While all of us at Multiversity are fans of a wide spectrum of comics, there are a few of us that tend to self-identify as “DC guys.” We’ve cried for justice; we’ve been through the blackest nights and the brightest days. And now, we’ve been culled together for a new column to focus on some of the bigger goings on in the world of Detective Comics Comics. If you’re wondering who is going to stand up and discuss what is happening at DC – don’t worry:
Brian: The worst kept secret in comics became public a few weeks ago: John Romita Jr. is joining Geoff Johns on “Superman” starting this summer. This is the latest in what has been a near total shakeup of the Superman line of books since last summer. Before we get to the new kids on the block, let’s take stock. Currently, what Super-family books are you guys reading?
Vince: I’m currently reading and constantly recommending Greg Pak & Aaron Kuder’s “Action Comics”, which is a great examination of how Superman sees his own upbringing and how he would apply it to something himself. I’m also reading “Batman/Superman”, but dropped out for the Brett Booth arc – no offense to Booth, but the story and that art for this particular title is just not what I wanted. The first arc was among the best things DC Comics has published since the ‘New 52’ started. “Superman” has been a stinker since the beginning, so I’m anxiously awaiting the new creative team that we’ll talk about later. I feel the same way about “Superboy.” I no longer read “Supergirl”, but I think that’s been a decent title for most of its run – if not overly conventional. “Superman/Wonder Woman” isn’t the trainwreck it could have been (Charles Soule is a darn good writer), but it didn’t hold my interest.
In other words, Greg Pak is really shouldering that line as far as my pull list is concerned.
Zach: I’m with Vince 100%. He completely and accurately described my feelings about the current Superman line. The only thing I’ll add is that, while their start was a little rocky, I’m really interested to see where the new “Supergirl” team takes this whole Red Lantern thing.
Vince: Wait, what Red Lantern thing? Aw man, I hate being out of the loop.
Brian: Vince, to catch you up, Supergirl is the newest Red Lantern. I’m not reading her solo series, but the latest issue of “Green Lantern” had her in it as a Red.
I’m, more or less, with you guys. I’m reading both Pak-written series, as well as “Superman/Wonder Woman,” and I started reading “Superman Unchained” (the forgotten child in this endeavor), but dropped off due to general boredom.
At various points in the New 52, I’ve read all of the Super-books, save “Superman” proper, which has been a festering pile of garbage since its debut.
So, let’s take the books/directions one at a time and discuss them. Since Zach mentioned “Supergirl,” what do you guys think of Kara being a Red Lantern? To me, the development is exactly the type of out of the box thinking DC should be doing with their lesser selling books. Kara, thus far in the New 52, has been quite angry at her situation in life and, therefore, sort of a perfect candidate for Red Lantern-ism. Plus, this is the first time in the New 52 (I think) that any pre-existing non-Lantern has donned a ring. Gone are the Luthor in an orange ring days, apparently.
Vince: I guess Kara as a Red Lantern sounds pretty interesting – though I’m pretty burned out on Red Lantern-related things letting me down in the ‘New 52’. Bedard is writing “Supergirl” now? If you’re telling me this goes beyond gimmick territory, I’ll have to give his run a shot.
Brian: I don’t know how long of a development this will be, but something has to stick here. I was a much bigger fan of the original incarnation of the New 52 “Supergirl” than I thought I would be, but once Mahmud Asrar left the book, I lost most of my interest. While I was not a fan of wiping out all Supergirl-related business from pre-‘Flashpoint,’ the creative team on the relaunch brought an interesting perspective and didn’t fall into a lot of the traps of the New 52, in terms of wanting it both ways (fresh start + relying on what worked in the past). It was a true fresh start, and it worked about as well as it could have been expected to – that said, once Asrar left the book, as I said, it hasn’t been in my pull.
Continued belowZach: I know covers can be deceiving, but Supergirl is back to being ringlets on the cover of “Justice League United” #0. Of course, she’s still sporting red in both “Supergirl” and “Red Lanterns” that same month, so who knows.
So that’s what the Superman line is looking like these days, but what about the things that are coming down the line? As Brian mentioned, the big news that prompted this convening of the DC3 is the new “Superman” creative team of Geoff Johns and John Romita Jr. This, in my opinion, some of the most exciting news to come out of DC in quite some time. Before I gush over why I think this is so great, what are your thoughts?
Brian: Well, I think that all of us here believe, even if contemporary evidence is lacking, that Geoff Johns can write a hell of a comic. I think we can also presume that we all really dug his work on “Action Comics” in the ’00s.
In addition, John Romita, Jr. is a pretty big get for DC – an exclusively Marvel artist for over 30 years, JRJR can do some amazing work when properly used. Personally, he isn’t my favorite artist working today, but I think he’s a good fit, in so much as he will draw readers to the book and will add his iconic touch to an iconic character.
Vince: I happen to be a really big John Romita Jr. fan (though I can objectively see why some might not be). His style is wholly original, while still maintaining the sense of fluidity and grandeur that you’re looking for in superhero comics. If he applies the same sense of grandeur and imagination that he did on “Captain America”, to his work on “Superman”, we’re all in for a real treat.
Much of that rests on Geoff Johns’ shoulders (though it sounds like this has already been a strong collaborative effort between the two of them, if their interviews are to be believed).
I’m torn on Johns right now. I’ve said it before, but I do not feel that Geoff Johns’ best trends are done any favors by the ‘New 52’. Conversely, I think his indulgences and weaker tendencies are magnified by it – regardless of the fact that he was resistant to the ‘New 52’ in the first place (listen to Fat Man on Batman to hear him talk about that). At his best, Johns captures what was great about Silver Age heroism. The ‘New 52’ kind of resists that. At his worst, he can write overly violent/grim and decompressed for my tastes. The ‘New 52′, unfortunately, leans toward that.
Johns’ can recapture his best traits. I really do believe that. He hasn’t forgotten what makes these characters great at their cores – if nothing else, he’s the ultimate “distilling” writer in that he can tell you exactly “who” a character is in 2-3 sentences, and he’ll nail it. Johns knows who Superman is as a character. I hope he gets the opportunity to write that.
Needless to say, I’m very excited and very ready to be disappointed by the ‘New 52’ yet again.
Zach: Once again, I’m with you, Vince. As big as a Johns fan as I am, the New 52 hasn’t been the kindest to him. However, I’m hopeful that returning to Superman may bring a return to form. Also, taking over “Superman” right as he moves Lex Luthor into “Justice League” seems like a terrific opportunity for the kind of cross title synergy he excels at. Most of all, I think Johns is the perfect person to reel Superman back from some of the problems the character has experienced in the New 52.
Likewise, JRJR on art is huge for two reasons. First, as Brian mentioned, it’s one of the first “wins” DC has had over Marvel since the early days of the New 52. Second, Romita was born to draw the New Gods. The characters have only played small roles thus far, mostly in “Wonder Woman.” JRJR is the perfect artist to officially bring the Fourth World into the New 52 with a huge BOOM. If that opportunity is wasted, then I will most certainly be disappointed.
Continued belowBrian: The New Gods point is a great one, Vince. My biggest concern with the title is that it is going to be really hard to not look at this as “Superman Unchained” part 2 – two big name creators working on Superman, without much excitement coming from the book. I sincerely hope I’m wrong, but we’ll see.
I don’t think we need to spend too much time talking about Greg Pak’s work – we all seem to be pretty big fans – but let’s talk about his artist on “Action Comics” and the new writer on “Superboy,” Aaron Kuder. If I recall correctly, all three of us were pretty impressed by his “Parasite” one-shot during Villains Month, and I don’t think any of us are particularly big fans of the current “Superboy” iteration. What do you guys think Kuder can bring to “Superboy?”
Vince: Well, most of all: fun!
Gosh, we sound like a broken record, don’t we? But that’s what Aaron Kuder brings to any title he’s on – tons of energy and an eye for what’s fun about the characters he’s writing. Hell, his Parasite story was one of the very few that went light with its character’s origin. I imagine he’ll bring that sort of lightness to “Superboy.”
Zach: “Superboy” is the title I have the least connection too. I actually am not ever sure what’s going on in that book. Isn’t there a new, more evil Superboy from the future or something? Anyway, based on the “Parasite” story, I think Kuder has a fresh, unique voice, which is just what the Boy of Steel could use right now. In fact, as much as I would hate to see him off “Action Comics,” I would love to see him go full writer/artist once more on “Superboy.”
Brian: Zach, that is the only reason I’m slightly down on this decision – because if it goes well, it means Kuder will be off “Action.” That said, “Parasite” really felt like something fresh and different in the miasma of shit that was Villains Month, so I’m hoping that he is able to bring some fun back into the character – if the character isn’t an evil future version, still. Who knows – it’s going to take a lot of work to un-Lobdell the entire Superman line, but I can’t help but think that “Superboy” might be the hardest redemption story of the batch.
That actually segues nicely into the next discussion: the return of Doomsday. There is a Doomsday-themed crossover hitting “Action,” “Superman,” and “Superman/Wonder Woman” before Lobdell leaves for the greener pastures of anything at all. Charles Soule, writer of the surpsingly good “Superman/Wonder Woman,” has said that Doomsday might not have killed Superman in the New 52, and that story might be in the future of the line. This sentence filled me with dread, which was eased, bizarrely enough, by Lobdell himself, saying that the last thing he wanted to do was to simply re-make the “Death of Superman.”
That said, what do you guys expect from a Doomsday story, other than groans?
Zach: I can’t say that I expect too terribly much. Although, it is nice to see a Superman crossover that isn’t completely helmed by Lobdell. The whole “Death of Superman” storyline has been in an uncomfortable state of flux since the reboot, so it will be nice to at least put that conundrum to rest. With creators like Charles Soule, Greg Pak, and presumably Aaron Kuder and Tony Daniel pitching in, it has the potential to be a pretty quality production. It at least has to be better than ‘Reign of the Doomsdays’ from a few years back, right?
Vince: Can I say something heretical that I rant about to no one in particular all the time on Twitter? I usually don’t give even a minuscule shit about chronological continuity in decades-old cape comics. The whole “did Doomsday happen?” thing is no exception. If we get a good story out of this, I don’t care where “whatever” fits in or “when” it fits. If we don’t get a good story out of this, then the worst that could happen is that we still don’t have a “good” Doomsday story. Nothing gained, nothing lost (but our precious time).
Continued belowAs for the actual prospect of these creatives working on a “Doomsday” crossover? It’s quite simple. I haven’t been interested in Lobdell’s take on “Superman” and I don’t think that’s going to change now. It’s too bad that “Action” is going to have to be roped into this.
I’ll tell you exactly what this is going to be: when I look back into my long boxes 5-10 years from now, I’ll say “oh yeah, Greg Pak’s nice run on “Action Comics! Why am I missing some issues in the middle there?”
Brian: Doomsday is a concept that seems so unbearably planted in the early 90s that I really can’t see it working anywhere other than in that time and place. I know that there is no such thing as a bad character, only bad stories, but Doomsday is pretty much the least interesting story device I can think of – add Lobdell to that, and this is a must-pass for me.
I guess the only books we haven’t really talked about are “Superman/Wonder Woman” and “Superman Unchained.” The former has been far better than anyone, or at least the Multiversity gang, thought it would be. Soule isn’t just writing cheesy love stories, or stories where they use their attraction to get the bad guys – he’s telling actual stories. Stories with some depth to them, as well, mind you.
As for “Superman Unchained,” I think this is the book that officially, once and forever, ended my love affair with Jim Lee’s art. For “Justice League,” despite not loving his work, Lee felt appropriately cinematic. Here, he just seemed like he was cross-stitching and overly detailing for the hell of it. I read more than half of these issues, and I can tell you almost nothing about it, and I can certainly tell you nothing about the art that stood out to me in any sense.
For a superstar pairing, Scott Snyder and Jim Lee didn’t really give us anything to write home about.
What about you guys?
Vince: I’m not any more down on Jim Lee than I usually am (I think he has a good eye for grandeur and kinetic action, but a pretty outdated design sense), but the whole “Superman Unchained” project is just a dud in my eyes. Snyder said that this was the story he’d write if he got one chance to write the character. If that’s the case, I don’t see the sense of urgency, nor do I feel that this is as well-rounded a story as I’d expect from a writer of his caliber. Mostly, I surprised at how little he and Lee have to say about Clark Kent and his extended cast. Maybe my expectations were just set differently based on what they were saying leading up to its release, but this Superman vs. Anti-Superman stuff has been dragging on for too long, with too little going on apart from that.
“Superman/Wonder Woman” is definitely a book that rises above its premise, which felt like a joke if you didn’t consider the creative talent behind it. Still, I wasn’t invested enough after a couple issues to keep reading. It definitely wasn’t bad, but the Superman & Wonder Woman pairing doesn’t do a lot for me. I just don’t think it works well from a thematic standpoint. I prefer Wonder Woman in Brian Azzarello’s title and I prefer Superman/Clark Kent trying to chase after Lois Lane. One of the few times my inner “comic book fan” wins out over “Is this an objectively good story?”
Zach: I was honestly expecting “Superman Unchained” to be the book to redeem the New 52 Superman, and was utterly surprised at how much it hasn’t. I’m with you, Vince, regarding the lack of urgency. I’ll also agree this isn’t Jim Lee’s best work. I wanted to like this, but didn’t make it past the third issue. I may give it another shot once it’s collected, however.
I honestly haven’t given “Superman/Wonder Woman” much attention. I wrote it off initially, for the obvious reasons. However, the positive feedback it’s been getting has definitely piqued my interest. I do love some good Tony Daniel art, after all. It’s great to see books such as this one expanding the Superman line in such a unique way, but the concept definitely feels finite. I can’t see the Clark/Diana pairing, and by extension this book, lasting more than another year or so.
