@Tonebone, I think part of the problem is that today's creators grew up on 80s & 90s comics, and *are* trying to reflect the comics of their youth. But that was a very different youth than yours and mine.
And I hear that. But sometimes to come up with stories, you've got to step outside of the expectations of the characters. Shake things up a bit. Have a romance that might turn out to be a mistake, etc. I don't know that the core concept gets threatened by that, as the core concept it strong enough to withstand the temporary dramas and reversals of a story. Or, if a new idea is so strong that it actually affects or changes the core concept and develops it further, then great. Even an old character can grow a bit.
See, I don't see this as stepping outside of expectations. And I certainly don't see it as a new idea. The Superman/WW romance idea has been explored repeatedly.
Of course, from my creaky perspective, the John Byrne/George Perez take on the relationship isn't ancient history.
And Frank Miller's trashy version is an all-too-recent memory.
I also think that anytime I see Kal making goo-goo eyes at a woman that isn't Lois or Lana freaking Lang, I vomit inside on my very soul. It's as bad as Barry not being with Iris anymore. Stupid DCNU crap.
Well, if you want to be completely safe from change or variety, you could always read your old comics over, and over, and over again. And then they will be only what you think they should be.
DavidD, as I have criticized the DCNU, I constantly have this argument thrown back at me... "Why don't you just read your old comics... all the stuff you love is still there".
It's because I want there to be goddam comics around when I have grandchildren. The artform has survived almost a hundred years. Probably thousands of concepts and characters have fallen by the wayside, or are remembered only ironically, or as camp, because of their pandering to very specific points in time. Their "trendiness" led to their own demise. Concepts like Superman, Wonder Woman, Batman, the Justice League, etc. have reached a level of timelessness that survives the occasional lapse into trendiness. Look at Batman... look at what the character has gone through, and how he has evolved (and sometimes devolved) through the years. But the CORE CONCEPTS always guided him back to who he is, and back to popularity.
Now, once you start to screw around with those core concepts, the concepts suffer. THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE MYTHOLOGIES OF THE DC CHARACTERS, AS THEY WERE.
I am on a number of discussion groups about Golden and Silver Age comics and they say the exact same thing as this.
There are STILL fans who are unhappy about the effects of Crisis on Infinite Earths and say that everything since then has been crap. There are fans who say that everything at Marvel since Kirby left has been crap. There are fans who say that everything since the Comics Code has been crap. There are fans who say that all super-hero comics since the end of WWII have been crap.
They are all correct. For them.
Maybe the new DC isn't for you. Sales are up across the board for DC books and while some people (me among them) don't care for the comics, someone does.
Comics will ALWAYS be around. They may be webcomics or they may be special graphic novels or they may be monthly publicans, but they will be there. If the current editorial team ruins sales, guess what?" They'll be fired and a new set of editors will be brought in, and so on and so on.
And, while it seems mean to say Not Everything Is For You.
Science fiction and fantasy novels aren't for me any more because they focus on book series that go on and on rather than done in one, and I don't want to deal with waiting a year (If I'm lucky, right George RR Martin?) for the next installment of a novel that will also end on a cliffhanger.
Does that mean fantasy novels suck? Nope. It means I am not in their audience, so we've parted ways.
And I hear that. But sometimes to come up with stories, you've got to step outside of the expectations of the characters. Shake things up a bit. Have a romance that might turn out to be a mistake, etc. I don't know that the core concept gets threatened by that, as the core concept it strong enough to withstand the temporary dramas and reversals of a story. Or, if a new idea is so strong that it actually affects or changes the core concept and develops it further, then great. Even an old character can grow a bit.
See, I don't see this as stepping outside of expectations. And I certainly don't see it as a new idea. The Superman/WW romance idea has been explored repeatedly.
Of course, from my creaky perspective, the John Byrne/George Perez take on the relationship isn't ancient history.
And Frank Miller's trashy version is an all-too-recent memory.
I hear that. And, again, the position I was taking exception to is the more general statement that the core concepts have to be adhered to, and that if it isn't broken don't fix it, etc.. And I agree with you that there are many examples of deviating from expectation. Sometimes with good results, sometimes not. But at the end of the day for leave room for stories, we have to give them the chance to try things (even if, all to often, they are trying things that they have also tried before).
Now, once you start to screw around with those core concepts, the concepts suffer. THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE MYTHOLOGIES OF THE DC CHARACTERS, AS THEY WERE. The problems, in my opinion, were a lack of creativity on the part of the editorial staff of DC, and the fact that the writers were (and still are) mandated to write to the 35 year old comics readers, already familiar with 70 years of back story. How to fix this? Not by screwing around with the basic premises that made the characters popular in the first place. And DC is continuing to write, despite what their DCNU press releases said, to the fanboy audience. This is the proverbial snake eating its own tail, that will eventually consume itself, whether digital, paper, or whatever.
For the record this is the part I was specifically Amen-ing.
I also really liked this line: And the reason I pine for the comics of my past? It's because they had a future.
Continuing to target comics to the 35+-year-old longtime reader, rather than genuinely trying to find new readers is a doomed enterprise.
The NewDCU project, seems pretty clearly to be targeting lapsed readers from the 90s boom, while also trying to appease the readers they had left and yet claiming to be be aimed at new readers. As such, it increasingly seems to be crumbling as the "years of planning" turn out to be a bunch of half-considered concepts which are in a constant state of revision.
This latest stunt smells of desperation to me, as do the Zero issues. And as the new Wonder Woman series, which has been one of the few bright points for me in this mess, is likely to be interfered with, I'm especially annoyed.
For years, I was one of the beneficiaries of the trend of writing for older readers, and I loved it. But now that I am older than the "older reader" who is currently being written for, I can see how a lot of the magic and wonder and fun were tossed aside when comics "matured." And I think that was a mistake. Now the magic and wonder and fun are relegated to the "kiddie comics" ghetto. That makes me sad.
(I also think Drunk Cap would be jealous he got to kiss a fish lady.)
I miss Drunk Cap. It seems like he hasn't called in in months. Has there been a Drunk Cap call since the forum got rebooted?
Now, once you start to screw around with those core concepts, the concepts suffer. THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE MYTHOLOGIES OF THE DC CHARACTERS, AS THEY WERE. The problems, in my opinion, were a lack of creativity on the part of the editorial staff of DC, and the fact that the writers were (and still are) mandated to write to the 35 year old comics readers, already familiar with 70 years of back story. How to fix this? Not by screwing around with the basic premises that made the characters popular in the first place. And DC is continuing to write, despite what their DCNU press releases said, to the fanboy audience. This is the proverbial snake eating its own tail, that will eventually consume itself, whether digital, paper, or whatever.
For the record this is the part I was specifically Amen-ing.
I also really liked this line: And the reason I pine for the comics of my past? It's because they had a future.
Continuing to target comics to the 35+-year-old longtime reader, rather than genuinely trying to find new readers is a doomed enterprise.
The NewDCU project, seems pretty clearly to be targeting lapsed readers from the 90s boom, while also trying to appease the readers they had left and yet claiming to be be aimed at new readers. As such, it increasingly seems to be crumbling as the "years of planning" turn out to be a bunch of half-considered concepts which are in a constant state of revision.
This latest stunt smells of desperation to me, as do the Zero issues. And as the new Wonder Woman series, which has been one of the few bright points for me in this mess, is likely to be interfered with, I'm especially annoyed.
For years, I was one of the beneficiaries of the trend of writing for older readers, and I loved it. But now that I am older than the "older reader" who is currently being written for, I can see how a lot of the magic and wonder and fun were tossed aside when comics "matured." And I think that was a mistake. Now the magic and wonder and fun are relegated to the "kiddie comics" ghetto. That makes me sad.
(I also think Drunk Cap would be jealous he got to kiss a fish lady.)
I miss Drunk Cap. It seems like he hasn't called in in months. Has there been a Drunk Cap call since the forum got rebooted?
No. Not a peep since the live call in show. Here's hoping!
And I hear that. But sometimes to come up with stories, you've got to step outside of the expectations of the characters. Shake things up a bit. Have a romance that might turn out to be a mistake, etc. I don't know that the core concept gets threatened by that, as the core concept it strong enough to withstand the temporary dramas and reversals of a story. Or, if a new idea is so strong that it actually affects or changes the core concept and develops it further, then great. Even an old character can grow a bit.
See, I don't see this as stepping outside of expectations. And I certainly don't see it as a new idea. The Superman/WW romance idea has been explored repeatedly.
Of course, from my creaky perspective, the John Byrne/George Perez take on the relationship isn't ancient history.
And Frank Miller's trashy version is an all-too-recent memory.
I hear that. And, again, the position I was taking exception to is the more general statement that the core concepts have to be adhered to, and that if it isn't broken don't fix it, etc.. And I agree with you that there are many examples of deviating from expectation. Sometimes with good results, sometimes not. But at the end of the day for leave room for stories, we have to give them the chance to try things (even if, all to often, they are trying things that they have also tried before).
You're right... we do need the breathing room to "deviate from expectation" and "try new things"... that is truly the only way to advance and produce those works that inspire and further the artform and the industry.
The only problem is that, while some, with foresight and respect for the source material, aim high and produce this:
Others target a desired demographic they THINK they know, they forsake all tradition, honesty, and respect for the source, and produce this:
What we need are good stewards of the characters and concepts we love. They deserve better.
And I hear that. But sometimes to come up with stories, you've got to step outside of the expectations of the characters. Shake things up a bit. Have a romance that might turn out to be a mistake, etc. I don't know that the core concept gets threatened by that, as the core concept it strong enough to withstand the temporary dramas and reversals of a story. Or, if a new idea is so strong that it actually affects or changes the core concept and develops it further, then great. Even an old character can grow a bit.
See, I don't see this as stepping outside of expectations. And I certainly don't see it as a new idea. The Superman/WW romance idea has been explored repeatedly.
Of course, from my creaky perspective, the John Byrne/George Perez take on the relationship isn't ancient history.
And Frank Miller's trashy version is an all-too-recent memory.
I hear that. And, again, the position I was taking exception to is the more general statement that the core concepts have to be adhered to, and that if it isn't broken don't fix it, etc.. And I agree with you that there are many examples of deviating from expectation. Sometimes with good results, sometimes not. But at the end of the day for leave room for stories, we have to give them the chance to try things (even if, all to often, they are trying things that they have also tried before).
You're right... we do need the breathing room to "deviate from expectation" and "try new things"... that is truly the only way to advance and produce those works that inspire and further the artform and the industry.
The only problem is that, while some, with foresight and respect for the source material, aim high and produce this:
Others target a desired demographic they THINK they know, they forsake all tradition, honesty, and respect for the source, and produce this:
What we need are good stewards of the characters and concepts we love. They deserve better.
Well, yes. Everything deserves to be good, and we hope it works out more often than it doesn't And like all creative sometimes it is, and sometimes it isn't. And like all fields there will be true, passionate artists, and there will be hacks.
If I am arguing for anything, it is that we as the readers, keep an open mind and give each generation of stewards a chance to do their best. And, as with ever prior generation of stewards, some will succeed, and some won't.
To get specific to the New 52, there are some stewards that are doing great work right now, and some that aren't. Just like before. (Just like always, it seems.) If anything, there seem to be a few more right stewards in the mix (at least to me) than there were two or three years ago. So, for me, that feels at least like a step in the right direction.
I agree that we readers need to keep an open mind to change, the problem seems that with each generation there is less of us around to do so. How many old readers are lost in each attempt to gain new readers?
@Tonebone, I think part of the problem is that today's creators grew up on 80s & 90s comics, and *are* trying to reflect the comics of their youth. But that was a very different youth than yours and mine.
I agree that we readers need to keep an open mind to change, the problem seems that with each generation there is less of us around to do so. How many old readers are lost in each attempt to gain new readers?
Take this with the caveat that there are those around who know their numbers much better than I do, but this is what I have heard creators say--
Lest we get too doomy, I believe comics are still up relative to where they were in the late 90s.
Comics as a language, are way up, and much more available, then back when there was no such thing as a webcomic.
Now- I know this is as much a culture thing as it is an actual buy-and-read-funnybooks thing. But not for nothing comic book conventions are, I think, getting bigger and bigger all the time.
And certainly comics are in different places, and around more than they were back when there were barely any trade paperbacks and little traction in the book market.
And, maybe in the age of the mobile device and comics app, they are up and available in new ways yet again. We'll see.
I don't know. OF COURSE it could be better. But I also think there are a lot of things that have made the last 25 years, or even the last 10, something other than a steady decline.
I do not know if saying comics are still holding up to where they were in the late 90's is a good or bad thing.
The geek culture has increased tremendously since I started reading in the 80's. Conventions are extremely popular. Comic movies are usually the biggest sellers of the year. But the actually purchasing and reading of comic books are no where near as prominent as they used to be. There are many factors to that, but it seems odd that every thing about comics are increasing in popularity except the actual comics.
There will always be comics in some format with devoted readers, I just see that pool of readers getting smaller and smaller. Each reboot, some people leave before it starts, sales #'s are strong at first then slowly go down until the next reboot when more people leave.
There has to be a balance between keeping your old customers happy and attracting new ones without reinventing the wheel each time....I am not smart enough however to know what that is.
I don't know that every reboot is a net loss- leaving behind more than it picks up.
Retailer/analyst Brian Hibbs recently did a column about the New 52 from a sales point of view, and he seems pretty positive about. Especially, as he put it, when enough months go by that it seems the "tourists" have left and the numbers have leveled. A year in, from the point of view of the readership pool, it seems that more was gained than lost.
Now, once you start to screw around with those core concepts, the concepts suffer. THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE MYTHOLOGIES OF THE DC CHARACTERS, AS THEY WERE. The problems, in my opinion, were a lack of creativity on the part of the editorial staff of DC, and the fact that the writers were (and still are) mandated to write to the 35 year old comics readers, already familiar with 70 years of back story. How to fix this? Not by screwing around with the basic premises that made the characters popular in the first place. And DC is continuing to write, despite what their DCNU press releases said, to the fanboy audience. This is the proverbial snake eating its own tail, that will eventually consume itself, whether digital, paper, or whatever.
For the record this is the part I was specifically Amen-ing.
I also really liked this line: And the reason I pine for the comics of my past? It's because they had a future.
Continuing to target comics to the 35+-year-old longtime reader, rather than genuinely trying to find new readers is a doomed enterprise.
The NewDCU project, seems pretty clearly to be targeting lapsed readers from the 90s boom, while also trying to appease the readers they had left and yet claiming to be be aimed at new readers. As such, it increasingly seems to be crumbling as the "years of planning" turn out to be a bunch of half-considered concepts which are in a constant state of revision.
This latest stunt smells of desperation to me, as do the Zero issues. And as the new Wonder Woman series, which has been one of the few bright points for me in this mess, is likely to be interfered with, I'm especially annoyed.
For years, I was one of the beneficiaries of the trend of writing for older readers, and I loved it. But now that I am older than the "older reader" who is currently being written for, I can see how a lot of the magic and wonder and fun were tossed aside when comics "matured." And I think that was a mistake. Now the magic and wonder and fun are relegated to the "kiddie comics" ghetto. That makes me sad.
(I also think Drunk Cap would be jealous he got to kiss a fish lady.)
I miss Drunk Cap. It seems like he hasn't called in in months. Has there been a Drunk Cap call since the forum got rebooted?
Eh. It doesn't bother me. It's not a very original idea of the two being in a relationship and I always liked the idea to be honest. I have gotten to the point that the new 52 is all new and all different. Even the things that didn't change are kind of changed in the new 52. You either like it or you don't. I'm curious to see how this translates into the Superman book since it looked to me that Clark might start a relationship with Lucy Lane but that's just the impression I got.
The old continuity is a giant drag. It's not what made successful characters popular in the first place (no possible arguing about that, is there?). When the distilled essence of these characters is identified and brought to life by quality creators, the comics are amazing. My main problem with DC right now is that they still seem hampered by the past. I wish they'd have wiped the continuity slate completely clean.
The old continuity is a giant drag. It's not what made successful characters popular in the first place (no possible arguing about that, is there?). When the distilled essence of these characters is identified and brought to life by quality creators, the comics are amazing. My main problem with DC right now is that they still seem hampered by the past. I wish they'd have wiped the continuity slate completely clean.
Well, I see your point. I wish they had either a) wiped everything clean or b) started an "All Star" line that serves as their version of Ultimates
Instead we have a universe that is half all new, half completely the same.
Inspired by the Wonder Woman & Superman embrace, I wrote a very short story.
Superman & Wonder Woman Together at Last
After years of tension, they finally embraced, floating above the clouds amongst the stars. Superman and Wonder Woman, Kal-El and Diana, arms wrapped around each other passionately. As Superman began to feel sick and wondered what was wrong; he began to detect the taste and smell of Kryptonite on Wonder Woman's lips...
Boy, do I remember those. I bought the entire 12-issue Hush storyline and was greatly disappointed by it, both story and art. I didn't even bother with the Superman story.
Hush was horrible. I got it cause of the great review the CGS crew gave it. Read it once and then earlier this year sold the two trades to someone on this forum for the price of shipping. The story read like badly written fan-fic and the artwork looks like Jim Lee was drawing a bunch of pin ups or posters.
Wow. I literally lol'd at how much you dislike him. Never heard anyone say that about him. Liefeld, yes. Lee, no.
Different strokes.
People love Howard Chaykin, but I can barely tolerate his art.
And I'm no fan of Kirby's art, either.
Be careful with that Kirby comment. I have a revelation coming up in an ep about something I despise and I do not think the guys shared my opinion on this "beloved" show!
Wow. I literally lol'd at how much you dislike him. Never heard anyone say that about him. Liefeld, yes. Lee, no.
Among fans who value storytelling, Lee has pretty much always been disliked, and on a number of discussion groups populated by people who study the art form, he's used as an example of WHY comics are hard to read and how the art of storytelling went away in the 90's.
He's an illustrator, not a storyteller, and I don't care for his illustrations. You want an example of why I dislike him, look at his Batman and Superman covers when he did his 12 issue runs...he drew Superman and Batman almost exactly the same, same facial features, same pose, and only the background and costume were different.
Boy, do I remember those. I bought the entire 12-issue Hush storyline and was greatly disappointed by it, both story and art. I didn't even bother with the Superman story.
Hush was horrible. I got it cause of the great review the CGS crew gave it. Read it once and then earlier this year sold the two trades to someone on this forum for the price of shipping. The story read like badly written fan-fic and the artwork looks like Jim Lee was drawing a bunch of pin ups or posters.
I'm wondering if I was one of the people on that Hush review? Although there were somethings I really liked (the JT cameo, the best Superman/Batman fight to date) it started off really slow, a predictable villain, and the "twist" ending. The ending bothers me the most because there is NO way anyone could have figured the hook out. That always pisses me off.
I did get the Absolute Edition, but I don't think this storyline comes close to cracking my Top Ten Batman stories of All Time.
Well, having read JL #12, I think they did a great job of giving a completely logical rationale for the relationship. Excellent, and precisely the kind of curveball I'd like more of in this new universe.
Well, having read JL #12, I think they did a great job of giving a completely logical rationale for the relationship. Excellent, and precisely the kind of curveball I'd like more of in this new universe.
And there you have it. Hand-wring all you like, but maybe...juuuuust maybe...the guys at DC might know what they're doing.
Well, having read JL #12, I think they did a great job of giving a completely logical rationale for the relationship. Excellent, and precisely the kind of curveball I'd like more of in this new universe.
And there you have it. Hand-wring all you like, but maybe...juuuuust maybe...the guys at DC might know what they're doing.
Intrigued after all the talk in this thread, I got it off the rack yesterday, too. I hadn't read JL in a few months, and this issue did not make me regret that decision, as it is still all a little distant and pose-y. But the Kal-El/Diana scene was done well, I thought. A lot of it turned on the fact that they were in costume (no, not in that Nite Owl/Silk Specter way) and that it seems Diana is making him doubt or question whether he even needs another identity, or whether he can really relate to humans.
I think this would be done best if they let it play out for awhile. I mean, of course, it will eventually end up being Lois. It will always be Lois. But I think there is potential if they give this one some time. And let it be part of a larger internal conflict of Kal-El deciding whether or not he really needs to try to pass as human or love like a human. I mean, of course, we all know what his conclusion will eventually be, but in the time he is questioning, there may be some stories to tell. We'll see.
I agree with Stewart's earlier statement, though, that I don't want this to interrupt or be a distraction in the Wonder Woman title. I really enjoy that book, but at times Diana already feels like a supporting character in her own title. And I think bringing Superman into that book too much would just further crowd her out.
It looks like Johns is playing with the Alienated Superman trope.
Which is only to be expected as he is a Donner Disciple.
I know the Byrne Vision has been tainted by Byrne's personality, but I really prefer Clark Kent, midwestern farmboy, as the real personality as opposed to the bumbling caricature of humanity from a superhuman's point of view as played by Chris Reeve and immortalized by Jerry Seinfeld.
And the poor orphan boy, obsessed with the Kryptonian daddy he never knew, and by extension Krypton itself bores me stupid.
Morrison promised us a non-mopey Superman, and true to his word, the hero in Action Comics has not been. But Johns and the committee writing Superman have created an unpleasant, unlikeable version which I fear reflects what we'll be seeing in next year's movie.
Comments
Of course, from my creaky perspective, the John Byrne/George Perez take on the relationship isn't ancient history.
And Frank Miller's trashy version is an all-too-recent memory.
There are STILL fans who are unhappy about the effects of Crisis on Infinite Earths and say that everything since then has been crap. There are fans who say that everything at Marvel since Kirby left has been crap. There are fans who say that everything since the Comics Code has been crap. There are fans who say that all super-hero comics since the end of WWII have been crap.
They are all correct. For them.
Maybe the new DC isn't for you. Sales are up across the board for DC books and while some people (me among them) don't care for the comics, someone does.
Comics will ALWAYS be around. They may be webcomics or they may be special graphic novels or they may be monthly publicans, but they will be there. If the current editorial team ruins sales, guess what?" They'll be fired and a new set of editors will be brought in, and so on and so on.
And, while it seems mean to say Not Everything Is For You.
Science fiction and fantasy novels aren't for me any more because they focus on book series that go on and on rather than done in one, and I don't want to deal with waiting a year (If I'm lucky, right George RR Martin?) for the next installment of a novel that will also end on a cliffhanger.
Does that mean fantasy novels suck? Nope. It means I am not in their audience, so we've parted ways.
I miss Drunk Cap. It seems like he hasn't called in in months. Has there been a Drunk Cap call since the forum got rebooted?
The only problem is that, while some, with foresight and respect for the source material, aim high and produce this:
Others target a desired demographic they THINK they know, they forsake all tradition, honesty, and respect for the source, and produce this:
What we need are good stewards of the characters and concepts we love. They deserve better.
If I am arguing for anything, it is that we as the readers, keep an open mind and give each generation of stewards a chance to do their best. And, as with ever prior generation of stewards, some will succeed, and some won't.
To get specific to the New 52, there are some stewards that are doing great work right now, and some that aren't. Just like before. (Just like always, it seems.) If anything, there seem to be a few more right stewards in the mix (at least to me) than there were two or three years ago. So, for me, that feels at least like a step in the right direction.
Lest we get too doomy, I believe comics are still up relative to where they were in the late 90s.
Comics as a language, are way up, and much more available, then back when there was no such thing as a webcomic.
Now- I know this is as much a culture thing as it is an actual buy-and-read-funnybooks thing. But not for nothing comic book conventions are, I think, getting bigger and bigger all the time.
And certainly comics are in different places, and around more than they were back when there were barely any trade paperbacks and little traction in the book market.
And, maybe in the age of the mobile device and comics app, they are up and available in new ways yet again. We'll see.
I don't know. OF COURSE it could be better. But I also think there are a lot of things that have made the last 25 years, or even the last 10, something other than a steady decline.
The geek culture has increased tremendously since I started reading in the 80's. Conventions are extremely popular. Comic movies are usually the biggest sellers of the year. But the actually purchasing and reading of comic books are no where near as prominent as they used to be. There are many factors to that, but it seems odd that every thing about comics are increasing in popularity except the actual comics.
There will always be comics in some format with devoted readers, I just see that pool of readers getting smaller and smaller. Each reboot, some people leave before it starts, sales #'s are strong at first then slowly go down until the next reboot when more people leave.
There has to be a balance between keeping your old customers happy and attracting new ones without reinventing the wheel each time....I am not smart enough however to know what that is.
I don't know that every reboot is a net loss- leaving behind more than it picks up.
Retailer/analyst Brian Hibbs recently did a column about the New 52 from a sales point of view, and he seems pretty positive about. Especially, as he put it, when enough months go by that it seems the "tourists" have left and the numbers have leveled. A year in, from the point of view of the readership pool, it seems that more was gained than lost.
Instead we have a universe that is half all new, half completely the same.
Superman & Wonder Woman Together at Last
After years of tension, they finally embraced, floating above the clouds amongst the stars. Superman and Wonder Woman, Kal-El and Diana, arms wrapped around each other passionately. As Superman began to feel sick and wondered what was wrong; he began to detect the taste and smell of Kryptonite on Wonder Woman's lips...
www.microfiction.weebly.com
Boy, do I remember those. I bought the entire 12-issue Hush storyline and was greatly disappointed by it, both story and art. I didn't even bother with the Superman story.
Hush was horrible. I got it cause of the great review the CGS crew gave it. Read it once and then earlier this year sold the two trades to someone on this forum for the price of shipping. The story read like badly written fan-fic and the artwork looks like Jim Lee was drawing a bunch of pin ups or posters.
...and I'm glad you did! :D
I'm wondering if I was one of the people on that Hush review? Although there were somethings I really liked (the JT cameo, the best Superman/Batman fight to date) it started off really slow, a predictable villain, and the "twist" ending. The ending bothers me the most because there is NO way anyone could have figured the hook out. That always pisses me off.
I did get the Absolute Edition, but I don't think this storyline comes close to cracking my Top Ten Batman stories of All Time.
M
I think this would be done best if they let it play out for awhile. I mean, of course, it will eventually end up being Lois. It will always be Lois. But I think there is potential if they give this one some time. And let it be part of a larger internal conflict of Kal-El deciding whether or not he really needs to try to pass as human or love like a human. I mean, of course, we all know what his conclusion will eventually be, but in the time he is questioning, there may be some stories to tell. We'll see.
I agree with Stewart's earlier statement, though, that I don't want this to interrupt or be a distraction in the Wonder Woman title. I really enjoy that book, but at times Diana already feels like a supporting character in her own title. And I think bringing Superman into that book too much would just further crowd her out.
M
Which is only to be expected as he is a Donner Disciple.
I know the Byrne Vision has been tainted by Byrne's personality, but I really prefer Clark Kent, midwestern farmboy, as the real personality as opposed to the bumbling caricature of humanity from a superhuman's point of view as played by Chris Reeve and immortalized by Jerry Seinfeld.
And the poor orphan boy, obsessed with the Kryptonian daddy he never knew, and by extension Krypton itself bores me stupid.
Morrison promised us a non-mopey Superman, and true to his word, the hero in Action Comics has not been. But Johns and the committee writing Superman have created an unpleasant, unlikeable version which I fear reflects what we'll be seeing in next year's movie.
Bleah.
This storyline looks to be growing out of that difference.