|
|
Post by zaku on Mar 14, 2019 17:26:32 GMT -5
But they didn't too much with it, right? Did they ever appear again? I don't think so; though, again, I wasn't reading the series regularly, anymore. This story was in 1982, Moore's in 1985, and Man of Steel launched in 1986, 7 months after Crisis on Infinite Earths ended. The only really significant story I can recall, from this period, was Cary Bates Superman Revenge Squad saga, which got a bit of acclaim, as kind of a last classic for Superman, apart from Moore's two dabbling, prior to his "Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow?" send off of the Earth-1 Superman. I read a few issues of the Superman series immediately before the relaunch and I don't remember any other appearance of them. There is no mention of them in the DC Wiki too. |
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Mar 14, 2019 18:04:39 GMT -5
I don't think so; though, again, I wasn't reading the series regularly, anymore. This story was in 1982, Moore's in 1985, and Man of Steel launched in 1986, 7 months after Crisis on Infinite Earths ended. The only really significant story I can recall, from this period, was Cary Bates Superman Revenge Squad saga, which got a bit of acclaim, as kind of a last classic for Superman, apart from Moore's two dabbling, prior to his "Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow?" send off of the Earth-1 Superman. I read a few issues of the Superman series immediately before the relaunch and I don't remember any other appearance of them. There is no mention of them in the DC Wiki too. only talks about that one story, following the enlargement and appearance in the Krypton Chronicles. So, that would seem to be it I suspect response was lukewarm and the idea was just dropped. The Superman comics were pretty much on life support, during the early 80s; hence, the revamp. Marv Wolfman tried; but it mostly fell on an indifferent audience. I get the sense that Levitz and Kahn knew they had to get Julie Schwartz out of the picture to stir things up, and he retired in 1986. They weren't going to cancel a flagship series, despite sales, as they proved when they saved Detective and ended Batman Family, despite the reverse sales figures. I also suspect that most of the former Marvel writers weren't interested in doing Superman, if they couldn't make drastic changes. Julie pretty much was the last of Carmine Infantino's "guys," who was still entrenched, and probably safely so. Julie was a fan favorite and that was about all they had going for the character. DC Comics Presents was the series where writers were allowed to play around a bit, with Superman. nothing drastic; but, we did get stories of him in WW2, faced with taking a life (in an amnesiac state), dealing with a vengeful Pete Ross and a time displaced Superboy, fighting Mongul, and Moore's Swamp Thing & Superman crossover. Action and Superman seemed to be stuck with the status quo. Schwartz was the editor on that series, too; so, maybe he felt a bit more liberal about material there, than in the regular books. Then again, it could have been just a decision not to mess with too much, while they had Superman films in theaters. Superman 3 was out in 1983 and 4 didn't come out until 1987; so, that might have been a corporate-mandated factor (or an excuse, at least). |
|
|
|
Post by chadwilliam on Mar 14, 2019 20:06:16 GMT -5
The overall theme of the story is encapsulated in the title: What gift could anyone give Superman? Sentimental items probably, tokens of friendship rather than items of intrinsic worth. But what are we to make of Mongul’s “gift”? Black Mercy was supposed to give Superman his heart’s delight, which we would think might involve marriage to Lois, peace on Earth, etc. Instead, he has a pretty horrific vision of Krypton on the verge of violent revolution, a disappointed and disappointing father, an endangered family, and himself just a helpless pawn in social forces beyond his control or understanding. I really wonder what Moore is trying to tell us about Superman here.
What's going on is this:
The Black Mercy does make its subject's greatest desire come true and for most people that would be enough. However, this is Superman. Though the story begins mid-dream (or somewhere after the beginning anyway) I think it's safe to say that Superman's fantasy started off as something recognizably idyllic - wonderful wife, loving kids, peaceful city, etc. We don't see this part of course, but I think it's safe to say that's what we would have seen had Moore opened his story with the opening moments of Superman's dream. Why does it turn so dark and twisted though? Because on some level, Superman knows what's going on and that the only way to get out of this fantasy is to make it so repugnant and revolting that he'll want to wake up.
I mentioned elsewhere on this board recently that I was put off by the bloodshed in Moore's later work Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow? but here I think it serves a vital purpose and is far from gratuitous. This story shows just how much Superman would sacrifice for the world - "leaving must have been like ripping off your own arm". So noble is Superman that he'll turn down his heart's desire if he's needed elsewhere. As Moore would later write, Superman really was "the perfect man who came from the sky and did only good".
|
|
|
|
Post by rberman on Mar 14, 2019 23:58:20 GMT -5
The overall theme of the story is encapsulated in the title: What gift could anyone give Superman? Sentimental items probably, tokens of friendship rather than items of intrinsic worth. But what are we to make of Mongul’s “gift”? Black Mercy was supposed to give Superman his heart’s delight, which we would think might involve marriage to Lois, peace on Earth, etc. Instead, he has a pretty horrific vision of Krypton on the verge of violent revolution, a disappointed and disappointing father, an endangered family, and himself just a helpless pawn in social forces beyond his control or understanding. I really wonder what Moore is trying to tell us about Superman here.What's going on is this: The Black Mercy does make its subject's greatest desire come true and for most people that would be enough. However, this is Superman. Though the story begins mid-dream (or somewhere after the beginning anyway) I think it's safe to say that Superman's fantasy started off as something recognizably idyllic - wonderful wife, loving kids, peaceful city, etc. We don't see this part of course, but I think it's safe to say that's what we would have seen had Moore opened his story with the opening moments of Superman's dream. Why does it turn so dark and twisted though? Because on some level, Superman knows what's going on and that the only way to get out of this fantasy is to make it so repugnant and revolting that he'll want to wake up. I mentioned elsewhere on this board recently that I was put off by the bloodshed in Moore's later work Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow? but here I think it serves a vital purpose and is far from gratuitous. This story shows just how much Superman would sacrifice for the world - "leaving must have been like ripping off your own arm". So noble is Superman that he'll turn down his heart's desire if he's needed elsewhere. As Moore would later write, Superman really was "the perfect man who came from the sky and did only good". "Superman's sense of duty causes him to reject the perfect dreamland" would have been a great story. But as you note, "we don't see this part." All we see is "Superman rejects a really terrible nightmare." Wouldn't the story have been more effective if everything was going great, but Superman kept seeing hints that it was all a lie, and finally he rejects everything he wanted? |
|
|
|
Post by rberman on Mar 15, 2019 7:26:48 GMT -5
DC Comics Presents #85 “The Jungle Line” (September 1985)
Creative Team: Alan Moore writing, Rick Veitch pencils, Al Williamson inks.
The Story: A meteorite from Krypton has exposed Superman to a deadly fungus from his homeworld. His powers are cutting in and out erratically; his research indicates that death is imminent and certain. Hallucinating badly, he sets out in his car to die alone, ending up in Swamp Thing’s bayou in Louisiana. Superman gets violent, but eventually Swamp Thing cures him of the fungus. Superman flies away not realizing that he had any help getting better.  My Two Cents: As was often the case in this series, this issue was mainly a big advertisement: “Hey Superman fans! Go read the series with this other character. It’s really good!” I didn’t own this issue in time to cover it in the proper chronological place in the Swamp Thing thread (in the middle of the “American Gothic” arc), which is just as well; it fits much better here, as a counterpoint to “The Man Who Has Everything.” Where that story was about a xenobiological exposure allegedly (but not really, as far as we saw) giving Superman a vision of his deepest hopes, this one is about a xenobiological exposure giving him his greatest nightmare, with his powers out of control and death just around the corner. Swamp Thing is absent for most of the story anyway, showing up just at the end as a brief punching bag and then the antidote to Superman’s illness. Beyond that, this issue is depicting Superman on a bad drug trip, and Swamp Thing’s job is to teach him to chill out until he comes down from his high, and presumably to keep him from biting his tongue. Is anyone else surprised that editorial let Alan Moore get away with this on their flagship character? As someone noted in another thread, DC Comics Presents tolerated material that Superman or Action Comics would not.  This story may have been inspired by Edward Hamilton’s story "The Last Days of Superman" ( Superman #156, 1962), in which a Kryptonian meteorite carries a virus which will sap Superman’s strength and kill him in a short time. In that story, the virus turned out to be bogus; it was really a nearby chunk of Kryptonite, accidentally imbedded in Jimmy Olsen’s camera, which was killing him. Sorry, dude! That story also featured Superman performing a host of mighty deeds in the days before his death, a plot element repeated by Grant Morrison in All-Star Superman.
|
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Mar 15, 2019 7:56:37 GMT -5
The overall theme of the story is encapsulated in the title: What gift could anyone give Superman? Sentimental items probably, tokens of friendship rather than items of intrinsic worth. But what are we to make of Mongul’s “gift”? Black Mercy was supposed to give Superman his heart’s delight, which we would think might involve marriage to Lois, peace on Earth, etc. Instead, he has a pretty horrific vision of Krypton on the verge of violent revolution, a disappointed and disappointing father, an endangered family, and himself just a helpless pawn in social forces beyond his control or understanding. I really wonder what Moore is trying to tell us about Superman here.What's going on is this: The Black Mercy does make its subject's greatest desire come true and for most people that would be enough. However, this is Superman. Though the story begins mid-dream (or somewhere after the beginning anyway) I think it's safe to say that Superman's fantasy started off as something recognizably idyllic - wonderful wife, loving kids, peaceful city, etc. We don't see this part of course, but I think it's safe to say that's what we would have seen had Moore opened his story with the opening moments of Superman's dream. Why does it turn so dark and twisted though? Because on some level, Superman knows what's going on and that the only way to get out of this fantasy is to make it so repugnant and revolting that he'll want to wake up. I mentioned elsewhere on this board recently that I was put off by the bloodshed in Moore's later work Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow? but here I think it serves a vital purpose and is far from gratuitous. This story shows just how much Superman would sacrifice for the world - "leaving must have been like ripping off your own arm". So noble is Superman that he'll turn down his heart's desire if he's needed elsewhere. As Moore would later write, Superman really was "the perfect man who came from the sky and did only good". "Superman's sense of duty causes him to reject the perfect dreamland" would have been a great story. But as you note, "we don't see this part." All we see is "Superman rejects a really terrible nightmare." Wouldn't the story have been more effective if everything was going great, but Superman kept seeing hints that it was all a lie, and finally he rejects everything he wanted? I read it another way, I thought that he himself, sabotaged his dream world because he sensed something wasn't right. Prior to what we saw, it was all great. |
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Mar 15, 2019 9:27:32 GMT -5
"Superman's sense of duty causes him to reject the perfect dreamland" would have been a great story. But as you note, "we don't see this part." All we see is "Superman rejects a really terrible nightmare." Wouldn't the story have been more effective if everything was going great, but Superman kept seeing hints that it was all a lie, and finally he rejects everything he wanted? I read it another way, I thought that he himself, sabotaged his dream world because he sensed something wasn't right. Prior to what we saw, it was all great. This is my interpretation too. |
|
|
|
Post by chadwilliam on Mar 15, 2019 11:06:12 GMT -5
DC Comics Presents #85 “The Jungle Line” (September 1985) I think this also the first time we see Superman shave by bouncing his heat vision of a mirror. It's a minor detail, but it's one of those little ideas introduced so close to Crisis (such as LexCorp) that I think most people associate it with the post-Crisis era not realising that it was in use before then. |
|
|
|
Post by rberman on Mar 15, 2019 11:15:13 GMT -5
DC Comics Presents #85 “The Jungle Line” (September 1985) I think this also the first time we see Superman shave by bouncing his heat vision of a mirror. It's a minor detail, but it's one of those little ideas introduced so close to Crisis (such as LexCorp) that I think most people associate it with the post-Crisis era not realising that it was in use before then. It's a fun idea, albeit one that doesn't stand up to scrutiny. The temperature required to singe off Superman's hair must be substantially less than the temperature required to melt the silver on the surface of the mirror, or the glass behind the silver. yet Superman's hair is unsinged by flying into the sun. Not that comics have to make sense, but it's fun to think about the ways in which they don't. |
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Mar 15, 2019 13:55:30 GMT -5
Frame Story Part 1: It’s February 29, Superman’s birthday! Wonder Woman, Batman, and Robin (Jason Todd) come to the Fortress of Solitude to celebrate Superman’s birthday. They find Superman entranced, with some alien plant glued to his chest. Mongul appears to gloat over the success of his attack with “Black Mercy,” which grants its victims an unending fantasy of their happiness. Mongul wants to know which hero would be politest to kill first; Wonder Woman volunteers to be his sparring partner.  How strong was considered Earth-1 Wonder Woman? I mean, now she could probably get Superman to break a sweat, but then? I answered myself.  First of all, I searched on line the stats of these two heroes for the DC Heroes RPG.  This game was made in strict collaboration with the DC staff (the maps of Gotham City and Metropolis will became the official maps of the cities in the comics). Even Alan Moore collaborated on the Watchmen modules and Gibbons provided some wonderful illustrations for them  So the info on this RPG are "official" are official as far as possible. The game system used was the Mayfair Exponential Game System.
From Wikipedia: The strength of Batman is 5, so he can lift max (in a very optimal situation and if he's lucky) more or less 400 kg (900 pounds for you Imperial-units-lovers...) .   (Note: the characters named in this table are the post-crisis versions) Fortunately the first edition of the game was published during the Crisis, so we have the stats of various pre-Crisis characters.  With a strength of 45, she can lift max 429,496,729,600 tons.  Superman has a strength of 50, so he is 2x2x2x2x2=32 times more strong than Wonder Woman and he can lift max 13,743,895,347,200 tons (the Earth "weights" 5,972,000,000,000,000,000,000 tons so you can see the pre-Crisis Supeman was quite down-powered in comparison to his Silver Age counterpart, who could juggle with planets). ETA: Obviously, using their "Hero Points", heroes can perform extraordinary feats over the limits of their stats... |
|
|
|
Post by rberman on Mar 15, 2019 14:07:58 GMT -5
Sounds like Batman ought to be dialed back to a Strength of 4...
|
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Mar 15, 2019 14:15:35 GMT -5
Sounds like Batman ought to be dialed back to a Strength of 4... I'm not sure about that...  |
|
|
|
Post by Duragizer on Mar 15, 2019 14:18:32 GMT -5
I think this also the first time we see Superman shave by bouncing his heat vision of a mirror. It's a minor detail, but it's one of those little ideas introduced so close to Crisis (such as LexCorp) that I think most people associate it with the post-Crisis era not realising that it was in use before then. It's a fun idea, albeit one that doesn't stand up to scrutiny. The temperature required to singe off Superman's hair must be substantially less than the temperature required to melt the silver on the surface of the mirror, or the glass behind the silver. yet Superman's hair is unsinged by flying into the sun. Not that comics have to make sense, but it's fun to think about the ways in which they don't. I like what Kurt Busiek did in Superman: Secret Identity — made Clark's invulnerability an ability he could turn off and on as needed. I'm disappointed no writers have incorporated this trait in the mainline comics. |
|
|
|
Post by rberman on Mar 15, 2019 14:22:35 GMT -5
It's a fun idea, albeit one that doesn't stand up to scrutiny. The temperature required to singe off Superman's hair must be substantially less than the temperature required to melt the silver on the surface of the mirror, or the glass behind the silver. yet Superman's hair is unsinged by flying into the sun. Not that comics have to make sense, but it's fun to think about the ways in which they don't. I like what Kurt Busiek did in Superman: Secret Identity — made Clark's invulnerability an ability he could turn off and on as needed. I'm disappointed no writers have incorporated this trait in the mainline comics. Maybe he could have a magic word that turned him back to normal like shabammm! or something. |
|
|
|
Post by Duragizer on Mar 15, 2019 14:43:45 GMT -5
I like what Kurt Busiek did in Superman: Secret Identity — made Clark's invulnerability an ability he could turn off and on as needed. I'm disappointed no writers have incorporated this trait in the mainline comics. Maybe he could have a magic word that turned him back to normal like shabammm! or something. Now I'm having Electric Superman flashbacks.... |
|
