Page 5 of 15 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 214
  1. #61
    Astonishing Member manwhohaseverything's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    3,370

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Superbat View Post
    Jon.

    Unpopular opinion here. I liked Tomasi's Rebirth Superman but hated Jon.

    He kept taking attention away from the Superman and Lois and the longtime supporting characters. Every story I thought how much better everything would be if Jon was replaced by a different character and instead of the family stuff, it was about Superman and Lois making friendships with the New 52 characters.
    Sure, but the character needed time to breath. As said, it helped. The character got over. Long-time support characters don't need that. They would have gotten the panel time back. The character didn't need the direction it is on.He was all set to go on supersons and teen titans.
    The irony is clark kent superman and lois lane would be replaced by the same character you thought was stealing panel time. So much for that.

  2. #62
    Astonishing Member manwhohaseverything's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    3,370

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Robanker View Post
    Batman wears a onesie too. My point is that without the trunks, the belt is superfluous. With Batman he at least stores gadgets. Clark doesn't use those. He has no use for a belt on a onesie without the trunks. It's just there to be there, which is fine. It's a superhero costume. My entire argument is that if you're bemoaning why one element of the costume needs to be there, you're just drawing an arbitrary line in the sand because none of them serve any real function. Every iconic element (the cape, logo, boots, belt and trunks) are there because they make him look like Superman and don't "need" to be there for any reason other than that; it's recognizable. You could take the ears off of Batman and he'd still be Batman. Just wouldn't look as much like him. You can take the cape and S off of Clark and he still looks like Superman.

    Attachment 93225

    He just looks best with all the classic elements in tow. I liked the Post-Reborn suit a lot. If we lose the trunks, that's the best it ever looked, but I still prefer the trunks
    Clark is absolutely still a man of action. I sometimes wonder if you still read the books, dude. Everyone gets it. You want the silver age back. Don't worm it into every conversation, please. It's exhausting.

    That said, I appreciate the love for The Phantom. After Superman, he was my dad's favorite superhero back in Greece and he raved about him from time to time.
    So? Change the costume design. There is no rule that says superman's costume needs to have the same pattern. Actually, clark does use gadget. Reborn belt had tech encluding strength enhancement and force fields. It can even change fitting. Actually, a cape can be used to save and protect people . The skintight costume helps to distinguish from normal folks who aren't vigilantes or superheroes and helps with agility, flexibility . Those are in story reasons. Even the s sheild can either be for strongman(cause Clark's ability to name himself is bad). For the same purpose as distinguish yourself out there.

    I don't believe that. A simple explanation always help with setting things right and manages the suspension of disbelief. Why does the xmen where colourful costume? Because the world scorns their individuality. In retaliation, they celebrate it and their identity as a mutants. Why do ghouls in tokyo ghoul wear mask? Because they began to see the masks as their real face, that protects them from human hunter and helps them hide.They could easily provide a reason why clark wears it. It can be done if they wish to.

    Of the top of my head,clark had a grand father or great grandfather(Joe Walker/carter kent, named after his creators and phantom or john carter ) who lived during the time of jsa. He used to work as circus strongman. He had a meta gene that gave him a ability to break limits of human capacity with effort and a higher learning curve. He became a vigilante and was running around in that era. Clark became enthralled by him. He takes on his legacy. Essentially, a standin for the original goldenage superman.

    Ah! The good old Ship of Theseus. If that's the case, why not the original costume which is down to earth and wasn't made by the corporate machine. If we are using that(ship of theseus aka will not look as much with removal of a certain part) argument the current guy himself wouldn't be superman in characterisation.change is inevitable,people feeling it being outdated is natural. Changing a costume wouldn't be much of a change.



    He could wear a non skin tight costume. It wouldn't look like a onsie.
    Sorry, but can't help it. I don't believe he is the man of action. Because action is believed to be secondary. In such an environment, he could never be the man of action.

    Phantom is what introduced me to superheroes. They used to rerun an old cartoon with him called defenders of the earth when i was kid. I was a strange one though. Nobody else used to watch it.
    Last edited by manwhohaseverything; 02-15-2020 at 06:10 AM.

  3. #63
    Mighty Member Yoda's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    1,971

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by objectivewatcher2013 View Post
    I firmly believe that if Bendis could away with it, he would dissolve the Lois and Clark marriage.
    If you listen to the Word Balloon podcasts he talks directly about wanting to write married characters and how he firmly disagrees with the idea that marriage is the end of a story. It's a tired trope that he doesn't follow. He took the marriage in a different direction, but whatever you think about it they are portrayed as loving and together by Bendis and Rucka than they were probably in the pre-flashpoint era. He is firmly in the camp that you can write marriages with all the excitement and passion that you can with single characters without soap opera drama of fights and breakups. He considers them a team. It's not a stereotypical nuclear family set up, but the idea that he wants to break them up or this was some sort of soft breakup are nonsense. He actually expressed annoyance at those takes on Action 1004 (which did have a botched execution so they weren't necessarily unreasonable) which for him is pretty rare to acknowledge any negative response to his work.

    Quote Originally Posted by Robanker View Post
    Bingo. I actually really enjoy most eras of Superman, though I admit I skew harder toward Post-Crisis and Rebirth with New 52 being the nadir of my fandom for the character... And despite really liking Rebirth, Lois was reduced to "have I mentioned I'm a mom" every few issues. She was done the biggest disservice in Rebirth's Superman run because, well, she wasn't really Lois Lane. She didn't take too much shit from anyone, I'll grant you, but where was the world's leading journalist? I'd understand if her tenure was treated more like an extended maternity leave and we got a big bad arc of Lois returning to the journalism world and sending waves through the DCU and then she was back in proper form.... But we didn't quite get that, or at least I don't recall it off hand, so it must not have been very memorable.

    Complaining Lois is sidelined during the Bendis run while loving the Rebirth run is just outright petty. She has her own mini, is clearly working together with her husband and they do flirt, kiss, have sex and so on across the four books she's appearing in, save Event Leviathan if memory serves (and given it takes place during a time of crisis and her dad dies, not really the right time to do so).

    Bendis absolutely failed at writing her voice in Action #1004, but I'd argue he's gotten better each time and that he overall presents a Lois Lane more consistent with her overall publication history than the Rebirth era, and again, I really enjoyed that time.
    Thank you. That is exactly what I was getting at. Even when she did appear in the Rebirth title she wasn't really being used as "Lois Lane as a mom" as opposed to just Tomasi's ideal version of "A" Mom. Initially, it made sense since she was an alternate Lois and they were hiding out, but after Reborn it became more of a weird characterization. I firmly believe that "Lois Lane as a mom" would not be baking pies. She'd be a kick ass mother no doubt, but not of that flavor. She was used better in Action and the Deathstroke two parter was a solid fill in, but the Rockwellian use of her in Superman became a bit much. And there was a solid bit of criticism of that at the time as well. The Apokalips arc was actually a pretty blatant dig at that criticism that Tomasi was getting for her use in the book.

    And yes. Action #1004 was not a good use of Lois, it was forcing a story out that got them to where Bendis wanted them, though with the time that's past and how it's all shaken out I find it's more tolerable. But Bendis' voice for her has improved quite a bit along with her characterization. Lois in the Leviathan Rising arc was great. Rucka nailed her voice and characterization right out of the gate (although I think that book really has suffered from being turned into a mini because we aren't getting the focus on Lois that I would have liked.) And for my money turned out one of the best character pieces for her in her history with Lois Lane #6.

  4. #64
    Astonishing Member manwhohaseverything's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    3,370

    Default

    I like her being written as a momma bear than a shitty mother.Yeah!i don't find action comics 1004 tolerable at all. It is as disgusting as what they did to wonderwoman in rebirth in regards to her relationship with superman . Making food doesn't make her,not lois. Besides you are talking as if lois became ma kent. I mean, She didn't even make the kid the costume. She used to leave and do her thing. If apocalypse arc was retaliation by tomasi. Then what about the frankenstein arc?Action comics didn't have anything to do with the family dynamic, except for the last arc where sam lane was reintroduced . It was meant to balance what tomasi was doing.




    If you ask me, tomasi's lois was badass, and she didn't have to get edgy to do it. Nor did she need to stop being a mother.

  5. #65

    Default

    Superman: For Tomorrow was the one worst Superman stories ever told.

    It's boring.
    It's makes no sense.
    The villains are forgettable.

    The only good thing about it was Jim Lee's artwork and even that doesn't help because it's not the kind of story that suits his strengths as an artist, but not that any artist could save this turd.

  6. #66
    Mighty Member Yoda's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    1,971

    Default

    You like to pretend it's some kind of zero sum equation. The Frankenstein bit was good. But that was before Reborn, where it'd make sense that she would go work at a small town newspaper. But that was basically it for Tomasi's run. The rest she wasn't really used effectively at all. You can like that characterization, it's fine. But again she wasn't really being used as Lois Lane as much as a generic superhero mom.

    She used to leave and do her own thing that was never part of the story. So how is that a good look? She was basically Ma Kent to Clark's Pa Kent.

    And I don't agree that Loid or Clark have been portaryed as bad parents. You're hung up on that because of Jon. People.arent bad parents because their kid gets in an accident which is the equivalent of what happened to Jon.

  7. #67
    Incredible Member OpaqueGiraffe17's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    963

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yoda View Post
    You like to pretend it's some kind of zero sum equation. The Frankenstein bit was good. But that was before Reborn, where it'd make sense that she would go work at a small town newspaper. But that was basically it for Tomasi's run. The rest she wasn't really used effectively at all. You can like that characterization, it's fine. But again she wasn't really being used as Lois Lane as much as a generic superhero mom.

    She used to leave and do her own thing that was never part of the story. So how is that a good look? She was basically Ma Kent to Clark's Pa Kent.

    And I don't agree that Loid or Clark have been portaryed as bad parents. You're hung up on that because of Jon. People.arent bad parents because their kid gets in an accident which is the equivalent of what happened to Jon.
    Dude, she ditched her kid in outerspace with a villain. She made Slade Wilson look like a good parent. And I think you’re absolutely exaggerating Lois being written as just being a generic mom in Rebirth. Between her going to the planet to investigate Mxy Clark, the Frankenstein arc, the Deathstroke arc....But I guess she made Batman a pie so I guess she may as well be Marge Simpson.

  8. #68
    Mighty Member Yoda's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    1,971

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OpaqueGiraffe17 View Post
    Dude, she ditched her kid in outerspace with a villain. She made Slade Wilson look like a good parent. And I think you’re absolutely exaggerating Lois being written as just being a generic mom in Rebirth. Between her going to the planet to investigate Mxy Clark, the Frankenstein arc, the Deathstroke arc....But I guess she made Batman a pie so I guess she may as well be Marge Simpson.
    He wasn't written as a villian in that arc at all. Can you point out what Jor El actively did that harmed Jon in the story as the story was written. Examples from the actual story. It's hyperbolic nonsense to compare her actions to Slade. I'm sorry but it is. There's nothing in that story that is remotely like what you are characterizing her actions as. Jor El wasn't evil in that story. He didn't hurt Jon, he didn't endanger him any more than Clark did thoughout Tomasi's run or Damian did in Super Sons.

    The Mxy arc was in Action. Not Superman which is what we were talking about. And I addressed the rest already. The Deathstroke arc wasn't written by Tomasi and I said it was the best use of her in the entire run.

  9. #69
    Incredible Member OpaqueGiraffe17's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    963

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yoda View Post
    He wasn't written as a villian in that arc at all. Can you point out what Jor El actively did that harmed Jon in the story as the story was written. Examples from the actual story. It's hyperbolic nonsense to compare her actions to Slade. I'm sorry but it is. There's nothing in that story that is remotely like what you are characterizing her actions as. Jor El wasn't evil in that story. He didn't hurt Jon, he didn't endanger him any more than Clark did thoughout Tomasi's run or Damian did in Super Sons.

    The Mxy arc was in Action. Not Superman which is what we were talking about. And I addressed the rest already. The Deathstroke arc wasn't written by Tomasi and I said it was the best use of her in the entire run.
    Because he was a villain the last time we saw him. What if Tynion’s run opened with Bruce letting Damian run off with Flashpoint Thomas Wayne or Ras Al Ghul. Only Grandpa didn’t commit commit mass murder this arc, so it’s cool.

  10. #70
    Mighty Member Yoda's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    1,971

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OpaqueGiraffe17 View Post
    Because he was a villain the last time we saw him. What if Tynion’s run opened with Bruce letting Damian run off with Flashpoint Thomas Wayne or Ras Al Ghul. Only Grandpa didn’t commit commit mass murder this arc, so it’s cool.
    It's a retcon. And the run takes place after Doomsday Clock so Manhattan's influence isn't a factor anymore.

    Again, I'm asking for actual examples in the story as written, meaning with the retcon of Jor El considered. You might not like the retcon. That's fine. But can you please point to any actions taken within the story that support your point?
    Last edited by Yoda; 02-15-2020 at 09:34 AM.

  11. #71
    Incredible Member OpaqueGiraffe17's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    963

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yoda View Post
    It's a retcon. And the run takes place after Doomsday Clock so Manhattan's influence isn't a factor anymore.

    Again, I'm asking for actual examples in the story as written, meaning with the retcon of Jor El considered. You might not like the retcon. That's fine. But can you please point to any actions taken within the story that support your point?
    Here’s the thing I don’t even think your argument here holds water. What exactly got retconned? Is your statement about Doomsday Clock supported by the story or mere speculation on your part? Because I’m pretty sure it’s the latter. I don’t think any of that is even implied, you’re just filling in the blanks with headcanon.
    As for your questions. Didn’t he keep the kid from going home even though he wanted to leave? And then there’s the obvious bit with driving him into a wormhole where he was tortured in solitude for years. See if Clark was the one with Jon, the whole thing might have worked. Since we know Clark is competent. But Jor-El was chosen for that role in the story, and thus, in my opinion. The story falls apart from lack of internal logic because of it.

  12. #72
    Mighty Member Yoda's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    1,971

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OpaqueGiraffe17 View Post
    Here’s the thing I don’t even think your argument here holds water. What exactly got retconned? Is your statement about Doomsday Clock supported by the story or mere speculation on your part? Because I’m pretty sure it’s the latter. I don’t think any of that is even implied, you’re just filling in the blanks with headcanon.
    As for your questions. Didn’t he keep the kid from going home even though he wanted to leave? And then there’s the obvious bit with driving him into a wormhole where he was tortured in solitude for years. See if Clark was the one with Jon, the whole thing might have worked. Since we know Clark is competent. But Jor-El was chosen for that role in the story, and thus, in my opinion. The story falls apart from lack of internal logic because of it.
    None of what you're pointing out actually happened in the story. Jor El offered to bring Jon home when he overhead Jon ask the Green lanterns. Up to that point he apparently didn't know Jon was homesick. He didn't "drive" the ship into a wormhole intentionally. There is nothing to indicate that that was what happened. It's shown as the equivalent of a car accident. And he didn't not talk to him for years - that was obviously hyperbole on Jon's part because the entirety of the trip was a few weeks long at that point. Jor El is portrayed as pretty competent thoroughout actually. He gets them involved in and helps out several times on world's, frees enslaved people that Lois observes and the Green Lanterns don't seem to have an issue. If anything he's overly proactive.

    EDIT: emotionally Jor El is shown to be a little off. But not in a harmful or dangerous way. He's looking at and treats Jon as almost a peer. Unique like him. He's a little standoffish and doesn't really know how to deal with Jon in some ways, hence the quietness after Jon wants to go home. But none of that is shown as being malingnent or intentionally harmful.

    Doomsday Clock happened before the age up and before Lois leaves the DP. It happened before the Kents were revived because there's a cagey reference to Ma Kent in the beginning of the Unity run. Jor El was also kidnapped by Manhattan at the end of the Oz effect at which point he was no longer under his influence. His reappearance isn't a surprise to Clark, just an inconvenience or lack of respect of boundaries. So contextually it all would have happened after Doomsday Clock reset the timeline with the Kents. The entirety of Man of Steel and the Unity Saga takes place over 3 weeks which leads directly into Leviathan and then directly into the ID reveal. Doomsday Clock fits before all of it. Jor El's use in that arc works in that context. Ignoring all of that is the only way you can say they let him go off with a terrorist or whatever.
    Last edited by Yoda; 02-15-2020 at 10:21 AM.

  13. #73
    Incredible Member OpaqueGiraffe17's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    963

    Default

    I think those are big leaps and even if you’re right, I still don’t think it works at all. But that’s just me. And I don’t want to derail this further, though it kinda was already derailed. Maybe if this was moved to another thread.

  14. #74
    Ultimate Member Sacred Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    16,882

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Superbat View Post
    Jon.

    Unpopular opinion here. I liked Tomasi's Rebirth Superman but hated Jon.

    He kept taking attention away from the Superman and Lois and the longtime supporting characters. Every story I thought how much better everything would be if Jon was replaced by a different character and instead of the family stuff, it was about Superman and Lois making friendships with the New 52 characters.
    Well you got one person who is with you at least. I probably still would have been a little lukewarm in someway to a Rebirth initiative of just re-establishing Superman and Lois as a married couple and their home life, just because that's still not my particular Superman ideal in terms of status quo, but I would have tolerated it so much better and been able to enjoy the adventures a lot more.
    Last edited by Sacred Knight; 02-15-2020 at 10:28 AM.
    "They can be a great people Kal-El, they wish to be. They only lack the light to show the way. For this reason above all, their capacity for good, I have sent them you. My only son." - Jor-El

    "“Your boos mean nothing, I’ve seen what makes you cheer!”

  15. #75
    Astonishing Member manwhohaseverything's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    3,370

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sacred Knight View Post
    Well you got one person who is with you at least. I probably still would have been a little lukewarm in someway to a Rebirth initiative of just re-establishing Superman and Lois as a married couple and their home life, just because that's still not my particular Superman ideal in terms of status quo, but I would have tolerated it so much better and been able to enjoy the adventures a lot more.
    You kinda have that now. No jon anywhere near in sight.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •