Superman #43 Preview/Discussion

[Superlad93]

For the record, I agree, Nelliebly, it's super dated, and has been one of the nagging issues I've had with their run. I'm personally never too pressed about it because I get that it's just Tomasi and Gleason's personal nostalgia leaking through (admittedly, as a 90s/2000s kid I cringed SUPER hard at everything coming from Clark's mouth). One could concoct an explanation about Jon and Martha showing Clark all that old stuff if one was real, real pressed about it. When I read it it just turns into white noise before I get on with the issue. Even though I don't agree at all with the severity of your reaction, Nelliebly, I don't think it should've been so backhandedly dismissed as it was in this thread. That was lame of them to do that the way they did it.

Anyways, I'm actually pretty into this issue as a whole because its high concept, apparent speed, and 80s kid monster movie vibe that happens to star Superman and Superboy. It all has a nice bounce to it, and I'm sure that's largely because Tomasi and Gleason are writing pretty much unfettered as of this arc. I'm willing to take some of their bad habits in exchange for an arc that's super passionate and fun. It's only like 2 or 3 more issues to go.

But Gleason's art is probably where I focused most of my attention. And I'm starting to see where Bendis might be coming from with putting him on a more grounded book.

[adrikito]

Honestly, I'm sad that Gleason is staying on with Superman when Bendis comes aboard. I find his art overly cartoony and juvenile looking and I think he's way too conservative personally to ever do justice to Lois Lane in any capacity.

I read the comments... You should be more worried for Superman future with Bendis in both books...

Despite I don´t saw all the run, I heard that Gleason run received a lot of love by the fans..

[Nelliebly]

S'alright, hell that's the whole reason I made the joke. Sometimes you gotta laugh at yourself. It was basically me having a laugh at my own expense mixed in with the genuine criticism. It wasn't meant to offend anyone.

But the main thing has just been I haven't felt any dimension to them under Tomasi's pen. A happy marriage is great. But I don't feel Tomasi has ever written a happy marriage because I don't think he's ever actually explored the marriage period. He's never put any mark of depth onto their relationship at all. Whenever they're together its just stuff like this. Which is fine sometimes. Our Town is my favorite issue of this run after all. But for an entire run there's been nothing more to their dynamic, and to me it makes the entire thing seem hollow. I'm not saying they need to fight all the time and never cuddle or whatnot, as its not about fighting. Its just about trying to portray a real marriage within this unreal world. Things of substance beyond the superficial.

Ok so here's the thing. I think they ::have:: portrayed a happy marriage. And I can see why this kind of writing has felt like a warm hug to a lot of people. I admit fully that given all the strife in my life right now there are days when I just want to see Superman, Lois and Jon holding each other and smiling. It makes me happy. I think we've seen happiness.

Where I think you are correct is that Tomasi and Gleason have not actually invested time in Lois and Clark as a relationship. And I think they have also pushed some very conservative gender roles into Lois that do not FIT her but then try to make up for it by having her like wear a hellbat suit or punch a fury every few issues as if to say, "see, Lois is strong!" Except this is NOT why Lois is strong and iconic as a character. Lois is iconic as a character distinctly because her brain is her most valuable asset. Her devotion to her job is so important to her and, this is key, it's important to CLARK. Clark loves how devoted Lois is to her job. So that fact that we didn't see that in this book? It was a problem. Because that's a huge part of who Lois is and it's part of what brought them together as a couple.

A friend of mine is doing her first viewing of "Lois and Clark" right now and so I've been doing some various rewatching along with her. Is the show dated in some regards? Sure. Corny villains? Sure. But what the show NAILED (and Smallville did it too) is that Lois and Clark are a great team on every front and that Clark is distinctly attracted to the way Lois defies traditional gender roles and he NEVER ASKS her to change. He doesn't put the same pressure on her to conform to what a "lady" is supposed to be the way that other men might and this is such a huge part of their dynamic and relationship. Watching "Lois and Clark" again has been such a pleasure in that regard because, at times, it's hard to believe that sometime like this was on television over 20 years ago because in so many ways it feels more progressive than stuff we see right now on current DCTV which is kind of mind blowing. Smallville also did a really great job of showing that Clark Kent didn't think Lois was going to change into this perfect housewife when he married her. On the contrary, he didn't WANT her to.

I just think that these writers have to think harder about why Clark Kent loves Lois Lane and why she loves HIM beyond the surface of "she has a Pulitzer." It's easy to say that Lois is "strong" etc but their love is so much deeper than that and the interesting ways they relate to each other and how much he appreciates how truly unique she is are interesting.

[Nelliebly]

I read the comments... You should be more worried for Superman future with Bendis in both books...

Despite I don´t saw all the run, I heard that Gleason run received a lot of love by the fans..

I am worried about Bendis. And I never said that fans didn't love this run. I love it too. So don't put words in my mouth.

But I also think a lot of the love people have for Rebirth Superman (and I do think it's been an insane success that has saved the franchise) is that idea of Superman, Lois and Jon as a family. I think a lot of people (myself included) missed the marriage and had been waiting for years for Lois and Clark to have a child so having it happen feels like a dream come true especially after the new 52. There is a LOT to like there because the concept is GREAT. But the execution has had problems and it's ok to talk about them because we want to see it continue to evolve, ok?

[Nelliebly]

For the record, I agree, Nelliebly, it's super dated, and has been one of the nagging issues I've had with their run. I'm personally never too pressed about it because I get that it's just Tomasi and Gleason's personal nostalgia leaking through (admittedly, as a 90s/2000s kid I cringed SUPER hard at everything coming from Clark's mouth). One could concoct an explanation about Jon and Martha showing Clark all that old stuff if one was real, real pressed about it. When I read it it just turns into white noise before I get on with the issue. Even though I don't agree at all with the severity of your reaction, Nelliebly, I don't think it should've been so backhandedly dismissed as it was in this thread. That was lame of them to do that the way they did it.

Anyways, I'm actually pretty into this issue as a whole because its high concept, apparent speed, and 80s kid monster movie vibe that happens to star Superman and Superboy. It all has a nice bounce to it, and I'm sure that's largely because Tomasi and Gleason are writing pretty much unfettered as of this arc. I'm willing to take some of their bad habits in exchange for an arc that's super passionate and fun. It's only like 2 or 3 more issues to go.

But Gleason's art is probably where I focused most of my attention. And I'm starting to see where Bendis might be coming from with putting him on a more grounded book.

And to be clear...I think the severity of my reaction is more of an aggregate thing, you know? Like if this was the first offense I would be probably be annoyed but not too bothered. But this is like the 20th offense so now I'm seeing red. LOL

Can you help me explain what you love so much about Gleason's art though? I would really love to know. Because I admit fully that his style does not appeal to me but I know others seem to love it so I'm wondering if I'm missing a different pov here.

[Superlad93]

And to be clear...I think the severity of my reaction is more of an aggregate thing, you know? Like if this was the first offense I would be probably be annoyed but not too bothered. But this is like the 20th offense so now I'm seeing red. LOL

No need to explain. I get where you're coming from.

Can you help me explain what you love so much about Gleason's art though? I would really love to know. Because I admit fully that his style does not appeal to me but I know others seem to love it so I'm wondering if I'm missing a different pov here.

Gladly! I will say that it might just be simple a taste situation and nothing more, so that's something to keep in mind, but I'll try my best.

Gleason's command of getting information to you before hitting you with a big image is pretty strong. Aside from his basic command of the eye, I like Gleason because of his willingness to distort a character model to sell an action or emotion. He draws as if his work were ready to move at a moment's notice. That said he's also quite great at still images with a lot of impact and dramatic light. Take a look at his Batman and Robin stuff. It's basically a masterclass on everything I've brought up.

[Nelliebly]

Gladly! I will say that it might just be simple a taste situation and nothing more, so that's something to keep in mind, but I'll try my best.

Gleason's command of getting information to you before hitting you with a big image is pretty strong. Aside from his basic command of the eye, I like Gleason because of his willingness to distort a character model to sell an action or emotion. He draws as if his work were ready to move at a moment's notice. That said he's also quite great at still images with a lot of impact and dramatic light. Take a look at his Batman and Robin stuff. It's basically a masterclass on everything I've brought up.

I love this. Thank you. This gives me something to pay attention to now. I admit that I have such a soft spot for Mahke's art and so I was always looking forward to his issues vs. Gleason on art. I just really respond to the way he draws Superman's face. But you've made some really interesting points here and I want to look for them now. Thank you!

[vasir12]

I just don't see a reason for Beacon and Nobody to not like each other. Seems kinda forced.

[Kuwagaton]

It's easy enough for me to think that they just got off on the wrong foot, now that we know Kathy can basically sense Maya's powers. So Kathy finds her suspect and Maya considers her in the way. I see it as more a super vs bat family parallel than a "girls don't like each other" thing, so it's not too much of a trope imo.

Clark and Lois are being corny, but I think Clark is a pretty corny person, so I'm not surprised to see him drag Lois down there with him, haha. It's only one page anyway.

And lastly, those Prado inks are so good that I'll be a bit bummed if the inevitable turn back to Mick Gray is immediate.

[DragonPiece]

It's easy enough for me to think that they just got off on the wrong foot, now that we know Kathy can basically sense Maya's powers. So Kathy finds her suspect and Maya considers her in the way. I see it as more a super vs bat family parallel than a "girls don't like each other" thing, so it's not too much of a trope imo.

Clark and Lois are being corny, but I think Clark is a pretty corny person, so I'm not surprised to see him drag Lois down there with him, haha. It's only one page anyway.

And lastly, those Prado inks are so good that I'll be a bit bummed if the inevitable turn back to Mick Gray is immediate.

I thought something was different about Gleason's art, I guess it was someone else being doing the ink lol. And I see both sides of the argument on that dialogue, I thought it was corny, but at the same time I could see his parents making him watch those shows as a kid.

[Kuwagaton]

*shrug*

I'm 30 and watched a good bit of both shows as a kid, with or without my parents, because I was glued to WPIX and later TBS. Seems like an odd nitpick.

[Jackalope89]

*shrug*

I'm 30 and watched a good bit of both shows as a kid, with or without my parents, because I was glued to WPIX and later TBS. Seems like an odd nitpick.

28, and grew up on old shows like I Love Lucy, Happy Days, etc, myself.
And Cheesy Clark being cheesy is like Batman brooding. Its part of who they are.

[DragonPiece]

28, and grew up on old shows like I Love Lucy, Happy Days, etc, myself.
And Cheesy Clark being cheesy is like Batman brooding. Its part of who they are.

Yep, I see no problems, just trying to rationalize it.

[Flash Gordon]

28, and grew up on old shows like I Love Lucy, Happy Days, etc, myself.
And Cheesy Clark being cheesy is like Batman brooding. Its part of who they are.

I never saw Superman/Clark Kent as a cheesy guy.

Anyway, I don't think the nitpick is with Lois and Clark discussing the Andy Griffith Show, but with the overall quality of the writing which is made clear in those odd quips. It's all very dated. There's no work done to show Lois and Clark as characters, they're simply "there".

A marriage between Lois Lane and Clark Kent would just look very different from this- in any year, but epecially in 2018.

Not that it matters since this is all going away in a few months, just making observations.

[BBally]

First off, NO ONE in their late 30's (because according to Jurgens Clark and Lois are only supposed to be like 38 in Rebirth timeline) gives a crap about Andy Griffith or the Honeymooners.

I'm 36 and I have fond nostalgic memories of watching classic shows like Andy Griffith, I Love Lucy, I Dream of Jeannie..etc, so you might need to rephrase that.