Official : Bendis gets both books

[Myskin]

Again I’m not really seeing how Batman fits together better. You talk about Batman’s mental state but that doesn’t really correlate to a more cohesive whole, that just means writers have played around with Batman’s psychology not his world. For example how do you reconcile the Batgod of Justice League who can out prep Cthulhu and has plans for the JL going rogue, but is routinely surprised by mentally unbalanced yahoos from Arkham escaping? Those two characterizations just don’t fit together at all. Batman’s a super genius who can build a mech suit to take down Supes but he can’t build one to use against his common rogues? They use the “he doesn’t want to rely on it” hand wave but that’s every bit as bull**** as Supes raising his voice a pitch and slouching to hide his identity. An excuse to keep an important feature of his story going. But Batman’s fanbase enjoy those stories anyway. Stuff not fitting into one neat package is pretty much a feature of superheroes.

When I refer to coherence, I am not saying that every single version of Batman is coherent with each other (they aren't). What I mean is that every single version is coherent with main idea of the character and the different interpretations writers have given about the Bat lore. You can get Morrison's BatGod, Rucka's detective, even funny Batman '66 and it is always Batman. It is always recognizable and coherent in its own way with the character. The strength of a cultural icon is measurable by how many different and convincing interpretations and versions you can have of it without betraying its original essence. In that regard, Batman belongs to the realm of immortal characters like Dracula and James Bond, way more than it can be considered similar to Superman. And I wouldn't be so focused on the fanbase, because IMHO Batman's appeal is strong for casual readers, too.

I don't really believe in true fans, so I agree with you on that front. But I'm really curious about what you do like of the character because I think it's more constructive to talk about the elements that works today.

Fair enough. I will give you an answer. To me, Superman's history in the latest 20+ years is just an endless list of lost chances, with one exception - All-Star Superman (which is well, perfect and - just to be clear - is ONE possible interpretation of the character, in the same way that Dark Knight Returns is one possible version of Batman). It couldn't be defined in any different way. I won't indulge in the reasons why this happened: sometimes DC failed and sometimes fans didn't accept new interpretations of the character.
Please not that I am NOT nostalgic, because I don't think that when Superman was the peak of his success - in the 1950s and the 1960s - he was the best character ever created. It worked because those were different times: that version of the character was a very well-known component of pop culture, and it was appropriate for that era in the same way Batman'66 was appropriate for THAT era. The problem arose when after the 80s - because of a lot of different reasons - for these characters came the moment of evolving into something different and more modern. Batman succeeded, but Superman didn't - it's not that Byrne's era is without its merit, it's just that it was not strong enough to pave the way for more stories which had the same strength of Arkham Asylum or, I don't know, Night Cries. Superman simply missed the train. It's not that they didn't try to start something new and more complex later - during the Kelly/Loeb era (which is probably my favorite one, even if I see its limits), during the Johns era or even during the New52 era. But things always followed the same pattern - they started with very strong starting points, focused on one single aspect of the character (his aliennes, his moral doubts, his role), but they never - NEVER - developed this idea to the very end, in a coherent narrative which could finally "state" something new about the character and be a new starting point for something which could come later. Maybe it would be more precise to define it as an endless list of false starts. What I see now in the Superman universe is a group of completely disconnected elements, which taken singularly could be even potentially interesting but simply don't mesh well with each other. It's as if they were trying to build a porcelain vase by putting together the fragments from 50 vases which are completely different from each other. It doesn't make sense and there is no discernible direction, even if I think that Bendis is a talented writer (but there are several plot points in his run which don't make much sense, even if I appreciate the ideas).
What really frustrates me is that I see the potential of the character and its universe, I see that there are a tons of potentially interesting ideas which could put Superman in the same league with popular works like Doctor Who or Adventure Time or even Moebius' Arzach saga (with the right writer, of course). That's what I like - the potential which never comes to fruition.

[manwhohaseverything]

When I refer to coherence, I am not saying that every single version of Batman is coherent with each other (they aren't). What I mean is that every single version is coherent with main idea of the character and the different interpretations writers have given about the Bat lore. You can get Morrison's BatGod, Rucka's detective, even funny Batman '66 and it is always Batman. It is always recognizable and coherent in its own way with the character. The strength of a cultural icon is measurable by how many different and convincing interpretations and versions you can have of it without betraying its original essence. In that regard, Batman belongs to the realm of immortal characters like Dracula and James Bond, way more than it can be considered similar to Superman. And I wouldn't be so focused on the fanbase, because IMHO Batman's appeal is strong for casual readers, too.

Are you trying to say that superman is an archetype now more than a character While batman is still a character with a characterisation?
Or
Are you trying to say Superman has always been just an archetype? Which in your eye has caught upto the character in a bad way.
I mean, i feel like all star succeeded because clark of that world felt like a character. A genuine humble man of tomorrow.

[Myskin]

Are you trying to say that superman is an archetype now more than a character While batman is still a character with a characterisation?
Or
Are you trying to say Superman has always been just an archetype? Which in your eye has caught upto the character in a bad way.
I mean, i feel like all star succeeded because clark of that world felt like a character. A genuine humble man of tomorrow.

I am saying that Batman has been used way, way, way better in the latest 30 years, to put it simply, and Superman wasn't.
They are both archetypes - they are simply too old and well-know not be archetypical, but Batman can also be a character in his own stories, in the same way of Dracula or Sherlock Holmes. If Superman had been used better, maybe he could also be in the same league of Batman today.
All-Star is perfect and isn't inferior to Dark Knight Returns IMHO. But it is ONE story in an ocean of mediocrity.

[Vordan]

I am saying that Batman has been used way, way, way better in the latest 30 years, to put it simply, and Superman wasn't.
They are both archetypes - they are simply too old and well-know not be archetypical, but Batman can also be a character in his own stories, in the same way of Dracula or Sherlock Holmes. If Superman had been used better, maybe he could also be in the same league of Batman today.
All-Star is perfect and isn't inferior to Dark Knight Returns IMHO. But it is ONE story in an ocean of mediocrity.

What did you think of Morrison’s Action Comics and the Rebirth runs? Apologies if I asked that already but I am curious given I thought both provided strong foundations and showcased Supes’ wide range.

[manwhohaseverything]

I am saying that Batman has been used way, way, way better in the latest 30 years, to put it simply, and Superman wasn't.
They are both archetypes - they are simply too old and well-know not be archetypical, but Batman can also be a character in his own stories, in the same way of Dracula or Sherlock Holmes. If Superman had been used better, maybe he could also be in the same league of Batman today.
All-Star is perfect and isn't inferior to Dark Knight Returns IMHO. But it is ONE story in an ocean of mediocrity.

I disagree, I feel,the problem only started after birthright. atleast, byrne reboot had a coherent vision.it might not have been for you or me. But, It was stable for years.
Yes, but i feel like your main problem is lack of clear vision or direction for the character. For instance goldenage had the vigilante who runs from the police and was making statements by wearing a sheild shaped like a badge. We know that doing the right thing means protecting the weak for that guy. Even if it means breaking the law or taking it into your own hand. That was his mission statement .
american alien was good for me. It basically modernized (spidermanised) postcrisis byrne superman.Superdad was good for me while it lasted as well. So was morrison's action comics. So, i dont get that feeling.Then again, I do get my superman fix even now.even though, he is not wearing a big s on his chest.so, There is that.
I think the current trend is to make superman the bad guy.

[Myskin]

What did you think of Morrison’s Action Comics and the Rebirth runs? Apologies if I asked that already but I am curious given I thought both provided strong foundations and showcased Supes’ wide range.

To me, it was another missed opportunity, even if Morrison was/is one of my favorite writers. It was marginally more readable than other works which came before, but way, way inferior to what was legitimate to expect.
There are some elements which I like. I like the Phantom King, President Superman, the SuperDoom concept and several other elements. Superman's characterization is likeable at times. There are things which I don't like. I don't think that the T-Shirt and cape look works good. It looks incongruous. I think that it would have worked better if they had tried to include the cape in a more "casual" way, as if it was a scarf/keffiyeh or something like that. I don't like the Collector of World's look. It is stronger than me, but every time I look at it I think that it looks like an ugly muppet, like Uncle Deadly (maybe that was exactly the intention?). The main problem I have with that run is how uneven and self-indulgent it is. What I think is that Morrison was not that THAT interested in the run itself - his heart was probably with Multiversity and that's why some of best parts are almost a prologue to that story. There doesn't seem to be enough material for an entire run (as you know, some ideas came from an unwritten All Star Superman special): in some parts it is decompressed, in others everything moves too quickly, without giving the reader enough time to breathe.

Some parts are confusing. Not Invisibles/Nameless confusing, just very rushed, ad if he didn't give the ideas time to develop. Brainiac/Metallo changes characterizations and plans at least 2-3 times at the end of the first arc. The narration goes from Golden Age, populist Superman to outcast Superman and space hero Superman without a real focus. Some parts are anticlimactic, like Nimrod's origins or the final fate of Captain Comet (does anyone remember that he was in it, too)? I didn't particularly care for Vyndytkvx.

[Superbat]

Morrison's run is one of the most overrated Superman stories.

There were some bright spots, but it didn't hold a candle to his Batman run.

[Vordan]

Morrison's run is one of the most overrated Superman stories.

There were some bright spots, but it didn't hold a candle to his Batman run.

I don’t know how it can be overrated given most people crap on it.

And his Batman run is his magnus opum and the strongest ongoing storytelling arc from a mainline comic. Nothing so far has measured up to it lol.

[Sacred Knight]

Most people don't crap on it. Its routinely listed as the best thing about the New 52 era of Superman, even from sources who hate that era. And not in a "best by comparison deal" but genuinely liked. I mean, as with anything that doesn't mean its universal, certainly those who dislike it and that's cool but not to any substantial measure like say, the Superman title from this time is hated on. But that said I don't think its overrated even then. If anything I feel it remains today underrated. Had he wanted the time to tell an epic like he did with Batman, he could have. But he felt this was really the last thing he had to say on the character. Unfortunate in my book but so it was. But it was certainly better than Batman Inc Volume 2 which got more attention at the time.

[Vordan]

Most people don't crap on it. Its routinely listed as the best thing about the New 52 era of Superman even from those who hate that era. But that said I don't think its overrated anyway. If anything I feel it remains today underrated.

You’ve met more charitable people than I. People routinely complain about how “edgy” Superman is in that run when I try to talk to people outside CBR about it. But I would agree it’s underrated.

[Superbat]

I don’t know how it can be overrated given most people crap on it.

And his Batman run is his magnus opum and the strongest ongoing storytelling arc from a mainline comic. Nothing so far has measured up to it lol.

I'll concede to that, but I've seen a lot of people praise his Action run.

[Sacred Knight]

You’ve met more charitable people than I. People routinely complain about how “edgy” Superman is in that run when I try to talk to people outside CBR about it. But I would agree it’s underrated.

Huh, interesting. I mean its not like I haven't heard that complaint before of course, here and elsewhere, but for me it hasn't been something I've come across with regularity pertaining to this run in particular. Most I've come across liked how Morrison captured his attitude as a young upstart. I've come across more "edgy" complaints outside of that run, personally. Different circles and all that I suppose.

[manwhohaseverything]

Huh, interesting. I mean its not like I haven't heard that complaint before of course, here and elsewhere, but for me it hasn't been something I've come across with regularity pertaining to this run in particular. Most I've come across liked how Morrison captured his attitude as a young upstart. I've come across more "edgy" complaints outside of that run, personally. Different circles and all that I suppose.

Here is a guy crapping on morrison's action comics run. He basically refuses to believe its goldenage superman inspired. But, his gripes are more regarding dceu superman.

[Robanker]

You’ve met more charitable people than I. People routinely complain about how “edgy” Superman is in that run when I try to talk to people outside CBR about it. But I would agree it’s underrated.

I'm personally a bit mixed on it. He does come across as a bit of a dick in a few minor instances ("guns are for sissies" is pretty shitty when you're essentially bulletproof and talking to soldiers who actually need them to be effective, but hey I guess it's cool to humiliate soldiers, cops, his adoptive father and so forth) but he does come across as a much younger version of the golden age Superman. He's who that character would be if he started out today and was in his very early twenties or late teens. The run grew on me, even if I don't care for the New 52 years much at all.

I think the biggest damning factor for his Action run is that, well, it's written by the man who wrote All-Star Superman. It's like looking at a nice sketch by Michelangelo and then remembering the Sistine Chapel. When levied against that which was only half a decade prior, it does feel a lot less inspired.

[Vordan]

I'm personally a bit mixed on it. He does come across as a bit of a dick in a few minor instances ("guns are for sissies" is pretty shitty when you're essentially bulletproof and talking to soldiers who actually need them to be effective, but hey I guess it's cool to humiliate soldiers, cops, his adoptive father and so forth) but he does come across as a much younger version of the golden age Superman. He's who that character would be if he started out today and was in his very early twenties or late teens. The run grew on me, even if I don't care for the New 52 years much at all.

I think the biggest damning factor for his Action run is that, well, it's written by the man who wrote All-Star Superman. It's like looking at a nice sketch by Michelangelo and then remembering the Sistine Chapel. When levied against that which was only half a decade prior, it does feel a lot less inspired.

I liked him starting out dickish because it showed actual character development when he calmed down and became less arrogant. The problem for me with the Byrne and Johns reboots is his personality is essentially solidified from Day 1 unlike other heroes who grow into their iconic incarnations, and that was always rather dull to me. As for that line put it in context: Guns aren’t going to do jack to Brainiac, and Sam Lane and his soldiers had just let Lex Luthor torture the hell out of him, so yeah he talked smack to them, which I’ll be honest I enjoyed. After years of Post Crisis Supes just letting everyone mock him as an outdated relic (“the last time you inspired anyone was when you were dead”) it was enjoyable to see Supes sass his antagonists right back. You might say that Supes should be the bigger man and that is fair, but I personally think he’s perfectly willing to lay some verbal smack down, especially when these guys tortured him. I loved the line where they tried to arrest him and he told them contemptuously to “slap on the bracelets or get out of his way” lmao.

All-Star is basically the iconic Superman pulling off his last great feats while Action was Clark becoming Supes, so I never had the same expectation for each work that others seemed to. I love them both honestly for different reason.