View Single Post
Old 12-22-2011, 12:39 AM   #99
Banned User
Kurosawa's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: 22,300 miles above the Earth
Posts: 9,485
Default Re: What was Mark Waid's issues with the 1986 retelling?

Originally Posted by theMan-Bat View Post
Again, John Byrne said that he wanted to do stories of Superman "learning the ropes." A Superman who is "new to the job." Byrne said, "The choice to leave him out of the canon was mine. But, as noted many times, that choice was made with the assurance from the Powers That Were that I would be able to do a Superman who was still learning the ropes. Then, after the contracts were signed, they reneged on that promise."
"There's hardly a job out there that I would not tweak in some way if I could. As you may know, I dumped Superboy from the Superman mythos largely because I did not see him as a necessary character, and DC had agreed to allow me to show Superman "learning the ropes" after the reboot. Unfortunately, once the contracts were signed, the backed down on this and insisted we do MAN OF STEEL so that Superman would be "up to speed" by the time the new first issue came out. (Eventually I would realize that they wanted Superman rebooted without him actually being, you know, rebooted. Odd, indeed, since I had said from the start I was prefectly prepared to work from within continuity, and the reboot was their idea.) So, since I did not have a Superman who was still "figuring it out", I wish I had had Superboy to fill that role."
The sad thing is one way or another, he wanted to show Superman being incompetent. Not that Superboy didn't make mistakes-he did-but the main thing seems to be that Byrne was wanting to deconstruct Superman by having him "learn the ropes", not unlike how Miller did with Batman, I suppose. That is something that can be done well, but also needs to be handled with caution. Regardless, it is there in his own words: "I wish I had had Superboy to fill that role."

Clark had no need for that deathbed advice that he must use his great powers for the good of mankind, since he'd already been doing that as Superboy.

Well, you don't get it, I suppose.

I do not mindlessly conform to what some people assume about Frank Miller.
Unless it's praise.

I've already pointed out strong female characters in Frank Miller's material. Frank Miller contributed to a comic book called A.A.R.G.H.! (Artists Against Rampant Government Homophobia), in which Frank Miller did a story called "RoboHomophobe!" about a gay-bashing man transformed into a quadriplegic after a car accident, and the homophobe ends up being a homosexual himself. Martha Washington is a hero in Frank Miller's material who is both an African American and a woman.
Yay FM.

Jerry Siegel was obviously not happy with DC's use of Superboy without his input or approval. We know that Jerry Siegel wanted Superboy to be a trickster character, we don't know what exactly Siegel would have written, since he didn't get to write those Superboy stories, Don Cameron did, without the input or approval of Jerry Siegel.
No, although he did write Superboy later on in the 60's.

I didn't claim the Detective title outsold the Superman title in the '60s.
It came off like you were claiming that Batman (as a franchise) outsold Superman (as a franchise) in the 60's and you were called out by me and several other people for that.

As I've explained, your assumption is inaccurate. I believe that Superman was more successful in the '50s, which was also the Silver Age. Much of what is associated with Superman came from the '30s, '40s and '50s.
The top selling comics of the 50's were Dell's Walt Disney comics. And while much of what is associated with Superman came from the 30's-50's, of course, the most fruitful and iconic period of his existence is the 1959-1970 Weisinger period, especially the early 60's when Jerry Siegel came back and wrote his best stories ever. My personal favorite Superman eras are the Golden and Bronze Ages, but there is no question that the Silver Age Superman is the most iconic.

The Adventures of Superman show starring George Reeves continued to be aired in syndication throughout the '60s. And The New Adventures of Superman was aired on Saturday mornings from 1966 to 1969.
Yes, but they were never as big as the Batman TV show briefly was. I feel those shows did well because of the popularity and quality of the Superman comics of the time, not the other way around, as was the case with Batmania. Not that the Schwartz/Fox/Finger/Infantino/Giella etc Batman of that time wasn't really good, because quite a bit of it was, and a big improvement over the Jack Schiff edited Batman of the late 50's-early 60's. Although I think those comics get kind of a bum rap.

Kurosawa is offline   Reply With Quote