|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Jan 23, 2021 7:57:34 GMT -5
I feel like I liked Bogdanove when he was doing Man of Steel when Steel was in it, but maybe I'm getting things confused... he definitely has a distinctive style, that's for sure. Some of those panels are a bit wonky for sure though... We'll see if I still like it when you get there  |
|
|
|
Post by chadwilliam on Jan 24, 2021 15:00:58 GMT -5
I hate to say it, but Bogdanove's artwork is only going to get more extreme and unrestrained as the 90's swing into gear. There's a frentic energy which I think served him well during the Doomsday arc, but intensity isn't really something you need when, say, Lois and Clark are standing around talking. It's too bad, since he clearly has an appreciation for Joe Shuster's early squinty eyed Superman and I personally get a kick out of knowing that at least one artist was still trying to stay on model to how Superman looked when penciled by Al Plastino during the 50's/60's (but for some reason, that's only when he's depicting Superman in profile) but, yeah, "more extreme" and "unrestrained" + 'Mullet" is where things will be headed for Bogdanove, unfortunately.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,872
Member is Online
|
Post by shaxper on Jan 25, 2021 9:11:14 GMT -5
She edited issues 137-182 of X-Men and the first 20 (I think) of New Mutants. She stepped down as an editor in 1983 to focus on writing WOW. I didn't realize her departure as editor coincides almost exactly with Claremont's peak on X-Men. The aftermath of Jean Grey's death (#138 and beyond) is where I've always felt the series and characterizations truly hit their stride, and the 180s are where the series really started to lose focus and drop off for most people. Yes, that explains it. Thanks. Just one more barrier women face in the comics industry -- your name changes, and all but the most loyal fans don't know who you are anymore. |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,872
Member is Online
|
Post by shaxper on Jan 25, 2021 9:14:23 GMT -5
Wow, that's some serious bland art there, especially Angstrom. His head looks too small for his massive body. Why bother giving him hair at all if that's the best that it's going to look? The premise of this issue gives Bogdanove a nice pass since Angstrom is constantly changing/mutating. Lousy drawing can easily be dismissed as a further mutation. I have to admit I didn't catch that. Yes. It's obvious Simonson is just looking to create tension in Lois and Clark's relationship, but it feels so forced. |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,872
Member is Online
|
Post by shaxper on Jan 25, 2021 9:16:35 GMT -5
he clearly has an appreciation for Joe Shuster's early squinty eyed Superman and I personally get a kick out of knowing that at least one artist was still trying to stay on model to how Superman looked when penciled by Al Plastino during the 50's/60's Best defense of his style that I've seen yet.  Did the guy actually have fans in the '90s? I truly don't get why he was left on this title. |
|
|
|
Post by MDG on Jan 25, 2021 10:53:16 GMT -5
Re Louise Simonson: Apart from her work at Warren, I never paid much attention to her except on Power Pack, which I wasn't loyal reader of, but liked what I saw. I do remember getting to page 4 of the first issue of Steel and thinking, "Yeesh--this was sure written by a white person." I've met her a couple times at shows, though, and she's delightful in person.
Re Bogdanove: I remember liking his work when I first saw it, but can't remember where that was. On Superman, though...
Re the whole triangle era: Made me drop Superman. I hated the idea of "you have to buy it all if you want to read any" + it seemed like it was a constant adding of new subplots and supporting cast.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,872
Member is Online
|
Post by shaxper on Jan 25, 2021 11:28:18 GMT -5
Re the whole triangle era: Made me drop Superman. I hated the idea of "you have to buy it all if you want to read any" + it seemed like it was a constant adding of new subplots and supporting cast. To each their own. It made no sense to me at the beginning of the reboot that what was happening to Superman in one title never ever impacted his life in the other titles. And I happen to believe this era of Superman is one of the finest runs in mainstream superhero comicdom (the Simonson/Bogdanove contributions aside). Such meticulous continuity, and the human stories are often more interesting/exciting than the metahuman plots. And, for what it's worth, if you use an inflation calendar, it turns out that the cost of keeping up with all four Superman titles in 1991 was equivalent to spending $8 in 2021. Not too hefty an investment. I will concede that the zeitgeist had moved far away from Superman and DC in general in 1991, and that the Marvel titles certainly seemed more compelling. 11 year old me moved my dollars over to Marvel instead of sticking with four Superman titles a month. |
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Jan 25, 2021 11:52:55 GMT -5
The Triangle era had its pluses and minuses; I liked the more complex storytelling and the more epic stories; but, there were individual chapters that were "less" than the others and some plots were stretched longer than necessary. It was great at the start and was strong for a while; but, I was burnt out after Panic in the Skies. I had dropped it just before they launched the Death of Superman and had to scramble for the early chapters.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,872
Member is Online
|
Post by shaxper on Jan 25, 2021 12:05:50 GMT -5
It was great at the start and was strong for a while; but, I was burnt out after Panic in the Skies. I had dropped it just before they launched the Death of Superman and had to scramble for the early chapters. We're just now getting into the issues I never read as a kid, so I have no idea what's ahead beyond a couple of obvious spoilers. I honestly think this franchise was at it's strongest just before the triangles got slapped on the covers (1991 has been a little more lackluster), but I'm hoping to see the franchise attain even greater heights ahead. |
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Jan 25, 2021 20:05:15 GMT -5
I started reading just after Doomsday, and kept on a bit after... While I liked that the tiles had cross continuity, eventually I just didn't want to read Superman every week (especially after Steel and Superboy had their own books)
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,872
Member is Online
|
Post by shaxper on Jan 26, 2021 9:19:48 GMT -5
I started reading just after Doomsday, and kept on a bit after... While I liked that the tiles had cross continuity, eventually I just didn't want to read Superman every week (especially after Steel and Superboy had their own books) I'm both curious about that era and a little afraid of it. Asking the reader to be invested in four new heroes instead of one time-tested one was ambitious at best, and audacious at worst. I'm not even clear on who the Supergirl of that era is. I know she's connected with Lex II. No spoilers, please  |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,872
Member is Online
|
Post by shaxper on Jan 26, 2021 9:21:09 GMT -5
I feel like I liked Bogdanove when he was doing Man of Steel when Steel was in it, but maybe I'm getting things confused. I have to hope he gets better with time. chadwilliam would seem to suggest that isn't the case, though. |
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Jan 26, 2021 9:31:23 GMT -5
I started reading just after Doomsday, and kept on a bit after... While I liked that the tiles had cross continuity, eventually I just didn't want to read Superman every week (especially after Steel and Superboy had their own books) I'm both curious about that era and a little afraid of it. Asking the reader to be invested in four new heroes instead of one time-tested one was ambitious at best, and audacious at worst. I'm not even clear on who the Supergirl of that era is. I know she's connected with Lex II. No spoilers, please I read them, and I couldn't tell you. I will say that only 2 of the 4 characters did anything for me... the other two I was reading to 'keep up'. Based on later publishing decisions, I suspect I wasn't alone. |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,872
Member is Online
|
Post by shaxper on Jan 26, 2021 9:35:46 GMT -5
I'm both curious about that era and a little afraid of it. Asking the reader to be invested in four new heroes instead of one time-tested one was ambitious at best, and audacious at worst. I'm not even clear on who the Supergirl of that era is. I know she's connected with Lex II. No spoilers, please I read them, and I couldn't tell you. I will say that only 2 of the 4 characters did anything for me... the other two I was reading to 'keep up'. Based on later publishing decisions, I suspect I wasn't alone. And I vaguely recall some advertising of the period strongly implying (maybe even stating) that one of them was going to end up really being Superman, back from the dead? Or maybe they just meant "which will become the REAL (new) Superman?" Whatever the case, this just seemed like a very poorly conceived idea. I guess they wanted to do something different/bigger than Azrael replacing Batman. And we did get Steel and Conner Kent out of it, which means something to some folks. As I've never read either character, I can't really weigh in. |
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Jan 26, 2021 9:42:12 GMT -5
At the time, they implied that one of them was the 'real' Superman, yes. Whether they meant to imply one was Clark Kent reborn, or 'who will take the mantle?', you'd have to ask the editors at the time. I personally assumed the later, since even then we all knew no one in comics dies forever. There was a faint possibility Clark Kent would come back in some other form. (Ala Hal Jordan as the Spectre). I think they deliberately left it vague to inspire buzz. But of course the internet was in its infancy then, so there wasn't nearly as much discussion/speculation as now.
I remember reading Comic Shop News and anxiously awaiting for info.
|
|
