Official : Bendis gets both books

[Kuwagaton]

Pretty much. Lois has so many looks I like but my favorites are "80s straight bangs" courtesy of Rosenberger, Swan, Oksner, Byrne during MoS, etc. currently being repped on the Middleton cover and the early 90s "auburn with volume" as a composite of the numerous real life Lanes (Joanne Siegel, Phyllis Coates, Noel Neill, Teri Thatcher, Erica Durance, Amy Adams, and always in my own mind the young Julia Roberts) as well as the Fleischer cartoons.

That Pacheco style... I'd have to see another artist do it, because there it looks much too Hot Topic/Starbucks for me. It reminds me of how even my favorites like Mahnke give Superman this tough spiky hair at the unfortunate expense of his curl.

[Ascended]

Pretty much. Lois has so many looks I like but my favorites are "80s straight bangs" courtesy of Rosenberger, Swan, Oksner, Byrne during MoS, etc. currently being repped on the Middleton cover and the early 90s "auburn with volume" as a composite of the numerous real life Lanes (Joanne Siegel, Phyllis Coates, Noel Neill, Teri Thatcher, Erica Durance, Amy Adams, and always in my own mind the young Julia Roberts) as well as the Fleischer cartoons.

That Pacheco style... I'd have to see another artist do it, because there it looks much too Hot Topic/Starbucks for me. It reminds me of how even my favorites like Mahnke give Superman this tough spiky hair at the unfortunate expense of his curl.

Julia Roberts would've made a great Lois back in the day.

And I agree; that haricut is....yeah it's a little *too* Hot Topic for me. I've always thought of Lois being more an "80's rock band big hair" girl than a "edgy punk cut" one. But that's probably Erica Durance's Lois influencing me.

[Last Son of Krypton]

What can you say about the redefining nature of the story and the new direction the Man of Steel will be going in?

Lee: I feel like that's Brian's story to tell. All I can say is that it will be startling. It will be interesting. It will be illuminating. It will usher in a new era for the character, which is what you want. We didn't want to do a celebratory issue that didn't mean anything. In walks Brian with this great idea, this great premise, to redefine the character and it unlocked all these other ideas.

DiDio: Let me spoil it a little bit. Brian's stuff really does challenge the origin of Superman and calls in some new elements that reinterpret everything that's happened to him up until this point. The piece that you're going to see in "Action Comics" #1000 takes place after the events in "Man of Steel," so you get kind of a preview of what's to come. We introduce a new villain and there's lots of story beats inside there. More important, when you have as many people buying into this, it becomes a great launchpad for everything that Brian wants to do as well as to get a sense of the scope of the DC Universe.

Society, and the comics that represent it, are changing, but do we need a new Superman?

DiDio: It's the accessibility and relatability of the character that creates our constant need to really contemporize him and move the stories forward. With so much other media with our characters these days, it's essential for us to stay as innovative as possible. So we always feel like we have to be in front of them in our storytelling — reviewing them and finding ways to freshen them up. I think Superman is the perfect example. You've seen so many iterations, but he's always true to what he is, though he's still built on today's ideas.

What was the draw for bringing in Bendis?

Lee: We're longtime fans of his work at Marvel and really jealous that they had such a prolific writer [who] was driving so much of their narrative, their mythology and their universe. So, we knew he's a creator with big ideas. That's what you want on your biggest character and your biggest issue. He just came in with a passion that you see was a trademark for the work he did at Marvel. He's not a guy [who’s] scared of exploring, experimenting and really burrowing down into what makes characters tick. As Dan alluded to before, we do not keep these characters encased in amber for all eternity. We need to really keep them modern and fresh, and that requires risk and that requires change and that requires modernizing the mythologies. And we have a fearless writer in Brian, and that's something that doesn't happen very often.

DiDio: It goes back to what we're celebrating — 80 years of Superman. A lot of times when you have a character for that long, you don't change the character that much. So what we try to do is bring in fresh voices, a fresh set of eyes and new perspectives.


Full interview here: http://www.latimes.com/entertainment...htmlstory.html

[Ascended]

And this is the first interview that made me not like what I was hearing.

You need to "contemporize" Superman, Didio? Then you really don't understand him at all. Superman is as contemporary today as he was in 1938, you just don't get it. He's not the problem. You are.

[Superfamily]

And this is the first interview that made me not like what I was hearing.

You need to "contemporize" Superman, Didio? Then you really don't understand him at all. Superman is as contemporary today as he was in 1938, you just don't get it. He's not the problem. You are.

I agree with you, superman and all his mythology is not the problem, the only problem here is Didio

[Superlad93]

You need to "contemporize" Superman, Didio? Then you really don't understand him at all. Superman is as contemporary today as he was in 1938

Funny enough, I think he alludes to this idea in the interview. He says "Brian's stuff really does challenge the origin of Superman and calls in some new elements that reinterpret everything that's happened to him up until this point." While that could just mean origin story, based on what I've heard Bendis say about going back to S&S work to inform him, I'm somewhat incline to think he might mean his origins in Action Comics #1.

Then we have Superman #1 saying "Clark Kent looking at the world through new eyes...with new ideas about what Superman could and should do for the city of Metropolis and the planet Earth." That sounds more in line with the more proactive Superman of 1938. It sounds to me like a direct sequel the ideas that spawned Superman.

The idea seems to be that Clark will be reexamining what he's been doing with the last few decades of his life, and coming up with what he can do to do better.

[Ascended]

The idea seems to be that Clark will be reexamining what he's been doing with the last few decades of his life, and coming up with what he can do to do better.

Which could be fine. I mean, many of our own conversations basically amount to the same thing, "What could be done better with Superman?" Bendis hasn't given me much reason to doubt his vision in all the interviews I've read or heard about either (though his recent track record at Marvel is still concerning).

And ultimately, this is the same kind of crap Didio always spits out; "Superman needs to be modernized and changed!" He says it no matter what is going on. It's just part of the hype engine. But it still galls me that this guy has the balls to say there's something wrong with Superman. The concept is fine, and has been fine for eighty years. Its the people in charge of it that keep f*cking up.

[Superlad93]

I guess I'm fine with it because I have the context of Bendis' words so far to give Didio's words weight in this particular instance. In reality this does all point to a contemporization and sharp change in Superman. A broken clock has to be right twice a day, I suppose.

My favorite part is that it all seems to be personal changes he's making himself to whatever extent.

[Ascended]

Indeed, I do think we're about to hit a major upheaval. It's not something I think we really need, but it looks like its coming regardless of my personal feelings (DC, how could you not tailor your product specifically to my desires!!?? I am undone!!)

We'll just have to see what Bendis has planned, and whether he can execute it or not. He's saying a lot of the right things, and he's done some incredible work in the past. My only real cause for concern is his latest Marvel work, which hasn't impressed me outside of Miles Morales, and Didio himself, who seems to screw up Superman every time things are starting to gel nicely.

[Sacred Knight]

My inner-problem is that its a pick-my-poison thing right now. Which head honcho do I want with one eye on Superman? Geoff Johns or Dan Didio? I'm comfortable with neither today. But if you twist my arm I might actually go with Didio. Both come with their own set of risks though in my eyes.

[Ascended]

"Neither" is my option as well. But if I had to pick one? Jesus, do I want Not-as-good-as-Donner-man or Trying-to-be-Bat-Man?

Yeah, Im just gonna stick with "neither."

[JAK]

And this is the first interview that made me not like what I was hearing.

You need to "contemporize" Superman, Didio? Then you really don't understand him at all. Superman is as contemporary today as he was in 1938, you just don't get it. He's not the problem. You are.

Which could be fine. I mean, many of our own conversations basically amount to the same thing, "What could be done better with Superman?" Bendis hasn't given me much reason to doubt his vision in all the interviews I've read or heard about either (though his recent track record at Marvel is still concerning).

And ultimately, this is the same kind of crap Didio always spits out; "Superman needs to be modernized and changed!" He says it no matter what is going on. It's just part of the hype engine. But it still galls me that this guy has the balls to say there's something wrong with Superman. The concept is fine, and has been fine for eighty years. Its the people in charge of it that keep f*cking up.

AMEN! Didio drives me bonkers. He just needs to not talk. Or at least not talk when it's Superman.

My inner-problem is that its a pick-my-poison thing right now. Which head honcho do I want with one eye on Superman? Geoff Johns or Dan Didio? I'm comfortable with neither today. But if you twist my arm I might actually go with Didio. Both come with their own set of risks though in my eyes.

Yeah, I'd go with neither, myself. I want a "Dan" in charge, but it's not THAT Dan!

"Neither" is my option as well. But if I had to pick one? Jesus, do I want Not-as-good-as-Donner-man or Trying-to-be-Bat-Man?

LOL!!! That's perfect. Given his penchant for violence, do we call Johns "Evil Donner" (like "Evil Ryu" from Street Fighter)? And "Trying-to-be-Bat-Man" needs to be on a shirt. Or replace all the heads from the Lego movie with Didio's, all singing "Everything is Batman!!!"

[DragonPiece]

Review of AC 1000 from a CBR writer that read it
"Action Comics #1000 is a hell of a tribute to The Man of Tomorrow.

I loved all of the stories — except for Bendis and Jim Lee’s — but my favourite was Tomasi and Gleason’s, which was a surprised considering how mediocre their run in Superman has been."

https://twitter.com/KingImpulse/stat...61249157648384

Already bad reviews(an AV Club writer that read it in the replies wasn't a fan either)

[Dispenser Of Truth]

Kieran's typically pretty on-point - even if Bendis's run as a whole is good, I wouldn't be surprised if this as an apparently action-heavy prologue was pretty empty. What stood out to me was his description of it to someone asking about the problem as "It's a carbon copy of a very bad Superman story". Does he mean For Tomorrow, which could at least be interesting, and might fit with what we're hearing about the Zone? Or given the rumors about Rogal Zarr destroying Krypton, does he mean Earth One, which would be very bad news indeed?

[Superlad93]

In a comic that basically has every other writer/team doing what amount to one off tribute stories, can't say I'm surprised that Bendis' story that 1) isn't resolved in the issue and 2) functions as a glorified preview more than anything else sticks out quite a bit. Man of Steel is clearly where the big shifts will start to happen.

If anything, I'll be treating Bendis' story like those DCYOU previews a few years back, and even that's not a great comparison because at least with those they sort of just drop you in with the big change as soon as the story starts.

Not like the story sticks out in or is basic, but I'd probably just advise that we take into account context as we go into read this issue next week.