Grant OYL gave us.

[Mat001]

I cannot help you there. When I stopped reading the books in 1998, I last saw Cat in "Superman Forever" #1 and "The Doomsday Wars" #1. Those were the last solo stories that I bought until Action Comics #844 and 845 in December of 2006. In those earlier stories, Adam's death was mentioned but her attitude during Jimmy's stint wasn't present. If something was mentioned, it was either after I stopped reading or in an issue that I didn't pick up before I had to stop reading. Since her return, the only thing that was said both in the books and in interviews was that Cat left Metropolis not long after Adam's death, to grieve and she finally decided to come back after a few years. I recall reading a review on the Superman Homepage saying that Cat became Lex's press secretary or something to that effect, but then she disappeared not long after.

If I were to give a bad idea opinion, it would be that the majority of Superman's supporting cast was sent into limbo when Loeb, Kelly, Schulz, DeMatteis and Casey took over. Especially when they weren't given a farewell like Ron Troupe and Lucy Lane had.

[stk]

How is dying from a rare tropical disease that is nearly impossible to cure too fantastic?When the story also involves pirate treasure and time travel, that's how. I mean, I guess it could have been worse and taken place on an alien world or involved leprechauns or something, but still. Now that I think about it, I'm not too crazy about death by Brainiac, either. I find a more quiet, mundane death for the Kents more emotionally resonant. The heart attack for Jonathan in the first movie was a million times more powerful than either the Silver Age story or the modern jump-in-front-of-a-missile, imo.

[Mat001]

The setup maybe, but by and large, their Silver Age deaths were tragic since there was nothing Clark could do to cure them. Something that would be tweaked, but utilized in the 78 film.

[stk]

The setup maybe, but by and large, their Silver Age deaths were tragic since there was nothing Clark could do to cure them. Something that would be tweaked, but utilized in the 78 film.But the setup was the comic. I was always fine with their deaths in the vague way I knew about them from things like LSH 259 or whatever brief origin recap I came across as a kid. They died, it was sad, the end. But the actual story itself, when I finally encountered and read it, came off to me as goofy...which is not what you want when you present the story of the death of Superman's foster parents.

[OldSchoolfan]

If I were to give a bad idea opinion, it would be that the majority of Superman's supporting cast was sent into limbo when Loeb, Kelly, Schulz, DeMatteis and Casey took over. Especially when they weren't given a farewell like Ron Troupe and Lucy Lane had.

I agree with the fact that the supporting cast has changed often and not always after a huge reboot. Here are the ones I remember:

Jimmy is often appearing at various ages in the comics. During the triangle period it was a fairly consistent 20-25, but the new team that took over portrayed him as a kid in the 'Critical Condition' Storyline.

Ron and Lucy, did they have their baby? When triangle 1999 ended, I think that subplot was left in limbo. Where was the fairwell? I liked Ron, his sister and the owner, Mr. Stern.

No more Bibbo.

I don't recall seeing Ron after the 1999 period. Lucy came back as Superwoman. I am assuming that the Secret Origin reboot changed her status.

The Kents have stayed alive, and this has been discussed enough...I think I side with the people that like seeing them alive. Their influence on him is super important, and it give Clark/Kal/Superman someone to talk to that has known him a long long time.

I noticed that the Superman 80 pager had Perry White and Wildcat talking about their kids and this was the first mention of Perry's adopted son....he was a kid as I recall in 1999.

Even the background characters in the Daily Planet Office changed when the Planet got closed. Albeit there was a reasonable explanation for this...many of them got laid off. I don't think anything has been done with Scorn, Ashbury or her father since that time period either(1999).

Crisis wiped out Steve Lombard. I think if he was handled correctly, there could be some things that he could make the office different.

The only thing I can count on is Lois. She's always intelligent, attractive and, especially post crisis, her own woman.

[Mat001]

I agree with the fact that the supporting cast has changed often and not always after a huge reboot. Here are the ones I remember:

Jimmy is often appearing at various ages in the comics. During the triangle period it was a fairly consistent 20-25, but the new team that took over portrayed him as a kid in the 'Critical Condition' Storyline.

And now since then, he's been pushed back to being 22.


Ron and Lucy, did they have their baby? When triangle 1999 ended, I think that subplot was left in limbo. Where was the fairwell? I liked Ron, his sister and the owner, Mr. Stern.

The triange numbering ended in 2002. But Ron and Lucy continued to appear in the Superman books until 2001. Lucy did not return until 2005, during "That Healing Touch" under Rucka. Ron was only mentioned here and there. He was finally given a full on role in "Brainiac" in 08. As to their baby, Gates wanted to address it during his final two issues, but editorial opted to leave it ambigious for now.


No more Bibbo.

Until 2008.


I don't recall seeing Ron after the 1999 period. Lucy came back as Superwoman. I am assuming that the Secret Origin reboot changed her status.

Still married according to Supergirl #59.


I noticed that the Superman 80 pager had Perry White and Wildcat talking about their kids and this was the first mention of Perry's adopted son....he was a kid as I recall in 1999.

The aging is the result of "No Man's Land", "52", "New Krypton" and "World Of New Krypton" each refering to a year having past.


Even the background characters in the Daily Planet Office changed when the Planet got closed. Albeit there was a reasonable explanation for this...many of them got laid off. I don't think anything has been done with Scorn, Ashbury or her father since that time period either(1999).

Dirk Armstrong was refered to in "Final Crisis" #3. He lost a leg during the explosion in the Planet's newsroom. Allie is probably still there, but hasn't been focused on. Whit, I think was a reference to Glenn Whitmore who was working on the books at the time. I think he was a colorist. Much like Dooley, who ran the coffee shop that the Planet staff frequented, was a reference to Kevin Dooley.


Crisis wiped out Steve Lombard. I think if he was handled correctly, there could be some things that he could make the office different.

No, he wasn't. Lombard appeared at WGBS from time to time. Mostly in his role as sport anchor. He appeared in a one-shot that retold a Bronze Age story. But this was his first full on role and with a new look.

But the reason the supporting cast was scaled back was due to the fact that there was too many faces, vying for time and that was turning off readers and critics. That's why there was a major scaleback.

[dumbstruck]

But the reason the supporting cast was scaled back was due to the fact that there was too many faces, vying for time and that was turning off readers and critics. That's why there was a major scaleback.


I'm of the opinion supporting casts have essentially been cut because there's no room for them anymore. With longterm plotting going the way of the dinosaur, and writing for the trade being more common, each story arc has to be a "Superman" story first and foremost, in order for the trade to present a self-contained Superman story to the trade reader.

It's not just Superman. I've found in recent years Batman's supporting cast of characters playing a much reduced roll as well. The GCPD characters, including Bullock, Montoya, and Gordon, IMO have been reduced to little more than background characters. And when's the last time we had a really good story about Alfred? I can't remember.

[OldSchoolfan]

I'm of the opinion supporting casts have essentially been cut because there's no room for them anymore. With longterm plotting going the way of the dinosaur, and writing for the trade being more common, each story arc has to be a "Superman" story first and foremost, in order for the trade to present a self-contained Superman story to the trade reader.

It's not just Superman. I've found in recent years Batman's supporting cast of characters playing a much reduced roll as well. The GCPD characters, including Bullock, Montoya, and Gordon, IMO have been reduced to little more than background characters. And when's the last time we had a really good story about Alfred? I can't remember.

What you are saying resonates with me too. Story structure has become a slave to format.....its not always a good thing.

[OldSchoolfan]

No, he wasn't. Lombard appeared at WGBS from time to time. Mostly in his role as sport anchor. He appeared in a one-shot that retold a Bronze Age story. But this was his first full on role and with a new look.

But the reason the supporting cast was scaled back was due to the fact that there was too many faces, vying for time and that was turning off readers and critics. That's why there was a major scaleback.

Was the one shot the Walt Simonson "Sand Superman" story?

Now with tongue firmly in cheek:

So, technically Lombard wasn't wiped out by Crisis....because he appeared once. I guess I should have said, "We haven't seen Steve Lombard very much at all since Crisis." Instead of thinking he was gone....you miss or forget about a detail in one story and the whole point you are trying to make gets screwed up.....sheesh.

How come DC editorial can't do something about "Grounded" since its "turning off readers and critics" ?

Oops, sorry rhetorical question. Please don't give me an essay sized reply explaining to me how readers and critics really do love it.:wink:

[Mat001]

No, the Lombard one I was talking about was a few years back. It was a recreation of the ghost football player story. But nowhere was it ever stated by the Superman writers that Lombard was gone from continuity. Just that he was not part of the Planet's staff until post "Infinite Crisis" continuity.

As to "Grounded", DC is doing that. They're finishing the story with Chris Roberson and having him bring his ideas into it. There's only a few more issues left.

[ForeverYoung8]

I miss the supporting cast. I'm glad Superman has more page time, but I wish they had just reduced the time spent on the cast rather than take them completely out. If nothing else, it was a reminder that Clark had a life away from Superman.

Remember when Perry got cancer and Clark had to fill in as editor? It was interesting watching him juggle that with his Superman duties. We'd never get that kind of story today, with everything written for trades.

[Beria]

The fact that Superman manages to keep his secret identity by wearing spectalcles is perhaps the most ludicrous idea in the whole strip. But it's a good bad idea.

The notion that the Weisinger/Schwartz-era Superman was too powerful to be interesting is an extraordinary bad idea. Superman doesn't need to be threatened physically by villains for the story to be entertaining. Otto Binder, Edmund Hamilton, Cary Bates, Alvin Schwartz et al have written tons of excellent stories that proves my point.

Also the need to get rid of Kandor, Kryptonite of different colours, Krypto, Beppo, the Super robots etc. diminishes the appeal of the character IMO. As one may presume, my interest in Superman quickly waned after John Byrne had let loose his puritan attack on that wonderful barouque that is the heritage of the 50's and 60's Superman comics.

The "death" of Superman seemed like a bad idea to me, and I haven't even bothered to read it.

For a couple of years after that Superman looked ridiculous wearing that mullet. Bad idea.

The electric Superman seemed like another character altogether. Bad idea.

[Sean Walsh]

Was the one shot the Walt Simonson "Sand Superman" story?

I can honestly say I never knew Walt's Sand Superman story was a retelling.


How come DC editorial can't do something about "Grounded" since its "turning off readers and critics" ?

Since Chris Roberson's come onboard to write based on JMS's plot, it's apparently much better - and many of the detractors I've seen around here are enjoying it now. He even found a way to work the "Lex stole 40 cakes" (http://robot6.comicbookresources.com/2011/03/a-retcon-for-the-ages-lex-luthor-cake-taker/) meme into the comic. :biggrin::tongue:

[Sean Walsh]

Ron and Lucy, did they have their baby? When triangle 1999 ended, I think that subplot was left in limbo.

They did - a son named Samuel (named after her dad).


I don't recall seeing Ron after the 1999 period. Lucy came back as Superwoman. I am assuming that the Secret Origin reboot changed her status.

Ron's still around on the Daily Planet staff. In fact, SUPERMAN: SECRET ORIGIN established that he was already on staff when Clark started working there (that's a big change - he was still an up-and-comer when Superman died) and is actually more successful and acclaimed a reporter than Clark.

Their marriage hasn't been mentioned, though I'd imagine it couldn't have made it through INFINITE CRISIS intact. Considering they never made a point to have Ron do or say, well, anything during Lucy's Superwoman phase, that must be some sorta silent acknowledgement that they're no longer together and probably never were.... :-/


No more Bibbo.

Officially? Hasn't been seen since before INFINITE CRISIS, either way.


I don't think anything has been done with Scorn, Ashbury or her father since that time period either(1999).

Scorn vanished, and Dirk Armstrong is still at LexCom (if it's even still around anymore - which I reckon it isn't).


Crisis wiped out Steve Lombard. I think if he was handled correctly, there could be some things that he could make the office different.

He's back (on staff with Troupe and Cat Grant), thanks to INFINITE CRISIS.

[ShadowDemon]

What you are saying resonates with me too. Story structure has become a slave to format.....its not always a good thing.

I'll "third" this motion!

Bad ideas in Superman's history (my list):

Rainbow kryptonite
too many other Kryptonians
Super-power inflation (push a planet out of orbit Superman)

Honestly, the best written Superman I've seen in the last 10 years was Bruce Timm's version.

[Mat001]

Ron's still around on the Daily Planet staff. In fact, SUPERMAN: SECRET ORIGIN established that he was already on staff when Clark started working there (that's a big change - he was still an up-and-comer when Superman died) and is actually more successful and acclaimed a reporter than Clark.

Their marriage hasn't been mentioned, though I'd imagine it couldn't have made it through INFINITE CRISIS intact. Considering they never made a point to have Ron do or say, well, anything during Lucy's Superwoman phase, that must be some sorta silent acknowledgement that they're no longer together and probably never were.... :-/

Lois mentioned it in Supergirl #59, when she was talking to Lucy about how she used to be and how she became what she was now. Only Samuel hasn't been mentioned. He was last seen and mentioned in "That Healing Touch", when Lucy and Samuel visit Lois as her apartment, right before the Parasite Twins show up.


Officially? Hasn't been seen since before INFINITE CRISIS, either way.

Bibbo was in Superman #680, "The Coming Of Atlas" part three. He tried to help Superman and Steel fight Atlas, but both get knocked away. Bibbo turned up a few issues later when Atlas in civilian garb comes into the Ace O' Clubs and has a couple of beers. Bibbo thinks he looks familiar, but can't place him. Atlas claims that he mostly works in the sewers.


Scorn vanished, and Dirk Armstrong is still at LexCom (if it's even still around anymore - which I reckon it isn't).

He was back at the Planet right before "Final Crisis". Not sure about now since he lost his leg. No one has bothered to use


I'm of the opinion supporting casts have essentially been cut because there's no room for them anymore. With longterm plotting going the way of the dinosaur, and writing for the trade being more common, each story arc has to be a "Superman" story first and foremost, in order for the trade to present a self-contained Superman story to the trade reader.

Possible, but this was starting up before that format became common place. It's certainly a factor now.


It's not just Superman. I've found in recent years Batman's supporting cast of characters playing a much reduced roll as well. The GCPD characters, including Bullock, Montoya, and Gordon, IMO have been reduced to little more than background characters. And when's the last time we had a really good story about Alfred? I can't remember.

To be fair, the GCPD had a monthly series from 2000 through 2006 and was only canceled because Ed Brubaker became a Marvel exclusive along with Michael Lark. Greg Rucka felt that it was better if they closed down that title and that's why he moved Montoya and Cris Allen off into different directions.

Jim's been getting a lot of face time under Scott Snyder over in Detective Comics, with the return of his son. Alfred was part of the Outsiders book right after "Battle For The Cowl" for a while.

[dumbstruck]

To be fair, the GCPD had a monthly series from 2000 through 2006 and was only canceled because Ed Brubaker became a Marvel exclusive along with Michael Lark. Greg Rucka felt that it was better if they closed down that title and that's why he moved Montoya and Cris Allen off into different directions.

And it was a fantastic series. But that was five years ago. Where's the supporting cast been since then?


Jim's been getting a lot of face time under Scott Snyder over in Detective Comics, with the return of his son. Alfred was part of the Outsiders book right after "Battle For The Cowl" for a while.

Yet Snyder's only been on the book for what, 4 or 5 months? What about the 4 or 5 years since Gotham Central ended? And as to Alfred, I shouldn't have to read a tangental book to read about a member of Batman's supporting cast.

When it comes to the supporting cast, when's the last time we had a story centered on a supporting cast member? Stories like "A Bullet for Bullock", in which Batman is not the main player.

At the end of the day, a characters supporting cast is no longer an integral part of the book, which is a sad thing. I miss those types of stories. They really serve to flesh out the world the main character inhabits.

[Mat001]

And it was a fantastic series. But that was five years ago. Where's the supporting cast been since then?

I haven't read Streets Of Gotham, but I think that was the place to find them.


Yet Snyder's only been on the book for what, 4 or 5 months? What about the 4 or 5 years since Gotham Central ended?

Morrison and Dini were concentrating on Bruce, Jezebel, Zatanna, Hurt, Damian, Talia and Tim.


And as to Alfred, I shouldn't have to read a tangental book to read about a member of Batman's supporting cast.

When it comes to the supporting cast, when's the last time we had a story centered on a supporting cast member? Stories like "A Bullet for Bullock", in which Batman is not the main player.

Bullock's last story was "Officer Down". Alfred's was his appearences in Robin leading into "Murderer" and "Fugitive". Jim and Bullock's story about how they got their jobs back fell by the wayside when "52" went from being about the DCU to the central characters of that series. That's why DiDio said that "Countdown" was "52" done right, since it balanced between the characters and the DCU at large. Even if it was inferior.

[dumbstruck]

I haven't read Streets Of Gotham, but I think that was the place to find them.



Morrison and Dini were concentrating on Bruce, Jezebel, Zatanna, Hurt, Damian, Talia and Tim.



Bullock's last story was "Officer Down". Alfred's was his appearences in Robin leading into "Murderer" and "Fugitive". Jim and Bullock's story about how they got their jobs back fell by the wayside when "52" went from being about the DCU to the central characters of that series. That's why DiDio said that "Countdown" was "52" done right, since it balanced between the characters and the DCU at large. Even if it was inferior.


Soooo.....long story short....it's been too long since we've had good stories about any of the regular supporting cast.

[OldSchoolfan]

I'll "third" this motion!

Bad ideas in Superman's history (my list):

Rainbow kryptonite
too many other Kryptonians
Super-power inflation (push a planet out of orbit Superman)

Honestly, the best written Superman I've seen in the last 10 years was Bruce Timm's version.

Every thing you said is an opinion that I hold as well. Cool!

[OldSchoolfan]

No, the Lombard one I was talking about was a few years back. It was a recreation of the ghost football player story. But nowhere was it ever stated by the Superman writers that Lombard was gone from continuity. Just that he was not part of the Planet's staff until post "Infinite Crisis" continuity.

As to "Grounded", DC is doing that. They're finishing the story with Chris Roberson and having him bring his ideas into it. There's only a few more issues left.

Any way we can get 'Run into the Grounded' to come out weekly so we can get to a different story quicker?

Ummmm....sorry....being annoying again. Thanks for your reply.:smile:

[OldSchoolfan]

I can honestly say I never knew Walt's Sand Superman story was a retelling.
Forgive my sappy nostalgia....but the original story appeared in Superman (vol 1) #133-142. Denny ONeal, Curt Swan and I think Murphy Anderson inked most of the issues...some one will pick me up on that I am sure.

This was the first Superman book I bought for myself, I was 11 or 12 and I stayed with the story until it was completed. There are some flaws in the story, but by and large it is a very satisfying read. I hope you get a chance and decide to check it out. I know for sure that issue 133 was reprinted as a Millenium edition and is in the Superman in the 70's collection. But I also found these issues for fairly cheap ($3-$5 a copy) at a convention.


Since Chris Roberson's come onboard to write based on JMS's plot, it's apparently much better - and many of the detractors I've seen around here are enjoying it now. He even found a way to work the "Lex stole 40 cakes" (http://robot6.comicbookresources.com/2011/03/a-retcon-for-the-ages-lex-luthor-cake-taker/) meme into the comic. :biggrin::tongue:

Although I am not a big fan of the silly stuff, I recognize there is a place for it....I certainly like what Roberson's doing now when he has a free hand. But, I thought his very first issue on the book was bad. I think that was because he was still working off JMS notes.

[Kurt Busiek]

Forgive my sappy nostalgia....but the original story appeared in Superman (vol 1) #133-142. Denny ONeal, Curt Swan and I think Murphy Anderson inked most of the issues...some one will pick me up on that I am sure.

This was the first Superman book I bought for myself, I was 11 or 12 and I stayed with the story until it was completed. There are some flaws in the story, but by and large it is a very satisfying read. I hope you get a chance and decide to check it out. I know for sure that issue 133 was reprinted as a Millenium edition and is in the Superman in the 70's collection. But I also found these issues for fairly cheap ($3-$5 a copy) at a convention.

That whole run was recently reprinted in hardcover as SUPERMAN: KRYPTONITE NEVERMORE. I think that's the title. It made for a very nice book.

kdb

[dupersuper]

SUPERMAN: SECRET ORIGIN established that he was already on staff when Clark started working there (that's a big change - he was still an up-and-comer when Superman died) and is actually more successful and acclaimed a reporter than Clark.


I ignore that sillyness.

[dancj]

The "death" of Superman seemed like a bad idea to me, and I haven't even bothered to read it.
Yeah it was rubbish, but it made The Return of Superman possible and that was fantastic!