Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 86
  1. #61
    (formerly "Superman") JAK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    iowa
    Posts
    2,405

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Myskin View Post
    By the way, what sounds even weirder is that superhero comic books are apparently the only type of entertainment for which seriality has become a burden.
    Seriality is everywhere. People LOVE to get committed to series. We have TV series, popular comic book series (I am thinking of Image now, but don't get me started on mangas), animated series, trilogies of movies and book series. Does anyone really think that MCU would have been so successful if they had had a standalone movie of Iron man and - a couple of years later - a completely different take on the character with an altered past?
    This is my thinking, too. So many other things have long-running continuities and they all fit together, and the rich history is celebrated. Superman could be the same way, imo.


    The problem with Superman in the latest decades is that the stories have been terrible, the character is awfully dated and they don't know how to relaunch it. It's never been because regular series are inherently a problem.
    I, honestly, don't think the character is dated. But DC needs to shift their approach, because that certainly is.

    Quote Originally Posted by Korath View Post
    Luffy's goal is to become the Pirate King. Goku wants to be the Strongest. Shin aims to become a Great Heavenly General. Caped Baldy just want to met someone he can't beat with just one punch and have an all out battle with him/her.

    What does Superman want ?
    Superman wants to, each day, leave the world a better place than he found it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bored at 3:00AM View Post
    I am not saying there should be radical shifts in the status quo each time a new creative team jumps on board. The basics are generally always the same, but give creators more wiggle room to play with different flavors and elements that might not necessarily jibe with whatever was done with the previous incarnation. Nothing too major, just the details.

    Major stuff like the Kents being alive or dead is not something that should be flip-flopped over and over again though. They were dead for decades, then alive for a couple decades, then dead again for a decade. Let's give 'em another decade of being alive again before hitting that button again. Like I said, if someone really wants a dead Pa Kent to be a factor in their Superman, he could still remember that Pa died in one of his previous incarnations.

    Krypton is far easier to deal with since they aren’t all that different from each other except for their look. The only real outlier is Byrne's Krypton, and even that can be used if any creator wanted to. Just explain that Jor-El and Lara went through a Goth stage in their youth and got really into Cyberpunk

    Also, this doesn't necessitate retelling the origin over and over either, just any clarifications that are necessary for whatever current stories are being told. If the exact nature of Krypton's demise isn't relevant to the story, it doesn't need to be brought up.

    All editorial has to do is establish clear benchmarks that they'd like creators to stick with while also being flexible if there's a good story reason for changing something big.

    Superman can still exist in the larger DCU and remain consistent with whatever is happening in his monthly books, but everyone needs to be clear on what their gameplan is, which is what killed Morrison's New 52 revamp. They had no plan.
    DC rarely has a fleshed-out plan when it comes to Superman, to be fair, lol....

    Well, that's got more of a structure than what I was thinking, so that's in the right direction. It "could" work, I suppose, but I personally wouldn't have as much interest in it.

    DC is pretty fluid with their continuity right now, though, so what we're seeing isn't too far off of that. Like most things, it's more of a "can they do it right" thing as opposed to an idea being bad, in and of itself.
    Hear my new CD "Love The World Away", available on iTunes, Google Music, Spotify, Shazam, and Amazon: https://smile.amazon.com/dp/B01N5XYV..._waESybX1C0RXK via @amazon
    www.jamiekelleymusic.com
    TV interview here: https://snjtoday.com/snj-today-hotline-jamie-kelley/

  2. #62
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,558

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bored at 3:00AM View Post
    I think you’re misunderstanding what I am proposing. I don't think they need to radically change the status quo every few months, but rather find a great creative team that has an interesting direction, then let them run with that without having to worry about how it jibes with the previous run. Whenever that take has run its course after a year or two (or more if it's particularly successful), bring in a new team with their own fresh take on Superman.

    Each new incarnation can build upon what was previously established, but is not beholden to stick with anything either.

    I think the vast majority of readers are interested in good stories, not how everything fits together nicely in terms of continuity.

    Within a storyarc, you need continuity, yes. The pillars that make up the characters lives should remain constant, but the exact details are far less important than the quality of the stories being told.
    If - hypothetically speaking - you bring in a new creative team every, I don't know, 7 years and each team works fine and uses a different continuity, well, you are basically doing what they are doing now. Just better (hopefully). I guess that it could work (I mean, also mangas after reaching their conclusion are often remade, relaunched, updated with new continuities inspired by the old one) but I really can't understand what kind of mindset could make DC work this way, that is purposefully changing the foundation of a character to make a specific team work on Superman every 6-7 years. I mean, if they have chosen a specific continuity and they are building stories on it why should the next team change it? Anyway, that's not what happened with Smashes the klan or All Star.
    The closest thing to your suggestion which could realistically happen (but won't happen anytime soon IMHO) could be simply giving freedom to a specific writer and allowing him/her to work on Superman for a relatively high number of years (like Slott on Spider-man). At the end of the run they could relaunch everything with a new continuity. But - if the writer has really produced a good work - it would be more likely that someone else will build something on the same foundations without changing them.
    Educational town, Rolemodel city and Moralofthestory land are the places where good comics go to die.

    DC writers and editors looked up and shouted "Save us!"
    And Alan Moore looked down and whispered "No."

    I'm kinda surprised Snyder didn't want Superman to watch Lois and Bruce conceive their love child. All the while singing the "Na na na na na na Batman!" theme song - Robotman, 03/06/2021

  3. #63
    Moderator Frontier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    115,005

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by manwhohaseverything View Post
    Does this look like a guy who understands people or is connected to them? This whole conversation sucks.

    It's portrayal. He absolutely does look like bruce wayne. Hence, people are distant. The guy himself is clueless and asks naive questions. I don't find naive good to be actual good.Nor do i find that kind of optimism true optimism. Superman isn't truly good in second case. He is Someone who is said to be good but can be easily twisted.Because his view of world is sunshine and daisies.

    They might be criminals. But superman didn't exactly go for the proper channel either. You could argue it's self defense. Still, this is superman.That makes him a criminal too.
    Yes, but I guess not in the way you would prefer. I don't see Bruce Wayne at all in this.
    Quote Originally Posted by Myskin View Post
    It's not that Bendis had necessarily to focus uniquely on the origin. There are Superman runs in which the origin is barely mentioned. What I mean is that there are some major points that sooner or later you'll have to address when you write Superman (the origin, the Kents, Luthor, Metropolis, how the main cast work, the Death, even Jon Kent now etc.). At that point you can do something very generic and ultimately unsatisfying - which is more or less what Johns did with Secret Origins and several parts of his run. However, if what you want to tell is a story with some meaning and some depth, as a writer you HAVE to give it a specific direction, even if it means disappointing some readers. Bendis chose to retell the origin as a conspiracy political thriller, tried to give Jon Kent a specific direction, planned to address certain elements, like Metropolis, but ultimately didn't, and was clearly forced - in my eyes - to include details - like the Kents - which IMHO wasn't really interested in managing. Tomasi was somehow luckier, or in a better position, because it looks like his run takes place in a bubble in which he was basically free to ignore most of his elements by focusing solely on Jon Kent. But I think that it's the only long run with this specific features in Superman's history.
    I mean, again, this doesn't really seem to stem from the issue you were pointing out but just general issues with comic books as a genre. Tomasi didn't deal with some elements because Jurgens was dealing with it to an extent, and Bendis writing both main Superman books of course has to address it and he made the storytelling decisions he felt he needed to make (and frankly the stuff with Jor-El and Zaar doesn't count as retelling the origin in my opinion).
    Quote Originally Posted by manwhohaseverything View Post
    That's not a goal. That's just a wish. There is a difference.
    If it's a desired outcome that drives his actions, then I think it is very much a goal.

  4. #64
    Black Belt in Bad Ideas Robanker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    San Jose, CA
    Posts
    7,986

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by manwhohaseverything View Post
    That's not a goal. That's just a wish. There is a difference.
    In his mind it's a goal, much like Batman seems to believe he can actually clean up Gotham City. They have unreal expectations of themselves but nevertheless, it is their goal.

  5. #65
    Savior of the Universe Flash Gordon's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    9,021

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by manwhohaseverything View Post

    Does this look like a guy who understands people or is connected to them? This whole conversation sucks.
    Is that really from an issue of Superman? Hot damn, that's SO bad.

  6. #66
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,558

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    I mean, again, this doesn't really seem to stem from the issue you were pointing out but just general issues with comic books as a genre.
    Well, there have been both. Aging Jon Kent provides two different purposes: one - which was probably the reason why this decision was taken in the first place - they were preparing to launch him as a Superman replacement for 5G (in hindsight, the entire run looks like a 5G prologue). I consider this an "editorial" reason, that is one of those "general issues" you mentioned. On the other hand, they get rid of a character who never really worked in the Metropolis environment (maybe one day he will - it's a relatively easy issue to fix IMHO, but they haven't found a way to do it yet). This is more of a "Superman reason", even if it refers to a relatively new concept. It's true, Jurgens dealt with some details in his run, but I think that we can all agree that what we consider the "real" Superman Rebirth run, that is the one which was really distinctive of that specific period, is Tomasi's Superman. Jurgens' Action Comics is a very generic book with moments everyone forgot about or didn't pay much attention to (Godslayer, SuperLex) or in which they tried to reprise some familiar elements of the past; and I think some attempts to fix continuity (I am thinking about Action Comics 977) are typical cases of "Superman's generic milestones" (especially Krypton).
    I'll keep my opinion regarding Zaar and Jor-El as a "retelling of the origin without openly retelling it", so let's agree to disagree. I am under the impression that at one point editors basically stopped Bendis from developing the story the way he wanted (more or less like Brainiac's involvement in Krypton's destruction as it was hinted during Johns' run) and everything stayed generic and hurriedly resolved (kind of). I think that if Bendis had gone the way he had planned now we would have some major alterations to Krypton, maybe including - as someone had thought here - the revelation of other sons of Jor-El's. It didn't happen and now we don't even know whether Zaar has really destroyed Krypton.
    Just to be clear, I consider the "political conspiracy thriller" a good thing as well as Zaar being Kal's stepbrother as someone had suggested here. At least it would be something less generic than usual, more distinctive than the usual "Krypton was a magnificent place which exploded".
    Last edited by Myskin; 07-01-2020 at 03:16 PM.
    Educational town, Rolemodel city and Moralofthestory land are the places where good comics go to die.

    DC writers and editors looked up and shouted "Save us!"
    And Alan Moore looked down and whispered "No."

    I'm kinda surprised Snyder didn't want Superman to watch Lois and Bruce conceive their love child. All the while singing the "Na na na na na na Batman!" theme song - Robotman, 03/06/2021

  7. #67
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,558

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Flash Gordon View Post
    Is that really from an issue of Superman? Hot damn, that's SO bad.
    It's from Venditti's Superman - Man of Tomorrow... I think. I wouldn't use it as a term of comparison though. Everything in that series is unreadable, even for Superman's standards.
    Educational town, Rolemodel city and Moralofthestory land are the places where good comics go to die.

    DC writers and editors looked up and shouted "Save us!"
    And Alan Moore looked down and whispered "No."

    I'm kinda surprised Snyder didn't want Superman to watch Lois and Bruce conceive their love child. All the while singing the "Na na na na na na Batman!" theme song - Robotman, 03/06/2021

  8. #68
    The Man Who Cannot Die manwhohaseverything's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    9,484

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    Yes, but I guess not in the way you would prefer. I don't see Bruce Wayne at all in this.


    If it's a desired outcome that drives his actions, then I think it is very much a goal.
    Not in this. But, as superman he is very much an elite. Especially, if you are just an old woman.Green arrow basically throws the entire jl under the bus in justice league unlimited .

    I certainly don't see bibbo in superman. That's what i would like to see. I ain't talking about intelligence either. A working class dude fighting for truth and justice.That's absolutely a bad thing.

    No,better tomorrow can be anything. Its not well defined. Its not a tangible in universe achievement or feat to set yourself up for and to focus your attention towards .

    Here is a goal for superman. Meta human/alien/other sentient species rights. Superman wants a set of laws of to be passed so that the metahuman who face discrimination can be protected. For instance, according to us law a guy could kill swampthing . It won't be termed as murder.
    Last edited by manwhohaseverything; 07-01-2020 at 04:09 PM.

  9. #69
    (formerly "Superman") JAK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    iowa
    Posts
    2,405

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Myskin View Post
    Well, there have been both. Aging Jon Kent provides two different purposes: one - which was probably the reason why this decision was taken in the first place - they were preparing to launch him as a Superman replacement for 5G (in hindsight, the entire run looks like a 5G prologue). I consider this an "editorial" reason, that is one of those "general issues" you mentioned. On the other hand, they get rid of a character who never really worked in the Metropolis environment (maybe one day he will - it's a relatively easy issue to fix IMHO, but they haven't found a way to do it yet). This is more of a "Superman reason", even if it refers to a relatively new concept. It's true, Jurgens dealt with some details in his run, but I think that we can all agree that what we consider the "real" Superman Rebirth run, that is the one which was really distinctive of that specific period, is Tomasi's Superman. Jurgens' Action Comics is a very generic book with moments everyone forgot about or didn't pay much attention to (Godslayer, SuperLex) or in which they tried to reprise some familiar elements of the past; and I think some attempts to fix continuity (I am thinking about Action Comics 977) are typical cases of "Superman's generic milestones" (especially Krypton).
    I'll keep my opinion regarding Zaar and Jor-El as a "retelling of the origin without openly retelling it", so let's agree to disagree. I am under the impression that at one point editors basically stopped Bendis from developing the story the way he wanted (more or less like Brainiac's involvement in Krypton's destruction as it was hinted during Johns' run) and everything stayed generic and hurriedly resolved (kind of). I think that if Bendis had gone the way he had planned now we would have some major alterations to Krypton, maybe including - as someone had thought here - the revelation of other sons of Jor-El's. It didn't happen and now we don't even know whether Zaar has really destroyed Krypton.
    Just to be clear, I consider the "political conspiracy thriller" a good thing as well as Zaar being Kal's stepbrother as someone had suggested here. At least it would be something less generic than usual, more distinctive than the usual "Krypton was a magnificent place which exploded".
    Actually, I don't agree. Tomasi was doing the big flourishes up front and that gained him a LOT of praise and adulation; meanwhile, Jurgens was doing most of the heavy continuity lifting/fixing while being instructed to put Doomsday into the first story/etc for "publicity" and got the short end of the stick.

    Heck, he was still ironing out details when he and Tomasi got booted for Bendis, but he was starting to get into better stuff and people were starting to notice that it was getting to be a stronger book than Superman.

    And then it was gone, just as it was hitting it's stride (imo).
    Hear my new CD "Love The World Away", available on iTunes, Google Music, Spotify, Shazam, and Amazon: https://smile.amazon.com/dp/B01N5XYV..._waESybX1C0RXK via @amazon
    www.jamiekelleymusic.com
    TV interview here: https://snjtoday.com/snj-today-hotline-jamie-kelley/

  10. #70
    Moderator Frontier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    115,005

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Flash Gordon View Post
    Is that really from an issue of Superman? Hot damn, that's SO bad.
    What's so bad about it?
    Quote Originally Posted by Myskin View Post
    Well, there have been both. Aging Jon Kent provides two different purposes: one - which was probably the reason why this decision was taken in the first place - they were preparing to launch him as a Superman replacement for 5G (in hindsight, the entire run looks like a 5G prologue). I consider this an "editorial" reason, that is one of those "general issues" you mentioned. On the other hand, they get rid of a character who never really worked in the Metropolis environment (maybe one day he will - it's a relatively easy issue to fix IMHO, but they haven't found a way to do it yet). This is more of a "Superman reason", even if it refers to a relatively new concept. It's true, Jurgens dealt with some details in his run, but I think that we can all agree that what we consider the "real" Superman Rebirth run, that is the one which was really distinctive of that specific period, is Tomasi's Superman. Jurgens' Action Comics is a very generic book with moments everyone forgot about or didn't pay much attention to (Godslayer, SuperLex) or in which they tried to reprise some familiar elements of the past; and I think some attempts to fix continuity (I am thinking about Action Comics 977) are typical cases of "Superman's generic milestones" (especially Krypton).
    I'll keep my opinion regarding Zaar and Jor-El as a "retelling of the origin without openly retelling it", so let's agree to disagree. I am under the impression that at one point editors basically stopped Bendis from developing the story the way he wanted (more or less like Brainiac's involvement in Krypton's destruction as it was hinted during Johns' run) and everything stayed generic and hurriedly resolved (kind of). I think that if Bendis had gone the way he had planned now we would have some major alterations to Krypton, maybe including - as someone had thought here - the revelation of other sons of Jor-El's. It didn't happen and now we don't even know whether Zaar has really destroyed Krypton.
    Just to be clear, I consider the "political conspiracy thriller" a good thing as well as Zaar being Kal's stepbrother as someone had suggested here. At least it would be something less generic than usual, more distinctive than the usual "Krypton was a magnificent place which exploded".
    I don't see much of value in the "political conspiracy thriller" aspect or trying to make Zaar into more then he really is, so on that level I can appreciate it if DC put a halt to Bendis' plans. I personally don't think the additions would've been as valuable in the long-run, but that's just me (I don't believe in change for the sake of change). I guess they couldn't have been as bad as Amanda Armstrong.

    I also thought Jurgen's run was solid (SuperFamily vs Revenge Squad for the win) so I think we're just coming at it with two very different takes here.
    Quote Originally Posted by Myskin View Post
    It's from Venditti's Superman - Man of Tomorrow... I think. I wouldn't use it as a term of comparison though. Everything in that series is unreadable, even for Superman's standards.
    Neal Adams comics are borderline unreadable. I don't see what's unreadable about this compared to Bendis' redundant dialogue or King's sometimes nonsensical poetic prose.

    I mean, if the content or take on Superman doesn't appeal to you, that's fine, but I don't see what's unreadable about it.
    Quote Originally Posted by manwhohaseverything View Post
    Not in this. But, as superman he is very much an elite. Especially, if you are just an old woman.Green arrow basically throws the entire jl under the bus in justice league unlimited
    I felt that he was trying to talk to that woman on her level and her reaction to him was her own mixed feelings and projections and not on Clark's part.

    Green Arrow keeps the League honest but he's the one who gives the speech about how important the League and Superman is in the end.
    No,better tomorrow can be anything. Its not well defined. Its not a tangible in universe achievement or feat to set yourself up for and to focus your attention towards

    Here is a goal for superman. Meta human/alien/other sentient species rights. Superman wants a set of laws of to be passed so that the metahuman who face discrimination can be protected. For instance, according to us law a guy could kill swampthing . It won't be termed as murder.
    If it's a goal that can accompany many different motivations or actions, such as the one you came up with, I think it's a worthy goal.

  11. #71
    Ultimate Member Gaius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Location
    Occupied Klendathu
    Posts
    12,881

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by manwhohaseverything View Post
    No,better tomorrow can be anything. Its not well defined. Its not a tangible in universe achievement or feat to set yourself up for and to focus your attention towards .

    Here is a goal for superman. Meta human/alien/other sentient species rights. Superman wants a set of laws of to be passed so that the metahuman who face discrimination can be protected. For instance, according to us law a guy could kill swampthing . It won't be termed as murder.
    So just ripping off X-Men?

  12. #72
    The Man Who Cannot Die manwhohaseverything's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    9,484

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaius View Post
    So just ripping off X-Men?
    Is it? Has mutants explored that? My idea was to incorporate the question of person hood. You know like the iron giant.I would call someone trying to take out iron giant, attempt at murder. While, doomsday isn't a person. It doesn't have a sentience. It's just destructive instinct.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ra-El View Post
    Honestly, with the exception of One Punch Man, those goals are kind of lame, I wouldn't want Superman to have a similar goal.
    Pirate king means to have the most freedom. There is political debate going on in one piece. Goku is a self made man. It isn't about just being the strongest. It about finding the pinnacle of your own potential.
    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    I felt that he was trying to talk to that woman on her level and her reaction to him was her own mixed feelings and projections and not on Clark's part.

    Green Arrow keeps the League honest but he's the one who gives the speech about how important the League and Superman is in the end.
    Her projections only exist because of her experience. For her superman isn't someone like her. Nit because he is an alien either.

    Yes,only after superman comes out and admits he is out of touch. Imagine that the champion of the oppressed doesn't fight for the little guy.
    Last edited by manwhohaseverything; 07-01-2020 at 11:32 PM.

  13. #73
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,558

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JAK View Post
    Actually, I don't agree. Tomasi was doing the big flourishes up front and that gained him a LOT of praise and adulation; meanwhile, Jurgens was doing most of the heavy continuity lifting/fixing while being instructed to put Doomsday into the first story/etc for "publicity" and got the short end of the stick.
    I have no problem in admitting this - that is, Jurgens was not as lucky as Tomasi. I'd just add that, more simply, Tomasi can write better than Jurgens (especially at this point of Jurgens' career) and Jurgens was involved in Rebirth mostly to reassure the fans that what they were about to get was more similar to 1990s Superman. I mean, his name is intrinsically tied to that period and many of the elements he used - Cyborg Superman, for example - are very '90s Jurgens-ian. I was not focusing on the reasons why his run is not as fondly remembered as Tomasi's (I have problems with THAT run as well and Jon Kent in particular). I was just remarking that whenever you think of Rebirth the main image you get is Jon Kent and Hamilton County rather than SuperLex and Godslayer.
    Last edited by Myskin; 07-01-2020 at 11:08 PM.
    Educational town, Rolemodel city and Moralofthestory land are the places where good comics go to die.

    DC writers and editors looked up and shouted "Save us!"
    And Alan Moore looked down and whispered "No."

    I'm kinda surprised Snyder didn't want Superman to watch Lois and Bruce conceive their love child. All the while singing the "Na na na na na na Batman!" theme song - Robotman, 03/06/2021

  14. #74
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,558

    Default

    Regarding the discussion about "Superman's goals"...

    I think that this point is a bit tricky because it largely depends on what the readers' expectations and idea of "goals" are and the format of the stories.
    In this thread there have been speculations about new, different formats Superman stories could be presented in. So let's say that if one day they will adopt the format of some acclaimed Image comics - like East of West or The Walking Dead - or even mangas, sooner or later they will have to keep in mind a specific climax towards which the stories will be developed, and a conclusion. Right now I am thinking about an old tweet of Max Landis (before anyone else mentions it: yes, I know that there have been some accusations of sexual misconduct against him, but that's not the point here...). He had hypothesized a possible plot for a long Superman saga with a specific conclusion in mind. I can't find that specific tweet, but basically it was a long series of encounters with increasingly strong menaces (something like: "Brainiac. Mxyzptlk. President Luthor"). Death, Resurrection and Wedding were some sort of happy ending. I'd say that if they wanted to create a trilogy of Superman movies with a similar approach they could, with Jon Kent as some sort of epilogue.

    However, I wouldn't consider these as "goals". It's more of a basic example of, I don't know, storytelling? You have the beginning, a development, a climax and a conclusion. In general, I don't think that defining Superman's "goals" is as important as defining his character, how he acts, his motivations, why he lives in Metropolis etc. That is, how Superman stories work in terms of dynamics rather than goals. One of the several reasons why Batman works better than Superman is that Batman's dynamics is defined and engaging well enough to keep the readers' attention alive after so many years. I would have several problems in defining Batman's goals as well. I mean, what are they? Making crime disappear?

    Let's talk about Asterix - a character who still sells infinitely more than Superman (and deservedly so IMHO). Asterix's stories have a very light continuity (sometimes there are some recurring characters, but that's it), but the foundations are extremely strong, as well as the character's personalities. Asterix doesn't have a specific goals, but follows very specific dynamics - his Gallic village is under a constant attack from Roman forces, but he and his friends successfully endure Julius Caesar's army thanks to a magic potion which makes them super-strong for a limited amount of time. This dynamics is very easy to get and - what's important - it's somehow the background of the stories, rather than a specific plot. The characters have no goals besides defending themselves. Every Asterix reader perfectly knows that there will NEVER be a final fight between Asterix and Caesar. Basically, Asterix adventures may last forever as long as the characters will find themselves in interesting situations.

    Each album is about a specific plot which is resolved at the end. Since we are in the field of speculations, I'd say that at there is a possible future of a parallel universe in which DC decides to adopt the classic BD format (Tintin, Spirou, Asterix...). I'd say that it could also be a good thing, but everything would depend on how Superman is characterized and what the dynamics is. And they should choose ONE version of Krypton, with a specific characterization, keep ONE specific foundation and build on it.

    By the way: yes, there have been some moments in the past in which Superman was basically an X-Men ripoff. I am thinking mostly of Johns' run. I guess that it was something they would try sooner or later, but there are some problems with this specific characterization. In their most famous versions, the X-men dynamics works - I am thinking about Claremont or Morrison right now - mainly because they really act as groups of activists with different ideologies in mind. Also, it is one of those cases in which THERE is a specific goal the characters have in mind - how to make mutants and humans live together. There is a sense of impending doom in some of the most successful X-Men stories - the idea of a final battle with humans, good mutants and evil mutants - after which their world will be forever changed.

    So, what's the problem with Super-X-Man? Well, besides the fact that IMHO in this specific version Superman isn't really convincing as a political activist, Johns had to create a very specific setting - Kandorians vs Earthlings and Superman in the middle - to make the idea work. And don't get me wrong, I think that it could have worked and I was also a fan of New Krypton at the beginning. But the problem is: how would the situation develop AFTER Kandor's inevitable defeat? It is exactly the type of story which you may present and resolve in a limited series, but I have some doubts that it could work longterm. But again, we are in the realm of the possibilities; so we can imagine a parallel earth on which the setting could have worked AFTER New Krypton's resolution. By the way, the forthcoming Man of Tomorrow animated movie adopts this exact dynamic - Superman as an ambassador of good aliens - and even if I am not particularly interested I guess that I could keep an open mind.
    Educational town, Rolemodel city and Moralofthestory land are the places where good comics go to die.

    DC writers and editors looked up and shouted "Save us!"
    And Alan Moore looked down and whispered "No."

    I'm kinda surprised Snyder didn't want Superman to watch Lois and Bruce conceive their love child. All the while singing the "Na na na na na na Batman!" theme song - Robotman, 03/06/2021

  15. #75
    The Man Who Cannot Die manwhohaseverything's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    9,484

    Default

    Why exactly does Superman live in Metropolis? I mean, it feels like gotham needs a superman than metropolis does.

Posting Permissions

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