Fun issue, but wasn't as strong as the first one.
Fun issue, but wasn't as strong as the first one.
Oh thank god, they came to their senses and ditched the cowriter. Already, plot-threads emerge and bubble back into the ether without rhyme or reason to the point of incomprehensibility, characters speak nigh-exclusively in Dadaist gibberish, and Neal Adams demonstrates that he thinks he knows how humor works. Short of a shirtless Superman vaguely threatening the reader with climbing tools, it's everything I was hoping for.
Buh-bye
Makes you wonder why Bedard was attached to first issue?
Eh... while we're getting a somewhat wacky Adams story, I wish we didn't have to give up a good Superman story for it.
The rough art is fine with me, but a little weird considering Adams was the aesthetic poster boy. Good on him for being as likable 50 years later, but this isn't quite the Sienkiewicz Revolution. I'm a little shocked at the character inconsistency between him and Sinclair.
Why didn't Clark raise an eyebrow at Nanny Goody's name? It is so obvious that is Granny Goodness.
The Gypsies had no home. The Doors had no bass.
Does our reality determine our fiction or does our fiction determine our reality?
Whenever the question comes up about who some mysterious person is or who is behind something the answer will always be Frank Stallone.
"This isn't a locking the barn doors after the horses ran way situation this is a burn the barn down after the horses ran away situation."
Love it Classic superman story where he shows intelligence. Nice Classic Costume. And no New 52 Angtst.