shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,871
|
Post by shaxper on Oct 29, 2023 14:26:02 GMT -5
I read some of the early post-Crisis issues recently. I didn't want to de-rail this thread commenting on issues. Not at all. I'm really glad you're using this as a resource to accompany your reading. That was always the primary intention of this and all of my review threads. This is pretty much exactly my point. Because his disability clearly fuels his disturbing behavior, and because he is given no backstory and no personality to otherwise set him apart from other handicapped persons, the implication (intended or otherwise) is that the average disabled person secretly harbors these desires. I think it's more sloppy writing than intentional prejudism, but it bothers me all the same. How disappointing to collect these stories and not preserve the often painstaking continuity mainained across them. Say what you will about Byrne; the Post-Crisis Superman Office itself --whether under Andy Helfer or Mike Carlin-- did continuity like no one else. I see your point. But, by that logic, why not just pull him aside and then play the radio for him? that way, it isn't disturbing the children AND isn't rubbing it in their faces that he can hear and they cannot. I think most of my objections with this story boil down to the fact that Byrne tried to be sensitive to a marginalized group and did it in such a clumsy way that it can be seen as offensive. This is not to say that it's intentional nor hateful; just very clumsy and more than a little ignorant. |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,871
|
Post by shaxper on Oct 29, 2023 14:42:09 GMT -5
In a lot of aspects, I dislike Byrne's need to explain everything rather than just suspend disbelief. I'm seldom ever one to defend John Byrne, but I think this is more a product of the era, of the company vision for a Post-Crisis DCU, and of editor Andy Helfer (who was hell-bent on explaining absolutely everything right down to the X-ray vision). On the surface, I agree with you. Had this story been told differently, I would have accepted the explanation and story without hesitation. My problem with Byrne's Luthor is always the extent to which he is over the top foolish and cruel in a wild, uncalculated way. This Luthor was headed for a downfall with or without Superman as an enemy. I prefer a more cold, precise, and amoral (not immoral) depiction that better encapsulates American corporate greed. Superman can stop anything...except big business. It's a powerful message that gets muddied when Luthor is this over-the-top. I would have accepted this ending without issue had Luthor disregarded the truth and then pitied the foolishness of his underling in some polite but utterly condescending way, "One day, you'll understand that what makes a successful businessman is taking the facts and filtering them through the lens of good instinct!" or something like that. But Byrne thinks he needs to play up his evilness and foolishness to the max in case the reader didn't already understand that Lex was the bad guy. Wholeheartedly agreed. Ha. Honestly, any idea you have for what to do with Lana is inevitably better than anything this Superman office came up with. Heheh. Give him time. Action Comics #592 is still eight months away. |
|
lordyam
Full Member
Posts: 170 
Member is Online
|
Post by lordyam on Dec 24, 2023 17:30:25 GMT -5
I'm looking forwards to the Crisis at Hand Arc coming up; it handles domestic violence in a way that's pretty sensitive and intelligent. I don't have any knowledge of that storyline, but now I'm excited too! It's a two parter, that occurs right before Doomsday (the last issues before the storyline begins as a matter of fact). |
|
lordyam
Full Member
Posts: 170
Member is Online
|
Post by lordyam on Dec 24, 2023 17:38:36 GMT -5
I also want to say that I was wondering if this would have been a better way of handling Post Crisis
1.) There are 52 universes (it gives more creativity)
2.) It moves in real time (I like comics but the floating timeline is a scourge)
|
|
|
|
Post by Duragizer on Dec 28, 2023 14:38:34 GMT -5
I also want to say that I was wondering if this would have been a better way of handling Post Crisis 1.) There are 52 universes (it gives more creativity) 2.) It moves in real time (I like comics but the floating timeline is a scourge) Though I'm not the biggest fan of the "52 universes" model, it could work, so long as time and care was taken to introduce and develop these worlds (as opposed to frontloading the majority with pre-existing Elseworlds stories  ). I've been an outspoken advocate of real time superhero comics for decades now. I'm not certain how well it would've worked long-term with the American model of comics publishing being what it is/was. Moving away from monthly floppies to finite miniseries might've been necessary to keep them accessible to more casual readers. |
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Dec 28, 2023 14:41:44 GMT -5
I want to know who decided that 52 was a magic number.
|
|
|
|
Post by Duragizer on Dec 28, 2023 15:16:27 GMT -5
Grant Morrison, I presume.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,871
|
Post by shaxper on Dec 28, 2023 20:31:46 GMT -5
I want to know who decided that 52 was a magic number. Dan DiDio? |
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Dec 28, 2023 23:39:59 GMT -5
it's not magic, I think they just wanted a year long weekly series and it stuck
|
|
|
|
Post by Duragizer on Jan 2, 2024 14:01:48 GMT -5
I'd personally prefer a multiverse of 1,000,001 Earths, numbered zero to one-million. Nice big number, but not ludicrously big where you're dealing with a googolplex of redundant universes which only differ with the position of a single quark and the whole notion of numbering Earths becomes nonsensical.
|
|
|
|
Post by spoon on Jan 13, 2024 0:46:01 GMT -5
Superman #11 "The Name Game" writer/pencils: John Byrne inks: Karl Kesel colors: Tom Ziuko letters: John Costanza editor: Michael Carlin grade: C- I still don't get it. If Byrne was so committed to the idea of making Superman more real and of removing all the more outlandish aspects of the Superman mythos in order to support this concept (even going so far as to retcon Superboy into an artificially constructed "Pocket Universe" and then kill him off while de-powering Krypto into a normal dog), then what the hell is this issue all about? If the post-Crisis return of Titano back in Superman Annual #1 wasn't enough for us, we've got a post-Crisis Mr. Mxyzptlk making his first appearance here, and even the cover is a clear homage to those shockingly misleading covers of the Silver Age (and, incidentally, while the post-Crisis Superman covers have generally been awful, this is probably the first truly good one we've seen). Maybe the idea of making Superman more realistic was really Andy Helfer's brain-child, and thus his leaving the Superman office corresponds with a new emergence of sillier, more fanciful aspects of the Superman mythos. In fact, there's a bit of evidence to support this correlation, as Superman Annual #1 (The Titano story) was the first story not to credit Helfer as co-editor, and this happened at the exact same time as the Legion crossover that brought back and then obliterated both Superboy and Krypto. Seems likely to me that there was a difference of opinion between Byrne and Helfer as to whether or not these outlandish elements had a place in the post-Crisis Superman mythos, leading to Helfer's hasty and unannounced departure. So now Byrne is free of Helfer and just plain having fun. If you can let go of the idea that this comic franchise was only recently adamantly against having such fun, then this isn't a thoroughly bad issue, though, in typical Byrne style, it's far from well done. I thought it was really well done. It's entertaining. Visually impressive. The bits were Lois going off with Ben and as a mannequin were scary. If Byrne departed from a more grounded vision and instead gave us something . . . too fun, then I'd like to congratulate him for screwing up that way. On the other hand, this is a criticism I can get on board with. Wolfman created a three-dimensional Cat Grant who could be a legitimate romantic rival for Lois. She provide a great tool in drawing out the "will they or won't they" for Clark and Lois by being the alternative. Byrne makes Cat dimensional. It gives Byrne an opportunity to deploy his art skills on a seductive character, but that's about it. Since Ben DeRoy is an anagram of Beyonder, he probably looks and acts as much like the Beyonder as \intended. |
|
|
|
Post by spoon on Jan 13, 2024 14:51:13 GMT -5
Was rummaging through Byrne's FAQ section of his site tonight (wow, the man is every bit as egotistical as I had expected), and found a few gems of info worth reposting: Yeah, Byrne really seemed to want to get to do his take on stuff from the pre-Crisis mythos (including lots of Silver Age stuff) like Bizarro, Lori Lemaris, Mr. Mxyzptlk, (Pocket Universe) Superboy, (Matrix) Supergirl, robot Superman, etc. In contrast, Wolfman's issue seem like more of an attempt at a clean break. Blunt as he is, Byrne is totally right here. It should've been obvious that changing Superman's continuity, particularly by eliminating his Superboy career, would create inconsistency with the basically unchanged post-Crisis Legion. This struck me right away as a very Byrne thing. The whole thing of taking a super-power most readers seem fully willing to just suspend disbelief on, coming up with a new "well, actually" explanation, and portraying it as more scientific. |
|
|
|
Post by spoon on Jan 13, 2024 15:07:15 GMT -5
Superman #18 "Return to Krypton" writer: John Byrne special guest penciler: Mike Mignola inks: Karl Kesel letters: Bill Oakley colors: Petra Scotese asst. editor: Renee Witterstaetter (guess she's sticking around) editor: Michael Carlin grade: D+ What the hell was that? Amen! I haven't made any secret of the fact that I'd grade Byrne's run significantly higher than you would, but I'm in the same neighborhood as you on this issue. It just seems like a pretext to shoehorn an Elseworlds Byrne wanted to tell into his run on the monthly titles. Fortunately, we had Mignola art to make the trip worthwhile, and while the What If? story about Kryptonians coming to Earth and inevitably making humans second class citizens was hardly unpredictable, it made for decent storytelling. Exactly. The whole point of flying to Krypton's former site was to come up with a solution for all the Kryptonite debris which is now reaching Earth. In the end, Superman has a bad trip but seemingly does nothing else. All concern about the kryptonite problem that had Superman on the verge of death on Earth has disappeared despite the fact that neither he nor the Hawks did anything to remedy the problem. |
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Jan 13, 2024 15:47:27 GMT -5
I wonder if it really happened the way Byrne told it. He said that everyone involved in running the Legion knew that Superboy would be erased from continuity, but it seems that they were hit by a collective attack of amnesia only to wake up after six months: "Hey, when you said that Superboy would be no more, did you mean that SUPERBOY WOULD BE NO MORE!?!?”
|
|
|
|
Post by chadwilliam on Jan 16, 2024 0:48:12 GMT -5
Yeah, Byrne really seemed to want to get to do his take on stuff from the pre-Crisis mythos (including lots of Silver Age stuff) like Bizarro, Lori Lemaris, Mr. Mxyzptlk, (Pocket Universe) Superboy, (Matrix) Supergirl, robot Superman, etc. And Alan Moore's "For the Man Who Has Everything" as well, though that of course, is The Bronze Age. During a fever dream, Superman vicariously experiences Krypton's continued survival through the persona of his father whose prophecy of destruction no longer spells the end of his race. However, rather than partaking in some idyllic fairytale, Superman bears witness to one mounting disaster after another thanks to his subconscious mind warning him of danger in the real world. Sound familiar? Of the three Superman stories written by Alan Moore, this is the only one I don't dislike. The self-sabotage Superman inflicts upon himself serves a purpose - as his subconscious mind reduces his dream state to a nightmare, his conscious mind is allowed to acknowledge an imminent threat in the real world. I get that. The purpose of Byrne's "Return to Krypton" though? To teach his Superman the following lesson: "Since I've learned of my alien origins, I've cherished the notion – the conceit, really – that the race of Krypton were somehow above the pettiness that's plagued humankind all these years. Now I've been shown a version of what might have been, had I not been the sole survivor of that doomed world. And much as I'm loath to admit it, I'm afraid my vision was accurate. A race of supermen cannot help but be a race of conquerors."I've mentioned before how offensive I found it that by Byrne's own admission, Superman's little speech at the end of his Man of Steel mini-series (which had him coming to the realization that he was first and foremost an Earthling) was brought about by Byrne's own feeling that adopted children who later sought out their biological parents are "ungrateful little shits". I can't help but think that two years later, Byrne is still grinding that ax. I mean, there's no reason why the post-Crisis Superman should have to come from a race of perfect beings (and really, "pettiness" and "Krypton" is pretty much baked into the Superman mythos what with The Science Council laughing in Jor-El's face when he proclaimed Krypton's doom from the very start) but does the grandeur and wonder of Krypton really need to be sacrficed just to appease Byrne's distaste for all those stories which had Superman pining away for Krypton? And how does Superman reach the conclusion that "my vision was accurate" anyway? Is he really citing a nightmare he had as proof of anything? It really feels as if Byrne isn't so much writing a story but picking at an imaginary scab - something which he's done before with the character. Byrne felt that there was a common misconception that had people believing that because Superman can't see through lead it must be invisible to him? Well, here's a 20 page Joker story written just to dispel that misconception (which I don't think anyone other than perhaps Byrne himself was ever under). Byrne believes that Superman's exclamations of "Great Rao!" were a slap in the face to his adopted planet? Well, here's a version of Krypton which deserved to blow up. Even the issue of Action Comics #600 which preceded this one contained that Wonder Woman story in which Superman declares that she's a God while he's just a farm boy and therefore way out of her league. Did we really need to see Superman grabbing Wonder Woman and sticking his tongue down her throat just so Byrne can once again establish that Krypton = bad, Earth = good? Again - Byrne can do whatever he likes with his Superman, but "Return to Krypton" just felt like another instance of him venting about something he didn't like about the character and not really offering any solution in return. Even the way Superman's dream just peters out without resolving anything feels like Byrne had tired himself out shaking his fist at some old comics and decided he was just going to end his story there so he could go lie down. |
|
).
