Newsarama: Superman Gets Through H'el With Some Justice League Help

[Superlad93]

Hot damn, I can't wait to see what this is about.

Is that for Superman!?!?!!!!??

Edit: disregard, I just saw the link. It's just so cool to have both these imaginative men on Superman right now :)

[stk]

I agree with all of the above. However, the execution of Lobdell's ideas is far from perfect. I'd say he gets it about 85 percent right, but misses the mark on the rest by ignoring continuity and characterization.

What continuity? What characterization? Whatever the Super-writers write right now IS the continuity and characterization. There is almost nothing to contradict yet even if they wanted to.

[Mr. Holmes]

While he spent the first two thirds of his life being a kid from Smallville, he's still a kid from Smallville, who was never truly human and had to hide that from his friends and the rest of the world. I know that a lot of people see Superman as this shining light on a hill, showing us how we can be the best of what we are and how humanity can rise to superhuman heights, but I always look at that as scant, because at the end of the day, Superman can do things that none of us can ever, ever do. And so this notion that Superman would see himself as an ideal, I don't see him that way. I see him as a person who lives on a planet not his own and trying to use his powers to do what's best for the rest of the people that live here. I don't think he's going to view himself as an outsider, that kind of James Dean, not-fitting-in outsider, as much as he has to be aware every time he looks at those around him that he's not part of us.

Wow he sure has a lot of nerve (don't mean that in a bad way). It's still a valid take on Superman as any, but for all the Morrison comparisons, this is something that is actually opposed.

[misslane38]

Well you didn't ask for a moment that we thought would wow you spadifically you just ask for what we thought was a quite moment did you not ;p

I believe the idea was to provide examples of impressively written moments of subtle characterization. Writing Superman like a basically decent person isn't impressive.

I have no idea what wows you personally so you'll have to deal with that on your own.

What wows me is unexpected and subtle brilliance that cuts to the core of what makes a character great but is also surprising and enlightening at the same time.

What continuity? What characterization? Whatever the Super-writers write right now IS the continuity and characterization. There is almost nothing to contradict yet even if they wanted to.

The characterization previously established in the New 52 on the same title. For example, the issue prior to Lobdell's run featured Lois Lane standing up to Morgan Edge for his lack of journalistic integrity. As soon as Lobdell joins the story with Superman #13, however, Lois is a sell out who is telling Clark to apologize for standing up to Edge. Characterization? Do you think it is okay for Clark Kent to slut shame Lois Lane (e.g. the "booty call" and "mattress" comments) and tease Supergirl by essentially calling her retarded? Should Superman really be abusing his powers to spy on his crush's text messages? Is it a good idea to suggest Diana wants to call Clark her beloved in a timeline that established that Clark was jealous about Lois Lane's new boyfriend less than 48 hours before? Superman and Clark have been written as somewhat hotheaded and socially inept in the New 52 thus far, but this is pushing it to the extreme.

[Mr. Holmes]

I gotta say though, I think Lobdell kind of stole General Zod's motivations and gave it to H'El. Then again, Zod is more about creating Krypton on Earth, but it's not too different.

[Superlad93]

I believe the idea was to provide examples of impressively written moments of subtle characterization. Writing Superman like a basically decent person isn't impressive.



What wows me is unexpected and subtle brilliance that cuts to the core of what makes a character great but is also surprising and enlightening at the same time.



The characterization previously established in the New 52 on the same title. For example, the issue prior to Lobdell's run featured Lois Lane standing up to Morgan Edge for his lack of journalistic integrity. As soon as Lobdell joins the story with Superman #13, however, Lois is a sell out who is telling Clark to apologize for standing up to Edge. Characterization? Do you think it is okay for Clark Kent to slut shame Lois Lane (e.g. the "booty call" and "mattress" comments) and tease Supergirl by essentially calling her retarded? Should Superman really be abusing his powers to spy on his crush's text messages? Is it a good idea to suggest Diana wants to call Clark her beloved in a timeline that established that Clark was jealous about Lois Lane's new boyfriend less than 48 hours before? Superman and Clark have been written as somewhat hotheaded and socially inept in the New 52 thus far, but this is pushing too the extreme.

Lol and I gave you a moment that I thought was impressive. If you don't agree then I'm sorry. I thought it was good due to how it played out. He doesn't say put him down or why are you doing this to him or whatever he just acts and I liked that. If that doesn't impress you then so be it. I liked it.

[misslane38]

Lol and I gave you a moment that I thought was impressive. If you don't agree then I'm sorry. I thought it was good due to how it played out. He doesn't say put him down or why are you doing this to him or whatever he just acts and I liked that. If that doesn't impress you then so be it. I liked it.

I like when Clark acts like Superman, too. It's why he's my favorite DC character. But when a writer writes Superman as a good person or a good hero, I'm not impressed with that because that's like the bare minimum of what an even mediocre writer should be capable of. I don't know. For me, strong subtle character moments make a poetic statement about the character that makes you seem them in a different light yet love and understand them more.

[AJBopp]

I believe the idea was to provide examples of impressively written moments of subtle characterization. Writing Superman like a basically decent person isn't impressive.



What wows me is unexpected and subtle brilliance that cuts to the core of what makes a character great but is also surprising and enlightening at the same time.



The characterization previously established in the New 52 on the same title. For example, the issue prior to Lobdell's run featured Lois Lane standing up to Morgan Edge for his lack of journalistic integrity. As soon as Lobdell joins the story with Superman #13, however, Lois is a sell out who is telling Clark to apologize for standing up to Edge. Characterization? Do you think it is okay for Clark Kent to slut shame Lois Lane (e.g. the "booty call" and "mattress" comments) and tease Supergirl by essentially calling her retarded? Should Superman really be abusing his powers to spy on his crush's text messages? Is it a good idea to suggest Diana wants to call Clark her beloved in a timeline that established that Clark was jealous about Lois Lane's new boyfriend less than 48 hours before? Superman and Clark have been written as somewhat hotheaded and socially inept in the New 52 thus far, but this is pushing too the extreme.

This is perhaps the most accurate writing I've ever seen in these forums. Well done.

[Flash Gordon]

Hot damn, I can't wait to see what this is about.

Well holy, holy, holy hell I'm excited.

[Darkspellmaster]

Well holy, holy, holy hell I'm excited.

Taking a wild guess here, that picture is more then likely going to be H'el.

So let me get this right, Kara's going to work with a guy that wants to take over earth to make it Krypton, and by doing so did either of them think, you know, maybe changing earth could either, 1) Kill the population now, or 2) Cause Clark, Kara, H'el and Conner to lose their powers and give the rest of the population powers since, you know, Krypton needs to have a red sun and other properties. It's the sun of earth that allows for Clark and the other Supers to have their powers. If this is true, it could be that, for whatever reason, humans or some of them may have the same response to the change in the planet. Or they might blow everything up.

Regarding Jimmy and Lois: for Jimmy I'm going to say either he gains super powers, or he gets kicked out by Clark but winds up hooking up with someone else or gets a better job. And it looks like Lois is being shifted into the old role that Gwen and MJ had with Peter Parker (Rest in Peace), where they got mad when he up and vanished from their events or had to hurry off. By the way, why has no one explored the fact that Lois was a military brat that might have issues in regards to moving around and might need to feel a close knit family?

Also: Gotta agree with Mslane in regard to the whole characterization problems. We keep flip flopping on Clark and he's not supposed to be this sort of person. Or rather Lobdell should go over what came before and try to keep up the personalties of what's been established a year ago in regard to Clark.

[Mr. Holmes]

Also: Gotta agree with Mslane in regard to the whole characterization problems. We keep flip flopping on Clark and he's not supposed to be this sort of person. Or rather Lobdell should go over what came before and try to keep up the personalties of what's been established a year ago in regard to Clark.

Yeah no thanks. The characterization "problems" have only made the book better.

[misslane38]

Yeah no thanks. The characterization "problems" have only made the book better.

The changes are abrupt changes that simply make the characters look like they're either unethical (Lois) or like they're jerks (Superman). I don't deny that there is an energy and freshness to the books that was lacking before, but I don't think that would be lost or it's asking too much for the characters to be written in a way that doesn't damage them with clunky, over the top, out of character dialogue or narration. You act like it's an either/or thing, when it doesn't have to be. I especially don't understand saying Lois Lane is better as a corporate sellout than a principled journalist. You should be able to like Lobdell's run overall while also acknowledging its indisputable flaws.

[Superlad93]

Yeah no thanks. The characterization "problems" have only made the book better.

Lol I agree, loving the "problems"!

[Volkditty]

Taking a wild guess here, that picture is more then likely going to be H'el.

So let me get this right, Kara's going to work with a guy that wants to take over earth to make it Krypton, and by doing so did either of them think, you know, maybe changing earth could either, 1) Kill the population now, or 2) Cause Clark, Kara, H'el and Conner to lose their powers and give the rest of the population powers since, you know, Krypton needs to have a red sun and other properties. It's the sun of earth that allows for Clark and the other Supers to have their powers. If this is true, it could be that, for whatever reason, humans or some of them may have the same response to the change in the planet. Or they might blow everything up.

H'El isn't trying to recreate Krypton on Earth, he's trying to time-travel to before Krypton blew up to save it. The danger to Earth is that the amount of energy required to travel through the chronal-nexus (as Lex says in Superman #15) will collapse the entire solar system.

[Sacred Knight]

I like this idea that the time travel of #0 will pay off, but later, not during this arc as it initially seemed. At least, it sounds like something where H'el will be defeated, only to later on in the year realize that before he was stopped he did manage to mess up some space time stuff, and Superman, Supergirl, and Superboy will then have to go and take care of it.