At least Alicia had that ice rink date with Clark before she died, though I wasn't a huge fan of hers as a kid (thought she was scary). I do like that she did try to redeem herself by her second appearance.
Edit: Gotta cut this chat short though. I'm gonna try to get some shut eye.
Last edited by Crabble; 11-03-2019 at 01:08 AM.
I'm not talking about a story, I'm talking about the creator consensus, where I remember Siegel and Neal Adams chiming in. There were a few others, too. I think even Bates, who wrote the famous marriage story of Action 484. Which just goes to say that the author's vision is still just an opinion and that there are ways to honor its spirit if not its law to the letter.
Frank Miller made Superman's powers look different than they did in the earliest years, but the point was that he was the strongest and essentially beyond harm. On the flipside Morrison gave him early golden age power, but put him in a modern setting where he got kicked around. It can be debated which is more accurate but they both follow the same spirit
Welcome or welcome back! Please check out the updated
CBR Community STANDARDS & RULES
I believe you. But, until i get the full context of the discussion . I can't make a judgement on it. I don't know what was said or how it was said.
Yeah! At first it did have the spirit. Aside from disregard for lois lane, lack of panel time for her compared to the other two and non-stellar treatment of women in general . I have no problem. In fact it's ok for me. Little wierd writing wise. But, ok. Then it started going into something another tangent. It gave me a whiplash. Like i said, i can take everything till he met lex. I just think clark. Especially the goldenage guy is too unruly for his own good to just give in like this. I mean, i can see clark becoming a totalitarian who wants to put the world in a bottle for safety more than this. Even, in American alien were clark was verbally dominated. He made a comeback that left lex speechless. I don't see clark bowing down to anyone,unless it is out of respect.
Well, that was just a demonstration of how Seigel believed Superman should have more than one love interest ... and since he was against the marriage (as the quote indicates) ... then there isn't really a "first choice" to speak of ... marriage is off the table and a variety of love interests is on the table so the whole "first choice" thing is forever debatable.
Fair enough. Good point. Still, the character's words and actions can reflect an aspect of the author's beliefs ... maybe not in 100% fashion ... but still, it's worth bringing into the discussionWhere did i try to reach?i didn't even have to think to reply. The secret identity and triangle have reached its full story potential in that form. It could not have helped the continued existence of superman franchise. No, it isn't. If lois and Clark's marriage was so insulting they wouldn't themselves have done it. No, that wasn't authors quote. It was a line from superman's thought. Superman's thought isn't jerry siegel's thought. Superman can have misunderstanding in story. Jerry as the author and creator who control everything in the superman's world. Cannot. I can give superman have thought bubble that said "wow! Batman is lame". Does that mean i think batman is lame?. It doesn't.it means the character thought that at the point of time.
Well, he has said a few times that he's an anarchist. But you're quite right. That doesn't mean he believes "in everything" the character does ... but he would believe in some significant aspects of the characterBy, your logic alan moore believes in everything v for vendetta does.
I posted that direct quote earlier (#469) and, as it indicates, Jerry Seigel said himself he did not support the idea of Superman and Lois getting married. I don't have the exact comic handy it's from but it's in the back of a pre-crisis issue (as Kuwagaton indicated). I'll try to find it ... tho that might take time. Rest assured, the quote hasn't been photo-shopped or anything like that. It's genuine.And incase you didn't notice my avatar is "man who has everything". I know the importance of lyla in superman stories. I don't think it trumps lois.lyla is Clark's fantasy. His image of a girl just made for him. Lois is his reality. And If you have direct quotation from jerry with a source. I will grant you supermarriage is against the nature of the character.
BTW yes, I noticed your avatar. It's a good one.
The third issue was a bit crammed and therefore Lois wasn't in the story as much as she could have been (not that she necessarily has to be on every page of a Superman story to make it a good Superman story ... she doesn't; going back to your avatar, 'For the Man who has Everything' is considered one the greatest Superman stories of all time and Lois isn't even mentioned once --- not that her absence is what makes it such a great story, but it demonstrates that her having a major presence isn't necessarily essential either).And frank miller doesn't honor or respect lois. She was barely relevant in the issue unlike lana and lori .
Still, I felt as tho Frank did honor and respect Lois. He wrote her quite well. She was the smart, sassy, no-nonsense intrepid reporter she's always been ... and the mutual attraction between her and Superman was there. True, she didn't have an overly major role but as I suggested that's not essential.
I never said that. I said it was against the nature of these characters. Still, that's just my opinion (and the opinion of Jerry Seigel)It is very much evident.right,married couples have no stories to tell. Get out of here with that.
Having multiple love interest (not at the same time. I believe clark is a one woman man) doesn't negate have a preference in the love interests. As for lois, she should always be the second most important character in action comics. Action comics without lois lane is like water not being wet. other than when zatara or other action comics headliners show up. That's my view.Regardless if she is in love with clark or not. I find it incredibly bad to when writers treat her like an after thought.
I can’t pass a judgement on chance argument. So, i will leave it at that for now. I am open to be changed my mind. And i never did or will question the authenticity of yours or @Kuwagaton's claims. I just can't pass judgments on it.i can't find the issue you mentioned so that's why. I need to know the full context otherwise. There are quotes taken out of context.
As for lois not being there in "for the man who has everything". well, she wasn't needed for that particular story.in fact, it is depended on the fact that she isn't. Clark's loneliness and desires were full on display. But as we said earlier it entirely his own creation(except for his dead parents). He played the wimp and never protected the girl as his fake persona(not that she needed it) and even lied to her. In fact,he caused her harm. Why would any girl give a damn about such a man? It is a miracle lois considered clark as a friend let alone boyfriend. He didn't accept the true and real lois with flaws.therefore was stuck with lyla in fantasy land. Both stories(the original and alan moores story) basically drive that point home. Clark gets a taste of reality.He gets over himself and his selfpity.that's why he gets over it and her pretty damn easily. It's superman's version of reality check.
That's fine. Your opinion is based on the evidence presented to you. For me, it isn't conclusive enough. But, i do believe the voice lf the author and vision needs to be respected. Especially, for a character like superman. Marriage or no marriage Clark's needs some work on modernising without losing the voice i mentioned earlier.
I mentioned "for the man who has everything" is because lyla is Clark's wife in the story btw in case anyone is wondering .
Last edited by manwhohaseverything; 11-05-2019 at 01:44 AM.
Thanks for that @last son of Krypton,it's basically the same @friendly-fire-press. So, i have answered it already. Nothing in there suggests that lois lane isn't good enough for clark or that she wouldn't be first preference (except for gerry conway, who wanted lana). It doesn't suggest that clark wouldn't marry lois no matter what.So not against the nature of the character. Heck! Jerry siegel would have loved to see them married . There is a difference between a character's nature and the ip's nature. He specifically talks about the longevity of the ip. They are averse to marriage because of mundanity taking more precedence (and societal view of marriage back then) . curt swan was worried about how to dissolve it. That's basically it. Otherwise, i didn't see much objection to lois lane, specifically . Or anything to me that suggested lyla is Clark's the one intended by the authors. There is a difference between fantasy and reality.
Mort weisinger had a good argument for the triangle to continue. But, the thing is it doesn't solve the problem or ridicule both the character gets now a days. Especially, considering that glass slippers are magic maintaining suspension of disbelief by saying that is pretty easy. Superman's story happens in world similar to ours or more advanced. It breaking suspension of disbelief is natural. A story is essentially a lie. To get the audience to believe in the lie is the story tellers job. Not to have arguments with them. If something doesn't works. It doesn't work. It is similar to zack Snyder's superman. It worked for some. But, for many it didn't. Now, i don't think triangle works at all.
While, i agree with their reservation. I have said so and will continue to. And will always call out when it happens. I have done so in the cw show thread and everywhere i reply.But, they haven't found a way to successfully modernise superman's secret id and love triangle for as much people as possible. So until then, the place holder has to be sufficient. That is just how it is. It is the same way I feel for the trunks. It is just piece clothing unless it is part of the characterisation which it used to be.
And i have no problem with modernising the character. Just changing the character into something else is where my reservation lie. I have seen it happen with goku. Who was a martial artist and bushido warrior getting turned to superman in a gi. That's my opinion.
Last edited by manwhohaseverything; 11-05-2019 at 09:54 PM.
Lead characters in old TV shows and movies almost never got married until the end of the series or never because creators used to think that marriage would end the story with people losing interest.
Times have changed a lot. Superman got married and his story didn't end but evolved to a more mature period. Even James Bond has changed.
Say what? Are you high or something? Jerry Siegel said: No. The proof is there. You've seen it with your own eyes. It's got nothing to do with "lois lane isn't good enough" or anything like that. It's about whether or not Jerry Siegel, the creator of Superman and Lois Lane, believed the two characters should marry. He answered: No. The evidence is there. For you to still say that his beliefs are somehow the opposite of what has just been proven to you is ridiculous. He. Said. No. End of story.
Last edited by friendly-fire-press; 11-06-2019 at 11:25 PM.
"Almost, everyone, including me, would like to see superman marry lois,i don't think it will be good for the longevity of superman books". That doesn't sound like a no to me. Anyone with reading comprehension can understand it. Also freaking alan moore married of lois lane and clark kent. Not lyla. not lana not lori. lois lane. That is saying something. "This is an imaginary tale. Aren't they all?". Jerry wanted imaginary tales where superman marries lois.
Jerry himself would have loved to see them married. His main concern is longevity.longevity isn't a factor anymore. Superman's longevity is already in question regardless of marriage . You brought up lyla lerrol to prove a point that lois won't be first preference for a lois lane. Lyla existing would never negate lois as Clark's love interest or lead heroine in action herione. No matter who is Clark's love interest. Action comics without lois lane is s***. I feel like, You are just biased against lois lane because you implied the "for the man who has everything" is great without lois lane. otherwise, why would you bring it up. Lois lane isn't a factor in greatness of a book. But, She is the main action heroine of "action comics". Second only to those who have headlined it like the guys i mentioned including superman. I would give equal status to guys like zatara to superman . They should have been featured in ac#1000, that's beside the point.
Explain to me how it goes against the character's nature? Everyone, including jerry said clark 'could' marry lois. So there is a possibility.
Last edited by manwhohaseverything; 11-07-2019 at 03:01 AM.
Batman was...
I mean...
Seriously, what an absolute git.
He's developed tech that could end the Oil Wars and he keeps it to himself.
Sure, it shows he's an engineering and tech genius but also that he's a git. ("She converts sea water straight into electrical power... giving me an ocean of fuel. The concept could have applications. That's if I ever cared to share it.")
Not sure why they stuck with calling this 'Year One', though, as it takes place over several years, overall. There seems to be a one-year-jump after he rescues Lois ("It's been over a year... and quite the time it's been. Clark Kent is enrolled in Kansas State University...")
He's clearly known Diana a while ("I can't risk you") and (I think I mentioned this before), I really didn't like him using Ursa's words. I like nods to the Donner-Reeve stuff ("snappy prose style") but the Ursa one was just wrong.
(The notes on the criminals... I actually had a similar scene in my 'Superman as a Muslim' fan-fic. I know it's not something new but it was 'nice' to see.)
Sorta kinda blog: http://justsomeofmyrambling.blogspot.co.uk
Fanfic: https://www.fanfiction.net/~adkal
What if Superman was a Muslim? (fanfic)
Alternate take on Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice
Author Page: http://facebook.com/wanderingandwriting
There’s something very amusing about how other Batman writers will go to great lengths to show that yes Batman does donate to charity and Bruce Wayne isn’t just a rich guy beating up poor people only for Miller to basically go “nah he doesn’t care about them at all” lol.