Superman: Red & Blue Announced

[HsssH]

I think this kind of series works best by letting one team have a full issue instead of eight pages or whatever. That way they have more freedom to come up with something more of a complete story.

Batman and Wonder Woman did better with same structure so I'd say its entirely on writers and editors.

[Yoda]

Yeah, the editors really botched this series up. There are a lot of good stories but so many repetitive stories that are basically just the same thing over and over.

And legitimately, how did they go six issues with no Lois centric story? That is BS.

[Myskin]

This could be one of the worst Superman-related missed opportunities in the latest years.
It could be the editors' fault, the writers' fault or whatever, but it is frankly depressing to see that the conception of Superman stories as rhetorical moral works (which are shallow too, by the way: none of the works presented was deeper than a Facebook post or an advertising) invades even continuity-free stories. It was a six-issue celebration of pietism with good art.
I guess that there may be an audience for reassuring, not particularly thought-provoking works like these, or the nth variation of "Jonathan Kent teaches Clark a valuable lesson", or ANOTHER Superman family story in which Krypto or Streaky or whatever do something funny and adorable and magical as if we were watching a 1960s sitcom like Bewitched, but I am definitely NOT part of that audience.

[Ra-El]

This could be one of the worst Superman-related missed opportunities in the latest years.
It could be the editors' fault, the writers' fault or whatever, but it is frankly depressing to see that the conception of Superman stories as rhetorical moral works (which are shallow too, by the way: none of the works presented was deeper than a Facebook post or an advertising) invades even continuity-free stories. It was a six-issue celebration of pietism with good art.
I guess that there may be an audience for reassuring, not particularly thought-provoking works like these, or the nth variation of "Jonathan Kent teaches Clark a valuable lesson", or ANOTHER Superman family story in which Krypto or Streaky or whatever do something funny and adorable and magical as if we were watching a 1960s sitcom like Bewitched, but I am definitely NOT part of that audience.

The only stories, from what I remember that somewhat escaped from this was Riddley's (I wasn't a fan, but at least it was something different) and Waid's.

[Will Evans]

How was the Val Zod story?

[Vordan]

How was the Val Zod story?

Decent. If you’re that desperate for content you can go buy the issue but it’s nothing amazing.

[Will Evans]

Decent. If you’re that desperate for content you can go buy the issue but it’s nothing amazing.

I saw that the story writer for that was Chuck Brown, who I haven’t read anything else from.

[Myskin]

The only stories, from what I remember that somewhat escaped from this was Riddley's (I wasn't a fan, but at least it was something different) and Waid's.

Waid's story (maybe there was more than one? I remember only the Mxyzptlk tale) was a forgettable filler. If you are in a good mood you may enjoy it and forget it one second after closing the book. it's the type of story which 20 years ago they would have used as a back-up in a Secret Files book. Definitely disappointing, since it was Waid's first Superman story in decades.
Ridley's story, as far as I remember, didn't even need Superman as the main character. You could have replaced him with anyone else and it would have been the same.

What really saddens me is that if I take the old Superman 400 issue and I browse it, I find more experimentation and evocative ideas than in these six-issue series (I guess that I could save the Matt Wagner one and not much else). Even the "commemorative" story in Superman 400 - Maggin's Miracle Monday - is more original and less corny than many Red & Blue tales. It really tells a lot about the conception of the character these days, or how lazy and uninventive corporate comic books can be. If they have a "bible" in DC offices regarding what Superman could and couldn't do, they should definitely rewrite it.

Oh, and the coming out story in the final issue? My God. There's literally no limit to what DC could do for promotional purposes, including tackling delicate, important issues to remind people that hey, they should buy the regular series because a couple of years ago they changed a fundamental detail of Superman stories in a very underwhelming way. It was as having Coca-Cola or MacDonald's sponsoring a fight against climate change.

[Myskin]

Batman and Wonder Woman did better with same structure so I'd say its entirely on writers and editors.

Without taking the most recent series into account... The first Batman Black and White series was released in 1996 and I STILL remember some of the stories even if I haven't reread them in 20 years.
This? I barely remember what they were about one second after closing the book.

[hairys]

Yeah, this series was just bad, and Supes deserves better.

Putting aside product quality for a sec, DC additionally doesn't really know how to market or sell Superman comics (anymore). Isn't Action Comics around #75 to 100 in the rankings at this point?

It's only a fantasy, but in a just world, DC would be forced to sell or lease Superman to another company who can try to do better with him.

[Bored at 3:00AM]

I think it was a mixed bag, certainly, but I don't think it was anywhere near approaching bad. It just needed better editorial oversight to make sure that the creators weren't repeating the same beats over and over. Plus, there needs to be a willingness to send stories back that aren't good enough.

[Vordan]

“Bad” is too harsh. Underwhelming would be a better description. I rather liked Waid’s story, Watters as well, Manupal’s story was gorgeous. Only rarely do you ever get an “amazing” anthology story, even in Batman B&W there’s a lot of crap to go with the gold. You may recall a handful of standouts but there were a lot more that were awful to forgettable that you don’t remember. Hell the recent B&W story, while showcasing far more variety than what we got here, still couldn’t come close to the quality of the original B&W.

But the original B&W had DC’s top talent put on it. This wasn’t that, this was mainly new blood getting try outs with a few old guard here and there. It did show a window into how both the writers and editors view Supes though, and I can’t deny that what we saw was disappointing.

[Quinlan58]

My personal "Greatest Hits" from this book:
- "Untitled" by John Ridley and Clayton Henry.
- Everything from Issue 3
- "For the Man who has Nothing" by Michael Conrad and Cully Hamner
- "Generations" by Daniel Warren Johnson
- "The Scoop" by Matt Wagner
- "The Special" by Tom King and Paolo Rivera

Loved those, but indeed most of the stories were forgettable and repetitive (that there wasn't a Lois story when Lex, Jimmy, Bizarro, Mxyzptlk and even Streaky all got one and Pa Kent got who-knows-how-many is just the most obvious proof of how much the editors failed here), and even a few that were a little more original than that mostly ended up dull anyway, with very few caring to use the color gimmick in any way.

[HsssH]

It did show a window into how both the writers and editors view Supes though, and I can’t deny that what we saw was disappointing.

Yeah, I think that art and writing itself was fine, but when you look at the big picture... well it isn't pretty.

[Myskin]

Cursed be the day when they decided to turn Superman into a full-time inspirational symbol of justice and wholesomeness.
I am serious. If it's not the main reason the character doesn't work anymore, it is in the top three for sure. It's not that it is forbidden to write "inspirational" stories, but you must be very, EXTREMELY careful when you do it. The concept of Steel as a citizen turned into a hero because he was inspired by Superman works. Elliot S. Maggin, with his (bizarrely western-y) Miracle Monday stories in Superman 400 knew how to do it without being preachy.
However, when they basically abandoned Superman as a CHARACTER and they fully embraced him as a SYMBOL, well, that's the day Superman started to die. A character is someone who does things, has meaningful relationships and ups and downs, thinks, makes mistakes, tries to survive and enjoys or hates stuff. A symbol doesn't do anything interesting. It's well, there, and the readers must accept that no matter what he does or how stupid and contradictory it seems, he has a positive influence on the world around him because the writers tell us that it is so. IMHO it's a complete betrayal of the character and its original, candid freshness. Superman's administration of justice is simply not made to have same importance or complex influence real-life people like Gandhi or Che Guevara or Malcolm X have in the real world. That's how monstrosities like Grounded are conceived, or stuff like Superman as a "cosmically" defining element of the DCU as in Doomsday Clock, which means that he is important as a matter of fact, not because he what he does is really unique or interesting.

I have several issues with the triangle era, but when I rethink about it, I don't remember the "inspirational" element being so strong or omnipresent. There were some stories about that, but - as far as I remember - they were rather tongue-in-cheek, Bibbo adopting Superman's symbol or something like that. Some stories were about Superman failing (for example when Cat Grant's son was killed by the Toyman), but they resolved the subplots in a couple of solid episodes, mostly based on character interaction. I am very sad to say that maybe the "inspiration" thing became a defining feature during one of my favorite eras, that is the Loeb/Kelly one. Some specific stories, like the Elite one, didn't age well. And, on a personal level, I think that one of the main problems I have with Jon is that his introduction gave Superman another reason to be inspirational and paternalistic.