Phil Jimenez Talks Superwoman with Comicosity

[vasir12]

http://www.comicosity.com/interview-...hs-superwoman/

"Lana Lang, Steel, Steel’s niece Natasha, who I love, and Lex Luthor. I would say those are the core supporting characters of the book."

[Sacred Knight]

I will say this...I'm still in because I love Lana and I like the writing and I like the concept. But it never should have been advertised as "Lois Lane as Superwoman". Even when the scoops were coming in and it was obvious that the first issue would feature a Lois Lane with powers, they should have stayed non-committal. Annoyingly so, as it would have appeared at the time. At least then you could say that you didn't purposely build up false expectations as to who the star of the book was, that the advertised question the entire time was always "Who is Superwoman?" even though artwork appeared to show Lois in the role. That's the title of the first arc, so they should have stayed mum on that. Maybe hindsight is 20/20 here, but I just can understand Lois fans feeling punked by this. I know Jimenez doesn't write the solicitations so I don't blame him. But DC should have been more on top of this.

Also kinda sucks to see what might have been here. Had it not been for this convoluted mess of a situation, maybe Jimenez could have been put on an Action or Superman run without having to go through all this middle man stuff. I'm sure he would have been happy to organically reintroduce some pre-52 concepts to Superman as his continuity was without all this crap.

[Superlad93]

http://www.comicosity.com/interview-...hs-superwoman/

"Lana Lang, Steel, Steel’s niece Natasha, who I love, and Lex Luthor. I would say those are the core supporting characters of the book."

I'm tellin you, it's a fake out. He hardly mentions Lois' name outside of recounting the other times there has been a Superwoman. You can check. He literally only says her actual name twice. And it's even in the same answer.

"Doing research, I discovered there have been Superwomans since, like, 1943. And it’s usually Lois Lane or some reimagining of that character, and usually Lois gets powers for a day and calls herself Superwoman."

[Sacred Knight]

Yeah, this is a Lana solo, Lois had one and only one appearance outside of any flashbacks. The #2 cover is symbolic. #3 can be changed to feature Lana in her Electric Superwoman look, either that or as Superlad theorizes, she could decide to use her powers to alter her appearance to look like Lois's Superwoman when she's on the job.

[vasir12]

Yeah, this is a Lana solo, Lois had one and only one appearance outside of any flashbacks. The #2 cover is symbolic. #3 can be changed to feature Lana in her Electric Superwoman look, either that or as Superlad theorizes, she could decide to use her powers to alter her appearance to look like Lois's Superwoman when she's on the job.

How can it be a Lana solo if she's a supporting character? That's not misdirection, that's a lie.

[Sacred Knight]

Then I guess you'll consider it a lie. Personally I would give the wordplay a little more leeway though and still call it misdirection. But I mean, the entireity of the interview is extremely telling. He only mentions Lois briefly. When asked about designing the character, Jimenez says he designed the costume for "that character". He won't name her. By next month I'm banking on the masquerade ending and them being comfortable in acknowledging this as a Lana solo. Lois's "death" is going to serve to enhance Lana's sense of loss and abandonment, a sense of failing someone, increase her anxiety, and really tackle those mental issues that will begin to become more severe as time goes on. Lois's journey isn't done, but I think that will be tackled elsewhere.

[Dolores - The Worst Poster Ever]

How can it be a Lana solo if she's a supporting character? That's not misdirection, that's a lie.

It's not new for creators to lie about these kinds of things.

I don't know how Thunderbolts #1 was promoted, but there must have been some lying involved. And it's not comics, but people involved with Star Trek: Into Darkness kept denying that Khan was the villain, and in the case of The Dark Knight Rises, Marion Cotillard said her character wasn't going to be Talia al Ghul.

Lois might be back in the next issue, but I think it's also possible that she's gone, and that Superwoman is going to be a Lana comic.

[gwangung]

It's amusing how tortured some of the reasoning is....