Superman Year One: out now (Spoilers)

[hellacre]

He has a miniseries. This very one. With 64 oversized pages in each issue. He spent 3 pages on Lana's attempted rape versus like 1 page and 2 panels preceding that with hardly any indication that they had spoken to each other before let alone had any sort of relationship. Their romantic relationship doesn't exist prior to him saving her from being raped and it just springs right into everything after. Lana and Clark have had their relationship portrayed far better in any number of stories. It doesn't take a miniseries to establish this stuff, just a writer who has an interest in it.

I'd settle for like 5 pages of build up at this point. We get nothing or something so amateurish and tropey sequences lifted off some fanfic. This series was supposed to be and exploration of Superman's growth THROUGH his relationships with these three women. It's not a subplot. Really what Miller meant was he'd have him bang a bunch of these women in the books.

And it's telling that you equate relationship building flirting - the type of stuff that actually does build a relationship and chemistry between two characters - with the nonsense we're getting here. It's not equivalent at all. There's actually a build up there and interaction. Here he shows up, shows off, and gets to bang a mermaid.

I said Lori and Clark was a relationship with chemistry and stuff?

Where did I say this?

Do not put words in my mouth, please. No where I said this.

I said Lana had enough build up for what it is. It is your issue you want more in a comic that cannot do it that way. I could cite movies that have time jumps and nothing shown on screen but we to believe a couple who just met are supposedly in love. In fact I am sure some would swallow hook line and sinker, if that is what they happy with but others will just as well say nope. It is rushed. But I would not get personal by trying to insinuate something about the person's opinion as you are obviously trying to do by saying it is telling. Again I am asking...pretty telling what?

Lori is supposed to be as it is as it is pointed out by others...it is a take on where men are ensnared by the power of the siren. Kurtzberg said it happened to many men...it came to pass with Clark. No one is saying Lori and Clark is the epitome of some great love story or relationship and it is deliberate and that was the point of the plot ... yet again you're twisting what people are saying...why I have no idea. You want a long courtship between them? Well I do not think it was meant to be that kind of dynamic.

[Yoda]

I said Lori and Clark was a relationship with chemistry and stuff?

Where did I say this?

Do not put words in my mouth, please. No where I said this.

I said Lana had enough build up for what it is. It is your issue you want more in a comic that cannot do it that way. I could cite movies that have time jumps and nothing shown on screen but we to believe a couple who just met are supposedly in love. In fact I am sure some would swallow hook line and sinker, if that is what they happy with but others will just as well say nope. It is rushed. But I would not get personal by trying to insinuate something about the person's opinion as you are obviously trying to do by saying it is telling. Again I am asking...pretty telling what?

Lori is supposed to be as it is as it is pointed out by others...it is a take on where men are ensnared by the power of the siren. Kurtzberg said it happened to many men...it came to pass with Clark. No one is saying Lori and Clark is the epitome of some great love story or relationship and it is deliberate and that was the point of the plot ... yet again you're twisting what people are saying...why I have no idea. You want a long courtship between them? Well I do not think it was meant to be that kind of dynamic.

Again, you equated the flirting in Superman: The Movie with Lois just throwing herself at Clark. That is a scene where they are attracted to each other and flirting. She doesn't proposition him and offer herself up to him as a prize for being Superman like Lori does in this issue. I'm sure that's how it will go down in the next issue though. I've explained this twice now why I think that is not an accurate comparison.

And again, there is no chemistry anywhere in either story. If this were a movie, it would be a bad one where the relationship isn't believable. And come one, a comic absolutely can do it the way I'm describing, because far better writers have done it in as few pages many many times. Miller cannot. Superman: For All Seasons, Birthright, etc. have all established credible relationships in few pages. There's build up, there's chemistry, etc. There's none of that in either because Miller has no interest in nor any ability to do anything beyond having these women throw themselves at Clark when he shows up.

[Kuwagaton]

I don’t get what you’re saying here. It’s ok to use racist and sexist tropes and stereotypes because that’s how it was done half a century ago? We shouldn’t update our storytelling? Or expect more in a modern retelling of Superman’s origin?

Your expectations will always be your own, but I think measuring and managing them in the context of the lore will help avoid getting 120 pages plus into something you don't like. So far I think I've gotten more than $14 worth because of all things, I didn't expect a peak 80s creator on a character from the 30s to really blow the doors off with Lori Lemaris among all characters. Sorry, but she's just a mermaid from his past. I found it easy to expect and enjoy a bold entrance, Clark consciously deciding to forsake a promising career to spare a life (aside from the promise of Atlantis, hope it's clear that that wasn't the point), battle giant monsters while again avoiding harming them, and just generally being that swaggering country boy of steel. Romita makes a skinny Superman work better than anyone short of Alan Davis, imo.

From where I sit it's fair to expect a sassy Lois with brains and guts. She's probably not going to upstage Superman or anything, because that just isn't the historical implication of using the character. Maybe Miller will supplement his unorthodox yet old school storytelling with modern sensitivity, but why would I expect that? That would be setting myself up for disappointment. What I look at instead is what to enjoy despite that. If the answer is slim to nothing, I'd just buy something else. Voting by withholding my money is all I can do if I think the material should better meet expectations.

[The Red Monk]

3 issues is too little. Miller needs at least 6 to flesh this out, even the best of the best would be hard-pressed to write a story as dense as this in 3 issues.

Other than that, interesting take. From what I see, the most prominent complaining about it is that Miller isn't 2019 enough, which tells me that there isn't anything particularly horrible about it. Later, people.

EDIT: Also, I am surprised that people are still complaining about Islamic terrorists being an insensitive depiction when groups like ISIS, Al-Qaeda and other Muslim extremists are regularly murdering and destroying things around the world for the past decade or more and are a huge global threat. That's like complaining about depicting Nazis or Communists or Christian fundamentalists as bad guys in comics. I figured people would've shut up about that after 2016.

[Vakanai]

...dammit, reading this shouting match has me itching to get this issue now too!

[Vordan]

Pros:
-I like Clark’s superior a lot. Miller depicts the DCU as a weird superhero universe that exists apart from Clark and it’s cool to see that the world is so full of crazy stuff that his superior is nonchalant about there being ******* mermaids.
-Clark’s exit from the military was handled very well for Miller. It made sense and stayed in character for Clark.

Cons:
-The narration is really boring to read
-Lori is awful in this story. She instantly falls for Clark and throws herself at him in a cringy way. All she wants is to have sex with Clark and pretty much every word she says is about how much she wants to have sex with Clark and that Clark “owns” her
-Clark just stands around being invulnerable. It’s really boring. The only exception is the heat vision, I liked Miller’s description of that

I don’t really have a problem with the incest. The Greek Gods were utterly messed up and if Miller wants to play Poseidon straight as the utter douchebag he was, fine. The terrorists of the coast of San Diego was cringy, but at least Miller wrote Clark as valuing their lives.

One more issue on Miller’s crazy ride. Given how Lori was treated and Miller’s past terrible writing, I am not looking forward to WW showing up. I am sort of curious at how he’ll write Lois since he’s never actually written her before. But I 100% do not want this to be even hinted at becoming canon.

[Sacred Knight]

WW was cool in DKIII, but then again so was Superman after the debacle of the first two chapters and Azz had a lot to do with that one. But on the other hand I see more similarities with this Superman and DKIII Superman even though this is all Miller, so maybe WW will be fine. Lois is such an unknown quanitity because as you say there's absolutely no reference there.

[manwhohaseverything]

As someone who has only read dark Knight returns . Is this as good as that quality wise? Or is just hard to read through? How is the art?

[Username taken]

3 issues is too little. Miller needs at least 6 to flesh this out, even the best of the best would be hard-pressed to write a story as dense as this in 3 issues.

Other than that, interesting take. From what I see, the most prominent complaining about it is that Miller isn't 2019 enough, which tells me that there isn't anything particularly horrible about it. Later, people.

EDIT: Also, I am surprised that people are still complaining about Islamic terrorists being an insensitive depiction when groups like ISIS, Al-Qaeda and other Muslim extremists are regularly murdering and destroying things around the world for the past decade or more and are a huge global threat. That's like complaining about depicting Nazis or Communists or Christian fundamentalists as bad guys in comics. I figured people would've shut up about that after 2016.

But the problem is they were pirates not Islamic terrorists. Pirates are generally not Islamic terrorists and they are definitely not suicidal (that kind of defeats the purpose of the pirating).

And for some reason, they are depicted like Pirates off the Horn of Africa. The Horn of Africa.

So, why oh why is Clark Kent training in an American base encountering pirates that are dressed like Islamic terrorists that operate around African waters?

[Man_of_Tomorrow]

As someone who has only read dark Knight returns . Is this as good as that quality wise? Or is just hard to read through? How is the art?

Dark knight returns is a pioneering book and a contender for best graphic novels of all time due to its quality and influence. Comparing this to TDK is unfair.

Does it have good qualities? Yes. While the first issue is a very by the books Superman origin, with some unique controversial new ideas sprinkled in. The second issue is completely bonkers!!! Completely original ideas and restructuring of old, controversial ideas, for sure but at least it's something new, exciting and logical in its premise.

Don't expect modern storytelling though. As kuwagaton said. This is a writer born in the 50s, who peaked in the 80s, writing about a character from the 30s, with a grecian myth as a template for story structure. Miller isnt woke.
And much of the controversy of the series comes because Miller's name is attached to it. Not because it deserves so strong reactions.

It is comparable to Daredevil Man without Fear and 300 if that helps. But we don't know how good the last issue will be to see the whole picture.

TLDR: I like it. Its a unique voice bringing a different spin on a well told story.

[Kuwagaton]

Yeah I'd imagine it has to be similar to something like DK3. But it is a YO title still. I'd have really liked going in without advance information because knowing of and seeing the new origin details like going to Atlantis in the first place (and debuting the costume there, etc.) in such a straightforward story makes a more engaging experience out of it.

-Clark just stands around being invulnerable. It’s really boring.

It is a little funny, how that worked out with story suspense. "And he's... just exactly the same. Nope, sorry."

[Yoda]

Your expectations will always be your own, but I think measuring and managing them in the context of the lore will help avoid getting 120 pages plus into something you don't like. So far I think I've gotten more than $14 worth because of all things, I didn't expect a peak 80s creator on a character from the 30s to really blow the doors off with Lori Lemaris among all characters. Sorry, but she's just a mermaid from his past. I found it easy to expect and enjoy a bold entrance, Clark consciously deciding to forsake a promising career to spare a life (aside from the promise of Atlantis, hope it's clear that that wasn't the point), battle giant monsters while again avoiding harming them, and just generally being that swaggering country boy of steel. Romita makes a skinny Superman work better than anyone short of Alan Davis, imo.

From where I sit it's fair to expect a sassy Lois with brains and guts. She's probably not going to upstage Superman or anything, because that just isn't the historical implication of using the character. Maybe Miller will supplement his unorthodox yet old school storytelling with modern sensitivity, but why would I expect that? That would be setting myself up for disappointment. What I look at instead is what to enjoy despite that. If the answer is slim to nothing, I'd just buy something else. Voting by withholding my money is all I can do if I think the material should better meet expectations.

I get what you are saying. But in this case, beyond the fact that I should have known better, I think my expectations were in line with how this was marketed for the last year plus. They have pushed it as a “definitive” origin for Superman unconnected to The Dark Knight Returns in the vein of Batman Year One. It was publicized by Frank Miller himself and others as a look at Superman’s early life through his relationships with three women. Namely it was supposed to hit three points in his life through the lens of these relationships. Not just be another origin story. They actually went out of the way to distance it from Miller’s past work for a very very long time because of his reputation and books like Holy Terror. He practically went on an apology tour trying to promote this at the Superman 80th anniversary panels. More generally, the Black Label is supposed to be evergreen collections that are marketed as literature basically.

It wasn’t until like a week or two before #1 dropped that they changed that tune and now it’s the origin of DKR’s Superman. Mind you, it’s still being solicited as a “definitive” origin of Superman in a line of evergreen books. So my expectations were more or less in line with what I was being sold. Expecting something that isn’t regressive or outright offensive in that context isn’t asking to much I don’t think. This won’t become a definitive origin obviously. It’s likely to be forgotten in a few years like Miller’s other modern work, this issue ensured that more or less, but I don’t think coming into this expecting more given how it was marketed is out of line. A little naive and overly optimistic, maybe. But I was only buying what they sold me.

Second, with the way comics are ordered you order these books months in advance. Compounding that, where I get my books I get a solid discount to prepay when I order. So I bought these books months before the first one even went on sale. I don’t have option to vote with my wallet for these two issues. It's not a movie or a television show where the sales are more in line with the quality of the content. Stores and consumers ordered these books months in advance, so saying #1 sold well based on the orders so it must not be bad is a very weak argument. Those sales were made in like March before we saw anything and before they switched up the marketing.

And finally, how is the fact that this is a character from the 30’s relevant to this book or expectations of Superman comics in general? Modernizing the content and stories is how we got here in the first place. Miller isn’t writing a 1930’s Superman story. He’s writing a “definitive” origin. Having it steeped in sexism and racism opens it to criticism. And Plenty of 80’s creators are capable of “blowing the doors off” older characters. That’s generally how this whole medium evolves. That type of effort is often celebrated and rewarded and it’s particularly warranted where said character, like Lori, is marketed as being central to the narrative. Neil Gaiman continues to evolve and has a successful career in comics and tv because he does. His older and newer work is still being adapted. Grant Morrison did exactly that with Action Comics and All Star Superman. And Morrison didn’t retain the casual sexism and racism that the Golden and Silver Age books he was basing his stories on included.

I don’t have to be satisfied or silent with stagnant and regressive storytelling, particularly where it’s being marketed as a “definitive” origin for a character I have read about for 30 years. I don’t think discussion of why this should not be a defining story for Superman is off limits. And I don’t think any of my posts are out of line for this thread. It’s not an appreciation thread, criticism is just as acceptable as praise here. I bought the books. If it makes people uncomfortable to be confronted with its faults, or to have their comments about it challenged isn’t that what the appreciation threads are for? I’m not making personal attacks.

[Ying Ko]

This is hardly Miller at his peak, but so far I don't mind the book. It certainly didn't offend me in any way.

[Sacred Knight]

And again, there is no chemistry anywhere in either story. If this were a movie, it would be a bad one where the relationship isn't believable. And come one, a comic absolutely can do it the way I'm describing, because far better writers have done it in as few pages many many times. Miller cannot. Superman: For All Seasons, Birthright, etc. have all established credible relationships in few pages. There's build up, there's chemistry, etc. There's none of that in either because Miller has no interest in nor any ability to do anything beyond having these women throw themselves at Clark when he shows up.

Again though, this does not stand up to scrutiny of Lana in issue #1. She does not throw herself at Clark. They share a mutual interest from afar, they both find more common ground when they're both interested in stopping the rampant bullying at the school and their personal interest grows, he saves her from an assault and they concretely get together. That's an honest assmenent of the trajectory of the writing of that relationship. Quick as it was, its just simply a fallacy that she threw herself at him. Lori did, definitely. Lana didn't. Will Diana? Will Lois? I don't know, cross that bridge when I read it. But for now, dishonest to paint both relationships portrayed in the existing issues with the same brush.

[Yoda]

Again though, this does not stand up to scrutiny of Lana in issue #1. She does not throw herself at Clark. They share a mutual interest from afar, they both find more common ground when they're both interested in stopping the rampant bullying at the school and their personal interest grows, he saves her from an assault and they concretely get together. That's an honest assmenent of the trajectory of the writing of that relationship. Quick as it was, its just simply a fallacy that she threw herself at him. Lori did, definitely. Lana didn't. Will Diana? Will Lois? I don't know, cross that bridge when I read it. But for now, dishonest to paint both relationships portrayed in the existing issues with the same brush.

I know you don't agree, but I don't see it as being disingenuous at all. I'll grant you it's not as glaringly ridiculous as it is with Lori. Lana doesn't literally presents herself to him as his prize. But it most definitely is the same scenario. They share one scene, the bus scene, in which she shows no attraction towards him whatsoever. Then there is the attempted rape and rescue. In the literal aftermath of which he makes a pass at her (nothing quite as romantic as asking someone out minutes after she was almost gang raped) and then it goes right into double entendres and "nerd love." I'm almost positive the bully subplot is dropped after that scene. They don't gather evidence, present it to the town, nothing. So there is no friendship while they are growing up, no working together, getting to know each other. He beats them up and it's over. She's his girlfriend.

Actually, this highlights another complete failure on Miller's part. To the extent this is supposed to hint at his budding love of journalism, it also fails since he doesn't actually use "truth" to get "Justice." He beats them into submission. So while Miller does hit a nice catch phrase, in "No justice without truth," the story completely undermines it for might makes right.

It's all based on how strong and powerful he is and that gets him the girl. That is all that there is to "romance" in this series.