shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,869
Member is Online
|
Post by shaxper on Jun 17, 2022 22:37:56 GMT -5
ehhhhhh. Yeah, she tosses Clark's picture in the trash but not so much in a "Clark's a great catch, but he's hardly the only man in the world" way, but in a, well, here's what she thinks: "I've loved Clark as long as I can remember... and he doesn't love me. Never has... never will. I can throw away my life waiting for something that isn't going to happen... or I can make the most of what I have. Pete may not be a Superman, but he's pretty wonderful in his own way... and he loves me... at least I think he loves me".translation: "Clark is my obsession... but I'll never be his. I'd wait my whole life for him since I don't have the inner strength to move on, but thankfully, Clark has enough strength for both us to make it clear that I have no chance with him hence my decision to take what pathetic crumbs get tossed my way and hang onto them with all I've got. Pete loves me... or does he? Why would anyone love me? oh come on, Lana, you're being too hard on yourself! Of course Pete loves you - it's not like he's Superman and is above settling for last place. Still... better go have sex with him just to make sure". Think I'm exaggerating? Take another look at Lana's sad sack face as she stares at her reflection in the mirror. Toss in the fact that Pete Ross is pretty sad sack himself (Lana thanks him for letting her stay with him and he responds with "Enough of that, Lana! I'm the one who talked you into taking that lemon... and you should be kicking me instead of thanking me... ( thinking) And I'd hoped she was over Clark. Who was I kidding? She'll never be over him..." And again, sad sack artwork used to depict Pete Ross - slumped shoulders, hopeless frown, almost no eye contact. Even when Lana makes her move on him he's still got that frightened, intimidated look on his face. Hard to credit Lana with pulling herself up by her bootstraps when this is the guy she's settling for. Pretty crazy to think that Pete Ross was created so that Superboy could have a pal who learned his secret identity on his own and kept that secret to himself so thoroughly that even Superboy was unaware that Pete was constantly getting him out of jams behind his back. To see him reduced to 'No, Lana! You sleep in the bed and I'LL be the one who spends in the night sobbing in the bathroom!" suggests that what's being set up here is many, many instances still to come of Lana staring at Clark's taped back together again picture thinking "oh Clark, even here in this cave in the middle of nowhere I can't stop thinking of you" as Pete's silhouetted form is visible in the background thinking "even after figuring out how to open that can of stew for our anniversary, she's still pinning over Clark. aw, who can blame her - Clark's wonderful. At least she and I can agree on that... but how come she never lets me hold his picture? Guess I really am a nobody..." Yes, you can absolutely see it that way, but I took those final panels to mean things were finally changing. I sense from your tone that it doesn't turn out that way, and that disappoints me greatly. Arrrrgggghhhh. Up until this issue, I positively loathed Bogdanove. I can respect what he is trying to do with his action panels, but the ridiculous proportions always distract me. He draws people the way Liefeld draws feet. I suspect Liefeld is exactly who DC was thinking of when they hired this guy, DC having totally missed out on the Image revolution, but I'd take Liefeld over Boggy anyday, and that's saying a lot coming from me! I suspect that was kind of the point. This conflict felt very real and universal. It's a moment nearly every couple goes through: no matter how douchy the ex is, there is always that insecurity that, at some point, your partner found this person more attractive than everyone else in their life. Supes being jealous of "Jeb" is sort of priceless. If even Clark can go down that path, we can excuse ourselves for doing the same (so long as we man up and apologize like Clark did). That would at least work better than, "This volume collects a bunch of stories from after the Byrne run you've heard about and before the Doomsday stuff you actually care about!" I actually saw an omnibus just yesterday collecting every Doomsday and Funeral for a Friend issue, and it was selling for $150. I imagine this is one run we'll never see DC reprint in its entirety. |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,869
Member is Online
|
Post by shaxper on Jun 19, 2022 11:44:08 GMT -5
Superman #63 (January 1992)  "Shadows from The Past!" Script: Dan Jurgens Pencils: Dan Jurgens (layouts); Brett Breeding (finishes) Inks: Brett Breeding Colors: Glenn Whitmore Letters: John Costanza Grade: D Well maybe last issue didn't provide any kind of satisying follow-up to 1991's big cliffhanger involving the rise of Lex Luthor II, but certainly this issue will focus on...  ahh f**k it. I don't know what any of this means and (worse yet) I don't care. A tie-in to promote the new Aquaman title, of all things, really feels like a hijack here. Save it for a month; we have major plot points to develop and resolve! I give Jurgens respect for digging deep into Post-Crisis continuity to find a meaningful connection between Superman's world and Aquaman's:  which then opens the door for this surprise twist that anyone could see coming from a mile away:   It doesn't seem like it's going to go anywhere since Lori is resolved to keep her secret and Superman has no real clue that she is still out there. So unless Cat Grant starts mentioning visions of mermaids rescuing Clark in the ocean next month, I think we're in the clear. And yet I find that all the more upsetting. It was uncomfortable enough when Byrne felt the need to introduce the idea of Clark having relationships before Lois. It's realistic, and I got over it, especially now with Jeb Freedman. But the idea that Clark loves them EQUALLY--that he still regrets losing Lori when he has Lois--that really irks me.  Clark and Lois have one of the greatest, most realistic, and beautifully executed romances in all of fiction here. Why do these writers keep feeling the need to shake it up? Find conflict in The Kyrpton Man trying to conquer Earth and The Daily Planet going on strike; not in our favorite engaged couple's feelings towards one another. Meanwhile, Jurgens seems to enjoy making multiple nods to recent continuity in this issue, summarizing Clark's amnesia, Jeb Freedman, the Daily Planet Strike, and even the mayoral race (which seemed like it was going to be a big deal in these comics but now is just over without ever having occupied center stage):  I guess we'll find out he's in Lex Luthor II's pocket soon, and that's how he won. We also get the first reference in a very long while to Superman keeping his Clark Kent clothing in a secret pouch in his cape.  I STILL don't understand how this works. Heck, even the main antagonist of this issue (if you can even call it that) is a leftover from the recent Blackout storyline:  Though it takes half an issue for Carlin to provide an editor's box, explaining where this happened for forgetful readers:  And yet there are quite a few continuity errors in this issue, too. For example, our two henchmen trailing Lois don't know why she is of interest to Cerberus  when he outright told them just last week:  And Jimmy is upset that his car is snowed in:  when just last issue it died because he couldn't afford gas for it. Was he planning to put it in neutral and push? Similarly whatever Simonson and Bogdanove were doing with turning Jimmy into comic relief, closely resembling Archie Andrews, is totally ignored here. We are asked to take him seriously and pity his plight once again. Sure, either of those glitches could be blamed on Simonson and Bogdanove, or poor inter-office communication in general, but it's a little harder to defend these next two errors: 1. Superman's wet hair.  I guess he no longer has an aura of invulnerability? 2. Running out of breath.  How many times has the Post-Crisis Superman office established that Superman can hold his breath for an extended period of time? Man of Steel #3 first established that Clark could fly into space but would still need to breathe occasionally, Action Comics #588 said Superman could hold his breath for about an hour even while doing intense physical activity, and Superman: The Earth Stealers and Superman #33 later extended this out to be about two to three hours. Whichever version you believe, there is no way Superman was under the water for even one hour. Anyway, continuity blunders and Breeding's awkward finishing over Jurgens' breakdowns aside, there are two genuinely worthwhile moments in this issue. The first is seeing that, indeed, Pete Ross and Lana Lang are faring well together:  and the second is this little moment for Superman:  I love moments where it is less Superman's natural powers and more his character and perseverance that save the day. So not a total loss of an issue, but there was a lot I could have done without here. Important Details:1. Lori Lemaris is still alive and still in love with Superman. 2. Aquaman does not know that Superman is Clark Kent. Minor Details:1. We're reminded again that a month in our world equals a week in Superman's. 2. How did Clark and Lois come to decide that Clark would get the big story while Lois would go shirt shopping for him?  I'm starting to think that Jurgens has no respect for the sanctity of this relationship. So many previous stories spent so much time establishing them as equals, even showing how they work out who gets the story on several occasions. This is supremely disappointing. 3. Here's a bit of weird foreshadowing:  If only Jurgens knew what was exactly twelve months away... |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,869
Member is Online
|
Post by shaxper on Jun 19, 2022 23:37:11 GMT -5
Adventures of Superman #486 (January 1992)  "Purge" Script: Jerry Ordway Pencils: Tom Grummett Inks: Doug Hazlewood Colors: Glenn Whitmore Letters: Albert DeGuzman Grade: C Well maybe the last two issues didn't provide any kind of satisying follow-up to last month's big cliffhanger involving the rise of Lex Luthor II, but certainly this issue will focus on...  Seriously? Look, this office utterly blew the opportunity that last year's year-long crossover event presented. Now, three issues into "1992", things don't seem to be looking any better. We've got lots of catching up on side characters and small points of continuity (all of which I greatly enjoy!), but absolutely no sense of a larger focus for the year. Two clueless super-powered thugs tailing Lois Lane for an entire issue, Lori Lemarus returning from the dead only to keep her being alive a secret from everyone, and now a freak robot trying to assassinate Manheim and accomplishing nothing. None of it seems to be going anywhere. In a city in which Lex Luthor II is rapidly amassing power and reshaping the city in his image, how is this not even getting casually mentioned in the pages of any of these issues? Oh, there are bits to love about this issue. While the central plot is both forgettable and inconsequential, it's nice to know that both Mannheim and Gillespie are still out there. And while that robot's abilities seemed to be total bulls**t (regenerating limbs, impervious to most damage, and even turning into a motorcycle, and Mannheim heavily implies it was built on Earth and not on Apocalypse!), the technology with which a completely broken Gillespie can operate a computer was surprisingly prescient for 1992, that technology first being pioneered in 1997.  Additionally, Ordway continues to write the best interactions between Clark and Lois, this little bit of flirtatious banter absolutely being the highlight of the issue:  Along with the heart-gushing look on Martha's face when they first arrive over the farm:  In an age in which comics were growing increasingly dark, this franchise was holding its own as a downright positive and happy place...at least for another twelve months. Going along with this, though, it's possible Ordway and Grummit overstep the goody-goody factor a bit with this awkward ending, which closes the issue at an arbitrary point just to emphasize the fact that Lois' family is a praying family:  Superman participating in Grace at the family table might just be good manners as a house guest, but it's also a bit alienating. it's one thing to have Superman helping Santa on the classic cover or two, but it's another to imply he is a devout Christian. Not only does it separate him from everyone reading who is not a devout Christian, but Seagal and Shuster were Jewish. I could almost see something like this flying in a Silver Age story (though they weren't big fans of mixing religion and comics back then either unless you wrote for Treasure Chest), but certainly an office that had taken progressive stands on environmental issues, homelessness, economics, inner city youth, American intervention in world politics, and especially feminism would understand in 1992 that not everyone is Christian. Minor Details:1. Gillespie is still running intergang from his hospital room. I'm not convinced criminals would ever be so loyal as to expend so much effort, take such risks, and cause such impractical delays in their operations as to let someone who can't even talk run the organization, but oh well. I guess everyone is sunshine and optimism in Metropolis--even the gangsters. 2. Mannheim has now had his restraining collar removed, meaning he can use his Apocalypse powers to escape at any time. 3. Ordway is definitely following Jurgens' continuity for Jimmy Olsen as opposed to Simonson's (Jimmy is living in his car and is still trying to get it out from the snow), but he is borrowing a bit of Simonson's humor. Not exactly Archie level, but definitely a step in that direction:  4. Is this a reference to Parasite?  Grummett's art is hilarious here. So much is conveyed without being said. 5. Ordway's covers continue to depict Superman with gray hair. As I noted last month: In the end, we've now gone three weeks and three dollars without anything of consequence occuring in Superman's world, but at least the characterizations are mostly working. The world of Metropolis keeps on moving, even when the A plots do not |
|
|
|
Post by chadwilliam on Jun 20, 2022 11:48:52 GMT -5
Superman #63 (January 1992) "Shadows from The Past!" Script: Dan Jurgens Pencils: Dan Jurgens (layouts); Brett Breeding (finishes) Inks: Brett Breeding Colors: Glenn Whitmore Letters: John Costanza Grade: D Well maybe last issue didn't provide any kind of satisying follow-up to last month's big cliffhanger involving the rise of Lex Luthor II, but certainly this issue will focus on... ahh f**k it. I don't know what any of this means and (worse yet) I don't care. A tie-in to promote the new Aquaman title, of all things, really feels like a hijack here. Save it for a month; we have major plot points to develop and resolve! I give Jurgens respect for digging deep into Post-Crisis continuity to find a meaningful connection between Superman's world and Aquaman's: which then opens the door for this surprise twist that anyone could see coming from a mile away: It doesn't seem like it's going to go anywhere since Lori is resolved to keep her secret and Superman has no real clue that she is still out there. So unless Cat Grant starts mentioning visions of mermaids rescuing Clark in the ocean next month, I think we're in the clear. And yet I find that all the more upsetting. It was uncomfortable enough when Byrne felt the need to introduce the idea of Clark having relationships before Lois. It's realistic, and I got over it, especially now with Jeb Freedman. But the idea that Clark loves them EQUALLY--that he still regrets losing Lori when he has Lois--that really irks me. 1. Superman's wet hair. I guess he no longer has an aura of invulnerability? How is that aura supposed to work anyway? Was the idea that Byrne's Superman was, strength wise, just a normal human who happened to have a nigh indestructible force shield around him which also let him lift and punch things at a phenomenal level? In other words, lose that aura and he's no different from any Earthling with his build? Erik Larsen ridiculed the aura early on in Savage Dragon pointing out that such an idea would prevent Superman being able to mask his body odor since soap and deodorant wouldn't stick to his skin and even Byrne made the wet hair mistake in his retelling/introduction of Lori back in issue 13. So as sloppy as it makes Superman look, I can't fault Jurgens too much for this. I mean, if Clark goes swimming for example, wouldn't people be wondering about his immaculate coif when he got out? What I DO blame Jurgens for - and here's a really ugly bit of foreshadowing - is that hideous mullet he gives Clark during his flashback. Byrne gave Clark slightly longer hair in his depiction of this flashback, but it wasn't anything like that. Unfortunately, it's not the last we'll see of it.... |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,869
Member is Online
|
Post by shaxper on Jun 25, 2022 16:10:50 GMT -5
Superman: The Man of Steel #8 (February 1992)  "Power Trip!" Script: Louise Simonson Pencils: Kieron Dwyer Inks: Dennis Janke Colors: Glenn Whitmore Letters: Bill Oakley Grade: D If you were starting to wonder if anyone could pencil worse than Bogdanove, the answer would appear to be "yes". Kieron Dwyer filled in previously on Action Comics #671, but the awfulness was less notable there. Here, Dwyer seems to really struggle with proportions and perspective, from Lois' freakishly long arms and torso to a stranger shrinking in size across two panels:   And, of course, there's Superman's giraffe neck at the end:  THIS is a professional comic book? Especially in the age of Image? Not too much to note about this one, as Simonson apparently thinks Cerberus is a much bigger deal than we do. His minions spent a full week (their time, not ours) trailing Lois and planning to catch her, and their preposterous plan to use far out technologies that never get explained to make Superman do their bidding blows up in their faces anyway, but not before Simonson and Dwyer can indulge in some heavy, comics code-approved s&m:   It's no Superman and Barda shooting a porno, but still, what the actual heck? Kids were reading this. Well, at least any kid disturbed by this can flip the page and watch something more wholesome, like kind-hearted Bibbo Bibbowsky and his friends pressuring Jimmy Olsen to get drunk for the sake of Christmas or something:  What could possibly be wrong with this message? Going bigger picture, after a month of build-up, all that really gets established in this issue is that Cerberus is not Cerebus the Aardvark:  and this ambiguous tease that didn't really entice me:  By the way, how does Cerberus know Superman is vulnerable to magic? Are his nonsense future-tech devices that sap Superman powers without any indication as to how/why they work somehow magical? This really needed to be explained better. Two months into 1992, and eight months into this title, Simonson still seems like she is writing in her own world, intersecting with the other three titles on the surface, but essentially marching to her own tune, furthering this one thoroughly uninteresting Cerberus plot across eight months worth of issues. Even without the legitimately bad writing in places, it's an inexcusable waste to stretch something this lackluster across so many issues. And Cerberus is hardly done. Minor Details:1. Dear God. Who thought this was a good idea for a costume:  2. Whereas Ordway, Stern, and Jurgens have worked hard to give Metropolis its own unique identity and details, Simonson treats it as New York in everything but name. Superman plants a Christmas Tree in Lincoln Park after it is pushed off the roof of "Dacy's" department store. How lazy can you get? 3. How did Superman know exactly where to punch through into the lead-lined warehouse?  Where was the alternate dystopian Armageddon 2001 future where Superman punches through five feet to the left and goes straight through Lois? To be fair, there were exactly two moments I appreciated in this story: Superman and Lois having to show restraint in front of onlookers after an intense ordeal  and this cute moment where the art actually worked:  I truly wonder if, upon re-reading this run, I could get away with skipping the Man of Steel issues entirely. There'd likely be a few minor moments of continuity I'd be missing, but did I really have to see Jimmy get kicked out of his apartment to understand that it happened? I doubt it. I couldn't care less about Cerberus at this point, and Simonson seemingly has nothing else to offer us. |
|
|
|
Post by Duragizer on Jun 25, 2022 21:10:43 GMT -5
I never would have guessed that was Butch Guice art. Likewise, mostly. I can see his style more clearly in the Lois panels. |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,869
Member is Online
|
Post by shaxper on Jun 26, 2022 9:35:37 GMT -5
Adventures of Superman #487 (February 1992)  "Christmas in Suicide Slumberland" Script: Jerry Ordway Pencils: Tom Grummett Inks: Doug Hazlewood Colors: Glenn Whitmore Letters: Albert DeGuzman Grade: B It's a little hard to follow-up Dan Jurgens' efforts in last week's issue of Superman with another spirit-of-Christmas story, but Ordway gives it his best. After establishing that the senator Pete Ross works for has been assassinated and that Pete Ross has been appointed by the governor to complete his term, Ordway tries for a feel-good story with Bibbo at its center, and it sort-of-kind-of-maybe-works. Where I struggle with this one is that, while Ordway has been depicting Bibbo as the loveable unlikely saint of Suicide Slum since winning the lottery at the beginning of "1991", his treatment is suddenly very different here. Whereas Bibbo's bar was depicted as an oasis of love in Suicide Slum only four months back,  it's a lot more depressing now, the Christmas party Bibbo throws consisting of High Pockets getting a six pack of beer, Lamar getting a pack of beef jerky, and no one remembering to give Bibbo anything, while they watch the news and some other regular complaining that her son never sees her anymore. The treatment get s no better once High Pocket and Lamar (no longer exuding any of the fun charm they had when they debuted in Adventures #483) are somehow stupid and drunk enough to believe that robbing a toy store and leaving behind payment (which they presumably don't even have) in order to help out orphans is a good idea. This leads to a run-in with Superman and Bibbo having to earn his mercy by volunteering to play Santa at a local hospital. Superman acknowledges Bibbo's recent good deeds (this is their first meeting since waaay back during Day of The Krypton Man, and Bibbo has sure come a long way since), but Bibbo becomes the butt of every joke after, everyone making snobbish remarks at this reformed man doing a good deed to help out his friends AND help orphans:    It's a bit of a betrayal to take someone we were encouraged to admire over the past year and make him into this much of a joke. Sure, Clark and Lois manage to see the good in Bibbo by the end  but no one ever actually acknowledges this to Bibbo's face. It's a hard sell asking me to repeatedly laugh at the most selfless person in Metropolis outside of Superman himself for twenty two pages, but it was an endearing story all the same, and Ordway tends to capture the souls of these characters better than anyone. Somehow, Bibbo in the Santa outfit exuded a very Norman Rockwell feel. Ordway is trying to tap that level of wholesome mischevousness, and it often works. Important Details:1. This will be the only Post-Crisis appearance of Turtle Boy, this time as a character Jimmy is hired to play for a pizza commercial:  Odder is the choice to name the ape Titano. That would be a cute nod to Pre-Crisis continuity if we hadn't already gotten a Post-Crisis Titano in one of my absolute favorite Post-Crisis Superman stories. Ordway may not have been involved in that story, but Mike Carlin did edit it, so it's a little surprising to see that it's been forgotten by this point. 2. Bibbo has reunited Jimmy and his mother by making a simple phone call.  Good riddance to that story arc. 3. Pete Ross is now an acting congressman after the assassination of his boss (clearly intended to look like it was done by Quraci terrorists, but it likely wasn't). Minor Details:1. Agent Liberty is back, and we're reminded of some old details that might have otherwise gone forgotten:  President Marlo has been in US custody since Superman #53. 2. In a truly unnecessary display of internal continuity, the shirt Lois bought for Clark in Superman #63 is now gifted to him here, except it was a dress shirt then and is a sweater now.  Oops. 3. Here's the problem with this idea that one month in our world equals one week in Superman's. Just last month, Jimmy was at Bibbo's Thanksgiving Party, and now Bibbo is having a Christmas one:  For the characters in this world, only one week has gone by, and yet we've clearly advanced a full month in terms of seasons. |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,869
Member is Online
|
Post by shaxper on Jun 26, 2022 19:06:47 GMT -5
Not looking to beat a dead horse here, but my objection was never that Clark had a Christian upbringing. In the very review chaykinstevens referenced, I praised the Superman Office for being that bold when mainstream comics generally tend to avoid religion. It's ending the issue with a prayer at the dinner table that I objected to - an indication that this is what normal Thanksgiving must be for everyone (including Clark and Lois). Clark can be quietly religious, but when it begins to feel like the comic is preaching religion, I have a problem. I wonder how many folks reading this review thread have any idea what my religion is because I don't force it down anyone's throat. The CCF doesn't make specific topics nor threads endorsing anything about what I believe in. The things I create for others are respectful of the idea that we all come from different places and hold different beliefs and practices. Heck, the Post-Byrne Christmas stories have twice now gone out of their way to acknowledge Jews and their culture. So an abrupt ending that seems to exist solely to force the saintliness of a Christian praying family at the dinner table down our throats rubbed me wrong. Several of you have since indicated that this did not bother you, and that's fine. But as this discussion is continuing, I felt it necessary to clarify my objection. Characters having a religious upbringing = fine. Previously nondenominational characters being revealed as devout practitioners of a religion = unsettling Abrupt shock ending designed to force Christian values down the reader's throat = not cool at all in my book. |
|
|
|
Post by badwolf on Jun 27, 2022 9:07:30 GMT -5
Not looking to beat a dead horse here, but my objection was never that Clark had a Christian upbringing. In the very review chaykinstevens referenced, I praised the Superman Office for being that bold when mainstream comics generally tend to avoid religion. It's ending the issue with a prayer at the dinner table that I objected to - an indication that this is what normal Thanksgiving must be for everyone (including Clark and Lois). Clark can be quietly religious, but when it begins to feel like the comic is preaching religion, I have a problem. I wonder how many folks reading this review thread have any idea what my religion is because I don't force it down anyone's throat. The CCF doesn't make specific topics nor threads endorsing anything about what I believe in. The things I create for others are respectful of the idea that we all come from different places and hold different beliefs and practices. Heck, the Post-Byrne Christmas stories have twice now gone out of their way to acknowledge Jews and their culture. So an abrupt ending that seems to exist solely to force the saintliness of a Christian praying family at the dinner table down our throats rubbed me wrong. Several of you have since indicated that this did not bother you, and that's fine. But as this discussion is continuing, I felt it necessary to clarify my objection. Characters having a religious upbringing = fine. Previously nondenominational characters being revealed as devout practitioners of a religion = unsettling Abrupt shock ending designed to force Christian values down the reader's throat = not cool at all in my book. I agree; Superman's upbringing should be evident in his "good works" rather than any specific ritual. |
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Jun 27, 2022 21:18:07 GMT -5
I was picking up the Super books and it got pushed in house ads and the DC supplements that were put out, and in things like CBG. The Superman books were still doing well and there was speculation as to when they were going to do the wedding. I believe, originally, it was supposed to happen within two years of the proposal; but, the debut of the Lois and Clark tv series put a hold on that, as they wanted to do it in parallel.
War World and the whole Superman in exile in space thing had done well, especially because of Perez's involvement. This being the return of Draga and War World and such was treated as a big deal by editorial. I saw a lot of people getting the Superman books, at that time.
There was the theory about Doomsday, because Brainiac does jettison something, during the storyline, that is supposed to be a weapon. That theory then drove sales of that issue as the first appearance of Doomsday. At the time, it was denied; but, they did kind of retroactively embrace it, as I recall. I think it was more of a parallel idea that got folded together.
Panic in the Sky was probably the last storyline that I rally enjoyed, as I ended up dumping the book, not long after its conclusion, though I scrambled back onto it when the Doomsday storyline got going. After that, I stayed through the initial return; but, the malaise returned quickly. In part, I was really burning out on superheroes at DC and Marvel and was picking up more alternative material. The speculator mess helped hurry along that decision.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,869
Member is Online
|
Post by shaxper on Jun 27, 2022 23:18:33 GMT -5
there was speculation as to when they were going to do the wedding. I believe, originally, it was supposed to happen within two years of the proposal; but, the debut of the Lois and Clark tv series put a hold on that, as they wanted to do it in parallel. I've heard the same. Of course, the engagement was more than a year ago, and Lois & Clark is a little more than a full year away, so someone was dragging their feet even before L&A. Heck, primetime TV was a crowded battleground back then, and they had no reason to believe the show would survive long enough for Clark and Lois to even get engaged (which doesn't happen until the end of season two). |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,869
Member is Online
|
Post by shaxper on Jun 28, 2022 21:18:32 GMT -5
Superman: The Man of Steel #9 (March 1992)  "Power Breakfast" Script: Louise Simonson Pencils: Jon Bogdanove (layouts); Dennis Janke (finishes) Inks: Dennis Janke Colors: Glenn Whitmore Letters: Bill Oakley Grade: A- Putting aside Simonson's ridiculous title for this story (her humor continues to misfire in these issues), this is one hell of a first act for this major event. This is now the fourth time Metropolis has faced a massive crisis (there was a Thanagarian invasion, a tsunami, and a city-wide extended blackout), but this is the first time a writer and artist have truly made us feel the extent of the devastation, from Lois being forced to loot her own favorite camera store to countless jaw-dropping street-level views of the devastation:  For the first time, the scale of it all seems real. Maybe the reason Bogdanove skipped out on the previous issue was because he wanted more time to get this one right. It would explain why his art looks so much BETTER this time around. There are still a few truly bad moments:  but they are rare and also less terrible than usual, while there are far more panels that are actually exciting and visually striking:  I finally see Bogdanove's potential. Maybe he's just a slow artist who can't handle monthly deadlines (and who benefits from having someone like Janke finish for him). I only have two criticisms of what is an incredibly impressive issue (seriously, coming from this creative team!). For one, while the devastation feels real and dire, it's quite a stretch that absolutely no one in Metropolis has died. I get that this is a Comics Code-approved book, but if Weezy and Kieron Dwyer could spend much of last issue working through some shared s&m fantasy, we can certainly afford to make the threat here a little more believable with a few off-panel deaths. Instead, everyone manages to be conveniently out of the way of those laser beams that keep ripping through windows:  and evacuated safely before buildings crumble to the ground:  It's a tad silly. The other misfire of this issue is Brainiac. Six years into this Post-Crisis relaunch, we are still waiting for someone not to f*ck up Superman's #2 villain, but Simonson and Bogdanove treat him like some archtypical melodrama villain, complete with the twirly mustache  who is easily thwarted and doesn't seem like he is going to be much of a threat here:  That's...not Brainiac. Minor Details:1. Jose Delgado is back as Gangbuster.  But then that gets me wondering why Simonson isn't depicting how this attack is affecting more of our extended cast of characters, all living in this city and all likely frightened. How are Cat Grant and her son faring? What about Sam Foswell and Alice, the intern? Where is Lucy Lane? Are Pete Ross and Lana Lang watching on television? What about Jonathan and Martha Kent? So many characters to check up on -- a full issue of their thoughts and reactions would have been worthwhile. I get why this phase of the event had to be crammed into a single month: the internal timeline of these books means that going into a fifth week would equal Brainiac's attack on Metropolis lasting for more than a week (which is unlikely). Still, this feels rushed and would have benefited from more time. It would have been nice to have brought in the annuals early in order to extend this out across those issues. 2. Yup. Mayor Berkowitz appears to be in Lex Luthor II's pocket. I guess that's how he won the re-election:  3. I can't get enough of Emil and Mildred. Even aging supporting characters need love:  4. I truly don't know what to make of Simonson's humor. Jimmy Olsen as Archie Andrews two issues back, the hilarious antics of Bibbo and friends pressuring Jimmy to get drunk last issue, and now the title of this story and that weird moment in the middle of an alien invasion when Professor Hamilton offers donuts to Jimmy and Bibbo:  WHY? It completely undercuts the tension of the moment. 5. One of Boggy's stranger moments is this little energetic telepathy cloud drawn between Lois and a fleeing shop-owner:  What was he trying to depict, there? 6. And yet, here's another tremendously impressive Boggy moment from this issue:  Or does the credit belong to Janke? Or Whitmore? 7. I'm really getting sick of Simonson treating Metropolis as if it's New York in everything but name. I used to drive by this place every day:  Every other creator in this office has worked hard to give Metropolis its own unique identity. This is so damn lazy. |
|
|
|
Post by badwolf on Jun 29, 2022 9:56:30 GMT -5
There is really quite an odd diversity of art styles in that issue. The Superman panels do look quite nice, but that picture of Lois outside the camera shop? She looks like she is 10 feet tall.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,869
Member is Online
|
Post by shaxper on Jun 29, 2022 10:20:32 GMT -5
There is really quite an odd diversity of art styles in that issue. The Superman panels do look quite nice, but that picture of Lois outside the camera shop? She looks like she is 10 feet tall. Good call. Makes me wonder if there is more going on with the art chores than the credits suggest since last issue suffered from those same problems even though it was credited to Dwyer. I wonder if Boggy began that issue and didn't receive credit for the parts that he did, and I wonder if Janke is erasing anything when he does his finishes. |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,869
Member is Online
|
Post by shaxper on Jun 29, 2022 22:49:20 GMT -5
Superman #65 (March 1992)  "Head Man" Script: Dan Jurgens Pencils: Dan Jurgens (layouts); Brett Breeding (finishes) Inks: Brett Breeding Colors: Glenn Whitmore Letters: John Costanza Grade: C+ Well here we go. Last issue established the level of damage being done to Metropolis, ending with the tease that this was only a beginning. Now, with Warworld on the way, Jurgens does his best to establish just how bad the threat is:  Heck, Warworld apparently has a reputation. Metron knows it, the New Gods know it; even Darkseid knows it:  Which then begs the question: what the hell was the point of first attacking Metropolis with Brainiac's "head ship"? Why give Superman or anyone warning when Earth could have been taken entirely by surprise? Come to think of it, what is Brainiac's goal anyway? Shouldn't that be sort of integral to this plot? WHY does he want to destroy Earth? And, as I've been asking since Action #674, can his goal really be to destroy Superman when he tried to recruit Superman for this mission in that issue? In fact, if it's revenge he's after, shouldn't his primary target be Brainiac 5 (see my review of L.E.G.I.O.N. '90 Annual #1)? A villain without a motive is definitely a bit of a problem when telling a big story like this. And, to be clear, this IS a big story. In fact, as soon as Superman has his allies assembled, John Costanza makes a point to bold the words "Crisis" and "Invasion" in his speech.  There seems to be a clear intent to make this every bit as big as DC's biggest events to date. Of course, DC has stopped doing events (outside of the annuals) for the time being, so Panic in the Sky is restricted entirely to the Superman titles, even though a lot of effort is made here to acknowledge the current continuities of Aquaman, the Justice League titles, and The New Titans. In an effort to lend some characterization to this event-centered issue, Jurgens makes the choice to suddenly give Clark an inferiority complex. It comes out of nowhere and disappears just as inexplicably, but for a couple of pages, Superman is a downright sad-sack:  And Brainiac is quick to (rightly) call him out for sitting back and watching while Orion and Lightray went to fight Brainiac on their own:  Where the hell did this come from? And, if you're going to go there, make it into a meaningful internal conflict, complete with a substantial resolution. Instead, Superman simply snaps out of it as soon as he realizes it's up to him to stop Brainiac. Seems like this issue was one big splash panel filled with heroes and a whole lot of filler surrounding it. Brainiac has no motive yet, Superman's internal conflict is abrupt, out of character, and suddenly gone without ever being meaningfully resolved, and even his recruitment process makes no sense. Let's be clear -- he made an open invitation for heroes to come join him:  But, before doing so, he extended personal invites to exactly three people. Wonder Woman makes sense. She is a great leader, follower, decision-maker, and fighter. I'm assuming she'd need a space suit, but otherwise she should be well-suited to a space battle for the destiny of mankind. But Superman's very first choice, which he builds up quite a bit:  ...is Deathstroke the Terminator?? Ummm, why? this had to be total fanservice, right? I mean even Superman later admits he doesn't know a damn thing about him:  and quickly discovers that he was completely wrong about Slade being a good leader. Clark's third choice makes even less sense to me, though:  Yes, folks. If you're going to have an all-out SPACE battle, you're going to need the guy who talks to fish. It just makes sense! Sure, I respect Superman thinking about personality temperment more than powers, but powers REALLY DO matter here. Sure enough, both of Superman's poor choices become evident at almost the exact same time, though I'm not sure either he or Jurgens note the irony the way I do:  Of course, upon further reflection, Superman never actually picked Aquaman. He went to Paradise Island to recruit Wonder Woman, and Aquaman just sort of showed up: "So, Diana, I need you to...Oh, hi Arthur! Right, so, like I was saying, I...uh...you're BOTH natural leaders--and I can't think of anybody I'd rather have at my side!" And, speaking of heroes who don't belong, how did Agent Liberty get on the cover? He only appears in that one splash panel while Wonder Woman plays a larger role and didn't make the cover at all. I'm glad he wasn't more prominantly featured in the story, as I'm getting really tired of Jurgens promoting this guy here. At least when the focus shifts to a character like Gangbuster or Professor Hamilton, we understand that these are characters who are a fundamental part of Superman's world. Agent Liberty, on the other hand, is clearly a pet project for Jurgens that is only here to garner interest. He managed to get a special released just last month, but apparently he can't do better than that on his own, so he's back fishing for attention here. All in all, this issue doesn't quite keep up with the two exceptional stories that came before it, but there is still plenty of room for Panic in the Sky to finish strong. Minor Details:1. I may not be happy that we're stuck with the interplanetary tyrant characterization for Brainiac that L.E.G.I.O.N. '90 Annual #1 gave him, but Jurgens does a nice job with the character here anyway:  I want the cold, calculating super-genius, but if we're going to make him an archtypical villain, Jurgens at least gives him a little theatrical panache. 2. What is this?  I'm guessing Jurgens can't say "Oh my God" in a Comics Code-approved book, but...like, is this an accepted thing people do instead of writing the word "God," is it some Kryptonian thing, or is everyone else just as confused as I am?  3. I can't decide whether I love Jurgens trying to go all Gil Kane in this panel or find it utterly awkward: At the very least, it looks more like Superboy than Superman. 4. Am I the only one who thought this was a thoroughly unimpressive way for Superman to get a hold of Lex Luthor II?  I mean, yes, it's cool that the Superman Office is anticipating yet another futuristic technological leap that will become a reality by our time, but couldn't Superman dramatically appear outside of Luthor's window like the old days? Calling the front desk and politely asking to be transferred is a little too humble even for the Big Blue Boyscout. 5. What's the point of trying to maintain a secret identity when countless onlookers can easily see Superman appearing outside of Lois Lane's balcony on a regular basis, coming inside, and not leaving for the rest of the night? Metropolis is supposed to be the largest city in the world; people are watching.  You couldn't get away with this in Cleveland. For that matter, if Lois is repeatedly kidnapped because folks associate her with Superman and assume he will come to her rescue, how has no one noticed these regular visits either:  At least Superman eventually leaves that apartment each time he visits! 6. Okay, I can accept trying to give Warworld a bigger reputation in the Post-Crisis by having all the intersteller heroes and villains know about and fear it already, but how the hell did word of Warworld get all the way down to Atlantis?   |
|
