I give you Pak: "Truth" Interview!!!!

[Sacred Knight]

And btw, Hal's comment was not sexist. He's clowning around. Clearly lighthearted. Take off the social justice glasses every once in a while.

[Blacksun]

And btw, Hal's comment was not sexist. He's clowning around. Clearly lighthearted. Take off the social justice glasses every once in a while.

hal wasn't even on league that time. it was barely a reaction

[hellacre]

hal wasn't even on league that time. it was barely a reaction

What? What are you even on about?

[Blacksun]

I don't want to be pessimistic here, but based on the interviews I've read, the sneak peaks we've seen of the Superman titles for the "Truth" storyline, and DC's previous track record regarding Superman throughout the New 52, I have bad feeling this will wind up being one of the more misguided creative directions since the Electric Blue Superman. Or, perhaps a more apt comparison, this could be regarded as just as much a fundamental misunderstanding of who a fictional superhero is and represents since Denny O'Neil removed Wonder Woman's powers and turned her into a Emma Peel knockoff.

And it's clear what the Superman writers like Pak, and Kuder are attempting to do here: it's one of those deconstructionist stories in which, in their words, "everything that makes Clark's life easy and comfortable is going to be stripped away," that he's "pushed to his limits and tested on every level in the best kind of ways," and in the process he'll come out triumphant and stronger at the end. That's all well and good, but one also gets the impression that the writers feel the only way to make Superman more interesting and relevant for today's audience is to all but take away everything which has helped to define, mold and shape the character of Superman over the past 75 years. Based on what we've been seeing in the Sneak Peaks, Clark has become Superman in name only, coming across as if he were Wolverine without the adamantum claws, funky haircut and excess body hair. Heck, the way Pak and Ruder describe what Clark's status quo will be, what with them talking about "the folks who live on Clark Kent's block back home" and "the Shadow ninjas," it reads more like something more suitable for Daredevil than Superman.

And it's not about a mere costume change or stripping away his powers that the big problem here--it's the taking away the secret identity. Time and time again, we've been told the reason for Clark to have a secret identity wasn't just so he could protect those he cared about; it was also so he could have some semblance of a normal life, that passing himself off as an ordinary human being is what brought him closer to those he wanted to help, to embolden his sense of humility. Now he's just going to be Superman 24/7. Short of rebooting continuity yet again, that's not something you just easily undo without coming up with the most contrived of scenarios. Pak suggests in the interview "Truth" is putting greater emphasis that "Superman's always been one of us, a man of the people," but what he's seem to overlook is that while Superman may see himself as "a man of the people," the people do not. They always see Superman as someone who is more than human, that he's a symbol of hope and look up to, no matter what his power set is. That's another reason why Clark passing himself off as a "mild-mannered reporter" was so crucial to how Superman works; because ironically, the only real way Superman can be regarded as "one of us" and "a man of the people" was through being Clark Kent. If everyone knows Clark Kent is Superman, then everyone will only see him as Superman, "the strange visitor from another planet," instead of Clark Kent, the everyman.

Also, and I'm sure others have alluded to this, what was the point of letting Jimmy Olsen in on the secret if everybody now knows the secret? (If the idea of having Jimmy know was that the folks at DC realized the New 52 Superman needed someone who wasn't a superhero to talk to, then maybe DC shouldn't have killed off Clark's adoptive parents. Just a thought.) And to have that secret identity be revealed by Lois Lane? That's certainly doing her character any favors, not matter what Pak says about how "Lois is a straight-up hero," because the sneak-peak for Superman clearly shows that her outing his secret identity was--surprise, surprise!--a huge mistake which has given Clark more problems, hence why she's trying to now apologize to him and make up for it.

In short, I think this latest attempt by DC to make Superman more identifiable will be a costly one, especially if fans believe this is DC trying too hard to imitate Marvel. Then again, I've been wrong before quite a few times, so who knows.

it seems just like another doomed. another unremarkable story for a unremarkable superman.

DC really seems to imitate marvel changes from next year on cap america and thor

Pretty sure I recall some very vivid reactions right before Trinity War, when the League found out about it in Khandaq. Then Atomica made Superman laser-eye Dr. Light and stabbed some kryptonite in Clark's brain, then everyone fought each other until they all got trapped in the undead-Firestorm matrix while the world was burned by their evil, counter-universe replicas. Since they got out they've had to deal with Luthor worming their way into their ranks, their public approval (which helps protect their ability to act autonomously) is at an all time low, and now after the super-zombie apocalypse left who knows how many new metas on earth, the Anti-Monitor and Darkseid are up to bat.

It seems to me that the Justice League title is all about dealing with these crazy big, cinematic events, summer blockbuster style. They're not supposed to be about the quiet, interpersonal drama. The book is not supposed to get too deep with what is going on in their personal lives. That's what other books do, (most of the League have at least one) including the title that was created just for the very specific purpose of exploring this particular soup opera.

You're mad that Justice League isn't Superman/Wonder Woman.

Let's not forget, the death of Batman's friggin SON wasn't that big a deal within the pages of Justice League. It was barely mentioned. Why? Because dealing with that drama isnt what the book is supposed to be about.

the team didn't knew about it, just batman. I didn't saw any reaction about the couple from the league.

JL dealing with all big stuff, so why the smww started on the book and made johns waste many pages on it?

seems just like he is not interested on the relationship, and he will most ignore it.

damian wayne is not on JL, but Bruce mentioned him on a JL issue.

[The World]

And it's not about a mere costume change or stripping away his powers that the big problem here--it's the taking away the secret identity. Time and time again, we've been told the reason for Clark to have a secret identity wasn't just so he could protect those he cared about; it was also so he could have some semblance of a normal life, that passing himself off as an ordinary human being is what brought him closer to those he wanted to help, to embolden his sense of humility. Now he's just going to be Superman 24/7. Short of rebooting continuity yet again, that's not something you just easily undo without coming up with the most contrived of scenarios. Pak suggests in the interview "Truth" is putting greater emphasis that "Superman's always been one of us, a man of the people," but what he's seem to overlook is that while Superman may see himself as "a man of the people," the people do not. They always see Superman as someone who is more than human, that he's a symbol of hope and look up to, no matter what his power set is. That's another reason why Clark passing himself off as a "mild-mannered reporter" was so crucial to how Superman works; because ironically, the only real way Superman can be regarded as "one of us" and "a man of the people" was through being Clark Kent. If everyone knows Clark Kent is Superman, then everyone will only see him as Superman, "the strange visitor from another planet," instead of Clark Kent, the everyman.

Also, and I'm sure others have alluded to this, what was the point of letting Jimmy Olsen in on the secret if everybody now knows the secret? (If the idea of having Jimmy know was that the folks at DC realized the New 52 Superman needed someone who wasn't a superhero to talk to, then maybe DC shouldn't have killed off Clark's adoptive parents. Just a thought.) And to have that secret identity be revealed by Lois Lane? That's certainly doing her character any favors, not matter what Pak says about how "Lois is a straight-up hero," because the sneak-peak for Superman clearly shows that her outing his secret identity was--surprise, surprise!--a huge mistake which has given Clark more problems, hence why she's trying to now apologize to him and make up for it.

In short, I think this latest attempt by DC to make Superman more identifiable will be a costly one, especially if fans believe this is DC trying too hard to imitate Marvel. Then again, I've been wrong before quite a few times, so who knows.

Being a conditional or situational everyman is a pointless concept.

[Ascended]

the team didn't knew about it, just batman. I didn't saw any reaction about the couple from the league.

JL dealing with all big stuff, so why the smww started on the book and made johns waste many pages on it?

seems just like he is not interested on the relationship, and he will most ignore it.

damian wayne is not on JL, but Bruce mentioned him on a JL issue.

Batman knew first, everyone else found out later. There was a pretty big hoo-ha about it in Khandaq as I recall, though if Im remembering it wrong, someone please correct me.

Okay, you've said that it gets completely ignored, but now you're saying that Johns has wasted "many pages on it" so which is it? You're just complaining for the sake of complaining.

So, the death of Batman's son shouldn't matter because Damien wasn't a member of the League? That's cold. And it also makes no sense. So you're expecting Batman and his team mates and friends to completely ignore a life-shattering, deeply personal event just because it wasnt League-centric? But two people are having a couple dates and kissing a little bit, and just because they're on the same team it should be mentioned all the time? That seems like a very unbalanced way of looking at characterization. Especially when there's an entire friggin book for that already and JL isnt about romance, its about explosions.

If your problem is that important inter-personal character dynamics aren't getting the kind of play they should get, then Damien's death doesnt get a pass just because he's not a Leaguer, the destruction of Central City during Forever Evil doesnt get a pass, Barry's breakup with Patty wont get a pass when the DCU returns after Convergence, Diana doesnt get a pass for her being the God of War barely being mentioned, and so on. All of these characters have books of their own and some pretty serious crap happens in all of them. If the relationship deserves mention, so does everything else. And then the whole book would just devolve into an exposition dump for other titles. If your problem is that the Clark/Diana relationship in particular isnt getting enough play, there's actually an entire title dedicated to their relationship, which is actually supposed to carry the weight of making that relationship visible to the greater DCU.

You're either complaining that the book isnt a soap opera, or you're being biased against something to the exclusion of other things. Regardless, this isnt an opinion formed by analysis and critical thinking, its a base emotional response to a situation you have a problem with.

[Darth Kal-el]

Comics are always about the illusion of change. We will get change for awhile but eventually everything goes back to the status quo. Remember how long Spider-Man revealing his identity lasted. As comic fans we kinda know what we are in for unless it's a limited story not connected to continuity.

In the end I am just looking for a good story that I can enjoy over and over and I hope truth is one of those, like John's flash or green lantern or Morrison's Batman

[Blacksun]

Batman knew first, everyone else found out later. There was a pretty big hoo-ha about it in Khandaq as I recall, though if Im remembering it wrong, someone please correct me.

Okay, you've said that it gets completely ignored, but now you're saying that Johns has wasted "many pages on it" so which is it? You're just complaining for the sake of complaining.

So, the death of Batman's son shouldn't matter because Damien wasn't a member of the League? That's cold. And it also makes no sense. So you're expecting Batman and his team mates and friends to completely ignore a life-shattering, deeply personal event just because it wasnt League-centric? But two people are having a couple dates and kissing a little bit, and just because they're on the same team it should be mentioned all the time? That seems like a very unbalanced way of looking at characterization. Especially when there's an entire friggin book for that already and JL isnt about romance, its about explosions.

If your problem is that important inter-personal character dynamics aren't getting the kind of play they should get, then Damien's death doesnt get a pass just because he's not a Leaguer, the destruction of Central City during Forever Evil doesnt get a pass, Barry's breakup with Patty wont get a pass when the DCU returns after Convergence, Diana doesnt get a pass for her being the God of War barely being mentioned, and so on. All of these characters have books of their own and some pretty serious crap happens in all of them. If the relationship deserves mention, so does everything else. And then the whole book would just devolve into an exposition dump for other titles. If your problem is that the Clark/Diana relationship in particular isnt getting enough play, there's actually an entire title dedicated to their relationship, which is actually supposed to carry the weight of making that relationship visible to the greater DCU.

You're either complaining that the book isnt a soap opera, or you're being biased against something to the exclusion of other things. Regardless, this isnt an opinion formed by analysis and critical thinking, its a base emotional response to a situation you have a problem with.

I don't remember very well about kandaq, but the team got all split in three.

damian isn't on team, johns can and have to neglect it. batman book did well the RIP part, one month only forthat and johns never used JL pages on damian before.

well it is wasted because he cimply didn't gave continuation for that. he just threw the realtionship and then he got out of Lee ideas and ignores it.

having people on team dating should be a big deal, it can be a danger to the safety of the team. Johns already adressed that WW is a God, and will adress more about her goodhood and her origins on darkseid war. also diana as god of war, damian or patty didn't started on JL

the relationship started on the book, it shouldn't be ignored. I'm not saying it should be more important than everything or get the spotlight, but it should be there.

[Ascended]

I don't remember very well about kandaq, but the team got all split in three.

damian isn't on team, johns can and have to neglect it. batman book did well the RIP part, one month only forthat and johns never used JL pages on damian before.

well it is wasted because he cimply didn't gave continuation for that. he just threw the realtionship and then he got out of Lee ideas and ignores it.

having people on team dating should be a big deal, it can be a danger to the safety of the team. Johns already adressed that WW is a God, and will adress more about her goodhood and her origins on darkseid war. also diana as god of war, damian or patty didn't started on JL

the relationship started on the book, it shouldn't be ignored. I'm not saying it should be more important than everything or get the spotlight, but it should be there.

It is there. Its being continued. In their own book. That's a promotion, not a setback.

Sorry, the relationship isnt being ignored at all. Its not relevant to JL. And honestly, I find your opinion that the death of a child means less than someone dating a co-worker pretty offensive. What began in what book has little importance to a shared universe. The relationship began in JL. It continues in SM/WW and gets mentioned in the Super books and Wonder Woman's solo and there's plenty of stuff still in JL too, its just not in your face. Did you find it this big a problem when Azzarello was ignoring it? You know what? Dont bother answering, Im finished here.

[Blacksun]

It is there. Its being continued. In their own book. That's a promotion, not a setback.

Sorry, the relationship isnt being ignored at all. Its not relevant to JL. And honestly, I find your opinion that the death of a child means less than someone dating a co-worker pretty offensive. What began in what book has little importance to a shared universe. The relationship began in JL. It continues in SM/WW and gets mentioned in the Super books and Wonder Woman's solo and there's plenty of stuff still in JL too, its just not in your face. Did you find it this big a problem when Azzarello was ignoring it? You know what? Dont bother answering, Im finished here.

Azzarello didn't started it, so it was fine ignoring it. If it is for JL that start the romance, if johns will simply ignore with no lasting impact on team and book, IDK what is the point of the relationship.

[Francisco]

Azzarello didn't started it, so it was fine ignoring it. If it is for JL that start the romance, if johns will simply ignore with no lasting impact on team and book, IDK what is the point of the relationship.

That's what the book Superman and Wonder Woman is for.

[Blacksun]

That's what the book Superman and Wonder Woman is for.

that doesn't mean it should be ignored from jL book

[Francisco]

that doesn't mean it should be ignored from jL book

Perhaps the JL book is more focused in the team fighting alien invaders and natural disasters rather than romantic relationships.

[Darth Kal-el]

I haven't seen it ignored. They show it more then telling. In Amazo Virus you could tell how they were drawn in their scenes they had a bond. But it was a crisis and not time to make out or anything. Also in the preceding arc she always was first to have his back with Luthor. I definitely see it in JL

[Blacksun]

I haven't seen it ignored. They show it more then telling. In Amazo Virus you could tell how they were drawn in their scenes they had a bond. But it was a crisis and not time to make out or anything. Also in the preceding arc she always was first to have his back with Luthor. I definitely see it in JL

No, I couldn't tell by the images anything special