Re: What was Mark Waid's issues with the 1986 retelling?
Touche, Touche! I guess that's not a valid argument coming from me. I must admit that I don't like the whole not caring about Krypton though.
1. why no plot at all?
There is a plot. It is a simple origin story that strips away all of the ridiculous notions of Superman as a boy in tights with a time traveling Legion, takes away the Super family and a lot of other campy nonsense. It also depowers Superman to what is supposed to be a golden age level.
2. why no show us why Superman wants to join the Daily Planet in the first place?
just like the golden age origin, it is implied that he wants to be close to the action so he decides to apply for a job at the Daily Planet
3. why does Superman spit on his origin?
you got me there.
4. why doesn't he even bother to find out who he is? (thin characterization)
he does later on in that same continuity when Stern, Ordway and Jurgens took over, but I agree with you, they should have dedicated at least a single issue to that plot line.
5. why does he display his high school trophies in his apartment?
maybe like any small town Kansas boy he is proud of himself (or just egotistical)
6. why is his Lois such a *****?
She's a woman of the 80's and in the 80's, career women were snobby, ruthless *******.
Jerry and Joe were gentlemen. Bob Kane was a thief and a glory-hound who was more concerned about profit and prestige. I cannot bring myself to believe the same things about Stan Lee in regards to his two main contributors, Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko. I'm inclined to believe Stan's version of events as he has usually been very willing to credit his co-conspirators, but the truth is because different versions of credit exists, we will never truly know.