EXCLUSIVE PREVIEW: "Supreme" #64

[Erik Larsen]

http://multiversitycomics.com/review...ew-supreme-64/

Really well put.

I was too angry to put my feelings into words.

Thanks for taking care of it.

"Moore gave Larsen a strong foundation on which to build the series’ new direction, and in a single issue, Larsen threw it all out the window. It is incredible, really; never before have I seen one writer get rid of every dangling plot thread the previous writer had left so quickly — though I certainly can’t say it was done deftly."

"Eric Larsen has managed to kill every bit of momentum within the span of a single issue. It is not even a matter of the comic being noticeably bad; rather, it is so noticeable not good."

Please feel free to rattle off a list of "every dangling plot thread the previous writer had left" that I have "gotten rid of."

What the reviewer doesn't seem to get--and you don't seem to get--is that I didn't toss everything out. What I did was reintroduce Rob Liefeld's Supreme--and, in doing so, give Alan Moore's Supreme his greatest challenge to date.

[Gavin Higginbotham, BotF]

Moore didn't really leave any dangling threads. He'd tied most of them off himself. The main dangler he left was Dax and the impending threat of Daxia. Well, I'd say Erik tied that one up rather well!

I guess we still have Billy Friday merging with Supremium Man. He's still out there somewhere.

Would it have been better if Erik came in and retconned out everything that came before like Moore did?

[USERNAME TAKEN]

I agree with Erik 100% about the Alan Moore work.

While it was great, it far too derivative of the Silver age Superman stuff. I actually read Moore's work and wondered why exactly people raved so much for a thinly veiled Superman pastiche.

I'm really looking forward to following Mean Supreme on a regular basis.

[chastmastr]

Erik--am I a million miles away with my hopes above, in the right ballpark, or is it one of those "wait and see" things? Fingers crossed...

[Erik Larsen]

Erik--am I a million miles away with my hopes above, in the right ballpark, or is it one of those "wait and see" things? Fingers crossed...

It pretty much has to be a wait and see thing. I can't say too much without tipping my hand.

[Erik Larsen]

Moore didn't really leave any dangling threads. He'd tied most of them off himself. The main dangler he left was Dax and the impending threat of Daxia. Well, I'd say Erik tied that one up rather well!

I guess we still have Billy Friday merging with Supremium Man. He's still out there somewhere.

Hey, hey--no fair reading the material and being familiar with the continuity! How are people going to continue to be outraged if they actually know what they're talking about?

[jesse_custer]

I agree with Erik 100% about the Alan Moore work.

While it was great, it far too derivative of the Silver age Superman stuff. I actually read Moore's work and wondered why exactly people raved so much for a thinly veiled Superman pastiche.

I'm really looking forward to following Mean Supreme on a regular basis.

Moore's story was intentionally derivative of Silver Age Superman because it was a commentary on Superman and how comic books change. It wasn't a thinly veiled Superman pastiche. Supreme, regardless of his attitude, has always resembled Superman. Moore was smart to play with that.

[chastmastr]

It pretty much has to be a wait and see thing. I can't say too much without tipping my hand.

Then I will continue in hope. (I mean, with a huge dollop of pitiful imploration on top, but I already did that above.)

[squashmaster]

I'll actually venture to say that Erik's Supreme is better than Alan Moore's. Alan Moore had a great idea about deconstructing the whole history of Superman and the endless reboot cycle, but past issues 41 and 42, what's even the point?

Larsen's flipping that idea on its head by throwing in the original Supreme in that universe, and having them deal with a real anti-hero. It's like getting cold water dumped on you while you're having a good dream.

[chastmastr]

It's like getting cold water dumped on you while you're having a good dream.

Er... apart from whether that's the final result of what Erik's doing (as I say above, I live in hope), why would that be a good thing at all?

[The Adventurer]

Er... apart from whether that's the final result of what Erik's doing (as I say above, I live in hope), why would that be a good thing at all?

Because being taken out of your comfort zone builds character. And that's especially true for comic book characters.

[chastmastr]

Because being taken out of your comfort zone builds character. And that's especially true for comic book characters.

Oh, I thought you meant for the readers, not for the characters. Honestly, I do think that the carnage apparently destroying all the cool stuff was precisely like a bucket of cold water interrupting a good dream, but as I say, I am hoping it is only temporary and its triumphant return will be forthcoming at the appropriate moment. The eucatastrophe, as it were.

[Gavin Higginbotham, BotF]

Hey, hey--no fair reading the material and being familiar with the continuity! How are people going to continue to be outraged if they actually know what they're talking about?

Ha! I'll try to forget things so I can bitch about stuff too. Heh

I do wonder how familiar some people are with Moore's run. They're moaning about previous events being ignored when that's exactly what Moore himself did. You're creating a world where both pre-Moore and Moore continuity co-exist. I like both so it's best of both worlds.

Moore was very good at tying stuff up. There's several of his characters still around like the mirror prisoners, Billy, Talos, etc.

Wait and we'll see all kinds of cool stuff. Yay!

[The Batman]

Moore's story was intentionally derivative of Silver Age Superman because it was a commentary on Superman and how comic books change. It wasn't a thinly veiled Superman pastiche. Supreme, regardless of his attitude, has always resembled Superman. Moore was smart to play with that.

At that point though, when it's so clearly commenting on Superman the character and the fictional creation, is it still derivative of it? To my mind, Moore took something that was clearly derivative of Superman with, if the high concept is to be believed, ambitions of offering commentary on the character and turned the who thing into a commentary on Superman, superhero comics, and the way those fictional constructions function. The appeal of Moore's stories aren't in their vague Supermaniness, but in Moore's observations and comments.

[Erik Larsen]

At that point though, when it's so clearly commenting on Superman the character and the fictional creation, is it still derivative of it? To my mind, Moore took something that was clearly derivative of Superman with, if the high concept is to be believed, ambitions of offering commentary on the character and turned the who thing into a commentary on Superman, superhero comics, and the way those fictional constructions function. The appeal of Moore's stories aren't in their vague Supermaniness, but in Moore's observations and comments.

Okay--so he made his statement. Now that's over. Am I to keep making it in his absence? Should I be parroting things already said? That doesn't sound fun for anybody.

Alan told his stories. It's time for me to take the wheel and tell mine.