|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Mar 18, 2024 9:02:56 GMT -5
I'm surprised that you evoked the name of Roy Thomas. Don't get me wrong, he's one of my favorite all Time writers, but he was in his period of decline in the mid 80's. When he returned to Marvel, none of his books struck a cord with me. Now, if you wanted Alan Moore to relaunch Superman, I think he would have made an impact , paired with a top notch artist of course. That artist would now be known as "former friend and collaborator of Alan Moore". Moore accumulated a lot of those. |
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Mar 18, 2024 12:56:51 GMT -5
Personally, I felt the robotic Brainiac was the most terrifying version of him ever done. Absolutely, but I feel like it's not as remembered as Lex Luthor's armor. But, like I said, maybe it's just my impression. |
|
|
|
Post by driver1980 on Mar 18, 2024 15:07:16 GMT -5
Personally, I felt the robotic Brainiac was the most terrifying version of him ever done. Absolutely, but I feel like it's not as remembered as Lex Luthor's armor. But, like I said, maybe it's just my impression. How long did Brainiac’s robotic look last? Less than 2 years, or right up until Crisis? I should check. Did Luthor’s armour last a little bit longer? I feel Brainiac’s robotic look was in my consciousness longer thanks partly to the Super Powers toyline (same for Luthor’s armour). Maybe it was that armour Luthor appeared in more stories than robotic Brainiac. It’s an interesting one. I would ask an AI search engine, but, Zaku, I still remember you asking one site about the origin of Kryptonite in the 1978 movie - and being given some bogus information about how Emil Hamilton appeared in that movie.  |
|
|
|
Post by chadwilliam on Mar 18, 2024 17:23:45 GMT -5
Personally, I felt the robotic Brainiac was the most terrifying version of him ever done. Absolutely, but I feel like it's not as remembered as Lex Luthor's armor. But, like I said, maybe it's just my impression. For whatever reason, the Post-Crisis DC Universe has gone back to Luthor's battle suit time and again (and even that weird 1970s purple and green ensemble on a few occasions) despite it being questionable whether businessman Luthor would even wear such a thing (I think he was actually President when he decided to put it on for the first time post Crisis so he could duke it out with Superman and Batman). John Byrne reintroduced it pretty quickly in his run, I believe, with a cute little gag where Superman has what seems to be battlesuit Luthor in his grip along with a "I've stopped you now Luthor!" or something comment. The scene shifts to a wide shot and it's revealed to be one of Luthor's men wearing a prototype for LexCorp's security division and Luthor is sitting across the room dressed like a human being. Luthor's battlesuit doesn't make sense to me pre or post Crisis. Luthor should be fiddling with chemicals in a lab coat while observing Superman on a screen and not exchanging leg drops and uppercuts with the guy. The idea of him even doing sit-ups just so he'll look buff in his disco tights doesn't sit right with me either. It makes sense to me that the guy should be a little pudgy - what's motivating him to work out? Vanity? What's convincing him to keep getting in the ring with Superman? A love for pugilism? It doesn't help that Cary Bates' introduction of the war suit makes no sense whatsoever. Luthor returns to Lexor, a place his affection for has always been made obvious to the reader thanks the insight comic books give us via thought balloons, finds out he has a child, finds out that he's still adored by the planet, discovers the Lexorian armour and promptly decides to go on a rampage against that world because he's just an evil guy. It never worked for me. And yet... Brianiac's robotic look has never been revisited to my knowledge despite it fitting the character like a glove. We got an overweight guy in a tuxedo when he was a carnival magician, we got a Ming the Merciless knockoff during the 90s, and from what I can tell, a number of looks based after his Lex Luthor with green skin and pads on his head silver age appearance. The Skull Ship did return but that skeletal grim reaper robot look seems off-limits for some reason. The only thing I can think of is that DC might be concerned that he looks too much like Metalo or something, but I mean, how often is Metallo used? Is there anyone who doesn't like that Brainiac? |
|
|
|
Post by mikelmidnight on Mar 23, 2024 12:36:59 GMT -5
I felt that while Moore did a good job of evoking the craziness of the Silver Age with Supreme, he never so much as hinted at the heartfelt sincerity that a lot of those stories contained. The corner of the Superman universe dealing with Red Kryptonite and wacky girlfriend shenanigans, sure, but the isolation of a selfless character in a world dependent upon his goodness just seemed too big a concept for Moore to be able to handle. As a result, Supreme just felt more like parody than pastiche to me with the silver age flashback sequences all too often serving to illustrate how ill-equipped the guy was at navigating the modern world. Of course, Supreme came ten years after the Superman reboot so who knows how much of what he did in 1996 would have even been in the back of his mind at the time of the reboot, but even in the 1980s, his Superman just seemed a little more naive than earnest in my opinion ( For the Man Who Has Everything, for instance, even ends with Superman telling Lois that he was a big-headed egotist who thought that the world couldn't get on without him). To put it another way - I don't think Moore could have written a Superman who could have delivered that "I never lie" line in the 1978 film the way Christopher Reeve had. I don't think folks are aware that Moore (and Steve Gerber, and I think Frank Miller) had actually submitted proposals to DC, for revivals of the post-Crisis Superman, and that DC chose Byrne? None of those proposals have ever seen the light of day, to my regret. I agree with you about Supreme, though. As much a Moore fan as I am, I don't think pastiching Silver Age superhero comics is a particular skill of his (as opposed to Morrison, who is brilliant at it), and I never cared for the series. I disagree with you that Moore couldn't write Superman, or thought him naïve. The story arc very much showcased Superman's competence and skill. And his closing words aren't disillusionment at all; they're an ironic commentary on someone's youth as he's passed into a comfortable middle age. |
|
|
|
Post by kirby101 on Mar 23, 2024 14:05:11 GMT -5
What Ever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow and For the Man Who Has Everything are to of the best Superman stories ever. Moore could write Superman.
|
|
|
|
Post by chadwilliam on Mar 24, 2024 12:16:55 GMT -5
I felt that while Moore did a good job of evoking the craziness of the Silver Age with Supreme, he never so much as hinted at the heartfelt sincerity that a lot of those stories contained. The corner of the Superman universe dealing with Red Kryptonite and wacky girlfriend shenanigans, sure, but the isolation of a selfless character in a world dependent upon his goodness just seemed too big a concept for Moore to be able to handle. As a result, Supreme just felt more like parody than pastiche to me with the silver age flashback sequences all too often serving to illustrate how ill-equipped the guy was at navigating the modern world. Of course, Supreme came ten years after the Superman reboot so who knows how much of what he did in 1996 would have even been in the back of his mind at the time of the reboot, but even in the 1980s, his Superman just seemed a little more naive than earnest in my opinion ( For the Man Who Has Everything, for instance, even ends with Superman telling Lois that he was a big-headed egotist who thought that the world couldn't get on without him). To put it another way - I don't think Moore could have written a Superman who could have delivered that "I never lie" line in the 1978 film the way Christopher Reeve had. I don't think folks are aware that Moore (and Steve Gerber, and I think Frank Miller) had actually submitted proposals to DC, for revivals of the post-Crisis Superman, and that DC chose Byrne? None of those proposals have ever seen the light of day, to my regret. I agree with you about Supreme, though. As much a Moore fan as I am, I don't think pastiching Silver Age superhero comics is a particular skill of his (as opposed to Morrison, who is brilliant at it), and I never cared for the series. I disagree with you that Moore couldn't write Superman, or thought him naïve. The story arc very much showcased Superman's competence and skill. And his closing words aren't disillusionment at all; they're an ironic commentary on someone's youth as he's passed into a comfortable middle age. I never thought of it this way, but this makes a lot of sense. I haven't read the story in a while so I can't say whether I agree or disagree, but there is a disconnect to how Moore presents his superhero work that often makes me wonder what he's attempting to do. Moore doesn't invoke The Silver Age to mock it or point out what he regards as its stupidity as some writers like to do (with Whatever Happened To)- he does seem to have a genuine reverence for the era, but at the same time, I can't say that he's not tearing the period down either. I guess its the fact that he's running The Silver Age through a meat grinder but doing so with love which tends to throw me. |
|
|
|
Post by mikelmidnight on Mar 25, 2024 10:52:52 GMT -5
Moore doesn't invoke The Silver Age to mock it or point out what he regards as its stupidity as some writers like to do (with Whatever Happened To)- he does seem to have a genuine reverence for the era, but at the same time, I can't say that he's not tearing the period down either. I guess its the fact that he's running The Silver Age through a meat grinder but doing so with love which tends to throw me. That is how he made his name, for better or worse. This story wasn't a SA pastiche, but Supreme, 1963, and some of his ABC stories were. |
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Mar 25, 2024 12:52:40 GMT -5
What Ever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow and For the Man Who Has Everything are to of the best Superman stories ever. Moore could write Superman. I think they are the best Bronze Age Superman stories ever. In second place (and very far away) some stories by Elliot S. Maggin. (Silver Age and Golden Age stories are so tonally different that it's pointless to make comparisons.) |
|
|
|
Post by driver1980 on Mar 25, 2024 13:42:53 GMT -5
What Ever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow and For the Man Who Has Everything are to of the best Superman stories ever. Moore could write Superman. I think they are the best Bronze Age Superman stories ever. In second place (and very far away) some stories by Elliot S. Maggin. (Silver Age and Golden Age stories are so tonally different that it's pointless to make comparisons.) No, the best Bronze Age Superman story is this one:  |
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Mar 25, 2024 15:00:50 GMT -5
I think they are the best Bronze Age Superman stories ever. In second place (and very far away) some stories by Elliot S. Maggin. (Silver Age and Golden Age stories are so tonally different that it's pointless to make comparisons.) No, the best Bronze Age Superman story is this one: uhmmm... I'll think about it  (Well, it's probably the only real fight between pre-Crisis Superman and a Green Lantern!) |
|
|
|
Post by mikelmidnight on Mar 26, 2024 11:31:17 GMT -5
No, the best Bronze Age Superman story is this one: I don't know about that story specifically, but certainly Starlin's work on this series (most though not all of which included Mongul), is one of the peaks for the character in the era. I wish Starlin had done more, as Bronze Age Superman would have been well-suited to his sort of cosmic nonsense. |
|
|
|
Post by driver1980 on Mar 26, 2024 11:36:07 GMT -5
The story I’ve mentioned is well worth tracking down. I believe some scientific study here in the UK stated that it had to be considered in the top five of pre-Crisis storylines…
|
|
