|
Post by Deleted on Dec 30, 2018 12:06:42 GMT -5
Should Superman be the sole survivor of Krypton in any continuity?
I don't think the sole survivor status necessarily defines the character. It's part of his origin, but I am not sure he gains or loses anything by being the sole survivor of Krypton. That doesn't mean I think they should "do a Spider-Man" and give him countless associates/spin-off characters; I'm merely stating that the sole survivor status doesn't feel vital in 2018.
Just my view.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 30, 2018 15:02:43 GMT -5
Should Superman be the sole survivor of Krypton in any continuity? I don't think the sole survivor status necessarily defines the character. It's part of his origin, but I am not sure he gains or loses anything by being the sole survivor of Krypton. That doesn't mean I think they should "do a Spider-Man" and give him countless associates/spin-off characters; I'm merely stating that the sole survivor status doesn't feel vital in 2018. Just my view. IMO that was proven when John Byrne jettisoned all the other Kryptonian survivors back in 1986. In fact I remember readers liking most of what Byrne did EXCEPT getting rid of his time as Superboy and the loss of his cousin Supergirl.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 30, 2018 15:19:13 GMT -5
Back to Byrne's Man of Steel:
Things I didn't like: depiction of Krypton. It was taken from the Superman movie. I missed the old 50's style Krypton. Loss of time as Superboy. It really messed up the LoSH. Loss of Supergirl as his cousin. Matrix never captured my interest. Loss of Batman friendship.
Things I was ambivalent about: Luthor as businessman rather than scientist. Clark being buff and not a nerd.
Things I loved: Jonathan & Martha Kent being alive and Clark needing their wisdom & insight. That was so uplifting for me. Superman's powers were dialed back a bit.
|
|
|
Post by beccabear67 on Dec 30, 2018 15:20:23 GMT -5
EXCEPT getting rid of his time as Superboy and the loss of his cousin Supergirl. I don't think he had any choice on Supergirl as the company had killed her off. It was/is obvious though having entire cities of survivors and a zoo full of creatures some of that '50s-'60s stuff would need to be retired off. I think if a writer can make something work then it's the right thing, if he can't it's wrong. Yeah, I can see in trying to say pastiche is not parody I imbued it with opposite intent when it's not necessarily so. I guess something could be a parodic pastiche or a pastiche in homage, you'd need the adjective to describe the pastiche.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 30, 2018 15:27:40 GMT -5
EXCEPT getting rid of his time as Superboy and the loss of his cousin Supergirl. I don't think he had any choice on Supergirl as the company had killed her off. It was/is obvious though having entire cities of survivors and a zoo full of creatures some of that '50s-'60s stuff would need to be retired off. I think if a writer can make something work then it's the right thing, if he can't it's wrong. Oh I agree. It was getting to the point where the only people that didn't survive Krypton's destruction were Superman's parents . And you are probably right about Supergirl being an editorial decision. At least DC had Byrne "try" and fix the Superboy & Supergirl situation although it made things worse IMO.
|
|
|
Post by beccabear67 on Dec 30, 2018 15:29:32 GMT -5
Matrix never captured my interest. I have a small stack of those various comics when trying to catch up on what I'd missed post 'Crisis' #7 and it pretty much was a mess twice over, first the protoplasmic imitation Supergirl followed by her merging with earthling Linda Danvers in that strange town... it all just proved it was stupid to have killed Supergirl in the first place. And of course now they've undone all of that, even before the tv show, and had a Kryptonian Supergirl arrive.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 30, 2018 16:13:21 GMT -5
I did like Luthor as a capitalist villain, that suited the 80s.
And I thought it was very clever how Byrne fixed the continuity issue with the LoSH. That quaint - I don't use that word pejoratively - tale featuring Superman VS Superboy, the Time Trapper and the LoSH is one of my favourite stories.
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Dec 31, 2018 12:18:17 GMT -5
Should Superman be the sole survivor of Krypton in any continuity? I don't think the sole survivor status necessarily defines the character. It's part of his origin, but I am not sure he gains or loses anything by being the sole survivor of Krypton. That doesn't mean I think they should "do a Spider-Man" and give him countless associates/spin-off characters; I'm merely stating that the sole survivor status doesn't feel vital in 2018. Just my view. I fully agree. I don’t even think it makes sense for Kal-El to be the sole survivor from Krypton, not unless the planet is retconned into being a pre-space travel civilization or an intensely isolationist one. One would expect Kryptonian explorers, politicians, tradespeople, scholars to have been abroad when the planet exploded, sort of like the Vulcans in the Star Trek reboot. The best recipe (said the old man set in his ways) was the pre-Crisis one, in which Kryptonian survivors were very rare, but not unheard of. The presence of Supergirl, Krypto, the citizens of Kandor or Dev-Em took nothing away from Superman’s uniqueness as a hero, and they enriched his universe.
|
|
|
Post by kirby101 on Dec 31, 2018 14:04:18 GMT -5
Should Superman be the sole survivor of Krypton in any continuity? I don't think the sole survivor status necessarily defines the character. It's part of his origin, but I am not sure he gains or loses anything by being the sole survivor of Krypton. That doesn't mean I think they should "do a Spider-Man" and give him countless associates/spin-off characters; I'm merely stating that the sole survivor status doesn't feel vital in 2018. Just my view. I fully agree. I don’t even think it makes sense for Kal-El to be the sole survivor from Krypton, not unless the planet is retconned into being a pre-space travel civilization or an intensely isolationist one. One would expect Kryptonian explorers, politicians, tradespeople, scholars to have been abroad when the planet exploded, sort of like the Vulcans in the Star Trek reboot. Not sure if you are being tongue in cheek here or not. But That is exactly how John Byrne made Krypton with his Man of Steel reboot.
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Dec 31, 2018 17:52:08 GMT -5
I fully agree. I don’t even think it makes sense for Kal-El to be the sole survivor from Krypton, not unless the planet is retconned into being a pre-space travel civilization or an intensely isolationist one. One would expect Kryptonian explorers, politicians, tradespeople, scholars to have been abroad when the planet exploded, sort of like the Vulcans in the Star Trek reboot. Not sure if you are being tongue in cheek here or not. But That is exactly how John Byrne made Krypton with his Man of Steel reboot. Really? I don't know how John expanded on that in later years, but in The Man of Steel he just showed us an emotionally sterile Krypton, where babies are grown in vats and people are far removed from the primitives of Earth. The world is however very familiar with travel through hyperspace, and while Lara looks down on people from Kansas because they have hair on their chest, she doesn't mention anything like Kryptonians not mingling with other species. Did John tell us more to explain why Kal could be the last of his kind? (I admit I haven't read much Superman after the miniseries and the first handful of Superman issues).
|
|
|
Post by chadwilliam on Dec 31, 2018 18:42:34 GMT -5
If you're asking about Bryne's intent, I know that he's said on numerous occasions that by introducing other survivors of Krypton's destruction, Superman was "de-uniqued". In The Krypton Companion released by TwoMorrows Publishing, Byrne (along with others) was asked if he felt that Supergirl, Kandor, Krypto, etc. made Superman less unique to which Byrne responded "if by unique you mean 'one and only' then the answer should be obvious'. I think this is one of the things Byrne either didn't understand about Superman or decided wasn't integral to his version of the character - that in his opinion, Superman's uniqueness stems from his being one of a kind in a biological sense and not in the sense that though there may be thousands who equal him physically, there's an integrity and inner strength to the character which sets him apart from all others. If Superman is the sole survivor of Krypton, then he automatically becomes the most powerful hero out there by default in the same way that if I were the last person on Earth, I automatically become the greatest person on Earth. I'm not saying that Byrne's take on the character isn't heroic or a good guy, but without other survivors, one can't really be sure that Kal-El was the best man for the job. Pre-Crisis however, there were others who attempted to fill the role (usually someone from Kandor) and just couldn't measure up. Stories told around this narrative nicely illustrated that Superman was more than just a fairly decent guy with powers which, in spite of there being thousands of Krytonian survivors, made him more unique than "sole survivor" status could have. There was a poster over on either the DC boards or old CBR forum named Justin Perez who I recall once said "I don't care how many Kryptonian survivors turn up on Earth so long as its maintained that his parents aren't among them". That's sort of my sentiment as well (with the understanding that I don't think anyone really thinks only Jor-El and Lara should have perished on Krypton). As long as it's established that out of all the survivors, Superman is the greatest, most qualified, noble hero there is, then I'm OK with him not being the only one out there.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 1, 2019 8:44:39 GMT -5
Good point!
|
|
|
Post by kirby101 on Jan 1, 2019 9:43:34 GMT -5
Not sure if you are being tongue in cheek here or not. But That is exactly how John Byrne made Krypton with his Man of Steel reboot. Really? I don't know how John expanded on that in later years, but in The Man of Steel he just showed us an emotionally sterile Krypton, where babies are grown in vats and people are far removed from the primitives of Earth. The world is however very familiar with travel through hyperspace, and while Lara looks down on people from Kansas because they have hair on their chest, she doesn't mention anything like Kryptonians not mingling with other species. Did John tell us more to explain why Kal could be the last of his kind? (I admit I haven't read much Superman after the miniseries and the first handful of Superman issues). You are right.He didn't lay it out in the original Man of Steel mini, but it became part of his reboot of the character.
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on Jan 1, 2019 9:59:26 GMT -5
If you're asking about Bryne's intent, I know that he's said on numerous occasions that by introducing other survivors of Krypton's destruction, Superman was "de-uniqued". In The Krypton Companion released by TwoMorrows Publishing, Byrne (along with others) was asked if he felt that Supergirl, Kandor, Krypto, etc. made Superman less unique to which Byrne responded "if by unique you mean 'one and only' then the answer should be obvious'. I think this is one of the things Byrne either didn't understand about Superman or decided wasn't integral to his version of the character - that in his opinion, Superman's uniqueness stems from his being one of a kind in a biological sense and not in the sense that though there may be thousands who equal him physically, there's an integrity and inner strength to the character which sets him apart from all others. If Superman is the sole survivor of Krypton, then he automatically becomes the most powerful hero out there by default in the same way that if I were the last person on Earth, I automatically become the greatest person on Earth. I'm not saying that Byrne's take on the character isn't heroic or a good guy, but without other survivors, one can't really be sure that Kal-El was the best man for the job. Pre-Crisis however, there were others who attempted to fill the role (usually someone from Kandor) and just couldn't measure up. Stories told around this narrative nicely illustrated that Superman was more than just a fairly decent guy with powers which, in spite of there being thousands of Krytonian survivors, made him more unique than "sole survivor" status could have. There was a poster over on either the DC boards or old CBR forum named Justin Perez who I recall once said "I don't care how many Kryptonian survivors turn up on Earth so long as its maintained that his parents aren't among them". That's sort of my sentiment as well (with the understanding that I don't think anyone really thinks only Jor-El and Lara should have perished on Krypton). As long as it's established that out of all the survivors, Superman is the greatest, most qualified, noble hero there is, then I'm OK with him not being the only one out there. Agreed on all counts. And Byrne also said that he really liked Krypto, even if it didn't fit in with his conception of the Superman mythos. (Good for him! Krypto rules!)
|
|
|
Post by beccabear67 on Jan 1, 2019 15:16:14 GMT -5
I know he's outside of 'continuity' but I loved Super Turtle most. The turtle of steel rules! There I said it. I'm not the only one; they included him in two of the "Silver Age" event books. This one written by Mark Waid was great fun... and this one with art again by Ty Templeton but more in the Henry Boltinoff style is also clever with lots of details for us true fans... From 'Dial B For Blog': www.dialbforblog.com/archives/314/
|
|