Superman: Secret Origin

[md62]

Covers are posted over at newsarama.com:

http://www.newsarama.com/php/multimedia/album.php?aid=24424

updated with link to Geoff Johns' interview:

http://www.newsarama.com/comics/110828-Geoff-Secret-Origin.html

[Bored at 3:00AM]

Dear lord, Gary Frank's stuff is just gorgeous.

I am really looking forward to this. I know a lot of people wanted to see DC do this a year or so earlier, but I'm glad they waited until Gary Frank was on board as the artist.

[Sean Walsh]

My only complaint is Metallo and Parasite on the cover of #5. They do not look good at all.

The rest is gorgeous, though. :smile:

[Mat001]

Metallo is based off of the late 70's/early 80's incarnation. Before he became the endoskeleton in Superman #1, volume 2. Parasite, it could be Rudy Jones or it could be the Pre-Crisis version.

[The Batman]

My only complaint is Metallo and Parasite on the cover of #5. They do not look good at all.

The rest is gorgeous, though. :smile:

Ditto. That Metallo just looks garish.

[Sean Walsh]

Metallo is based off of the late 70's/early 80's incarnation. Before he became the endoskeleton in Superman #1, volume 2. Parasite, it could be Rudy Jones or it could be the Pre-Crisis version.

....you know, I can't even remember what Metallo looked like pre-Crisis. Wow.

And Parasite does looks like his old P-C self, but........bleh. Never liked that look.


Oh, and golly - they've got a colorized version of the first 4 covers of SECRET ORIGIN!!

http://i.livescience.com/images/origin_CVRs.jpg

[The Batman]

That is nice.

[Utility Belt]

Those cover are fantastic! But what really gets my interest is the part where it says "will tell the definitive origin of the Man of Steel , reflecting post-Infinite Crisis changes as well as setting up storylines for the future".
I don't think Superman's origin needs to be told YET AGAIN but I do hope that whatever it is they stick with it.
From the covers we can deduce that it's an attempt to tie together elements from various origins through the years, including the movies. I noticed the following:
1) Superboy is back, as is his relationship with the Legion. Good.
2) On the "Daily Planet" cover, Lois Lane seems to look like Kate Bosworth (Superman Returns) and Clark/Superman has a certain Christopher Reeve quality.
3) The Fortress of Solitude is the movie version one and Jor-El has a Marlon Brando look to him. Jor-El also has the "S" curl like Kal-El does, just like in the movies.
4) Jor-El and Lara have the "S" shield on their clothes. Again, this is an element from the movies where it was established that the "S" shield was a Kryptonian symbol and not designed by Jonathan Kent as is the golden/silver age version.
5) Lex Luthor seems to be the "corporate mogul" Lex as opposed to the "genius scientist" Lex.

[Bored at 3:00AM]

I'm glad they've ditched the Kenny Rogers in Pajamas look Kubert designed for Jor-El in Last Son. Frank's redesign keeps the basics, but revamps it enough that he looks like an amalgam of Classic Jor-El, Brando and the Animated Series versions.

[Doc Goblin]

The only part of this I'm not really looking forward to is all in that second cover. Superboy and the Legion of Super-Heroes. That's not a part of Superman's origin I'm a big fan of, but Johns obviously is. Maybe he'll end up changing my mind, even though he hasn't managed to yet with all the Legion work he's done.

[Jeff-X]

....you know, I can't even remember what Metallo looked like pre-Crisis. Wow.

And Parasite does looks like his old P-C self, but........bleh. Never liked that look.


Oh, and golly - they've got a colorized version of the first 4 covers of SECRET ORIGIN!!

http://i.livescience.com/images/origin_CVRs.jpg

Is it just me or does Pa Kent look like John Kerry?

[Cipranzi]

He definitely does.

[Mat001]

....you know, I can't even remember what Metallo looked like pre-Crisis. Wow.

http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/marvel_dc/images/thumb/e/eb/Metallo_998.jpg/331px-Metallo_998.jpg

[J. Robb]

From the interview:

We haven't seen a modern day retelling of Clark's first adventure as Superboy with the Legion of Super-Heroes, or the day Superman met Jimmy Olsen or the origins of Superman's long time enemies like the Parasite and Metallo.
Wasn't there a new Jimmy Olsen "origin" just last year?

[CYOTI]

Is it just me or does Pa Kent look like John Kerry?
I don't see a botoxed smile nor do I see any signs of metrosexualism so no.

[Super Buddies Forever]

The only part of this I'm not really looking forward to is all in that second cover. Superboy and the Legion of Super-Heroes. That's not a part of Superman's origin I'm a big fan of, but Johns obviously is. Maybe he'll end up changing my mind, even though he hasn't managed to yet with all the Legion work he's done.

You and me both. I'll make the conceit that Superboy is important for the Legion, but it's my belief that the Legion is detrimental to the Superman story, especially when it involves him wearing the costume before he actually becomes Superman in Metropolis.

I'm going to try and keep an open mind though, because I believe that Johns will hold back and won't have any Superboy adventures in Smallville. It's strictly going to happen in the future to preserve his big Metropolis debut.

[Mat001]

From the interview:


Wasn't there a new Jimmy Olsen "origin" just last year?

Yeah, but I think that's being ignored.

[livin_target]

The only part of this I'm not really looking forward to is all in that second cover. Superboy and the Legion of Super-Heroes. That's not a part of Superman's origin I'm a big fan of, but Johns obviously is. Maybe he'll end up changing my mind, even though he hasn't managed to yet with all the Legion work he's done.


While the recent work on the Legion has changed my mind about them, I'm not a fan of Superman going about in his costume before his debute in Metropolis. Still, I'll keep an open mind as I've been relatively pleased with how the Superman franchise has been doing recently.

[Mat001]

Well, Clark can't be running around in the future with his school clothes on. He'd stick out like a sore thumb.

[livin_target]

Well, Clark can't be running around in the future with his school clothes on. He'd stick out like a sore thumb.

Maybe, but dressing him up as the most famous superhero ever when he's not ready to assume that role might be a mistake on the Legion's part.

[Doc Goblin]

Yeah, the reason the Superboy and the Legion thing isn't something I like is because it almost seems to undermine him becoming Superman. It's like the Legion came and made him Superman before he developed into that on his own. Does that mean Clark came to Metropolis already knowing he was going to become the greatest superhero ever? Like I said, that kind of undermines the big moment of him becoming Superman.

But who knows. Maybe Johns will pull it off in a way that works. I'm not saying it's impossible. It's just how his origin kind of sounds right now.

[WorstThingUS]

Maybe, but dressing him up as the most famous superhero ever when he's not ready to assume that role might be a mistake on the Legion's part.

Superman and the Legion is one of those things that was designed to be silly fun that you can't think too hard or deeply upon otherwise you realize that, given Superman's messiah like importance to the universe it's the equivalent of a bunch of kids bringing a teen Jesus into our time to pal around with. Basically, every living adult who wasn't on their knees worshipping him (the recent Supergirl and The LSH showed what always should have been a component of Superman's future presence with a religion in his name going nuts at the appearance of an "S") should have freaked out that they were risking the life of the most important person in history on a daily basis. If he dies, the universe will unravel given how many times he's saved it. Even the villains should react the same way. But when you take that "realistic" approach you destroy the conceit of LSH: Superboy going on adventures with being a teen superhero in the future. It's just supposed to be fun, nothing more. It'll be interesting to see how Johns does it given we've seen evidence of Superman worship in the Legion's time.

[J. Robb]

Yeah, but I think that's being ignored.
Not a surprise, I knew Busiek's new origin for Jimmy would be ignored as soon as it came out. There was also a new origin for him in Superman: Confidential early this year, but that whole series has been ignored.

The real question about "Superman: Secret Origin" is whether or not it will be ignored once Johns is off the books, which tends to be a pattern in the Superman titles this decade.

[Retro315]

I absolutely knew this had to be coming ...

Gary Frank isn't on New Krypton, but he's said himself that he's all about Superman, not going anywhere for a long time, and he seems like a guy who gets his work done on time without any problems ...

So why isn't he doing New Krypton? And Johns hints at the post-IC origins ... the break on February where Robinson does a two-parter cross-title ... a few other things? (And Johns has said Green Lantern wouldn't be the only one getting Secret Origin treatment).

Very cool.

My first thoughts, other than mild depression at the thought of it being a few months before I get Johns-Frank back in Action Comics are these;

1. Superman hands down definitely deserves his origins shown over six issues in all the Gary Frank, Christopher Reeve inspired, Johns continuity organizing glory they can get. I don't know if this one will be quite as "prophetic" as Hal Jordan's secret origin ended up - but in Green Lantern we're dealing with prophecies coming back and biting some serious asses. Superman's should be more straight-forward.

2. Who's next? The love for Superman is fantastic, with Action, Superman and Supergirl all awesome, Adventure Comics coming in for some Legion love after the LO3W event ... New Krypton coming through pretty reliably ... even Batman seems like this two-part, post-RIP "True story of Batman" Alfred is telling will be a bit of a Secret Origin as well ... well ... come on Aquaman!

3. Let's see those last two covers colored, damn it!

[Mat001]

Maybe, but dressing him up as the most famous superhero ever when he's not ready to assume that role might be a mistake on the Legion's part.

Well, it obviously wasn't since he's done well as an adult. Working with the Legion gave him the experience he needed to make the difficult decisions as Superman. He has to start assuming that role at some point and so starting when he's young and still impressionable does make sense.

Does that mean Clark came to Metropolis already knowing he was going to become the greatest superhero ever? Like I said, that kind of undermines the big moment of him becoming Superman.

Yeah, I think he knew that he would play a siginifcant part in the development of the Legion's future. He knew that they were inspired by his actions as a boy, before he had even put on a costume. Which is why as teenagers they went around and formed the Legion in the first place.

The real question about "Superman: Secret Origin" is whether or not it will be ignored once Johns is off the books, which tends to be a pattern in the Superman titles this decade

Well, the thing with "Birthright" is that no one could agree to use it or not. Certain creative teams ignored it and others embraced it. I think this time it's going to stick. "Return To Krypton" was just a story arc to celebrate the Silver Age. "Birthright" was to tell a new origin, but had an uphill battle going against it. "Secret Origin" does have a bit of that same struggle, but I think that it could be that the third time is the charm.

[cpahl2000]

....you know, I can't even remember what Metallo looked like pre-Crisis. Wow.

And Parasite does looks like his old P-C self, but........bleh. Never liked that look.


Oh, and golly - they've got a colorized version of the first 4 covers of SECRET ORIGIN!!

http://i.livescience.com/images/origin_CVRs.jpg

those covers pay for the series. I think it´ll be amazing. I´m not fan of re-telling origins but it can be the definitive( at least for a while) Superman´s. I like the Silver Age elements too. Great Superman event for 2009.

[Sean Walsh]

those covers pay for the series. I think it´ll be amazing. I´m not fan of re-telling origins but it can be the definitive( at least for a while) Superman´s. I like the Silver Age elements too. Great Superman event for 2009.

At this point, Superman does need a new/revised origin. SO much has been changed to his history of late without a proper origin tale being told. And makes sense that the guy who made most of these changes will herald it.

[Augusto]

Geoff Johns is making a phd in this kind of stories. Green Lantern Rebirth, Flash Rebirth and now Superman: Secret Origin.

I've been a big fan of Byrne's MoS but I have great expectations in this new story Johns is going to tell.

[cpahl2000]

At this point, Superman does need a new/revised origin. SO much has been changed to his history of late without a proper origin tale being told. And makes sense that the guy who made most of these changes will herald it.


I agree with you.

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

I'm going to try and keep an open mind though, because I believe that Johns will hold back and won't have any Superboy adventures in Smallville. It's strictly going to happen in the future to preserve his big Metropolis debut.

I like the idea of some adventures in Smallville, but not with the uniform and such - there needs to be THE point where he decides to become a hero, and it works better that he does it as a man.

That said, I believe in Up,Up And Away or one of the other John/Busiek penned stories (was sick on weekend and did a big bulk Superman read so can't remember which exactly) there was a reference from another character - possibly in a newspaper - linking Superman to the 'rumoured Superboy of Kansas', so they must have plan for him to be doing something that gets peoples attention.

Well, the thing with "Birthright" is that no one could agree to use it or not. Certain creative teams ignored it and others embraced it. I think this time it's going to stick.

As I mentioned in the other thread, I read it and Man Of Steel in the same week, and it was tricky to really see the need for Birthright.
Entertaining enough I guess, but it was a little too 'soft' in reboot terms, for it's own good.
It was reverent to Byrne's, but not reverent enough that they easily co-exist, and it also changed things, but didn't really change them enough.
I think it left it a little too gray for other writers, as too which to follow.

[Sean Whitmore]

Not a surprise, I knew Busiek's new origin for Jimmy would be ignored as soon as it came out. There was also a new origin for him in Superman: Confidential early this year, but that whole series has been ignored.

CBR News: "So what can we expect from DC in 2009?"

Didio: "Jimmy Olsen origins! All year long! We've actually got two planned to come out concurrently in May!"


SEAN

[Mat001]

I like the idea of some adventures in Smallville, but not with the uniform and such - there needs to be THE point where he decides to become a hero, and it works better that he does it as a man.

He already decided to become a hero before meeting the Legion.

That said, I believe in Up,Up And Away or one of the other John/Busiek penned stories (was sick on weekend and did a big bulk Superman read so can't remember which exactly) there was a reference from another character - possibly in a newspaper - linking Superman to the 'rumoured Superboy of Kansas', so they must have plan for him to be doing something that gets peoples attention.

"Infinite Crisis" #7, Action Comics Annual #10 and Superman #656 featured references or flashbacks to Clark doing superdeeds without a costume. In IC, Alexander tells Superboy-Prime that history changed and that among the notable changes was reports of a superboy in Smallville. "Camelot Falls", Clark is talking to Callie who mentions that she heard rumors of a Super-Boy in the midwest. In the annual, we see Clark actually saving lives while wearing regular clothes. So in each issue, Clark had done super rescues at superspeed, leading to all sorts of rumors. Then the Legion showed up and took him to the future. They gave him a copy of his suit designed to fit his smaller frame and blend in with the Legion. In the present, he had to conceal the suit under his clothing while being Clark. And he probably didn't run around in full costume in Smallville.

As I mentioned in the other thread, I read it and Man Of Steel in the same week, and it was tricky to really see the need for Birthright.
Entertaining enough I guess, but it was a little too 'soft' in reboot terms, for it's own good.
It was reverent to Byrne's, but not reverent enough that they easily co-exist, and it also changed things, but didn't really change them enough.
I think it left it a little too gray for other writers, as too which to follow.

Bingo. That's pretty close. It's not that Waid didn't try. But that he tried to do it and appeal to both origins. That's why Johns, Busiek and Nicieza have gone full bore with a harder reboot.

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

He already decided to become a hero before meeting the Legion.


That's not what I mean, and if it is, they weaken it's story quite a bit.

That moment where he decides he will be Superman, and protect Earth against all threats and heads to Metropolis (or heads to Metropolis and realises his calling).

Before that, it's alright for him to have had a couple of adventures, but more from a right place, right time angle (or wrong place, wrong time angle).
I think it actually weakens his decision when the Legion have shown up and told him he will be a famous hero.
Not a hard choice at all when you know you will be remembered and loved for a thousand years.

[Rugal 3:16]

I'm not a fan of Jor-el with white hair and a beard, I liked the Jor-el that kind of resembles Kal-el, clean shaved and black hair.

[eggie]

I don't think I like the bearded Jor-El either...I don't mind the white hair, but the white hair whie beard combo makes hime look like a Doobie Brother.

[Rugal 3:16]

I understand the white hair though, they're trying to make him like Marlon Brando.. but i still preffered the Jor-El that resembles superman.

[Bored at 3:00AM]

I understand the white hair though, they're trying to make him like Marlon Brando.. but i still preffered the Jor-El that resembles superman.

I heard they were originally going to go beard-less, but apparently the Brando estate caused a fuss and wanted royalties.

I don't mind the beard, it adds a nice Moses/Zues/Jesus thang to Jor-El.

[Mat001]

That's not what I mean, and if it is, they weaken it's story quite a bit.

That moment where he decides he will be Superman, and protect Earth against all threats and heads to Metropolis (or heads to Metropolis and realises his calling).

Before that, it's alright for him to have had a couple of adventures, but more from a right place, right time angle (or wrong place, wrong time angle).
I think it actually weakens his decision when the Legion have shown up and told him he will be a famous hero.
Not a hard choice at all when you know you will be remembered and loved for a thousand years.

In both Pre-Crisis and Post "Infinite Crisis" continuity, Clark chose to use his powers because he had them all at a certain point and because his parents said that he should. Earth-1, it was that the Kents told him to conceal his gifts and never be selfish with them. So Clark chose to use them publically, but to protect himself and his loved ones, he became Superboy. He met the Legion after he had been at it for a few years. New Earth, Clark was in the same boat. He had all of his powers and they were growing stronger with each passing day. The Kents warned him not to be abusive with them and he felt that he could do the most good by helping others. So he was doing that for a while when he ran into Mon-El and when the Legion showed up, he went with them because he didn't want to be alone. They then took him out to use his powers to help others and train him in their useage.

MOS took a different tract. He didn't have all of his powers at once. And when he did have them, they weren't at full strength. So he didn't go around helping people until after he found out he wasn't human and after high school, when he traveled the world. BR just kept that, but removed the athlete aspect. "Smallville" has Clark use his powers to save others, but he tries to avoid having to do it publically and on a more full time basis, out of a desire to be normal. And fear of what Jor-El wants him to do. The films had Clark not use his gifts until the Fortress has been built and he learned of his heritage and what Jor-El wanted of him.

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

In both Pre-Crisis and Post "Infinite Crisis" continuity, Clark chose to use his powers because he had them all at a certain point and because his parents said that he should. Earth-1, it was that the Kents told him to conceal his gifts and never be selfish with them. So Clark chose to use them publically, but to protect himself and his loved ones, he became Superboy. He met the Legion after he had been at it for a few years. New Earth, Clark was in the same boat. He had all of his powers and they were growing stronger with each passing day. The Kents warned him not to be abusive with them and he felt that he could do the most good by helping others. So he was doing that for a while when he ran into Mon-El and when the Legion showed up, he went with them because he didn't want to be alone. They then took him out to use his powers to help others and train him in their useage.


Yeah, and I think that weakens the story quite a bit.
I don't mind him having some adventures and such, maybe even meeting the Legion once - but not going to the future with them - even his Birthright around the globe style adventures... but the defining moment where he puts on the costume and becomes Superman should be when he goes to Metropolis, and relaises the world needs him.

The only reason I can see for Mon-El and the Legion in his youth is nostalgia.
Which is a shame they are going that way, because I don't mind the other crazy elements like the fortress and Krypto and such coming back, because overall they add to the craziness.
Already having had massive adventures as Superboy actually takes away from it.

[Mat001]

It's not so much for nostaliga as it is part of the character's lore for years. Metropolis doesn't need him. The world doesn't need him. He does what he does because of his genetic abnormality that gives him powers and because he was raised to be selfless. It doesn't matter what age he is, so long as he does it. The Legion is part and parcel for years and had Bryne not screwed that up and DC made it worse with retcons, it wouldn't be an issue.

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

It's not so much for nostaliga as it is part of the character's lore for years.

Metropolis doesn't need him. The world doesn't need him.

Not much of a hero then is he...

He does what he does because of his genetic abnormality that gives him powers and because he was raised to be selfless. It doesn't matter what age he is, so long as he does it.

Okay, the story works better with the set moment he decides to - it's part of the heroes journey.
Just doing it because you were raised to, isn't that interesting, unless the story being told is the protagonist bucking against that.

The Legion is part and parcel for years and had Bryne not screwed that up and DC made it worse with retcons, it wouldn't be an issue.

Actually, it just adds a lot clutter, and the further retcons only affected the Legion, not Superman.

The story of Superman is a better story without him being a hero from the get go.
You might love the individual stories told with him and the legion, and that's cool, but the actual story of Superman itself is more solid without it.

[Mat001]

Not much of a hero then is he...

He's a hero regardless of the world needing him or not. The world wasn't crying out for him. But when he showed up, the world took notice and has come to rely on him.

Okay, the story works better with the set moment he decides to - it's part of the heroes journey.

Two things.

1. That's partially because you're used to that in the films and "Smallville" where it is played up as the hero's journey.

2. Even in MOS, there isn't any destiny to his journey. It's as it always was just minus the Superboy years.

Just doing it because you were raised to, isn't that interesting, unless the story being told is the protagonist bucking against that.

Which has never been the character in the comics, not even with MOS as the origin. Clark has only railed against his destiny in the second film and in "Smallville". In the comics, the closest to that was the lead-in to "Infinite Crisis" and "Up, Up & Away". Though it's not seen as destiny so much as his lot in life.

Actually, it just adds a lot clutter, and the further retcons only affected the Legion, not Superman.

The clutter only began when Superboy was removed. That's why Johns is clearing it all up now. Superman was affected the Legion had been part of making Superboy into Superman. Taking out Superboy removed his adventures with them and made Superman into a novice, learning the ropes during the latter half of the 80's.

The story of Superman is a better story without him being a hero from the get go.
You might love the individual stories told with him and the legion, and that's cool, but the actual story of Superman itself is more solid without it.

He's still not the hero from the get go. It's not until his teens that he starts to use his powers and then puts on a costume to blend in the 30th century. So it doesn't change anything whether he's 13 or 23.

[David Walton]

As I mentioned in the other thread, I read it and Man Of Steel in the same week, and it was tricky to really see the need for Birthright.
Entertaining enough I guess, but it was a little too 'soft' in reboot terms, for it's own good.
It was reverent to Byrne's, but not reverent enough that they easily co-exist, and it also changed things, but didn't really change them enough.
I think it left it a little too gray for other writers, as too which to follow.

I think Waid re-emphasized Superman's alien roots, recapturing that sense that he is caught between two worlds.

There's a line from "Man of Steel" where Clark says it doesn't really matter where he came from because he's an American. While that might have reflected attitudes toward immigration in the patriotic fervor of the 1980s, I think it weakened Superman's conflict a bit and it certainly doesn't speak to our times. After years of "English only" talking points and calls for deportation, "Birthright" tapped into how to make Superman compelling and relevant. It's the best of both worlds.

Waid has the fortune/misfortune of shaping a lot of concepts that he doesn't always get credit for. Like his colloboration with Morrison on the "Superman 2000" pitch. A lot of those ideas are getting kicked around, both in "All-Star Superman" and in OYL. Waid had talked about Superman gaining powers exponentially (an idea also used from a different angle in "Kingdom Come"), a conceit that could be linked to Luthor's plot in All-Star and to the idea that Clark's sense of taste is overdeveloped in OYL. Also whether people liked Hypertime or not, there's little doubt that the return of the Multiverse is a development of Waid and Morrison's ideas there (if I recall correctly, Waid gives Morrison credit for helping him with the concept).

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

He's a hero regardless of the world needing him or not. The world wasn't crying out for him. But when he showed up, the world took notice and has come to rely on him.

If it's something anyone could do, he's not a hero, or valuable.

For him to be the person of importance he is in the DCU, he must've been needed.

Two things.
1. That's partially because you're used to that in the films and "Smallville" where it is played up as the hero's journey.
2. Even in MOS, there isn't any destiny to his journey. It's as it always was just minus the Superboy years.
Which has never been the character in the comics, not even with MOS as the origin. Clark has only railed against his destiny in the second film and in "Smallville". In the comics, the closest to that was the lead-in to "Infinite Crisis" and "Up, Up & Away". Though it's not seen as destiny so much as his lot in life.
The clutter only began when Superboy was removed. That's why Johns is clearing it all up now. Superman was affected the Legion had been part of making Superboy into Superman. Taking out Superboy removed his adventures with them and made Superman into a novice, learning the ropes during the latter half of the 80's.
He's still not the hero from the get go. It's not until his teens that he starts to use his powers and then puts on a costume to blend in the 30th century. So it doesn't change anything whether he's 13 or 23.

From a storytelling point of view, none of this is needed and is only clutter - which is actually why it was removed in MOS, rightly or wrongly, to give it a better flow.

There's no need for it to be introduced except that the writers want it introduced.

[Mat001]

If it's something anyone could do, he's not a hero, or valuable.

Well, considering how many heroes there are in the DCU and not all of them need powers to do it. Superman is no different from any of his contemporaries. He's just one of the few heroes who has the most powers and the strongest of moral codes.

For him to be the person of importance he is in the DCU, he must've been needed.

He's only important because he was the first modern superhero and made it possible for the heroes of old and the new generation to operate without fear of prosecution. Without the government getting involved as they did in the 50's.

From a storytelling point of view, none of this is needed and is only clutter - which is actually why it was removed in MOS, rightly or wrongly, to give it a better flow.

Superboy was only removed because Byrne thought that it would be better without it. The thing is that Superman works with and without Superboy. It's not clutter. It's history dating back to what Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster had in mind, way back when.

There's no need for it to be introduced except that the writers want it introduced

Same deal for removing it.

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

Well, considering how many heroes there are in the DCU and not all of them need powers to do it. Superman is no different from any of his contemporaries. He's just one of the few heroes who has the most powers and the strongest of moral codes.

And yet all the others look up to him - go read JLA, they are all impressed by, and often talk about how powerful he is.

I mean c'mon, are you Lex Luthor or something - he's the most powerful of all heroes!

What's the point in reading Superman if the world doesn't need him?
It's why Jor-El sent him here...

He's only important because he was the first modern superhero and made it possible for the heroes of old and the new generation to operate without fear of prosecution. Without the government getting involved as they did in the 50's.

This is an odd argument as in the next paragraph you're telling me I'm wrong about bits that were added by Byrne - Superman was the first hero for a looong time in comics.


Superboy was only removed because Byrne thought that it would be better without it. The thing is that Superman works with and without Superboy. It's not clutter. It's history dating back to what Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster had in mind, way back when.

And Byrne thought it worked better as the 'heroes journey' works better without Super boy, which is true.
It makes his arrival in Metropolis significant, and not 'he was the hero of Kansas, but now he's in the big city!'

I don't think Siegel And Shuster had a plan... I mean do you think he should have run around wearing a cape as a child?
I'd say it was a way to just tell different sorts of Superman stories, and appeal to younger readers, as opposed to any significance added to the mythos of Superman.


Same deal for removing it.

No, as I've said, removing it actually does work better from a story telling perspective - maybe not a story generating one, but in a story telling sense, his mythos loses quite a bit of significance if he's an old hat at everything when he arrives in Metropolis - which should be one of his most defining moments.

[Mat001]

And yet all the others look up to him - go read JLA, they are all impressed by, and often talk about how powerful he is.

I mean c'mon, are you Lex Luthor or something - he's the most powerful of all heroes!

Captian Atom, Captain Marvel, Green Lantern and more are stronger than him. They're impressed because he's the world's biggest boy scout who has several super powers.

What's the point in reading Superman if the world doesn't need him?

You can read Superman because you like him, not because the world needs him.

It's why Jor-El sent him here...

No, it isn't. Jor-El sent him to Earth to give him a chance to survive. Not to use his powers to help others. All Jor-El's A.I. has done is to remind him to be humble and to not forget his place.

This is an odd argument as in the next paragraph you're telling me I'm wrong about bits that were added by Byrne - Superman was the first hero for a looong time in comics.

I never said he wasn't. When Siegel and Shuster created him, he was the first one to catch on and have a long term appeal thanks to DC's exploitation. In continuity, pre-Crisis, Clark was the first. Post-Crisis, he was the first one of the late 20th century. There had been many others before him.

And Byrne thought it worked better as the 'heroes journey' works better without Super boy, which is true.

But it isn't the hero's journey he was writing. He was writing Superman like in the films. But that doesn't make him the only course for continuity. In fact, it glosses over an essential part of the character that Siegel and Shuster felt so adamant about, that they've harbored resentment towards DC for years, up until their death. And is why their heirs are fighting in court for the copyright and what is due them.

It makes his arrival in Metropolis significant, and not 'he was the hero of Kansas, but now he's in the big city!'

Which also contradicted what Siegel and Shuster had intended and what Weisenger (sp) wound up doing over the years. All Johns and Frank are doing, along with the others, is putting it back in where it belongs. Honoring the creators before them, while finding a logical middle ground. Having Clark debut in public as we see in Action #850, while before then, he had adventures as a boy.

I don't think Siegel And Shuster had a plan... I mean do you think he should have run around wearing a cape as a child?

I don't see why he shouldn't be Superboy. And as to what the creators had in mind, this has been proven in the US courts. That they had planned to introduce Superboy and flesh out the backstory from his youth, but DC rejected it until they did it behind their backs, effectively screwing Siegel and Shuster over. There is sufficent documentation of the fact that Superboy was a part of the plan and what they wanted to do, after the character took off.

I'd say it was a way to just tell different sorts of Superman stories, and appeal to younger readers, as opposed to any significance added to the mythos of Superman.

Well, you'd be wrong.

No, as I've said, removing it actually does work better from a story telling perspective - maybe not a story generating one, but in a story telling sense, his mythos loses quite a bit of significance if he's an old hat at everything when he arrives in Metropolis - which should be one of his most defining moments.

For you it does. Not everyone has agreed with you. Not the creators, not everyone at DC and not the fans of Superboy throughout the years.

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

Captian Atom, Captain Marvel, Green Lantern and more are stronger than him. They're impressed because he's the world's biggest boy scout who has several super powers.

Except for all the times characters have been in awe for him for just being Superman - go read JLA, Green Lantern stops to marvel at the fact that Superman is wrestling with an angel.
Those characters are 'stronger' than him in their books - butt in crossovers and such, it's always Superman who saves the day.


You can read Superman because you like him, not because the world needs him.


The whole character works when the world needs him.

If it doesn't, there's no point - I expand on this below.


No, it isn't. Jor-El sent him to Earth to give him a chance to survive. Not to use his powers to help others. All Jor-El's A.I. has done is to remind him to be humble and to not forget his place.

In the films, it's to save them.
In Birthright, Clark decides he NEEDS to become Superman because the world NEEDS him.

In every book, the hero is the hero because the world, or the city NEEDS him - unless you are telling a different story, but using the genre - otherwise, there is no point, and life would go on with or without that character.

I don't see why you would be so willing to diminish a character you obviously like



I never said he wasn't. When Siegel and Shuster created him, he was the first one to catch on and have a long term appeal thanks to DC's exploitation. In continuity, pre-Crisis, Clark was the first. Post-Crisis, he was the first one of the late 20th century. There had been many others before him.

When they invented him he was the ONLY one - he IS the first superhero.
I find it interesting that you ignore this piece of pre-crisis continuity due to your own personal taste - but state it as if it has and always shall be - and yet when I say Legion doesn't belong, you see that as something that was jettisoned because of the tastes of the day, and it always belonged.


But it isn't the hero's journey he was writing. He was writing Superman like in the films.

And in the films they were telling... the heroes journey.

But that doesn't make him the only course for continuity. In fact, it glosses over an essential part of the character that Siegel and Shuster felt so adamant about, that they've harbored resentment towards DC for years, up until their death. And is why their heirs are fighting in court for the copyright and what is due them.

They are fighting about it in court because they feel DC owes them money for Superboy - that's why Siegel and Shuster were resentful, and it's why the heirs went to court... not because they felt Super-Boy was essential, but because DC didn't share the money they made off of a profitable character.


Which also contradicted what Siegel and Shuster had intended and what Weisenger (sp) wound up doing over the years. All Johns and Frank are doing, along with the others, is putting it back in where it belongs. Honoring the creators before them, while finding a logical middle ground. Having Clark debut in public as we see in Action #850, while before then, he had adventures as a boy.

Siegel and Shuster didn't have a big plan for Superman.
Nor did Weisenger... it was all fill one issue at a time.
Siegel, Shuster and Weisenger weren't telling a continuing story - rightly or wrongly, comics these days are.

I can handle the concept of Superboy fine, I just believe that if you step back and look at a Superman time line, having him in costume as a youngster - and especially finding out that he's remembered as a hero for years and years,with no BIG moment debut for Superman or anything in particular to kick start his decision to become a hero etc etc - does more harm to the character than good.

I don't see why he shouldn't be Superboy. And as to what the creators had in mind, this has been proven in the US courts. That they had planned to introduce Superboy and flesh out the backstory from his youth, but DC rejected it until they did it behind their backs, effectively screwing Siegel and Shuster over. There is sufficent documentation of the fact that Superboy was a part of the plan and what they wanted to do, after the character took off.

Again, different times - it wasn't about fleshing a story out, it was about making more money off of the Superman franchise.

Well, you'd be wrong.

Nope.


For you it does. Not everyone has agreed with you. Not the creators, not everyone at DC and not the fans of Superboy throughout the years.

That's fine - I have no need to be popular with any of those people.
In terms of 'grand story' it's better to not have had a 'Super Boy', beyond the odd adventure where Clark rescued someone.

[David Walton]

There are ways to make the Legion angle work without diminishing the significance of Clark's journey into Metropolis. Superboy could enjoy adventures in the future and then have his memory wiped, leaving some faint intuition of his destiny but not the full picture.

[Mat001]

Except for all the times characters have been in awe for him for just being Superman - go read JLA, Green Lantern stops to marvel at the fact that Superman is wrestling with an angel.

It was the Flash who said that.

Those characters are 'stronger' than him in their books - butt in crossovers and such, it's always Superman who saves the day.

When it's Morrison writing the book or Waid, then it is Superman. Meltzer didn't have Superman save the day in "The Tornado Path" and McDuffie had the Green Lanterns and Firestorm save the day in "Injustice League". Plastic Man did it in "Trial By Fire". Flash saved the day in the JLE Secret Files & Origins story.

The whole character works when the world needs him.

The world doesn't always need him as we've seen. It gets along just fine without him.

If it doesn't, there's no point - I expand on this below.

Okay.


In the films, it's to save them.

That's the films. Not the comics. Every version of his origin, save for "Birthright", Jor-El sent his son to Earth to survive because Earth was similar to Krypton. It's also that way in the serials, the 50's series, the Superboy series, "Lois & Clark", "Super Friends", the Fliescher (sp) cartoons, the Filmmation series, the Ruby/Spears series and the DCAU.

In Birthright, Clark decides he NEEDS to become Superman because the world NEEDS him.

Which is no longer in continuity.

In every book, the hero is the hero because the world, or the city NEEDS him - unless you are telling a different story, but using the genre - otherwise, there is no point, and life would go on with or without that character.

Exactly. It went on when he died, when he was powerless for a year, when he was exiled in space. The Legion's future has done well without him when he wasn't around as Superboy.

I don't see why you would be so willing to diminish a character you obviously like

I'm not diminishing the character. I'm pointing out that Superman isn't that important that the world, nay the universe needed him. It's survived before and after his time. He just does what he does because of how he was raised. No more and no less.

When they invented him he was the ONLY one - he IS the first superhero.
I find it interesting that you ignore this piece of pre-crisis continuity due to your own personal taste - but state it as if it has and always shall be - and yet when I say Legion doesn't belong, you see that as something that was jettisoned because of the tastes of the day, and it always belonged.

I didn't ignore that. I said that in pre-Crisis history, he was the first hero. I then said that post-Crisis, he was the first modern day hero. You didn't read my post thoroughly.

And in the films they were telling... the heroes journey.

Yes, the films. But as I said, we're talking about the comics. Where it wasn't the hero's journey and hasn't been.

They are fighting about it in court because they feel DC owes them money for Superboy - that's why Siegel and Shuster were resentful, and it's why the heirs went to court... not because they felt Super-Boy was essential, but because DC didn't share the money they made off of a profitable character.

Yes, but again, you miss the point. Superboy was their creation. They had intended to introduce him as early as 1939, but were told no until Siegel went to war and they did it behind his back, without properly working out a deal. An illegal action on DC's part. Siegel and Shuster always planned for Superboy to be a part of the character, once Superman took off. To say that Superboy isn't important to Superman is false. The character works with and without that aspect and right now, DC wants it back in.

Siegel and Shuster didn't have a big plan for Superman.
Nor did Weisenger... it was all fill one issue at a time.
Siegel, Shuster and Weisenger weren't telling a continuing story - rightly or wrongly, comics these days are.

The plan was to add Superboy to the character's history. That is a big plan. I never said it was written out like it was today.

I can handle the concept of Superboy fine, I just believe that if you step back and look at a Superman time line, having him in costume as a youngster - and especially finding out that he's remembered as a hero for years and years,with no BIG moment debut for Superman or anything in particular to kick start his decision to become a hero etc etc - does more harm to the character than good.

Except that this is not the same as before. This is Superboy who was the subject of rumors and considered a bit of a myth, until Superman appeared in Metropolis. The big moment that kick started his career as a hero began when his parents told him to use his powers responsibly and not selfishly. He just put on a costume to blend in with his friends in the future.


Again, different times - it wasn't about fleshing a story out, it was about making more money off of the Superman franchise.

So you know what Siegel and Shuster were thinking in 1939? Were you there? How do you know that was the reasoning?

Nope.

Well, you are.

That's fine - I have no need to be popular with any of those people.

Didn't say that you had to be.

In terms of 'grand story' it's better to not have had a 'Super Boy', beyond the odd adventure where Clark rescued someone.

In your opinion.