Help me decide: Superman: The Man of Steel Vol 1 or Superman: Birthright?

[Kuwagaton]

Not extremely easy to get MoS? That surprises me. Usually even the original issues have been easy to find in a very nice condition, where maybe the first one is like $4 and the rest maybe $2. Wish I had that Ray Bradbury forward, though

[Netherman14]

Not extremely easy to get MoS? That surprises me. Usually even the original issues have been easy to find in a very nice condition, where maybe the first one is like $4 and the rest maybe $2. Wish I had that Ray Bradbury forward, though

As a trade? no, not that easy. considering I need the offer where it's shipping world wide. the original issues I did find, as stated in Update2.

[daBronzeBomma]

I know this most likely will get merged with daBronzeBomma's "30 years later, thoughts on John Byrne's THE MAN OF STEEL miniseries" thread, but I want to ask anyway. after reading the Grant Morrison Nuperman origin trilogy (issues 1-18, or volumes 1-3 if you've read them as a trade), which origin should I read next? John Byrne's The Man of Steel, from 1986? or Mark Waid's Superman: Birthright from 2003?

Attachment 45416 Attachment 45417

Oh, I'm not so sure : I'd say this thread does NOT warrant absorption, as it seems pretty unique and valid to me (also: I have zero actual say in what gets merged around here).

But to answer your question (IMHO):

THE MAN OF STEEL is basically the Republican party version of Superman's origin, while BIRTHRIGHT is basically the Democrat party version of Kal-El's beginning.

TMOS marginalized the immigrant aspect of the mythos to the point of having Kal actually be born on Earth, specifically America. He is uber all-American here: football hero, popular jock, official special deputy to the mayor. This is Superman as the Status Quote Defender.

BR brought the immigrant angle back big time and definitely had Superman as more of a Status Quo Disrupter (Morrison would really bring this back full-force with the New52).

THE MAN OF STEEL is the more important historical tale, but BIRTHRIGHT is the far superior story.

[Lokimaru]

Oh, I'm not so sure : I'd say this thread does NOT warrant absorption, as it seems pretty unique and valid to me (also: I have zero actual say in what gets merged around here).

But to answer your question (IMHO):

THE MAN OF STEEL is basically the Republican party version of Superman's origin, while BIRTHRIGHT is basically the Democrat party version of Kal-El's beginning.

TMOS marginalized the immigrant aspect of the mythos to the point of having Kal actually be born on Earth, specifically America. He is uber all-American here: football hero, popular jock, official special deputy to the mayor. This is Superman as the Status Quote Defender.

BR brought the immigrant angle back big time and definitely had Superman as more of a Status Quo Disrupter (Morrison would really bring this back full-force with the New52).

THE MAN OF STEEL is the more important historical tale, but BIRTHRIGHT is the far superior story.

This soooooo, This! MoS was the point they started that Clark is who I am, Superman is what I can do bull crap that diminished Superman to the point he is today. They literally TOOK the SUPER out of Superman and made him just another Punch clock Hero. Hell He didn't really even want the powers and would be just as happy being just Clark cause he really didn't NEED to be Superman. I think "The Nail" was a reaction to that. You can't have the Guy who sets the Tone for all the other Superheroes be Tonedeaf. You can't have the other heroes look up to Batman more the Superman, you get Problems.
'