Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 27 of 27
  1. #16
    Spadassin Extraordinaire Auguste Dupin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,541

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tuck View Post
    How much was Clark writing about Superman in the New 52 though? He doesn't write about the Justice League at all. They've made a point of Clark's thing being social justice stories. To the point they continuously mock him for it.
    He has been a few times . Most notably, he makes an interview about himself in Perez's run, gets scolded for making a Superman article "with barely any Superman in it" in Jurgens' run, and is having trouble with Perry for having gone like 3 weeks without making a single Superman article- implying that's also his beat- in Lobdell's. I think he also made a Superman related article when he gets back to the Planet in Johns' run, but I'm not completely sure about it.
    So, he has done it, but mostly because it has been assigned to it, and it has been implied he's not comfortable at all with the notion, and probably ended up doing it because he couldn't explain why he didn't want that gig without revealing the whole "secret identity" thing (which is an improvemnent compared to other takes). Still, he's been doing it enough to hurt the Planet's credibility.
    Hold those chains, Clark Kent
    Bear the weight on your shoulders
    Stand firm. Take the pain.

  2. #17
    Phantom Zone Escapee manofsteel1979's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Planet Houston
    Posts
    5,360

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tuck View Post
    How much was Clark writing about Superman in the New 52 though? He doesn't write about the Justice League at all. They've made a point of Clark's thing being social justice stories. To the point they continuously mock him for it.
    Good point, and I think it underlines one of the weaknesses of the conceit of the New 52...which is that in spite of the fact the powers that be present the DCNu/DC YOU era as something bold and new and a clear break from the past, it really isn't as divorced from the past as it appears on the surface, and the fact is, it's a case of wanting to have their cake and eat it too.

    Look at the conceit of TRUTH and just the Lois Lane stuff, and how the story has been sold. As much as it may not be the case in the actual published comic, there is no doubt the Press office at DC want everyone that hasn't picked up a Superman comic for awhile, or ever,to think that Lois Lane, "Superman's Girlfriend/lover/wife", has betrayed him, yet in the actual current state of the Superman continuity, Lois is and never has been romantically linked to Superman, and in fact is supposidly just (barely) bff's with Clark Kent and has barely interacted with Superman aside from a couple issues of Grant Morrison's ACTION COMICS, A cameo or two in JUSTICE LEAGUE, an extended cameo as BrainiLois in DOOMED and all of SUPERMAN UNCHAINED (although it's place in continuity is questionable at best). Now, granted, one of the other conceits of the NEW 52, at least early on, was a lot of the stuff that happened before FLASHPOINT occured, just over the course of 5 years rather than 15-20 years as it was previously, thus some details changed, but going just on whats been published and shown, Lois Lane really doesn't have that much of a history with Superman at all, and that's why, when we get to the big reveal in #42...it feels just empty. It lacks emotion or resonance....UNLESS you view it through the prism of all the previous Superman and Lois Lane stories...then and only then does it regain any sort of real impact.

    Same with Perry's reaction here. It should be a heartbreaking moment for us in the audience and for Perry,but when viewed through just the lens of just the stuff actually published and in continuity....well...it just doesn't gel or have any impact. I mean, how much panel time have we had with Perry since the relaunch? Not a whole heck of a lot. However, if one adds to the mix all the history from prior? Then you can feel more of an impact.

    Again though, that relies on a knowledge of who these characters were in a previous history, and that speaks to the larger issue at hand, which is while Superman himself has been developed better since the early months of the restart, most of his cast that wasn't Jimmy or Lana have been very poorly defined or at the least his relationship to those characters has not been given any real life. I mean, we have been told over and over that Lois and Clark are best friends...but other than SUPERMAN UNCHAINED...where have we actually seen it given any real time? We are told here that Perry loved Clark like a son....yet, other than a couple of the more recent Johns penned issues, where have we gotten a sense this is true? The previous Perry and Clark....we saw that relationship defined over many years. Same with Lois...but the current versions? Borderline cyphers. With Jimmy's part in all this, you feel some resonance, as we have seen that relationship explored over the course of the last 4 years. Same with Lana and John Henry. Same with Diana to an extent. Superman needs his cast and universe better defined before you go tearing it all down like they've done here.You need a sufficent number of apples in the apple cart before upsetting it, otherwise, why do it in the first place?

    Which is why, i think, instead of jumping right into something like TRUTH, Yang, Pak and company should have spent a year or two further developing the various corners of the Superman universe. Pak could have defined the future kentville and it's residents more clearly. Yang in Superman could have more clearly shown his relationship with Lois and Perry and the Daily Planet itself. WW/SUPERMAN could have spent more time developing that relationship...etc.Flesh out all corners of the Superman mythos as it exists in 2015 without relying on continuity that is no longer supposidly in play. Build up his world for a couple years...then...BAM out of nowhere spring all this.

    Don't misunderstand...I like a lot of the ideas shown and the overall concept....and it's mostly been overall well written, but I can't help but think the full potential here won't and can't be utilized because of the folly of past poor creator and editorial decisions.
    Last edited by manofsteel1979; 08-14-2015 at 11:06 AM.

  3. #18
    Boisterously Confused
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    9,449

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Kal-el View Post
    I am also wondering if pride has something to do with it. Perry sees himself as the best reporter in history except maybe for Lois and basically it was his life yet the biggest scoop ever was under his nose for five years and he couldn't see it.
    Yup. Nobody likes to feel like a chump. Especially people who make a living being well-informed.

  4. #19
    Fantastic Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    479

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tuck View Post
    How much was Clark writing about Superman in the New 52 though? He doesn't write about the Justice League at all. They've made a point of Clark's thing being social justice stories. To the point they continuously mock him for it.
    We don't know (thankfully; it's always really bothered me when he's beaten Lois to Superman copy and seems extremely immoral), but even if he's somehow avoided never writing a direct word on Superman, he would still have been lying by omission if he were ever more involved than his stories let on.

    At the very least-bad, he let co-reporters at his newspaper write copy on him without speaking up, which is hugely damaging to the paper's credibility.

    That's all ignoring the personal indignity of lying to Perry's face as a friend.

    EDIT -- Just saw Auguste Dupin's post at the top of the page. So apparently he has done it, but done it as little as he can (because New 52 Superman is a stand-up guy).

  5. #20
    Mighty Member Darth Kal-el's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    1,572

    Default

    So would it have been more ethical for Clark Kent to work as a baseball player since he wouldn't have a connection to his life as Superman

  6. #21
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    4,454

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by manofsteel1979 View Post
    Good point, and I think it underlines one of the weaknesses of the conceit of the New 52...which is that in spite of the fact the powers that be present the DCNu/DC YOU era as something bold and new and a clear break from the past, it really isn't as divorced from the past as it appears on the surface, and the fact is, it's a case of wanting to have their cake and eat it too.

    Look at the conceit of TRUTH and just the Lois Lane stuff, and how the story has been sold. As much as it may not be the case in the actual published comic, there is no doubt the Press office at DC want everyone that hasn't picked up a Superman comic for awhile, or ever,to think that Lois Lane, "Superman's Girlfriend/lover/wife", has betrayed him, yet in the actual current state of the Superman continuity, Lois is and never has been romantically linked to Superman, and in fact is supposidly just (barely) bff's with Clark Kent and has barely interacted with Superman aside from a couple issues of Grant Morrison's ACTION COMICS, A cameo or two in JUSTICE LEAGUE, an extended cameo as BrainiLois in DOOMED and all of SUPERMAN UNCHAINED (although it's place in continuity is questionable at best). Now, granted, one of the other conceits of the NEW 52, at least early on, was a lot of the stuff that happened before FLASHPOINT occured, just over the course of 5 years rather than 15-20 years as it was previously, thus some details changed, but going just on whats been published and shown, Lois Lane really doesn't have that much of a history with Superman at all, and that's why, when we get to the big reveal in #42...it feels just empty. It lacks emotion or resonance....UNLESS you view it through the prism of all the previous Superman and Lois Lane stories...then and only then does it regain any sort of real impact.

    Same with Perry's reaction here. It should be a heartbreaking moment for us in the audience and for Perry,but when viewed through just the lens of just the stuff actually published and in continuity....well...it just doesn't gel or have any impact. I mean, how much panel time have we had with Perry since the relaunch? Not a whole heck of a lot. However, if one adds to the mix all the history from prior? Then you can feel more of an impact.

    Again though, that relies on a knowledge of who these characters were in a previous history, and that speaks to the larger issue at hand, which is while Superman himself has been developed better since the early months of the restart, most of his cast that wasn't Jimmy or Lana have been very poorly defined or at the least his relationship to those characters has not been given any real life. I mean, we have been told over and over that Lois and Clark are best friends...but other than SUPERMAN UNCHAINED...where have we actually seen it given any real time? We are told here that Perry loved Clark like a son....yet, other than a couple of the more recent Johns penned issues, where have we gotten a sense this is true? The previous Perry and Clark....we saw that relationship defined over many years. Same with Lois...but the current versions? Borderline cyphers. With Jimmy's part in all this, you feel some resonance, as we have seen that relationship explored over the course of the last 4 years. Same with Lana and John Henry. Same with Diana to an extent. Superman needs his cast and universe better defined before you go tearing it all down like they've done here.You need a sufficent number of apples in the apple cart before upsetting it, otherwise, why do it in the first place?

    Which is why, i think, instead of jumping right into something like TRUTH, Yang, Pak and company should have spent a year or two further developing the various corners of the Superman universe. Pak could have defined the future kentville and it's residents more clearly. Yang in Superman could have more clearly shown his relationship with Lois and Perry and the Daily Planet itself. WW/SUPERMAN could have spent more time developing that relationship...etc.Flesh out all corners of the Superman mythos as it exists in 2015 without relying on continuity that is no longer supposidly in play. Build up his world for a couple years...then...BAM out of nowhere spring all this.

    Don't misunderstand...I like a lot of the ideas shown and the overall concept....and it's mostly been overall well written, but I can't help but think the full potential here won't and can't be utilized because of the folly of past poor creator and editorial decisions.
    Dc knows the power that lois have so they choose her to do their superman gimmick of the year. they just can't make up their mind what they want for lois and clark, because they mined lois and clois relationship a lot on new 52. Sure the results are people not caring about what is happening on superman books.
    the stakes were higher on pre 52, there was build. tear up what already was tore up is meaningless

  7. #22
    Fantastic Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    479

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Kal-el View Post
    So would it have been more ethical for Clark Kent to work as a baseball player since he wouldn't have a connection to his life as Superman
    Well, yes. Journalism is very strict with its ethics, and it has to be, because its very existence depends on its credibility with its audience. There's a lot of pride and idealism in the profession, even at its most cynical. Lying about your involvement in your own stories for years is really bad.

    On the other hand I personally believe journalism does more good than baseball and that it should be important to Clark. So I hope an outed Clark can ultimately find a way back to it under honest circumstances.

  8. #23
    Amazing Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    31

    Default

    An ongoing problem for me with the Clark / Daily Planet thing for me has always been that he shouldn't ever write a story on Superman. He should choose to actively avoid writing about him, citing other interests, purely from a standpoint that he's too close to the issue to be objective. The Superman staff has been very, very lazy and unimaginative when it comes to this issue.... and this entire storyline has been abysmal from a characterization standpoint.

  9. #24
    Spadassin Extraordinaire Auguste Dupin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,541

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Darth Kal-el View Post
    So would it have been more ethical for Clark Kent to work as a baseball player since he wouldn't have a connection to his life as Superman
    Well, no, because with his superhuman abilities, he wouldn't be able to give an honest effort without looking like he's using drugs, and whatever decision he makes in that regard would be a gray area.
    That being said, your affirmation would have been true for other jobs, like sales representative, or novelist, or construction worker.
    Hold those chains, Clark Kent
    Bear the weight on your shoulders
    Stand firm. Take the pain.

  10. #25
    Astonishing Member misslane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    2,701

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cipher View Post
    On the other hand I personally believe journalism does more good than baseball and that it should be important to Clark. So I hope an outed Clark can ultimately find a way back to it under honest circumstances.
    I hope so too. I even want him to continue to wear glasses not only because it would be a nice way to sort of indicate to himself and others what "zone" he's in personally, but also because I flat out like them and think he looks handsome in them.

  11. #26
    Mighty Member adkal's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by manofsteel1979 View Post
    Good point, and I think it underlines one of the weaknesses of the conceit of the New 52...which is that in spite of the fact the powers that be present the DCNu/DC YOU era as something bold and new and a clear break from the past, it really isn't as divorced from the past as it appears on the surface, and the fact is, it's a case of wanting to have their cake and eat it too.

    Look at the conceit of TRUTH and just the Lois Lane stuff, and how the story has been sold. As much as it may not be the case in the actual published comic, there is no doubt the Press office at DC want everyone that hasn't picked up a Superman comic for awhile, or ever,to think that Lois Lane, "Superman's Girlfriend/lover/wife", has betrayed him, yet in the actual current state of the Superman continuity, Lois is and never has been romantically linked to Superman, and in fact is supposidly just (barely) bff's with Clark Kent and has barely interacted with Superman aside from a couple issues of Grant Morrison's ACTION COMICS, A cameo or two in JUSTICE LEAGUE, an extended cameo as BrainiLois in DOOMED and all of SUPERMAN UNCHAINED (although it's place in continuity is questionable at best).
    Tut. You're forgetting how integral she was over in Batman/Superman and the Strife/Satanus storyline


    Now, granted, one of the other conceits of the NEW 52, at least early on, was a lot of the stuff that happened before FLASHPOINT occured, just over the course of 5 years rather than 15-20 years as it was previously, thus some details changed, but going just on whats been published and shown, Lois Lane really doesn't have that much of a history with Superman at all, and that's why, when we get to the big reveal in #42...it feels just empty. It lacks emotion or resonance....UNLESS you view it through the prism of all the previous Superman and Lois Lane stories...then and only then does it regain any sort of real impact.
    Agreed.

    Same with Perry's reaction here. It should be a heartbreaking moment for us in the audience and for Perry,but when viewed through just the lens of just the stuff actually published and in continuity....well...it just doesn't gel or have any impact. I mean, how much panel time have we had with Perry since the relaunch? Not a whole heck of a lot. However, if one adds to the mix all the history from prior? Then you can feel more of an impact.
    I really hoped for one panel with a thought-balloon for Perry where he thinks something along the lines of 'you better have a damn good reason, Lois', leaving it to us to decide if Perry knew but kept the secret for 6 or so years and if his anger at Clark and the 'betrayal' is more towards himself and not being upfront with Clark about knowing or towards the situation in general and his impotence at helping Clark with it. But...

    Again though, that relies on a knowledge of who these characters were in a previous history, and that speaks to the larger issue at hand, which is while Superman himself has been developed better since the early months of the restart, most of his cast that wasn't Jimmy or Lana have been very poorly defined or at the least his relationship to those characters has not been given any real life. I mean, we have been told over and over that Lois and Clark are best friends...but other than SUPERMAN UNCHAINED...where have we actually seen it given any real time? We are told here that Perry loved Clark like a son....yet, other than a couple of the more recent Johns penned issues, where have we gotten a sense this is true? The previous Perry and Clark....we saw that relationship defined over many years. Same with Lois...but the current versions? Borderline cyphers. With Jimmy's part in all this, you feel some resonance, as we have seen that relationship explored over the course of the last 4 years. Same with Lana and John Henry. Same with Diana to an extent. Superman needs his cast and universe better defined before you go tearing it all down like they've done here.You need a sufficent number of apples in the apple cart before upsetting it, otherwise, why do it in the first place?
    That paragraph is why although I had that hope I knew it wouldn't make sense.

    Which is why, i think, instead of jumping right into something like TRUTH, Yang, Pak and company should have spent a year or two further developing the various corners of the Superman universe. Pak could have defined the future kentville and it's residents more clearly. Yang in Superman could have more clearly shown his relationship with Lois and Perry and the Daily Planet itself. WW/SUPERMAN could have spent more time developing that relationship...etc.Flesh out all corners of the Superman mythos as it exists in 2015 without relying on continuity that is no longer supposidly in play. Build up his world for a couple years...then...BAM out of nowhere spring all this.

    Don't misunderstand...I like a lot of the ideas shown and the overall concept....and it's mostly been overall well written, but I can't help but think the full potential here won't and can't be utilized because of the folly of past poor creator and editorial decisions.
    Thing is, that would only really be possible if someone had a long term commitment to the books and the PTB were to lessen their interference - of course, there's also the risk of what's been happening (in my opinion) over in the Batman book, which I struggled with reading from the first arc but persevered and then stopped after the cave collapsed...a suit that looked fine in the store but just won't fit when you actually put it on.

  12. #27
    Incredible Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    905

    Default

    Maybe Perry is faking outrage in order not to make himself a target.
    I do know that if this happened Pre-Flashpoint, Perry would be clearly lying, because it was all but told during the early 2000s that Perry knew, but never said anything about it. Pretty sure I remember some New Krypton material that had a conversation between Perry and Superman, and it reminded me of these conversations between Superman and Lois when they're in public, or talking over telephone.

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
  •