|
|
Post by zarius on Dec 15, 2009 0:40:43 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Valentine Smith on Dec 16, 2009 0:48:49 GMT -5
Sounds like a tremendous snore.
It's time to end that marriage. I don't care how they do it. There's simply no way to make it interesting.
|
|
|
|
Post by zarius on Dec 16, 2009 2:04:49 GMT -5
I disagree, the marraige has taken a backseat for a long time, but to D.C's credit, was always kept in place for a good writer to work on if he wanted to. The last time it was used effectivly was during "Last Son"
|
|
|
|
Post by Valentine Smith on Dec 17, 2009 0:34:00 GMT -5
And even there...barely. Unlike Spidey's marriage to MJ, (which NEVER should have been "ended", let alone the way it was), which always felt like an organic progression of the characters, the Clark/Lois marriage has, from the outset, felt forced, and has robbed the characters of their most interesting character beats.
Dozens of writers have worked on the Superman books since they've married, and not one has made it interesting, or particularly fun parts of the book to read. The Superman books (with the odd blip here and there) have been on an impossibly dull treadmill for over a decade now. I buy them out of habit...but if I was able to quit smoking, then I can certainly quit buying these.
I dropped Action 3 issues into Greg Rucka's awful stint, and I don't know why I haven't ditched Robinson's Superman, which has been impossibly boring. There's nothing in that Guggenheim interview to make me think I'm going to put Action back on my list.
Oh well, at least Secret Origin is awesome.
|
|
|
|
Post by zarius on Dec 21, 2009 6:17:40 GMT -5
And even there...barely. Unlike Spidey's marriage to MJ, (which NEVER should have been "ended", let alone the way it was) Well, technically Spidey's marraige is still being kept around by Marvel. It's allowed to evolve in the Newspaper strip and in Spider-Girl. Continuity isnt Marvel's biggest priority anymore anyway. Lois and Clark's marraige on the other hand, isnt complimented by a series of paralel continuities where it could be given a sharper focus. It exists in a mainstream timeline dominated by fanboys who were raised on the movies and the Silver Age. Fans of that era do not come with a pro-marraige warranty card. They've had enough sense to keep it where it is when a writer who cares about it, and has made it CLEAR he cares about it, as Marc has, can work on making it interesting, rather than give up on it, as I beleive it would finish off the sales drop in Superman comics A lot of them werent comfortable with Supes being married though. If you don't have a guy on board that wants to really show the strengths of that relationship, you won't see it. In some respects, that shows it's not in the way of other dramatic elements and it's a good thing People grow and evolve, and I think even if they hadnt been married, Clark and Lois would remain who they are as characters currently without much change...they'd be fairly routine and predictable if they didnt. Marraige isnt about having characters stay who they are. I might go back to the titles after New Krypton, but I feel there's been so much character derailment (Lucy, Sam, Kara, Lana, Cat) that it'll take another Crisis to clear it up. At the moment, I think the best solutiuon is to have Clark pass the mantle to Connor so we have an all new Superman, and Clark and Lois can take up the roles left by Martha and Johnathan and continue to age. Maybe even give Connor's SUperman "Superman" and keep Clark and Lois in "Action" |
|
|
|
Post by Valentine Smith on Dec 21, 2009 23:42:56 GMT -5
Well, I know better than to argue with somebody who takes their continuity so seriously. But, the very notion of turning Superman into a "legacy" character would be enough to get me to quit comics entirely.
These characters aren't supposed to age. Comic readership continues to dwindle due to ridiculous cover prices and continuity so convoluted that a new reader can't possibly make heads or tails of an issue they pick up off the stands. And this is coming from a guy who buys between 15 and 20 titles a month, and is at the comic shop every Wednesday. Marrying Lois and Clark took away the most dynamic character beat in the entire relationship, and the most iconic struggle in comic history. It was a fine experiment, but here we are, nearly 20 years later annnnnnd.....zzzzzzzzz....
Wally and Dick were the DC characters allowed to grow up a little, not unlike Peter Parker. The guys that were allowed to grow outside the shadow of their mentors. Why? Because they were arguably more interesting and three dimensional than their grown-up counterparts. Can't say the same about Connor. Not even close.
|
|
|
|
Post by zarius on Dec 22, 2009 5:24:49 GMT -5
Well, I know better than to argue with somebody who takes their continuity so seriously. I'm not a continuity-aholic by any stretch, we've had reboots for years that don't affect the mainstream canon in a "vauge" sense, but still allow for major changes. I prefer characters to be consistent morally. The Clark/Lois/Superman "struggle" was never the reason I began reading the Superman comics in the first place. I was raised on the Byrne era, so my loyalty is to a grown up, less conflicted Lois and Clark that went through far more relatable things like making the sane choice and marrying your soul mate within a few short years. I have never been a fan of love triangles or "Clark's an inadequete boob, and Supes is all that". Those traits bore me to death. I don't beleive in "iconography". If you want a Superman you feel comfortable with, by all means start a new continuity and let the mainstream one continue to age the characters. Clark and Lois have lost nothing, they have only gained more in life If that bores you, that's your opinion. I love it. It's real. I'd rather comics evolve positivly and leave the weight of predictable, sales-sapping angst behind. |
|
|
|
Post by Valentine Smith on Dec 22, 2009 8:12:02 GMT -5
I'm completely in favor of the parallel continuity idea, and I think it's exactly what comics need in order to keep attracting new readers, ESPECIALLY new readers who may be exposed to the "iconic" versions of these characters in movies and cartoons.
I really like the "Earth One" graphic novel format. It's just a shame that I can't stand JMS, and I'm really bummed out that he's the one doing Superman. I'll probably have to pass on it.
At some point, I'll probably just be satisfied with the Superman stories I have. Which is an awful lot. I've got a longbox full of pre-Crisis stuff (primarily bronze age Cary Bates or Elliot Maggin written and drawn by either Curt Swan/Murphy Anderson, or Kurt Schaffenberger), and another long box full of all the post Man Of Steel stuff, from MOS up through the Death And Return. Which really makes a terrific read if you have about a month or so to kill and feel like reading about 400 comics. My personal fave of that era is the Marv Wolfman/Jerry Ordway Adventures Of Superman, which I found to be the perfect balance between the Byrne reboot and the classic versions.
The "One Year Later" and beyond stuff is rapidly filling up a new box, and I'm sad to say, that with the exception of a few of the Geoff Johns stories, and a good chunk of Busiek's run, I've been rather bored. James Robinson, author of my favorite mainstream superhero series ever (Starman), has really let me down with his Superman run. It's decompressed, dialogue heavy, and dull. The inconsistent art hasn't helped either (although I LOVE Pete Woods on New Krypton).
|
|
|
|
Post by Jor-L5150 on Dec 31, 2009 2:07:01 GMT -5
.....aaaaaaahhh nostalgia wins in the end!  personally i gave up a long time ago. i love comics- but i can't keep up. every summer its a new "end-of-the-world-event", characters killed off, replaced, ressuercted....lather , rinse, repeat. whatever it is they do- they will UNdo. whatever is relavent to continuity will soon be irrelevant. even bucky doesnt stay dead. SO- i just drop in now and then and try to enjoy stories on thier own- but like val i have my "grew-up-with-it" faves. love my precrisis swan era. love byrne. love ordway. anymore if i buy comics its stuff my boys are into, but now and then i steer them to my collection. |
|
|
|
Post by zarius on Mar 19, 2010 20:53:54 GMT -5
|
|
