Superman Year One: out now (Spoilers)

[RickWJ324]

I'm curious... do any of you think this art is good??:

supes year one 1.jpg
supes year one 2.jpg

At best, it's "lazy" for lack of a better word. At worst, its the art of someone that really cannot draw! I really think his artwork ranks right up there with Liefield, who is probably one of THE worst artists in the history of comics.

[Kuwagaton]

Before it loaded I thought you had Miller's work. His work isn't all that sharp as it was 30 years ago, though you normally would expect that. But I think that if you want to claim art to be of objectively poor quality, you have to give it a shot yourself. None of the components are things I can see someone just doing, my preference for the top piece over other JRJR work aside. Even The Rob, who likely hasn't gone through extensive teaching and seems below average in aptitude isn't who I would call lazy. You basically have enough script to work off, try the first ten pages of your own Year One #1. The experience isn't likely to suddenly make someone appreciate the nuance and craft, and I'm sure there are even high level pros who don't necessarily like the style, but I just think it's hard to say bad when you just compare one thing you can't do to another thing you can't do.

[RickWJ324]

Before it loaded I thought you had Miller's work. His work isn't all that sharp as it was 30 years ago, though you normally would expect that. But I think that if you want to claim art to be of objectively poor quality, you have to give it a shot yourself. None of the components are things I can see someone just doing, my preference for the top piece over other JRJR work aside. Even The Rob, who likely hasn't gone through extensive teaching and seems below average in aptitude isn't who I would call lazy. You basically have enough script to work off, try the first ten pages of your own Year One #1. The experience isn't likely to suddenly make someone appreciate the nuance and craft, and I'm sure there are even high level pros who don't necessarily like the style, but I just think it's hard to say bad when you just compare one thing you can't do to another thing you can't do.

To each his own... If someone is a fan of JRJR's work, I can respect that. I posted that to seriously ask if someone does like that artwork as I'm curious. I know art is subjective and we all have varying tastes. I don't have to be an artist to appreciate one's artwork (or hate their art). I don't have to be an actor to state my opinion on one's acting ability or lack thereof. It's opinion. Everybody has one. I find Romita's artwork to be ugly. His faces are almost always ugly, his anatomy is off, his details are typically just a bunch of lines and shading to fill in spaces because of a "seemingly" lack of ability to actually give details. Again... MY opinion. I was curious what others think. I've always said to myself that I don't see how Rob Liefield could have even a single fan, but obviously he has many or he wouldn't keep getting work.

[Kuwagaton]

Yeah, of course you have every to think he's bad and I tried be clear that I don't think saying anything will change your preference. I just think "lazy" would fit the definition of an unqualified statement even if I initially assumed it was framed as an opinion. My favorite Superman creator Jerry Ordway could write his own stories while doing covers and color/paint his own pieces like



Check out his astonishing likeness work on Batman or painted Shazam work. There's no evidence to support that the pencils took more effort really. Evidently JRJR is more in demand and I suppose that's an off topic can of worms, but I don't see why anyone would actively pick to work with a guy who would be described as lazy in a firsthand account.

[RickWJ324]

Yeah, of course you have every to think he's bad and I tried be clear that I don't think saying anything will change your preference. I just think "lazy" would fit the definition of an unqualified statement even if I initially assumed it was framed as an opinion. My favorite Superman creator Jerry Ordway could write his own stories while doing covers and color/paint his own pieces like



Check out his astonishing likeness work on Batman or painted Shazam work. There's no evidence to support that the pencils took more effort really. Evidently JRJR is more in demand and I suppose that's an off topic can of worms, but I don't see why anyone would actively pick to work with a guy who would be described as lazy in a firsthand account.

Nice pic! Classic!! I'll take that over JRJR any day!!

[daBronzeBomma]

Thoroughly surprised by how much I DIDN'T hate the book.

Granted, it had a very low bar to clear (no character assassination), and I actually liked some of the parts. This issue really did feel like a giant prologue, which considering this series is already one origin story, seems wasteful.

I did love that teenage Clark perfectly remembered his short time on Krypton in vivid detail. That's the one thing I would definitely like to see become a more standard part of the mythos.

[Ascended]

I'm curious... do any of you think this art is good??:

supes year one 1.jpg
supes year one 2.jpg

At best, it's "lazy" for lack of a better word. At worst, its the art of someone that really cannot draw! I really think his artwork ranks right up there with Liefield, who is probably one of THE worst artists in the history of comics.

Its good in that its emotive and dynamic (perhaps energetic would be a better term?). If you want to get into the technical aspects, like proportion, lighting, and anatomy.....not so much. But if you aren't expecting a high degree of realism in the work and are just going for the sensation its trying to convey, it's fine. JRJR isn't my favorite artist by any stretch but I think he's doing fine with SYO so far.

[Vordan]

Thoroughly surprised by how much I DIDN'T hate the book.

Granted, it had a very low bar to clear (no character assassination), and I actually liked some of the parts. This issue really did feel like a giant prologue, which considering this series is already one origin story, seems wasteful.

I did love that teenage Clark perfectly remembered his short time on Krypton in vivid detail. That's the one thing I would definitely like to see become a more standard part of the mythos.

It was the case during Pre-Crisis that he could remember, it was only during Post Crisis that they started to get away from that as part of the attempt to deemphasize the importance of Krypton in Clark’s life.

[Tzigone]

My only real criticism is that Martha Kent is barely present beyond being a stereotypical mother-figure. I liked the idea that she and Jonathan had differing perspectives on Clark's role and how she just wanted him to keep his head down and live a normal life while Jonathan wanted him to change the world. I feel Millar could have given us a bit more of this dynamic. As it stands, Clark and Martha don't even have a scene alone together, as far as I can tell.

I'd pretty much love for any hero mom to go the other way. Seems like it's always dad who understands the hero stuff where mom wants kid safe/controlled, with every teen hero with two decent parents. Also with psychos (Harm, Ulysses), moms are delusion while dads see evil. I'm tired of mothers always being the ones with the bad view or who don't shape the hero or what not when dad is good. Good or bad, dads always seem to be the important ones, when two parents are present. But that may well be selection bias on my part - I certainly don't know the background of every character or read every title.

[superduperman]

Thoroughly surprised by how much I DIDN'T hate the book.

Granted, it had a very low bar to clear (no character assassination), and I actually liked some of the parts. This issue really did feel like a giant prologue, which considering this series is already one origin story, seems wasteful.

I did love that teenage Clark perfectly remembered his short time on Krypton in vivid detail. That's the one thing I would definitely like to see become a more standard part of the mythos.

I will give Miller credit for one thing: He described super-memory better than anyone else I've seen. As he gets older, it becomes more vivid. Which implies that he didn't always remember it. I always wondered how it worked and this explanation works better than any other I've seen.

[Vakanai]

I read it, I liked it. Was it flawed? Very. Namely the dialog was atrocious - so much so I wanted to double check that Miller's first language really is English. It was bad, even as a pure stylistic choice it was bad. But at least that's my only major gripe with the story. Personally I wish it had been a bit longer so we could have gotten some more closure with the story. Example, we never see the bullies again after Clark beats them up that last time. Since Lana got those photos and everything, I would have like an extra page or two that dealt with the fall out of that, see them expelled from school or something. Plus I felt it was heavily implied that the bullies were a step ahead of Clark and knew **** because that one goth kid betrayed him, so a scene were he admits it and apologizes would have been good. Really would have elevated it and made it feel more like a whole self contained story in its own right other than just the opening story to a larger origin.

Anyways, that attempted rape scene was blown all out of proportion and the backlash/outrage over it was stupid. It didn't glorify rape but vilified it, and Clark stopped it before it could even begin. It's fine, in a medium where no one bats an eye over graphic depictions of murder it is fine.

One last nitpick, I've seen a few complaints about Clark being on a sports team (football). I never got this complaint. Sure, the arguments are 1.) it's cheating because he has powers and 2.) he could hurt someone. My counter argument is it isn't about winning, and him being able to hurt someone is exactly why Clark can play in sports as a kid. Think about it, kids are expected to get scrapes and bruises in sports, even sprains or things like that. For a guy trying to hide how powerful he is, and trying to learn how to be gentle, it makes sense he could use sports as a testing ground for practicing how not to hurt people. If he messes up a little, he can pass it off as usual rough housing and normal crap that happens out in the field, letting him practice interacting with people without hurting them in plain sight. Not that that's what Miller was going for at all, but I'm just saying the usual arguments for why Clark can't play football is dumb. You could give him a very good reason to do it - learning how to control his body and movements in a real world setting so he doesn't hurt people worse by accident in later life.

Anyways final thoughts - bad dialog, not a classic story, but in no way a bad story. If this wasn't Miller there'd have never been a controversy.

[Vordan]

For me the complaints about football have to do with how I loathe when writers use that as justification to write Clark as either a dumb jock or a hick. It’s part of the Byrne characterization which I do not like, and I just don’t feel like Clark being a famous football star really adds anything to the character. Birthright, Secret Origin, Morrison’s Action Comics all dropped that bit of characterization from Byrne and were stronger for it imo. In Year One I can tolerate it because Miller shows that Clark takes an interest in defending “losers” and fighting bullies so I get something that I like to balance out the “jock” aspects of Clark’s character.

[Sacred Knight]

Clark playing any sport in school is not a preference of mine either. I just don't think it makes much sense in an origin in which Clark has some semblance of superhuman abilities as a kid. When he already has powers, Jonathan and Martha should specifically go out of their way to outright forbid it. Furthermore by high school Clark should have enough understanding of the situation to begin taking it the extra step with the uncoordinated nerd aspect, which then carries over into how Clark Kent is publicly perceived from then on. So that was the one aspect of this particular issue that I didn't care for.

The only time Clark playing sports in school made any sense was the triangle era when Jurgens and co tweaked Byrne's origin to the point that Clark had no powers whatsoever till 18. But I'm not a fan of that aspect in of itself either.

[Myskin]

Re-read it and loved it.
There are some flaws, even if the bizarre dialogues don't bother me at all (there are some hints that most of them are meant to be self parodic, something which I would expect from Miller). The thing that I liked the most is how strongly active Clark is throughout the story. I had never realized it up to know, but as far as I remember most of Superman origin stories (I am thinking about Birthright, Byrne, Secret Origins, For All Seasons) show Clark in Smallville dealing with natural disasters or incidents rather than injustice. He is also very passive and paralyzed by self-doubt in many occasions (a concept which sometimes works and sometimes doesn't).

YO Clark is self-doubtful at times, but most of his inner turmoil concerns frustration for "youth energy" he keeps accumulating and never "discharges", so to speak, and the fact that he has no problem in dealing with unjust acts if opportunity arises. Somehow he made me think of an old ad for Popeye club, with Segar's Popeye punching a villain and saying to the reader: Hey, if you have enemies, just tell me! (or something along those lines). A mix of physical prowess and self-entitled right to do justice. Which is one of the key elements of the Superman character, if you think about it. Maybe it wouldn't work in a more realistic context, but in this specific, voluntarily over-the-top universe, it works.

More than everything, this approach finally pushes away the whole Jesus in the Gethsemane imaginary we have seen so many times in Superman origin stories, which IMHO was always meaningless. It's more Super-Popeye than Super-Jesus and somehow more relatable for that. I look forward to next chapters.

P.S. I can't understand the football controversy. I mean, he's obviously cheating because he has an unfair advantages on his adversaries. And yes, I think that at least partially he's doing that to be admired and popular for once (and to impress Lana, of course). So what? I mean, it's not as if he's starting a whole career in football or he's permanently damaging someone. It's not fair, OK, and the Kents clearly don't approve; but again, it makes sense for a character who is incredibly frustrated for not being able to openly express himself. I mean, it's not that we have never seen Superman doing something useless in the vein of a circus performance.

[Ascended]

I've never liked the idea of Clark playing football in high school but in this particular instance, with the way Miller handled the character and story, I'm not that bothered by it. It makes sense for this take on Clark in a way that, I think, it never quite fit for other origins that go this route.