|
|
Post by Pharozonk on Apr 4, 2016 13:22:18 GMT -5
Finally, what was with this twist ending? I honestly don't understand whether or not I was supposed to understand what was being hinted at:  I assume that was the writer's way of hinting that the villain would return again later, though I doubt many fans were clamoring for his return after this issue!  |
|
|
|
Post by Pharozonk on Apr 4, 2016 13:23:33 GMT -5
While visiting this thread has always been a pleasure, it's even more poignant given the current state of Superman affairs. *Sigh*...  Of course, one could argue that much of what Snyder is doing wrong with Superman was influenced by Byrne's run, and this thread is only a year out of those particular woods I'd actually say Snyder was more inspired by Golden Age Superman than Byrne's, but in all the wrong ways. He tried to revert to the idea that Superman was the real identity and Clark was disguise while also bringing back a looser moral code for Supes, but didn't place the character in a context to make either of those facets make any kind of damn sense. |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,872
Member is Online
|
Post by shaxper on Apr 4, 2016 19:18:16 GMT -5
Of course, one could argue that much of what Snyder is doing wrong with Superman was influenced by Byrne's run, and this thread is only a year out of those particular woods I'd actually say Snyder was more inspired by Golden Age Superman than Byrne's, but in all the wrong ways. He tried to revert to the idea that Superman was the real identity and Clark was disguise while also bringing back a looser moral code for Supes, but didn't place the character in a context to make either of those facets make any kind of damn sense. All of that sounds a lot like Byrne to me. And it was called "Man of Steel"  |
|
|
|
Post by Pharozonk on Apr 5, 2016 7:16:48 GMT -5
I'd actually say Snyder was more inspired by Golden Age Superman than Byrne's, but in all the wrong ways. He tried to revert to the idea that Superman was the real identity and Clark was disguise while also bringing back a looser moral code for Supes, but didn't place the character in a context to make either of those facets make any kind of damn sense. All of that sounds a lot like Byrne to me. And it was called "Man of Steel" Byrne pushed the idea that Clark was the true identity though. |
|
|
|
Post by dupersuper on Apr 5, 2016 9:06:12 GMT -5
Can we all just agree whatever Snyder is inspired by, it's in all the wrong ways? (I actually rather enjoyed Batman V Superman, but often in spite of Superman and Batmans characterizations)
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,872
Member is Online
|
Post by shaxper on Apr 5, 2016 11:34:12 GMT -5
All of that sounds a lot like Byrne to me. And it was called "Man of Steel" Byrne pushed the idea that Clark was the true identity though. True, though that gave way as his run progressed and we increasingly saw him try to hide what was going on with him as Clark and facing those issues head on as Superman. |
|
|
|
Post by SJNeal on Apr 5, 2016 18:16:01 GMT -5
While visiting this thread has always been a pleasure, it's even more poignant given the current state of Superman affairs. *Sigh*... Of course, one could argue that much of what Snyder is doing wrong with Superman was influenced by Byrne's run, and this thread is only a year out of those particular woods I was mostly referring to the whole "Rebirth" mess when I wrote that post, as I hadn't seen BvS yet. After finally making my way to the theater last night, my despair has reached a new level... |
|
|
|
Post by SJNeal on Apr 5, 2016 18:17:53 GMT -5
Can we all just agree whatever Snyder is inspired by, it's in all the wrong ways? (I actually rather enjoyed Batman V Superman, but often in spite of Superman and Batmans characterizations) Yeah, I'm kinda on the same page. It was a pretty damn good Batman movie, and WW kicked all kinds of ass! Even my friends (who don't read comics at all) walked away disappointed with Superman's showing in the film. |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,872
Member is Online
|
Post by shaxper on May 3, 2016 19:53:42 GMT -5
Adventures of Superman #459  "Solitude" plot: George Perez script: Dan Jurgens pencils: Dan Jurgens finisher: Tim Hula letters: Albert De Guzman colors: Glenn Whitmore associate editor: Jonathan Peterson editor: Mike Carlin grade: D It has now been a full year since Byrne abruptly left DC and the Superman office and, in all that time, Carlin, Jurgens, Ordway, Perez, and Stern still haven't managed to find a direction for the franchise. They've done an excellent job of maintaining an awareness of subplots and continuity but, Matrix aside (and that was pretty damned abrupt), nothing has actually happened. Superman went away; he came back. That's pretty much it. And this issue might be the worst offending one of the bunch yet. We spend eleven of the book's 22 pages rehashing old plot points for no apparent reason. Superman reflects that he's still not sure he won't become Gangbuster again (referencing an event that transpired ten months ago), rehashes how he managed to inflect Jimmy with an alien virus (three months ago) and its subsequent effect (one month ago),  and JUST when we think we're getting back up to speed with current events, we learn the true source of the infection was the Eradicator Device and then get a totally unnecessary three page rehash on its history (as first revealed four months ago):  Look, I get it. I'm a HUGE fan of continuity, but none of these flashbacks in any way serve a current developing plot nor suggest that they will be important again in the future. We're just rehashing stuff for the sake of rehashing stuff. Fortunately, the Eradicator Device does finally do something  but the six page crisis is quickly and arbitrarily averted, after which time we're told all that we really ever needed to know about the device at this point: it is from Krypton, and it may be intelligent and malevolent. Or, more simply:  There. That was a much better use of our time than a multi-page flashback. Because, God knows, when this thing comes back again, we're gonna get another multi-page explanation of what it is and where it came from anyway. We are thrown this confusing little bit of foreshadowing that I don't really understand.  Of course, I never really understood how cloning on Krypton necessitated a global civil war and planet-wide annihilation device as a reaction anyway. Honestly, I always thought Byrne's little ethics treatise on cloning in World of Krypton was incredibly childish and simplistic, so I can't say I'me excited about the prospect of the debate being resumed with Project Cadmus. Fortunately, if the rest of this story was a total waste (and, other than laying groundwork for a Post-Crisis Fortress of Solitude, it was), we still got this gorgeous final page out of Jurgens:  Now all we need is a new plot for Superman. Can we get a plot, please? plot synopsis: Not much. Superman visits Antartica and flashes back to his reason for doing so. In the flashback, he visits Professor Hamilton to check up on Jimmy and, while there, has multiple and prolonged flashbacks within this one giant flashback that don't really give us any vital information until the Eradicator Device goes off, blowing things up and transforming Jimmy into elastic again, but it suddenly stops when Superman approaches it. So he seals it in lead(?) and then hurls it into a frozen chasm in the antarctic, where it begins to glow ominously. |
|
|
|
Post by Action Ace on May 3, 2016 20:36:32 GMT -5
Of note coming up is how the Superman team does things. Action will have Brainiac, Adventures will have the Eradicator, and Superman will have the Cadmus stuff. So they'll do the issue hand off to the other two, comeback and pick up the story from there with some time elapsed. It's a bit odd, but it will get replaced by the traditional planned out three in a row (or more) crossover in 1990.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,872
Member is Online
|
Post by shaxper on May 3, 2016 20:42:05 GMT -5
Of note coming up is how the Superman team does things. Action will have Brainiac, Adventures will have the Eradicator, and Superman will have the Cadmus stuff. So they'll do the issue hand off to the other two, comeback and pick up the story from there with some time elapsed. It's a bit odd, but it will get replaced by the traditional planned out three in a row (or more) crossover in 1990. At least some stuff will be happening. I'm still wondering exactly what's going on with Perez. He was supposed to be the big mover and shaker of the reconfigured creative teams, but he's yet to take on a single issue by himself. Someone mentioned earlier on that he was dealing with health issues. All I know is that he won't be on the books much longer. |
|
|
|
Post by Action Ace on May 3, 2016 20:52:26 GMT -5
I think Perez was just overextended. He's still doing the writing in Wonder Woman and he drops back into New Titans for "Lonely Place of Dying" at about this point.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,872
Member is Online
|
Post by shaxper on May 3, 2016 20:57:39 GMT -5
I think Perez was just overextended. He's still doing the writing in Wonder Woman and he drops back into New Titans for "Lonely Place of Dying" at about this point. Perez only did the covers for Lonely Place of Dying, but I can see the logic in your general point. Edit: Whoops. I was completely wrong about that. I stand corrected. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2016 21:23:18 GMT -5
I think Perez was just overextended. He's still doing the writing in Wonder Woman and he drops back into New Titans for "Lonely Place of Dying" at about this point. Perez only did the covers for Lonely Place of Dying, but I can see the logic in your general point. Edit: Whoops. I was completely wrong about that. I stand corrected. Wasn't he supposed to be starting the Titans OGN Games with Wolfman at this point (the one that never got released at the time and was only finally put in print a couple of years back)? -M |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,872
Member is Online
|
Post by shaxper on May 3, 2016 21:25:14 GMT -5
Perez only did the covers for Lonely Place of Dying, but I can see the logic in your general point. Edit: Whoops. I was completely wrong about that. I stand corrected. Wasn't he supposed to be starting the Titans OGN Games with Wolfman at this point (the one that never got released at the time and was only finally put in print a couple of years back)? -M Wolfman claims '87 or '88 in his introduction to Games. |
|
