|
Post by zaku on Dec 13, 2020 18:23:29 GMT -5
But NOT so much... the comics of the 50s and early 60s. What I took away from that realization was... that quite possibly, DC FIRING Siegel & Shuster was what led to Superman becoming the D*** so many modern fans look back on with contempt. In an odd way, Hollywood treated Superman and his cast better than the comics had. Absolutely. I'm always surprised when people believe that the pre-Crisis Superman was a kind of Boy Scout full of integrity and honor always bound to do the right thing. Then I realize they are thinking about the Christopher Reeve's (magnificent!) version. I think a few random panels would be enough to change their mind about his comic's counterpart. Here, for example, our hero is needed elsewhere but he is stuck in a gym with Steve Lombard. Which of the countless and proven methods will you use to solve the problem? Obviously to give his colleague a concussion.
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on Dec 14, 2020 6:22:20 GMT -5
Whoa, "As I figured...", he could just as easily broken his neck. Way to go Supes!
|
|
|
Post by tarkintino on Dec 14, 2020 8:39:06 GMT -5
"Name a storyline that was retconned because it was terrible"The entire Pre-Crisis SUPERMAN continuity.
Hey, now. The original Sieger-&-Shuster Superman is quintessential Superman. Agreed. The early Superman was not the ridiculous version that ended the Golden Age and ran into the Silver.
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Dec 14, 2020 9:59:05 GMT -5
Whoa, "As I figured...", he could just as easily broken his neck. Way to go Supes! And it wasn't even the worst thing he did to him. Superman spent virtually all the Bronze Age in an idiotic prank contest with Steve Lombard. And often DANGEROUS pranks. I don't know even what was the point the authors were trying to make: "Kids you can defend yourself from bullies only if you are Superman!" "If someone pull a prank on you, give him a concussion!"
|
|
|
Post by mikelmidnight on Dec 14, 2020 12:54:39 GMT -5
When I got my hands on several of the earliest Golden Age SUPERMAN Archive books, I noticed something interesting. Althbough when she debuted, Lois Lane was really a SHREW, after a few years, she had slowly started to mellow out, and began cutting Clark some breaks. They started to get along, and have mutual respect for each other. Reading those early-40s stories, I could easily see that they could easily lead, quite naturally, to the version of SUPERMAN I saw in the George Reeves TV series in the 50s.
Did you know that Siegel and Schuster had planned for Superman to reveal his secret identity to Lois? and that DC ixnayed it, forcing them into the static relationship they had for decades?
Lois would have gone on to become a very different kind of character. www.supermanhomepage.com/k-metal-from-krypton-restoration-project/
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2020 13:38:44 GMT -5
Jeez, you guys sure hate fun comics. My point was that I believe the DC PTB are the ones who hated fun comics in the early '80s, and tried to mask it with "Our continuity is too complicated". Also, yes, I do hate fun comics, but that wasn't my point
|
|
|
Post by profh0011 on Dec 14, 2020 16:46:28 GMT -5
HAH!!!!! I think I may have read that somewhere. And it was probably in the back of my mind when I saw Dean Cain's version of Superman.
Strange but true: the Christopher Reeve movies, which John Byrne seems so totally enamored of, NEVER really impressed me. I mean the 1st one. I saw it when it came out, and thought... "Okay". But that was as far as it went. And the sequels increasingly fell off a cliff. (Like the 3 sequels to the 1989 "BATMAN", which I did like.)
My best friend sent me a copy of a 2-part story from the "SUPERBOY" tv series in the 80s. And what struck me was... that show (the 2nd actor in the lead, not the 1st), to my eyes, managed to capture the FEEL of the classic DC comics far, far better than the Christopher Reeve movies ever did. Amazing.
And then I saw the "LOIS & CLARK" pilot... and it blew the "SUPERBOY" show totally out of the water. Whoa!
Which means... to me... Dean Cain's Superman was at least TWO WHOLE LEVELS better than Christophper Reeve's. Never saw that coming!
|
|
|
Post by profh0011 on Dec 14, 2020 16:56:29 GMT -5
From a wide variety of sources (reading reprints of Golden Age Comics, countless articles & interviews with Golden Age creators, etc.), I've slowly developed a feeling that after World War 2, when a lot of the original creators came back, DC editorial had done all they could to "take over" the creative side of things, more than they had before. And the departure of editor Sheldon Mayer probably accelerated that.
I often think of the late 30s-early 40s as a really "classic" time for the oldest, earlier DC heroes. But the early 50s, I'd say, may have been some of their worst featuring any of them. I have a feeling DC was slowly improving over the late 50s, early 60s, late 60s, but still, somehow, never QUITE having the sense of freshness and excitement and FUN that those characters had early-on. A lot of things probably contributed to this. Certain editorial attitudes... the onslaught of the Comics Code, combined with the idea that "comics are for kids AND ONLY FOR KIDS". Mort Weisinger's outspoken belief that "WE MAKE CRAP FOR IDIOTS!" (actual quote, but don't ask me from where)
And then of course their absolutely clueless attempts to BADLY imitate what Jack Kirby was doing over at Marvel. (Kirby, a guy Jack Schiff had had BLACKLISTED and booted out of DC in the late 50s.)
I slowly began giving DC another look in the mid-late 70s, starting with Steve Englehart leaving Marvel (thanks to Gerry Conway). From then to the early 80s, there was a slow progression... until at some point, I suddenly realized... HOLY S*** !!!!! --DC's had become more fun to read than Marvels. By the early 90s, I'd completely given up on Marvel. But by the mid-2000s... I'd pretty much given up on DC, as well.
Every time some fan would ask him, Jack Kirby would give the following advice: "CREATE YOUR OWN CHARACTERS." If comics in this country were run like a "REAL" publishing industry, where creators-- NOT publishers owned the series-- no doubt we'd see more of that, and less infinite reboots of characters who were stale generations before I got hooked on buying comics.
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Dec 14, 2020 17:03:21 GMT -5
When I got my hands on several of the earliest Golden Age SUPERMAN Archive books, I noticed something interesting. Althbough when she debuted, Lois Lane was really a SHREW, after a few years, she had slowly started to mellow out, and began cutting Clark some breaks. They started to get along, and have mutual respect for each other. Reading those early-40s stories, I could easily see that they could easily lead, quite naturally, to the version of SUPERMAN I saw in the George Reeves TV series in the 50s.
Did you know that Siegel and Schuster had planned for Superman to reveal his secret identity to Lois? and that DC ixnayed it, forcing them into the static relationship they had for decades?
Lois would have gone on to become a very different kind of character. www.supermanhomepage.com/k-metal-from-krypton-restoration-project/
I have to say that, from a creative point of view, DC people put themselves in a corner. The extent he went in the Pre-Crisis period to hide his secret identity to Lois (Robots, Batman disguised as him, etc etc) was frankly ridiculous. He used his incredible powers and resources to made a woman think she was wrong when she was actually right. This while he was professing his never-ending love for her. If he had revealed his identity around this time, well, it wouldn't have ended well between the two. After-reboot he never got to these pathological extremes, so when the great revelation happened, well it didn't seem like he had much to be forgiven.
|
|
|
Post by Duragizer on Dec 14, 2020 20:19:37 GMT -5
When I got my hands on several of the earliest Golden Age SUPERMAN Archive books, I noticed something interesting. Althbough when she debuted, Lois Lane was really a SHREW, after a few years, she had slowly started to mellow out, and began cutting Clark some breaks. They started to get along, and have mutual respect for each other. Reading those early-40s stories, I could easily see that they could easily lead, quite naturally, to the version of SUPERMAN I saw in the George Reeves TV series in the 50s.
Did you know that Siegel and Schuster had planned for Superman to reveal his secret identity to Lois? and that DC ixnayed it, forcing them into the static relationship they had for decades?
Lois would have gone on to become a very different kind of character. www.supermanhomepage.com/k-metal-from-krypton-restoration-project/
This is among the reasons why I wish the DC Multiverse was more fully catalogued. The original S&S Superman should be considered distinct from the Earth-2 Superman.
|
|
|
Post by profh0011 on Dec 14, 2020 22:50:07 GMT -5
I know it gets a bit tough with the 5 characters who NEVER ceased publishing-- Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Aquaman & Green Arrow (the latter 2 were back-ups for quite a while). Where does Earth-2 end and Earth-1 begin? And the timing doesn't always overlap. And yes, one could argue S&S Superman was different from non-S&S Superman. Just as Wonder Woman by Marston & Peter couldn't possibly be quite the same as what came after them.
It's like, if you've ever watched the TARZAN film series-- not just those by other producers, but the "main" series that ran from Weismuller to Ely. Every time they recast the part, it's like the films move subtly into a slightly DIFFERENT UNIVERSE. With Gordon Scott alone, 3 different distinct versions just with that 1 actor!
Although, funny enough, I can believe Ron Ely and Jock Mahoney could be the SAME version... with Mahoney being an older, tougher version of Ely, despite his films having been made earlier.
I feel the same way about the Ronald Howard & Ian Richardson SHERLOCK HOLMES. Both have such a sense of fun and delight in their work, I often think Richardson is Howard's version when he got middle-aged. (Funny enough, these 2 examples, the same producer is involved-- Sy Weintraub. He did both Mahoney & Ely, but also Richardson.)
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Dec 15, 2020 2:36:01 GMT -5
I know it gets a bit tough with the 5 characters who NEVER ceased publishing-- Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Aquaman & Green Arrow (the latter 2 were back-ups for quite a while). Where does Earth-2 end and Earth-1 begin? And the timing doesn't always overlap. Well, this is probably the best analysis I found about the dividing line between the two Earths :-) www.mikesamazingworld.com/mikes/index.php?page=fanboy
|
|
|
Post by mikelmidnight on Dec 15, 2020 12:21:06 GMT -5
Strange but true: the Christopher Reeve movies, which John Byrne seems so totally enamored of, NEVER really impressed me. I mean the 1st one. I saw it when it came out, and thought... "Okay". But that was as far as it went. And the sequels increasingly fell off a cliff. (Like the 3 sequels to the 1989 "BATMAN", which I did like.) And then I saw the "LOIS & CLARK" pilot... and it blew the "SUPERBOY" show totally out of the water. Whoa! Which means... to me... Dean Cain's Superman was at least TWO WHOLE LEVELS better than Christophper Reeve's. Never saw that coming!
I always feel a little bad because most people adore Reeve's Superman … but I never gravitated to him at all. For a while I felt a little guilty because I was thinking, am I just in the grip or nostalgia because he isn't George Reeves? But then I immediately liked Dean Cain in the role!
I can't even say why I like Cain but not Reeve, frankly.
I will add that while I admit Reeve did a great job of portraying Clark as different from Superman, I never liked the 'country doofus' Clark that so many comic creators modeled after him. The original Clark was an urbane city dweller and that's how I imagine him.
I know it gets a bit tough with the 5 characters who NEVER ceased publishing-- Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Aquaman & Green Arrow (the latter 2 were back-ups for quite a while). Where does Earth-2 end and Earth-1 begin? And the timing doesn't always overlap. Well, this is probably the best analysis I found about the dividing line between the two Earths :-) www.mikesamazingworld.com/mikes/index.php?page=fanboy
Thanks for researching that I was just going to link to it!
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Dec 15, 2020 12:33:37 GMT -5
I will add that while I admit Reeve did a great job of portraying Clark as different from Superman, I never liked the 'country doofus' Clark that so many comic creators modeled after him. The original Clark was an urbane city dweller and that's how I imagine him. Well, in the movie universe it did make sense: the Kents were living in a farm, and, while some points of the film's timeline are a little obscure, it seems to me he went directly to the Daily Planet as soon as he arrived in Metropolis (after he had spent 12 years alone in the Fortress of Solitude - My God, I've never thought about it, it seems a little dark...), so it didn't have a lot of experience as a "city dweller" Thanks for researching that I was just going to link to it! You are welcome
|
|
|
Post by mikelmidnight on Dec 16, 2020 12:13:42 GMT -5
Thanks for researching that I was just going to link to it! You are welcome
There's no way to contact him in an obvious way, but there's one decision I'd dispute: Roy Thomas did a minor retcon of Robotman's trial, as obviously in the original the other All-Stars weren't in attendance. I'd argue that that was the trial of the Earth-One Robotman. It's a minor point though.
Looking through it again, I do agree with his decision that sometimes E-1 and E-2 continuities may have overlapped or alternated before the transition was complete, and we can't always try to tie down the single issue where the transition took place.
|
|