Batman/Superman #1 Discussion/Spoilers

[Kuwagaton]

I feel a little bad knocking Williamson for this, because the WF team typically requires a diminished Superman. And somehow it's impossible to resist a gag about how Batman sneaks away from Gordon. Not that it all makes the sun and moon stuff less redundant, and the fact that the company itself just spoiled all of this comic basically. Ultimately it just feels like they want to advertise and showcase the daylights out of the great art.

[The Red Monk]

Not gay enough.

Yeah, for a story that tries so hard to ape the good old Loeb days of Superman/Batman, it was surprisingly light on the occasional uber-gay subtext of the latter.

[Ascended]

Lmao I just finished rereading For Tomorrow and was thinking about making a thread about it. I think we could have an interesting discussion about it. Because it’s an interesting contrast to the typical flanderized pop culture view that the characterization of Clark is “oh golly shucks I just don’t think about the bad stuff!”

You should make the thread. There's been a few examples, I think, of Clark having and doing some questionable stuff and delving into big plans in a way we usually ascribe to Bruce.

Personally, I find these story beats fascinating. They don't show up very often, but they show up in virtually every continuity, sometimes including the larger media stuff. It's like Clark killing; it happens so rarely it's easy to forget or shrug off as bad writing, but it happens in every continuity. When it's that consistent, it's not bad writing....it's part of the character.

I feel a little bad knocking Williamson for this, because the WF team typically requires a diminished Superman. And somehow it's impossible to resist a gag about how Batman sneaks away from Gordon. Not that it all makes the sun and moon stuff less redundant, and the fact that the company itself just spoiled all of this comic basically. Ultimately it just feels like they want to advertise and showcase the daylights out of the great art.

I'm right there with you; I thought Williamson did a solid job with the issue; pacing was good, the basic plot is solid, the scene with Billy would've been amazing if it hadn't been spoiled ages ago, and the characters all sound (mostly) like who they're supposed to. With the exception of the "golly shucks aren't I just swell?" crap that we see every time Clark and Bruce interact (because light! and dark! It's contrast!!!) I got no issues with what Williamson is doing here. Hell, like I said, I added it to my pull.

I just miss the days when DC remembered that Clark has a dark side and isn't all sunshine and smiles and optimism.

[rpmaluki]

I've seen Clark drop his "aww shucks" veneer at least a few times with Bendis, like the first time he confronted the Red Mist and whilst in space after Jon returned. Rucka just had Lois call him out for his behavior by pointing out that she knows he's smart (calculating but not in a villainous way) behind that farmboy act. I think the writers do know there is more to Clark but many prefer him to show that side with actual villains as opposed to friends whose heads he needs to lop off on the off chance they go evil.

[Ascended]

Bendis totally gets the darker aspects of Clark, I think, and even better, he knows how to employ them. He doesn't go overboard with it. You never go full Super-dickery.

I think Rucka gets it too, but I haven't read his Superman in forever so I can't say for sure? Lois' book slipped past me; I gotta get caught up quick.

But I'm willing to bet both of them would go a little "aw shucks" with Clark if they were writing him opposite Bruce. Just seems to be what happens.

Its the inner monologue more than anything, for me. Clark's dialogue you can justify as him not feeling the need to put his foot down, or show that side of himself to an ally. But the inner monologue betrays that and shows it for Clark's real, honest thoughts.