Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1
    Mighty Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,720

    Default The roll back on Lois's status as the head of the Daily Planet/Galaxy conglomerate, a mistake?

    I remember there being a fair amount of backlash towards the idea way back when it first came about. There was a fear that it meant the end of intrepid reporter Lois Lane and that she would no longer be in the midst of action. That this idea of her doing her work from behind a desk rather than working the street for stories was a detriment to her character. In response to that criticism I think we're beginning to see a slow roll back on that concept in favor of a more traditional take, her working stories as a field reporter. It's safe and ultimately familiar for the people that have been reading this character long term.

    For me however this is a mistake. This idea was ripe for potential especially in terms of conflict. With herself, with Morgan Edge, her subordinates (including Clark) and ethics being a huge factor in all that as Morgan Edge became a Rupert Murdoch expy of sorts. It also gave her a general predicament in trying to keep the Daily Planet afloat while keeping it's dignity intact. She had new responsibilities and what could have been a whole new sandbox to explore as a character and I don't know I guess it feels like we're going back down a very well worn path especially since Johns story line.

    A good example of what I'm talking about would be the current Catwoman book. It basically did exactly what I mentioned but with Selina Kyle, it took her out of the Catwoman suit and made her a mob boss and it has worked very well so far. It's more restrained but also more intriguing than what was coming before. But again it's the Bat corner taking the risk even though it could comfortably cruise on the back Bruce's success.
    "That was some good ass Tekken" - Tasty Steve

  2. #2
    Ultimate Member Sacred Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    15,988

    Default

    I agree that it was a mistake. Basically both of Perez's ideas for Lois, this and the insinuation that she knew Superman's secret already, were interesting new spins, exactly the kind of thing you want to look for in a new continuity. That these were backpeddled on so quickly was very disappointing.

  3. #3
    Junior Member UltraWoman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Cape Girardeau
    Posts
    311

    Default

    It might not have been a mistake had they actually USED her in that capacity in a backup on a regular basis or her one book. Instead, we saw her virtually disappear from the books after the first six stories (the Perez books). The reason it works for Catwoman is that we are able to delve into how this fits (or doesn't fit) the character. I agree that. It would have been a. Organic growth of the character, but unless they're actually showing how it's a growth, it makes little sense to write it in the first place.


    I agree that the hint of Lois knowing the secret would have keptme on the books even through the SM/WW romance had they kept it instead of whitewashing it away. Even if they had never put Lois and Clark back together, at least it would have been a different dynamic that felt organic to the character.

  4. #4
    Phantom Zone Escapee manofsteel1979's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Planet Houston
    Posts
    5,043

    Default

    It was an interesting idea and dynamic that was set up. Something truly new. Lois being in a position of power, butting heads with Perry occasionally possibly, all while also being in a position to watch Clark's back in a way, keeping her as a clandestine keeper of the secret. However, soon as Perez left, it just became an excuse to keep Lois off the page and nothing literally was done with her. (although, not surprising as Idelson was still editor at the time and we all know how he felt about Lois.) So, one of the things Lobdell and Berganza did which I am grateful for was bringing her back to her reporting roots.

  5. #5
    Astonishing Member misslane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    2,674

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by UltraWoman View Post
    It might not have been a mistake had they actually USED her in that capacity in a backup on a regular basis or her one book. Instead, we saw her virtually disappear from the books after the first six stories (the Perez books). The reason it works for Catwoman is that we are able to delve into how this fits (or doesn't fit) the character. I agree that. It would have been a. Organic growth of the character, but unless they're actually showing how it's a growth, it makes little sense to write it in the first place.


    I agree that the hint of Lois knowing the secret would have keptme on the books even through the SM/WW romance had they kept it instead of whitewashing it away. Even if they had never put Lois and Clark back together, at least it would have been a different dynamic that felt organic to the character.
    Quote Originally Posted by manofsteel1979 View Post
    It was an interesting idea and dynamic that was set up. Something truly new. Lois being in a position of power, butting heads with Perry occasionally possibly, all while also being in a position to watch Clark's back in a way, keeping her as a clandestine keeper of the secret. However, soon as Perez left, it just became an excuse to keep Lois off the page and nothing literally was done with her. (although, not surprising as Idelson was still editor at the time and we all know how he felt about Lois.) So, one of the things Lobdell and Berganza did which I am grateful for was bringing her back to her reporting roots.
    I agree that it could have had potential. Unfortunately, as you two say, it was wasted. That said, I love seeing Lois out in the field taking chances. I don't like seeing her trapped inside or mostly in board meetings or the phone. Overall, I'd say there are more benefits to keeping Lois a reporter in the field.

  6. #6
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    6,613

    Default

    I prefer Lois on the streets, Lois is a character of action. being behind a desk is not what she wants.

    the whole problem is that writers and editors doesn't use her, it's not like berganza likes her that much too

  7. #7
    Moderator Frontier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    40,769

    Default

    I think there's always two sides to new directions for iconic characters. On the one hand, you could see it making sense for that character and offer new and interesting possibilities/challenges for them to deal with in that new direction. On the other hand, there's the argument to be made about how that character works best and is at their most dynamic as they were originally, in the position that made their character popular to begin with and that's worked well for them for decades. While I tend to find myself in the latter camp, I can see the points to be made for both sides. It's why on certain issues comic book fans can be so divided.

    Of course, the fact that this new position for Lois wasn't used well at all and just served to reduce her paneltime in the book was obviously pretty negative, but that's more on the writers and editors for not using it effectively than it being bad to put her in that position to begin with. All the same, perfectly happy to have Lois back as an ace reporter .

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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