|
|
Post by comicsandwho on Sept 26, 2018 12:19:00 GMT -5
I suspect that Justin Moore was meant to be the new Jimmy Olsen now that the latter had grown up. Although I haven't read all of the Superman stories being discussed during this period, I can't imagine there was a more Justin Moore-centric issue than Superman 402 in which he even lumps Olsen in with Clark and Lois as one of the "old pros" suggesting that Jimmy was no longer seen as the up and coming cub reporter looking to be taken seriously. The fact that Moore too, is a cub reporter who hasn't yet found his big break yet makes the connection between the two clearer. Although I don't think that the character was really needed, I do appreciate that there was something subtly crude and abrasive about the guy. Sure, Steve Lombard and Morgan Edge could also be described as self-centred, coarse, and blunt, but these were characteristics painted on with a wide brush. One could easily understand how Moore could genuinely regard himself as a decent, pleasant guy without picking up on the way he could come off as insensitive to others. "How Do You Hide a Superman?" is a memorable story in which Moore stumbles upon a guy dressed in a Superman costume waking up in an alley. The seemingly homeless man claims that he's actually Superman recovering from a bout of amnesia and power depletion after battling a group of 40th century marauders who have shown up in our time to take him down. Moore assumes that this is just a new angle a homeless guy has come up with to earn spare change (which is a nice detail since you'd have to think that in Metropolis you'd have to occasionally run into people with stories of 'Hey, can you spare me some change so I can call the police and report that Brainiac shrunk my car?') but begins to believe that this guy who does look like Superman, is in fact, Superman especially after it becomes clear that there is a couple of futuristic looking guys after him. His thoughts make it clear that Moore isn't the type of person to just ignore a person in need and he's resourceful enough to know how to evade the Marauders who but what's equally clear is that Moore isn't exactly empathetic to a guy he rolls his eyes at and considers a "loony" while thinking about how Lois might start paying attention to him if he makes a name for himself for saving the man of steel. Flippant thoughts about how Superman's sanity seems to have left town with his personality when 'Superman' starts acting strangely violent and threatening doesn't help either. Anyhow, with or without Moore, I'd add Superman 402 to my list of great Superman tales from this period (and it's written by Cary Bates who, to be honest, I was earlier dismissive of during this period) since it nicely draws out a complex tale that you're initially given to believe isn't all that complex. "Superman gets amnesia and loses his powers and is on the run from bad guys" eventually turns into "Superman begins to slowly regain his memory along with his powers and speaks in an odd manner" which in turn becomes "Superman becomes paranoid and starts ranting about the worms of Metropolis who don't honour him enough" which segues into "Superman is about to tear Justin apart with his bare hands when we learn he isn't actually Superman at all and those bad guys from the future are actually police officers looking for a dangerous criminal with a Superman complex". So another example of this period not always having great stories to tell, but when they're good, they're great. Yeah, I remember that one. Like a formerly great, but not yet retired baseball slugger, Bates could occasionally still 'clear the fences' when not otherwise striking out, or, at best, popping up). That seemed like it was Justin's 'meatiest' role, aside from the Vartox story where he was introduced. As for Jimmy, he had been considered an adult since the Jack Kirby era(1970-71) an afterwards in the last issues of his old series. By the 80s, he, Clark, Lois, and Perry would have been considered the faces on a Daily Planet version of Mount Rushmore(although Morgan Edge would have just created a monument to himself, anyway). The Byrne reboot, once 'Man of Steel' had put things in place, also treated Jimmy as as an established reporter, albeit maybe a little younger than he'd been depicted in the previous few years. If we choose to accept the 'Clark and Superman are always 29' thing, then Jimmy's age gets a little tricky... |
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Sept 27, 2018 11:18:44 GMT -5
There is another subplot which is worth of mentioning: the problems that Perry White was having with his wife. It's worth because it's virtually the only one (before the reboot) which had some sort of closure in Superman: Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow?. I remember that when I read this story, I thought it an Alan Moore's idea. So it was a little surprising when his conjugal problems were mentioned from time to time in the stories I read (really, a panel every 2-3 issues. Perhaps).
|
|
|
|
Post by mikelmidnight on Sept 27, 2018 11:58:13 GMT -5
Jimmy-Lucy had always been "on again, off again;" but, I wasn't reading the book when they were engaged. No idea on the specifics. Probably trying to push it further in the soap opera to match the era. You know, after reading those issues, I decided that "dinner" is a code word for "sex". I don't know how many times Lana Lang asked Clark to "dine" with her. Clark was sad? Let's dine! There's anything to celebrate? You've got to come for dinner. I'm in a particular good mood? You could come to the house for "dinner", because I have a new "recipe" you have to try. The writers did confirm that "bœuf bourguignon" was a euphemism for sex. |
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Sept 27, 2018 12:03:35 GMT -5
You know, after reading those issues, I decided that "dinner" is a code word for "sex". I don't know how many times Lana Lang asked Clark to "dine" with her. Clark was sad? Let's dine! There's anything to celebrate? You've got to come for dinner. I'm in a particular good mood? You could come to the house for "dinner", because I have a new "recipe" you have to try. The writers did confirm that "bœuf bourguignon" was a euphemism for sex.   |
|
|
|
Post by comicsandwho on Sept 27, 2018 16:11:39 GMT -5
You know, after reading those issues, I decided that "dinner" is a code word for "sex". I don't know how many times Lana Lang asked Clark to "dine" with her. Clark was sad? Let's dine! There's anything to celebrate? You've got to come for dinner. I'm in a particular good mood? You could come to the house for "dinner", because I have a new "recipe" you have to try. The writers did confirm that "bœuf bourguignon" was a euphemism for sex. They clearly didn't do that in the 'Private Life of Clark Kent' story in 'Superman Family' # 211, in which Clark and Ralph Dibny keep getting distracted on the way to lunch...of 'bouef bourguignon.' |
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Sept 27, 2018 19:45:06 GMT -5
You know, after reading those issues, I decided that "dinner" is a code word for "sex". I don't know how many times Lana Lang asked Clark to "dine" with her. Clark was sad? Let's dine! There's anything to celebrate? You've got to come for dinner. I'm in a particular good mood? You could come to the house for "dinner", because I have a new "recipe" you have to try. The writers did confirm that "bœuf bourguignon" was a euphemism for sex. No.no; that's "Boff" Bourguignon |
|
|
|
Post by comicsandwho on Sept 27, 2018 20:58:30 GMT -5
"The recipe calls for roast babbotch...but if you have a couple of pork chops, you can fake it..."
|
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Oct 6, 2018 5:41:41 GMT -5
Bates wrote a lot of great Superman tales while giving us Steve Lombard, Vartox, Terra-Man, the Super-Mobile in the 70's, but when I think of his 80's output I keep turning to his Luthor revamp (Action 544) which essentially reduced the character to a monster willing to turn to acts of genocide so as to stay relevant. I would just like to point out that Luthor was always depicted a little genocidal (well before the 1983) like, for example, in Dc Special 26 where he was ready to destroy the Earth just to kill Superman |
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Oct 6, 2018 6:12:33 GMT -5
Bates wrote a lot of great Superman tales while giving us Steve Lombard, Vartox, Terra-Man, the Super-Mobile in the 70's, but when I think of his 80's output I keep turning to his Luthor revamp (Action 544) which essentially reduced the character to a monster willing to turn to acts of genocide so as to stay relevant. I would just like to point out that Luthor was always depicted a little genocidal (well before the 1983) like, for example, in Dc Special 26 where he was ready to destroy the Earth just to kill Superman By the way, I read this story again and Superman comes across equal parts paranoid, creepy, vain, and stupid. A room features statues of all his hero friends standing next to their secret identities?!? A statue dedicated to Jimmy Olsen? Man are you OK?!?!   |
|
|
|
Post by aquagoat on Oct 6, 2018 8:11:36 GMT -5
I've read a lot of Golden Age, Silver Age and Post-Byrne Supes, but somehow the Bronze Age has largely eluded me. I think because there aren't many trade paperbacks collecting stories from the era. But also, the Bronze Age of Superman if kind of hard to define. The Golden Age is the sketchy, pulpy crusader. The Silver Age is the barrel-chested Curt Swan doing silly things in charming, harmless stories. And the post-Byrne Supes, New 52 Supes etc are all easy to define, whether you like them or not.
But Bronze Age Superman seems to me almost filler, somewhat Marvel-esque in that Supes began to have more human qualities and failures, but still awkwardly trying to fit into the outsize sci-fi stuff from the Silver Age.
|
|
|
|
Post by chadwilliam on Oct 6, 2018 9:11:10 GMT -5
I would just like to point out that Luthor was always depicted a little genocidal (well before the 1983) like, for example, in Dc Special 26 where he was ready to destroy the Earth just to kill Superman I should clarify that the genocide Luthor committed in Action 544 was the destruction of the planet Lexor which - as his thoughts always indicated previously - he truly respected and worked hard to earn the love he received from this planet. In Bates' tale however, he rants and raves about how they're nothing but worthless ants as he flies around in his power suit attacking these people at random. The destruction of the planet seemed to be accidental on Luthor's part, but was set in motion by his actions and came across as a desperate attempt to improve Luthor just by racking up his body count. Thankfully, not all writers followed this template for the duration of the Bronze Age. |
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Oct 6, 2018 9:40:31 GMT -5
I should clarify that the genocide Luthor committed in Action 544 was the destruction of the planet Lexor which - as his thoughts always indicated previously - he truly respected and worked hard to earn the love he received from this planet. Yep, I know what did you mean  . My point is, if Luthor was ready to destroy the Earth only because he was suffering from early balding, why would he have to worry about the wellness for the inhabitants of another planet (even if he had showed some signs of affection for them)? I know people like to paint pre-crisis Luthor like some kind of tragic Shakespearean figure, but he was just a (very disturbed) criminal. I know that some authors tried to add depth to him (like in the aforementioned and excellent Einstein Connection!), but, really, there wasn't a lot to redeem. And, by the way, he wasn't neither a really good criminal. I mean, he had a red sun radiation ray, a kryptonite ray, an enlarging ray, a mind-scrambler ray, a 3d-to-2d ray and probably the biggest stash of kryptonite stash on Earth, so why Superman was still alive? I was feeling like Scott Evil while I was reading these stories: "Just. Shoot. Him!" |
|
|
|
Post by rberman on Oct 6, 2018 10:14:46 GMT -5
I should clarify that the genocide Luthor committed in Action 544 was the destruction of the planet Lexor which - as his thoughts always indicated previously - he truly respected and worked hard to earn the love he received from this planet. Yep, I know what did you mean . My point is, if Luthor was ready to destroy the Earth only because he was suffering from early balding, why would he have to worry about the wellness for the inhabitants of another planet (even if he had showed some signs of affection for them)? I know people like to paint pre-crisis Luthor like some kind of tragic Shakespearean figure, but he was just a (very disturbed) criminal. I know that some authors tried to add depth to him (like in the aforementioned and excellent Einstein Connection!), but, really, there wasn't a lot to redeem. And, by the way, he wasn't neither a really good criminal. I mean, he had a red sun radiation ray, a kryptonite ray, an enlarging ray, a mind-scrambler ray, a 3d-to-2d ray and probably the biggest stash of kryptonite stash on Earth, so why Superman was still alive? I was feeling like Scott Evil while I was reading these stories: "Just. Shoot. Him!" Hence the suspension of disbelief required for the stories to even happen; anybody smart enough to invent all those things would be rolling in dough already from military contracts alone. |
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Oct 6, 2018 10:29:12 GMT -5
Yep, I know what did you mean . My point is, if Luthor was ready to destroy the Earth only because he was suffering from early balding, why would he have to worry about the wellness for the inhabitants of another planet (even if he had showed some signs of affection for them)? I know people like to paint pre-crisis Luthor like some kind of tragic Shakespearean figure, but he was just a (very disturbed) criminal. I know that some authors tried to add depth to him (like in the aforementioned and excellent Einstein Connection!), but, really, there wasn't a lot to redeem. And, by the way, he wasn't neither a really good criminal. I mean, he had a red sun radiation ray, a kryptonite ray, an enlarging ray, a mind-scrambler ray, a 3d-to-2d ray and probably the biggest stash of kryptonite stash on Earth, so why Superman was still alive? I was feeling like Scott Evil while I was reading these stories: "Just. Shoot. Him!" Hence the suspension of disbelief required for the stories to even happen; anybody smart enough to invent all those things would be rolling in dough already from military contracts alone. Yep. You have super-villain who came up with incredible scientific breakthroughs just to rob some bank. Eventually even in the comics themselves they made fun of it. ETA Found this:  Eta 2: Now I remember, they tried to rationalize it in Secret War |
|
|
|
Post by chadwilliam on Oct 6, 2018 11:32:52 GMT -5
I should clarify that the genocide Luthor committed in Action 544 was the destruction of the planet Lexor which - as his thoughts always indicated previously - he truly respected and worked hard to earn the love he received from this planet. I know people like to paint pre-crisis Luthor like some kind of tragic Shakespearean figure, but he was just a (very disturbed) criminal. I know that some authors tried to add depth to him (like in the aforementioned and excellent Einstein Connection!), but, really, there wasn't a lot to redeem. That's a good point - you can hardly fault a writer for having a bad guy do bad things. My problem was that Bates selected the one group of people Luthor would never go after and have him torment them. It's sort of the difference between having a guy who, for example, expends his energy robbing banks and occasionally attempting to kill whatever superhero gets in his way all of a sudden blowing up hospitals and orphanages - it's a cheap tactic that goes too far for certain villains. |
|
. My point is, if Luthor was ready to destroy the Earth only because he was suffering from early balding, why would he have to worry about the wellness for the inhabitants of another planet (even if he had showed some signs of affection for them)? I know people like to paint pre-crisis Luthor like some kind of tragic Shakespearean figure, but he was just a (very disturbed) criminal. I know that some authors tried to add depth to him (like in the aforementioned and excellent Einstein Connection!), but, really, there wasn't a lot to redeem. 