Superman: American Alien, #1

[Kuwagaton]

Excellent preview, the premise sells itself, but I love the humanity put into the scene.

finally, at least i can buy without feeling bad about it.

If you're implying something, please don't.

[bholderman]

Because Action Comics #1, though it has a June 1938 cover date, actually hit news stands in February of that year. That's why Superman always arrives on earth in the winter, and why his birthday is celebrated then. Also, a large blizzard happened not long after he landed, making it difficult for the Kents to get into town, this accounts for how the Kents could just miraculously end up with a baby in the late spring months to the people of Smallville without it seeming suspicious (leading to the assumption that Martha was pregnant during the winter months).

I think this book looks awesome. I love that Max Landis seems to be writing Superman as a PERSON, as that is who he is. He is Clark Kent with the powers of Superman, reporter Clark at the Daily Planet is a façade where he downplays himself, and Superman is another façade where he presents himself as a sort of fireman always willing to help - the only thing that doesn't change with these different identities he takes on is his morality. This is who Superman is, and not a pretentious, self elevated space Jesus messiah sent here to "show us the way" and fulfill the will of his space ghost dad like Zack Snyder's Man Of Steel and other things try to portray him as. That's so against who the character is, and it dehumanizes him and makes him boring. Superman was sent away to save himself, not us, and he only becomes Superman because the Kents raised him to be a good person and he decides to create a costume/identity to use his powers to help, not because of his holy space ghost dad telling him to put on a costume.

I'm looking forward to this book, and am really hoping that Landis gives him the REAL Superman costume (trunks and all) if the time comes in this series, and not that New Fifty-Screw robo-puzzle-armor garbage or the Snyderverse chainmail/snakeskin rubber piping suit. With this book and the Dan Jurgens series, it's good to finally see not only a Superman book, but a DC book that has me genuinely excited again.

I always saw it as Superman appearing in 1938, roughly 33 years of age (going with the Christ-like metaphors). That put his arrival around 1905 or 1906. Agricultural Kansas in 1905, winter? Ford didnt develop the assembly line until 1908, the chance of the entire region still riding on horseback (and carriages) is feasible. I'm sure the Kents could easily explain a newborn baby that wasn't their own.

[Robotman]

I always saw it as Superman appearing in 1938, roughly 33 years of age (going with the Christ-like metaphors). That put his arrival around 1905 or 1906. Agricultural Kansas in 1905, winter? Ford didnt develop the assembly line until 1908, the chance of the entire region still riding on horseback (and carriages) is feasible. I'm sure the Kents could easily explain a newborn baby that wasn't their own.

MoS was the first time it was said that Clark was 33 when he started as Superman. the movie was way too heavy handed with the Jesus similarities. usually he starts his career as Superman in his early to mid 20s.

[superduperman]

Okay, the whole arrived-on-Earth-in-winter thing didn't really start until the 1986 reboot. I get why they did it then. They wanted a semi-logical explanation for why a woman who wasn't even pregnant could have a baby the next day. My point is, they don't need to do it with every single version. Earth One didn't do it. The movies didn't do it. Smallville didn't do it. To be honest, all they'd have to say is that someone literally left him on their doorstep and you have an explanation. It's also a little too convenient. You're already suspending disbelief by having the Kents be the only people who saw his ship crash. It would just be nice to do something different.

[Flash Gordon]

Arriving in winter, in a rural farming community, makes it easier to cover up.

As for this issue, I'm excited for this book. The preview did nothing for me, not even remotely, but I'm interested in seeing where this goes. I'm more keen on exploring Clark as a young man wandering the world, as opposed to more Smallville/raising Superbaby stuff for the umpteenth time. Hopefully Landis delivers something unique here.

[Yahnoos]

What's the big issue with it being in Winter? Saying other representations didn't do it should mean you can appreciate a different take/view. What's with all these fans, Landis included, thinking there's only one way to write a story. Especially one not being presented as the character's bible.

The preview looks good. The art is on point. Landis has a consumer here.

[Potanical Pardon]

I have a really strong feeling that if this takes off, it's going to be a Birthright scenario. Where DC says it's just an elseworlds, then says it and Byrne's MoS are both true, except this time it's AA and Morrison's origin.

[Myskin]

I have a really strong feeling that if this takes off, it's going to be a Birthright scenario. Where DC says it's just an elseworlds, then says it and Byrne's MoS are both true, except this time it's AA and Morrison's origin.

I doubt that they will put AA in continuity, since Landis has already said that in his mind his Superman story has a definite end and probably issue #07 will deal with a 44-year old Supes. Of course that doesn't imply that it wouldn't be better than Morrison's origins, something which I suspect it will be, at least character wise. Sure, similar cases seem to appear frequently within DC these days (what about The Legend of WW?), but I think that they will belong to the realm of "stories which are out of continuity but too peculiar to become elseworlds', like All Star Superman and DKR.

[bholderman]

MoS was the first time it was said that Clark was 33 when he started as Superman. the movie was way too heavy handed with the Jesus similarities. usually he starts his career as Superman in his early to mid 20s.

Well, for me it was based more on how Shuster drew him, even with his simple lines, I always got the vibe of someone who was a bit older than in his 20s. Add to that, back then getting a successful job as a reporter for one of the bigger papers in that time period would indicate to me a longer ladder to climb up through the ranks, thus time.

That said, its a moot point for me and one not worth arguing, it still puts his arrival in the early years of World War 1.

And I agree, I think the Jesus metaphors are a bit overdone.

That said, the preview gives me what I was hoping for so far. Not sure if this series tells a complete story or is a series of vignettes, but insights into young Clark and the Kents having to deal with this kid is what I was hoping for. Looking forward to more.

[Kyer]

I love Superman and adore his origin with the Kent's.

However, the art is a mite too children's-animation cartoon for me.

[Dr. Banner]

I'm very excited about this!

[superduperman]

I have a really strong feeling that if this takes off, it's going to be a Birthright scenario. Where DC says it's just an elseworlds, then says it and Byrne's MoS are both true, except this time it's AA and Morrison's origin.

They've made it pretty clear this is not canon. I think they've learned their lesson about the whole sneaking a new history in under the radar thing from BR.

[adkal]

MoS was the first time it was said that Clark was 33 when he started as Superman. the movie was way too heavy handed with the Jesus similarities. usually he starts his career as Superman in his early to mid 20s.

Other than in Superman: The Movie

He's 30 there

[adkal]

I always saw it as Superman appearing in 1938, roughly 33 years of age (going with the Christ-like metaphors).

Why would two Jewish folk use 'Christ-like' metaphors?

That put his arrival around 1905 or 1906. Agricultural Kansas in 1905, winter? Ford didnt develop the assembly line until 1908, the chance of the entire region still riding on horseback (and carriages) is feasible. I'm sure the Kents could easily explain a newborn baby that wasn't their own.

The explanations varied over the years - from finding on the roadside and giving to a orphanage and returning to adopt to 'son of now deceased sister' etc

[Sacred Knight]

I have a really strong feeling that if this takes off, it's going to be a Birthright scenario. Where DC says it's just an elseworlds, then says it and Byrne's MoS are both true, except this time it's AA and Morrison's origin.

Really doubt it. Birthright started gaining a foothold at a time when the canon origin of the day was getting really old, with the mythos moving further in an alternate direction from MOS's original mission statement. Morrison's origin is only 4 years old and still a clear foundation for the current stories. Not even mentioning its a pretty flawless origin.