Superman in the post-Crisis era (reviews by shaxper)

[Bad Wolf]

Let's be clear. Big Barda gets repeatedly RAPED in this issue...by a nobody villain Byrne first introduces in this issue.

Villains are there to be a threat to the heroes. It shouldn't matter whether it's a "nobody" or not.

Darkseid's Omega Beams can accidentally transport a person to Earth instead of killing them??

They can probably do whatever Darkseid wants them to do but we've seen them transport Superman to Apokolips, so why not?

[shaxper]

Villains are there to be a threat to the heroes. It shouldn't matter whether it's a "nobody" or not.

I'm of the belief that, if you're going to do something hugely, monumentally awful to a hero, it should be for a purpose, it should be done well, and it should be done by a villain who has earned the right, not by a writer's new darling creation to which they're looking to give a reputation by doing such a thing.

They can probably do whatever Darkseid wants them to do but we've seen them transport Superman to Apokolips, so why not?

Well yes, but emphasis on the "accidentally" part. Sleez certainly presents the info in such a way.

[foxley]

I'm of the belief that, if you're going to do something hugely, monumentally awful to a hero, it should be for a purpose, it should be done well, and it should be done by a villain who has earned the right, not by a writer's new darling creation to which they're looking to give a reputation by doing such a thing.

Shades of when Terry Kavanagh created Kaine for the Spider-Man titles, and had his first act be to murder all of Spider-man's established rogues gallery to show how badass he was.

Don't writers realise that this never works and all it does is seriously p***-off long-time readers?

[shaxper]

Shades of when Terry Kavanagh created Kaine for the Spider-Man titles, and had his first act be to murder all of Spider-man's established rogues gallery to show how badass he was.

Don't writers realise that this never works and all it does is seriously p***-off long-time readers?

Well, unfortunately, it worked quite well for Bane and Doomsday.

[dupersuper]

These stories are basically exactly why I pretty much permanently lost all interest in Superman - and just about the entire mainstream DCU - after Crisis.

My first issue of Superman was #414. So I had only been reading the book a few months when Crisis happened. I was totally confused beyond belief, but I did like Byrne's FF, so I gave the reboot a try.

It's taken 25 years for me to become interested in Superman again, but pre-Crisis only. My collection will end with Action #583 and Superman #423. The thought of reading this Byrne garbage again is beyond anything a mortal man should have to bear.

If you're starting a bonfire (or should that be a Byrnefire?), let me know so I can throw my Avengers West Coast collection onto it while I have the chance.

Don't throw the baby out with the bath water: the triangle era was awesome.

[Captain Jim]

Happy birthday, shaxper.

In celebration of the occasion, you can take a day off from reviews.

[shaxper]

Happy birthday, shaxper.

In celebration of the occasion, you can take a day off from reviews.

If only my OCD would agree

And thanks much!

[Bergman]

Shades of when Terry Kavanagh created Kaine for the Spider-Man titles, and had his first act be to murder all of Spider-man's established rogues gallery to show how badass he was.

Don't writers realise that this never works and all it does is seriously p***-off long-time readers?

Nope, it works.

[foxley]

Nope, it works.

Really? So when people are asked to name a member of Spider-Man's rogues gallery, Kaine is the first name that leaps to everyone's mind?

Somehow I don't think so.

[shaxper]

Really? So when people are asked to name a member of Spider-Man's rogues gallery, Kaine is the first name that leaps to everyone's mind?

Somehow I don't think so.

Actually, he's become such an influential character since that time that God adapted him into the bible (changed the spelling a bit, though).

[shaxper]

A Bit More About the Whole Rape Thing


Here's what really bothers me about writers needlessly having female characters raped in comic books in order to create sensationalism or some warped idea of reality:

Yes, raping a character can be profoundly dramatic.
Yes, it can really get a reader's attention.
Yes, this would happen often when confronting powerful psychopathic villains in real life.

Therefore, when are we going to see the issue in which the Joker captures and sodomizes Batman?


They'll never do it because it would be undignified for the character. Fan reaction would be outrage.

So let's be clear then: raping a female hero = "cool," while raping a male hero is out of the question.


I rest my case.

[Van Cleaf]

I'm pretty much against any kind of rape in superhero comics. I hate rape scenes in general. I also hate graphic torture. I read comics for fun and this kind of stuff is just the opposite.

Of course, it might be "hypocritical" not to have problems with supervillains murdering dozens of people (actually I think many characters are way too dangerous these days) but with rape but this is just a general feeling. I don't need to rationalize it. Of course, murder is worse, if watched objectively but it just doesn't feel like it.

[shaxper]

Adventures of Superman Annual #1

"The Union"
writer: Jim Starlin
pencils: Dan Jurgens
inks: Steve Montano
letters: John Costanza
colors: Tom Ziuko
editor: Mike Carlin

grade: A-

One again, no Andy Helfer. He seems to be on the "every other issue" schedule.

I'm assuming this issue was planned after Wolfman had already decided he was on his way out. Otherwise, it seems odd not to have him involved in the first annual for the title that he went out of his way to preserve and re-brand in the Post-Crisis. I at least expected that this mysterious "Union" was going to be "The Circle," the secret society bent on Superman's destruction that Wolfman had been building up for a number of issues. It seems clear that he isn't going to get to that story before he leaves Adventures of Superman, so I'd hoped Starlin and Jurgens would tell it here.

Still, what we got instead was fantastic. I'm used to Starlin telling great science fiction in the space opera style (ala Adam Warlock and The Metamorphosis Odyssey), but this Earth-based sci fi story in which an intergalactic religious zealot collects human brains in order to connect them to a holy union positively rocked. The ending felt a little too forced whereas it should have been more moving, but I still enjoyed the story immensely.

And Jurgens truly came alive for this one. I've begun to notice his art slowly becoming more dynamic and impressive as of late, but he really kicked it into overdrive in this issue with dynamic panels, unique arrangements,striking images, and inker Steve Montano truly bringing Jurgens' pencils to life, especially when immersing Superman in partial shadows with the S still peeking out dramatically.

In short, this was a brilliant issue. A true gem in an otherwise desert of creativity that has been the Post-Crisis Superman franchise thus far.


Important Details:

- Should we know who the gentleman with the bionic hand advising the President is?

- First appearance of The Word Bringer. Is he ever coming back?

Minor Details:

- So the tentacle monster thing abducted the first batch of Trudeau citizens, but when Superman uses his microscopic vision to search for clues, he doesn't notice any trails of slime (which the monster clearly leaves behind later), nor a trail of any kind. Couldn't he have even noticed a large number of footprints heading towards the sewer since the citizens were all hypnotized to go down there at one point?

- Another unflattering depiction of Reagan, especially since, in response to a letter in Adventures #432 requesting that Superman take on some real world dictators, Carlin(?) responded by saying:

"The concept of addressing current political and social situations in the pages of ADVENTURES OF SUPERMAN is a very intriguing one, Arthur. However, comic books are a fictional medium, and there is a limit to how close to the truth we can get. We can use situations that parallel the ones that occur in our own world, but we cannot use real people or events in our pages." (my bolds).

I have no particular problem with the critique of Reagan in this issue (as opposed to the over-the-top depiction in Adventures #431), but it is incredibly inconsistent with this policy. We've seen with Wolfman's Qurac, O'Neil's Santa Prisca, and even the fictitious Russian bureaucrats that Starlin, himself, is about to write for Batman's "Ten Nights of the Beast," a careful and deliberate attempt to avoid taking on real world politics directly, so why is Reagan fair game? Because he's within our own government?

- I'm relatively sure the Oval Office doesn't have a window and, if it does, I'm relatively sure Superman couldn't just open it from the outside, and if he could, I'm relatively sure an alarm would go off, followed by a swarm of secret service agents.

- This issue feels like a nod to (and definitely an improvement over) the premiere Twilight Zone episode, "Where is Everybody?"

- Is Starlin homaging Gary Trudeau with the name of the town?


Plot synopsis in one long sentence:

The town of Trudeau goes silent, the President reluctantly sends Superman in, Superman cannot find anyone at first but is ultimately confronted by a tentacle monster that drags him into the sewer, he meets The Word Bringer, a zealous alien that believes all minds should be connected to "The Union," and their bodies converted into mass to create tentacle monsters, Superman defeats the Word Bringer and sends him fleeing back to space (with a suggestion that he'll return), and the brains, no longer linked to the Word Bringer, use telepathy to force Superman to kill them all since they can no longer return to their bodies.


Yeah, it's better than the plot synopsis makes it sound.

[shaxper]

I'm pretty much against any kind of rape in superhero comics. I hate rape scenes in general. I also hate graphic torture. I read comics for fun and this kind of stuff is just the opposite.

Of course, it might be "hypocritical" not to have problems with supervillains murdering dozens of people (actually I think many characters are way too dangerous these days) but with rape but this is just a general feeling. I don't need to rationalize it. Of course, murder is worse, if watched objectively but it just doesn't feel like it.

I struggle with this as well.

And I think the difference is that murder can be clean. It's horrific, but it can be quick, impersonal, and anonymous.

Rape cannot be quick, impersonal and anonymous. You don't walk into a room and rape thirty people with a single thought -- a single pulling of a trigger or squeezing of a detonator. It is a more committed act of cruelty and sadism that requires a personal connection with your victim and follow-through, and therefore a greater perverse intention to harm than firing off a semi-automatic into a crowd or detonating a bomb.

Joe Chill could kill Thomas and Martha Wayne in a quick, instinctive act of cowardice. There's no way he had the malice to rape them.

[destro]

Yes we do see the Word Bringer again. And I'm pretty sure the guy with the metal hand advising the President is Sarge Steel...if I remember correctly.

I really liked the Union!

Despite my dislike of a lot of the Byrne material there were still some good stories in this era. And it led into the superior triangle era which was quite good for the most part.

I suggest some of you go back and read some of the last 5 to 10 years of Superman comics before the reboot. Much of that stuff was as bad as the Byrne era, and often much worse.

Cary Bates should get some sort of anti-award for simultaneously writing Superman and Flash into the ground and making them almost unreadable for years.