Page 11 of 19 FirstFirst ... 789101112131415 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 165 of 275
  1. #151
    Veteran Member Sacred Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    7,582

    Default

    Its not about not "letting" Grant Morrison make a 4-6 long super-narrative. Its that Grant Morrison didn't have that kind of epic left in him to tell. Not for Superman, not for any superhero, apparently. People need to stop taking Grant's decision to stop monthlies and blaming it on DC.

    And not even Grant Morrison could have fleshed out 1938 to Byrne to the pre-Flashpoint and made it all canon. You're asking the impossible. Superman continuity and Batman continuity are completely different animals, he couldn't have done for Superman what he did for Batman in this regard. The only possible way to even begin to try and make it work would be to actually made Superman arrive in 1938 and have the character be 74 years old in the present day. I know some were hoping for that when the relaunch was announced, but I thought then and still do think its a terrible idea.
    Last edited by Sacred Knight; 11-02-2012 at 10:59 PM.

  2. #152

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Bat-Man View Post
    Many of the primary elements of the iconic Superman mythos were created by Jerry Siegel...
    Superman first travels through time under his own power in Superman no. 48 (1947) "Autograph, Please" by Jerry Siegel.

  3. #153

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sacred Knight View Post
    Its not about not "letting" Grant Morrison make a 4-6 long super-narrative. Its that Grant Morrison didn't have that kind of epic left in him to tell. Not for Superman, not for any superhero, apparently. People need to stop taking Grant's decision to stop monthlies and blaming it on DC.

    And not even Grant Morrison could have fleshed out 1938 to Byrne to the pre-Flashpoint and made it all canon. You're asking the impossible. Superman continuity and Batman continuity are completely different animals, he couldn't have done for Superman what he did for Batman in this regard. The only possible way to even begin to try and make it work would be to actually made Superman arrive in 1938 and have the character be 74 years old in the present day. I know some were hoping for that when the relaunch was announced, but I thought then and still do think its a terrible idea.
    All Star Superman ended in August of 2008, so that's four years ago. Morrison might be a spent force now, but in the last four years he's produced a lot of work for DC. All Star Superman has been the most critically successful use of Superman in the last decade and yet for some reason, after it ended, there was no editorial desire to build on its success. Instead they wasted our time with a lot of stories that back-burnered Superman in favour of other characters.

    Hindsight is 20/20 (although I recall fans constantly wishing Morrison would do more stuff with Superman, even before the end of All Star), but those four years could have been put to good use. We'll never know what might have been.

    It might not have been possible to smooth over every facet of continuity, but in a big picture way I think Grant Morrison would have found a satisfying work-around. He's about the only writer (short of Alan Moore) who could have pulled it off and garnered both respectable sales and critical respect for doing so.

  4. #154
    Elder Member Mat001's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    11,997

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Bat-Man View Post
    I found the Superman/Clark and Lois characters blander with them married and her knowing all of his secrets. I found the Superman/Clark and Lois characters interesting and entertaining with the unrequited love of the ever-present chase, the under lying sexual tension, the secrets that go with her not knowing his secret identity, almost getting caught and found out.
    Which had loads of problems. Superman either came off like a dick towards Lois, or he came across as a coward who was afraid of commitment. Meanwhile, Lois comes across as a pathetic woman who keeps taking Clark's abuse. Or she came across as a stuck up bitch, who was part of the stereotype of women who was only interested in the idea of Superman and not the man himself. At least with the Post Crisis take, every action lead to another action and ultimately made the characters grow up. I liked that Clark realized that life was too short to waste on playing games and that Lois realized that she was living a fantasy, while the reality was right across from her.

    Quote Originally Posted by An Ear In The Fireplace
    All Star Superman ended in August of 2008, so that's four years ago. Morrison might be a spent force now, but in the last four years he's produced a lot of work for DC. All Star Superman has been the most critically successful use of Superman in the last decade and yet for some reason, after it ended, there was no editorial desire to build on its success. Instead they wasted our time with a lot of stories that back-burnered Superman in favour of other characters.
    That's because ASS was only meant as a standalone feature. That was the whole point of the All Star line. If the Batman series had ended, none of it would have made it's way into the main books. Likewise if the Batgirl and Wonder Woman series ever saw the light of day. That's why DC editorial replaced All Star with Earth One and fixed the main problem with the former, which was having a monthly with slow artists. By having it as an OGN, it guarantees that the whole thing is done by the same creative team. JMS and Shane Davis just finished volume two for Superman, which works well given the pace that JMS works at.
    Last edited by Mat001; 11-03-2012 at 11:01 AM.

  5. #155
    Creator Bill Finger The Bat-Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    571

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mat001 View Post
    Which had loads of problems. Superman either came off like a dick towards Lois, or he came across as a coward who was afraid of commitment. Meanwhile, Lois comes across as a pathetic woman who keeps taking Clark's abuse. Or she came across as a stuck up bitch, who was part of the stereotype of women who was only interested in the idea of Superman and not the man himself.
    Their loads of problems were entertaining. Character flaws, imperfections, are entertaining.

    At least with the Post Crisis take, every action lead to another action and ultimately made the characters grow up. I liked that Clark realized that life was too short to waste on playing games and that Lois realized that she was living a fantasy, while the reality was right across from her.
    Which made them duller to me, less entertaining.
    Last edited by The Bat-Man; 11-04-2012 at 03:03 AM.
    Jerry Siegel/Joe Shuster, Bill Finger/Bob Kane, William Moulton Marston. Creators of the most enduring iconic archetypes of the comic book superhero genre and its powerful legacy.

  6. #156
    Elder Member zryson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    12,064

    Default

    The way I feel about Superman these days is sad. He's just not the same guy I used to enjoy. Part of it is the horrible new costume but I just feel that if this is the best DC is capable of, then they need to bring in new people to restore Superman to his greatness. Because I'm not seeing it.

  7. #157
    Senior Member jgiannantoni05's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Arkham, Mass.
    Posts
    3,636

    Default

    By Morrison's admission what worked for Batman wouldn't have worked with Superman (assuming you mean the "everything counts" continuity), due to the drastic revamps and reboots the character keeps getting.
    I don't recall Morrison admitting that at all. All he admitted was that he wasn't going to do "everything counts" with Superman NOW, DUE TO the New 52 reboot. He never addressed what he might have done under different circumstances.

    Morrison was never really interested in doing a long Superman run after All Star Superman was his definitive statement, and Action Comics is basically just his leftover ideas.
    Source? Just speculation to me, without more. And for "leftover ideas", he certainly felt strong enough about them to write & publish them.
    Last edited by jgiannantoni05; 11-04-2012 at 08:30 AM.
    DC discarded their history, and now has none. DC will always be in the shadows of their past work.

  8. #158
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    221B Baker Street
    Posts
    18,005

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jgiannantoni05 View Post
    I don't recall Morrison admitting that at all. All he admitted was that he wasn't going to do "everything counts" with Superman NOW, DUE TO the New 52 reboot. He never addressed what he might have done under different circumstances.


    Source? Just speculation to me, without more.
    Unfortunately I don't really have time to google out these sources, but they're there and I remember reading them.

    And for "leftover ideas", he certainly felt strong enough about them to write & publish them.
    That's how Morrison rolls. He'll write and publish about anything that comes to him. He made a story revolve around a random cover once. He's a jazz improv musician.

    He said after All Star Superman (a few years ago) he had some ideas to do Superman's early years and it would involve him fighting the devil. That's what we're getting now.

  9. #159
    Elder Member Mat001's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    11,997

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Bat-Man View Post
    Their loads of problems were entertaining. Character flaws, imperfections, are entertaining.
    Not really. It turns readers off after a while. If your character is an asshole, it doesn't make them interesting. It makes them an asshole and makes you want to find something else to read.

    Which made them duller to me, less entertaining.
    To you, but not to others. Their relationship was still one filled with problems, but they were more mature ones. And the writers still found stories worth telling in spite of that.

  10. #160
    Senior Member ascended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,519

    Default

    Well, this is just a "different strokes" sort of thing. Some people liked the marriage, some liked the eternal love triangle.

    Me? I supported the marriage. Now, it often wasnt written up to what it should have been, but then again, Clark and Lois got married in 96 (or was it 98?), during the days when the line's quality was starting to drop. So you cant say that the marriage didnt work, because the entire franchise wasnt working for most of their time as a married couple.

    But to me, Superman is the American dream given form, the ultimate authority figure and *the* alpha male. Being married worked on all those levels. Especially if you're still trying to appeal to the teenagers and kids. Superman is not someone you can relate to. He just isnt. He's a power fantasy, and most guys like to believe that someday they'll end up with the super hot, intelligent woman. And if you, like most of the modern fanbase, is already old enough to be married, then hey! Odds are your wife is nowhere near as awesome as Lois frikkin Lane-Kent. So the power fantasy maintains. And if, by chance, my wife is reading this right now, you clearly are the exception to what I just wrote.

    I also thought the potential for drama was endless. I hated it when Clark and Lois would have marital problems like "Lois thinks Clark is cheating on her." I mean, really? He's friggin Superman and if he wanted to tap Wonder Woman, he would have years ago! I never thought the Kents should have normal marital problems, they're both too exceptional for that. But watching Lois try to cover for Clark at the office? Getting in trouble with Perry, possibly putting her career at risk? That's fun. Lois getting mind controlled or otherwise having her morality/thought process messed with and (almost) revealing all of Clark's secrets to the world? Good stuff. Basically, anything you do to either Clark or Lois becomes that much more problematic, that much more dire, because they have no secrets, and because they are that close.

    I tell you what, go goggle the scene from Smallville (season 8? 9?) where Clark travels into his own future. I know, I know, its Smallville and therefore the devil. But even the most hateful fan would have to admit after seeing that five minute scene, that the marriage could work. That one tiny scene, on Smallville of all things, was better than the comics had been for a decade.

    As for the eternal triangle...its fun, for a while. But after a time, you want things to move on. Eventually, both Clark and Lois end up looking bad. The various outcomes were all listed earlier, and I happen to agree with them. I mean, yeah, its fun, but in this day and age of the life-long fan....I just dont think you can keep a status quo like that unchanged for that long and get away with it. Marriage is supposed to last forever and always finds ways to screw with you, but the triangle situation is one designed for resolution. Either they do or they dont, but both move on either way.

  11. #161
    Creator Bill Finger The Bat-Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    571

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mat001 View Post
    Not really. It turns readers off after a while. If your character is an asshole, it doesn't make them interesting. It makes them an asshole and makes you want to find something else to read.
    Wow, you want to continue arguing and take it to that level. Not revealing his secret identity to Lois and marrying Lois didn't make Superman an asshole. Character flaws, imperfections, are indeed entertaining. The iconic triangle that existed between Lois and Clark/Superman, where Lois loves Superman, but not Clark, and Superman would rather she love him as Clark, entertained generations for decades.

    To you, but not to others.
    To others as well, not only to me. I'm not the only one that preferred the iconic triangle, and I'm not going to pretend like you are the only one that preferred the marriage. Some considered the progression of the secret identity reveal, engagement and marriage on the Lois & Clark show and in the comics to be good progression and while others considered it a bad idea. Case in point, on the documentary Look Up in the Sky!: The Amazing Story of Superman (2006), Paul Levitz said, "We still have a good debate going on about that at the office. There's a lot of people on the creative staff who would like to find a way to have him wake up one morning and that just be a dream."

    Quote Originally Posted by ascended View Post
    Well, this is just a "different strokes" sort of thing. Some people liked the marriage, some liked the eternal love triangle.
    Exactly. To each their own.

    As for the eternal triangle...its fun, for a while. But after a time, you want things to move on. Eventually, both Clark and Lois end up looking bad. The various outcomes were all listed earlier, and I happen to agree with them. I mean, yeah, its fun, but in this day and age of the life-long fan....I just dont think you can keep a status quo like that unchanged for that long and get away with it. Marriage is supposed to last forever and always finds ways to screw with you, but the triangle situation is one designed for resolution. Either they do or they dont, but both move on either way.
    To keep Superman's love life from getting dull they introduced other love interests over the decades. Lana Lang first appeared in Superman #10 (1950) "The Girl in Superboy's Life" written by Bill Finger and became Lois' rival beginning in Lois Lane #7 (1959) "The Girl Who Stole Superman" written by Edmond Hamilton. Lana Lang (Annette O'Toole) is Clark's (Christopher Reeve) love interest in Superman III (1983) written by David Newman and Leslie Newman. Superman (George Reeves) proposed marriage to Helen O'Hara (Joi Lansing) and she accepted, and they pretended to marry in the "Superman's Wife" (1958) episode of the Adventures of Superman TV series written by Robert Leslie Bellem and Whitney Ellsworth. The original Super-Girl first appeared in Superman #123 (1958) "The Girl of Steel" by Otto Binder and appeared to have a crush on Superman. Mermaid Lori Lemaris first appeared in Superman #129 (1959) "The Girl in Superman's Past" by Bill Finger and she became a reappearing romance. Superman had a romance with Lyla Lerrol in Superman #141 (1960) "Superman's Return to Krypton" written by Jerry Siegel. In Action Comics #260 (1960) "Mighty Maid" written by Otto Binder, Superman publicly kisses and proposes marriage to Mighty Maid and announces that he's leaving the Earth. Mighty Maid secretly was his cousin Supergirl as part of a hoax to convince an invading alien fleet seeking to attack the Earth and get revenge on Superman, that Superman has left the Earth with Mighty Maid. In Action Comics #289 (1962) "Superman's Super Courtship" written by Jerry Siegel, Superman says to Supergirl that if he ever did get marred it would be to a girl like her, so she used an advanced Kryptonian computer and found Luma Lynai on the planet Staryl, who is like a duplicate of Supergirl as an adult. A romance with Wonder Woman goes back to Wonder Woman #130 (1962) "The Mirage Mirrors" written by Robert Kanigher and many other comics over the decades. Clark had a romance with Sally Selwyn in Superman #165 (1963) "The Sweetheart Superman Forgot" written by Jerry Siegel and Superman #169 (1964) "The Man Who Stole Superman's Secret Life!" written by Jerry Siegel. Clark dated Lyrica Lloyd in Superman #196 (1967) "The Star of Steel" written by Otto Binder. Cat Grant first appeared in Adventures of Superman #424 (1987) written by Marv Wolfman, and Clark became involved with her. Superman was intimate with Amazing Grace during his memory loss on Apokolips in Adventures Of Superman #426 (1987) "From the Dregs" written by Marv Wolfman, Jerry Ordway and John Byrne. Clark (Christopher Reeve) dated Lacy Warfield (Mariel Hemingway) in Superman IV: The Quest for Peace (1987) written by Lawrence Konner and Mark Rosenthal with ideas from Christopher Reeve. Maxima first appeared in Action Comics #645 (1989) "My Lady Maxima" written by Roger Stern, seeking Superman as her perfect mate, much to Superman's chagrin. I find Superman's other love interests along with the triangle with Lois to be much more entertaining than Superman tied down in marriage to Lois eternally.
    Last edited by The Bat-Man; 11-05-2012 at 02:20 AM.
    Jerry Siegel/Joe Shuster, Bill Finger/Bob Kane, William Moulton Marston. Creators of the most enduring iconic archetypes of the comic book superhero genre and its powerful legacy.

  12. #162
    Senior Member jgiannantoni05's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Arkham, Mass.
    Posts
    3,636

    Default

    Unfortunately I don't really have time to google out these sources, but they're there and I remember reading them.
    I beg to differ, they're not out there. I read all Morrison interviews, and he didn't address what he might have done (nor did he addres what he was incapable of doing). And he didn't support the "leftover ideas" point either.
    Last edited by jgiannantoni05; 11-04-2012 at 04:07 PM.
    DC discarded their history, and now has none. DC will always be in the shadows of their past work.

  13. #163
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    221B Baker Street
    Posts
    18,005

    Default

    I doubt you've read all Morrison interviews. He's said that he had no interest in writing Superman until he was told to he could reboot and do whatever he wants.

    Similarly, he said right after All Star Superman he wanted to tell a story about a Golden Age styled, early adventures of Superman where he fights the devil. That's exactly what Action Comics is about. That's the story he wanted to tell then and that's the story he's telling now.

    It's fine you have your things you wish Grant would do, but the fact is that those things were never in the cards to begin with.

  14. #164
    Senior Member jgiannantoni05's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Arkham, Mass.
    Posts
    3,636

    Default

    Grant definitely hinted at Golden Age-styled story ideas left, starting in All-Star Superman interviews and Final Crisis interviews. I can't confirm or deny that he said he had no interest in Superman without a reboot. He was certainly miffed about a Superman proposal that didn't happen, but...I don't know what wasn't in the cards. When asked if he was doing "everything counts" with Superman now, like with Batman, he said no, and that this was new Superman stuff...that was as far he as went in that interview.

    I'll have to look into it. May be right, and I'd want to know & how he precisely put it.
    Last edited by jgiannantoni05; 11-06-2012 at 03:16 PM.
    DC discarded their history, and now has none. DC will always be in the shadows of their past work.

  15. #165
    Elder Member Mat001's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    11,997

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ascended
    Me? I supported the marriage. Now, it often wasnt written up to what it should have been, but then again, Clark and Lois got married in 96 (or was it 98?), during the days when the line's quality was starting to drop. So you cant say that the marriage didnt work, because the entire franchise wasnt working for most of their time as a married couple.
    1. They married in 1996.

    2. It wasn't always bad when it came to their relationship, during the stories of that time. It was when there were stories that made Lois and Lana look bad, that was when the problems started. Lana in particular suffered.

    I also thought the potential for drama was endless. I hated it when Clark and Lois would have marital problems like "Lois thinks Clark is cheating on her." I mean, really? He's friggin Superman and if he wanted to tap Wonder Woman, he would have years ago! I never thought the Kents should have normal marital problems, they're both too exceptional for that.
    Which was the problem with the whole Cir-El storyline. It really made Lois look bad that she would think that of Clark, instead of putting on her reporter's cap and trying to get to the bottom of this mystery. Or when Chuck Austen let his bias show during his run.

    But watching Lois try to cover for Clark at the office? Getting in trouble with Perry, possibly putting her career at risk? That's fun. Lois getting mind controlled or otherwise having her morality/thought process messed with and (almost) revealing all of Clark's secrets to the world? Good stuff. Basically, anything you do to either Clark or Lois becomes that much more problematic, that much more dire, because they have no secrets, and because they are that close.
    Which made stories like "Til Death Do Us Part" and Superman #654 work. Then you had stories like the Superman/Detective Comics crossover by Loeb and Brubaker, where Bruce and Lois went after the Kryptonite Ring.

    I tell you what, go goggle the scene from Smallville (season 8? 9?) where Clark travels into his own future. I know, I know, its Smallville and therefore the devil. But even the most hateful fan would have to admit after seeing that five minute scene, that the marriage could work. That one tiny scene, on Smallville of all things, was better than the comics had been for a decade.
    Season ten.

    As for the eternal triangle...its fun, for a while. But after a time, you want things to move on. Eventually, both Clark and Lois end up looking bad. The various outcomes were all listed earlier, and I happen to agree with them. I mean, yeah, its fun, but in this day and age of the life-long fan....I just dont think you can keep a status quo like that unchanged for that long and get away with it. Marriage is supposed to last forever and always finds ways to screw with you, but the triangle situation is one designed for resolution. Either they do or they dont, but both move on either way.
    Indeed. Another issue which was that Superman always gave the excuse that Lois would be in danger if they had a relationship. An argument that falls apart given that his enemies already know that Lois already has a relationship with Superman. Max Lord was going to have Lois shot, regardless of their marriage. Jean Loring would still send a threatening letter to Lois, knowing that she would tell him about it. Hell, the imaginary story where Lex killed Superman was predicated on Lex kidnapping Superman's three friends at the Daily Planet and using them as bait for his trap. Not to mention "Superman II", where Lex didn't know the secret, but knew that Superman would come if Lois was in danger and so has Zod and his crew attack the Planet.

    Quote Originally Posted by The Bat-Man
    Wow, you want to continue arguing and take it to that level. Not revealing his secret identity to Lois and marrying Lois didn't make Superman an asshole. Character flaws, imperfections, are indeed entertaining.
    There's a difference between a character flaw and making your characters unlikable. A flaw would be the Post Crisis Lois having issues trusting men, because of her relationship with her father making her feel inferior growing up. Thus when she sees Clark Kent land all the stories regarding Superman, it bothers her that a nobody gets all the easy stories, while she had to fight tooth and nail to get to where she's at. That's a character flaw. Having Lois as the poster child for stereotypical women, where she has to try and trick Superman into revealing himself as Clark Kent in order to marry her, and crying whenever he turns his attentions elsewhere, makes her look pathetic.

    The iconic triangle that existed between Lois and Clark/Superman, where Lois loves Superman, but not Clark, and Superman would rather she love him as Clark, entertained generations for decades.
    It only lasted so long because DC editorial made the mistake of dragging it out for so long. Readers like progression and intelligence in what they read. It's the same reason people liked it when Spider-Man had his own relationship with Mary Jane.

    To others as well, not only to me. I'm not the only one that preferred the iconic triangle, and I'm not going to pretend like you are the only one that preferred the marriage. Some considered the progression of the secret identity reveal, engagement and marriage on the Lois & Clark show and in the comics to be good progression and while others considered it a bad idea. Case in point, on the documentary Look Up in the Sky!: The Amazing Story of Superman (2006), Paul Levitz said, "We still have a good debate going on about that at the office. There's a lot of people on the creative staff who would like to find a way to have him wake up one morning and that just be a dream."
    I am aware of that quote. But do note that when he said it, it was only with the people that are now in charge who only did it because they lack original ideas. Once Levitz resigned, did it happen. DiDio himself has been accused of undoing all the progress that DC made over a thirty year period, in favor of what he felt was the iconic period of DC. Which is why Wally West, Donna Troy and so many other characters have been put into limbo and so many dead characters were brought back.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •