I'm split. Even somewhat disappointed. I've been expecting for this for a while now. The military kind of got in the way, but when I actually got to read it, I was still hoping it was everything that I expected. I wasn't too demanding either. All I asked for was a fresh take on Superman's origin, while staying true to the character. You know, like the staff involved said it would be.
Okay, in all fairness, they never quite said that. They said this was going to be a "modern" take on Superman's origin, for a new, younger audience to become familiar with the character. But I guess it would have to do for me, since I needed that. Being a Superman fan that has been let down completely by the post-Infinite Crisis Superman, I needed that. I needed a new Superman origin that was actually new. I did not need a dead Pa Kent, just 'cause Donner did it. I did not need an origin mini-series that featured Christopher Reeve as Superman. I did not need a Clark Kent that's... well... ridiculous. I did not need a holographic Jor-El or a crystal Fortress.
See, for someone who claims to love superhero comic books, Superman has always been my drive to devote time to this troublesome (from a financial and practical standpoint) hobby. I love Batman almost as much and several other titles have had solid runs from both DC and Marvel Comics, but reading everything else and ignoring my personal favorite out of frustration.... eh, it just made me lost interest.
But Earth One seemed like I'd be getting what I wanted. A new take for an origin. A few fresh ideas here and there. A Superman that's closer to my Superman, as opposed to my dad's Superman (if my dad knew who Superman is). In other words, everything Geoff Johns fails to grasp in his nostalgia-bubble of wanking off to his childhood memories and injecting contrived drama and plot points into the mythos (btw, word has it Conner Kent's odd origin was his idea which he had written DC about when he was still a kid).
Alas, I was taken for a fool yet again. And I'm frustrated I didn't realize that sooner, what with DAN FUCKING DIDIO PROMOTING THE SHIT OUT OF THIS AS "HIP" AND "SEXY". Is this guy ever going to get the fuck out of DC, so that it may actually stop sucking again?
Believe it or not, "Superman: Earth One" isn't a bad book by any means. It shows great effort at working the characters, within a contemporary context and a simplistic, but direct story. The dialogue is for the most part top-notch and... well... I had a blast reading all of its 130-odd pages (despite usually getting bored of the standard 24-page-long Superman on-goings before I hit page 5).
Michael J. Straczynski tells a very Birthright-esque origin story that reaches its climax with an alien invasion and does it better than Mark Waid did (and I loved Superman: Birthright). His dialogues are smart and funny, even if sometimes he goes overboard with an abundance of text in a visual medium (an issue that dates several decades back and few seem to have grasped that too many speech bubbles in a comic book are not a good thing). He introduces a few neat ideas into the mythos that I'd like to see adapted in other stories of the Man of Steel as well. Where he really impresses is with the supporting cast. Lois, Jimmy and Perry are all excellent and their interaction both with each other and with Clark are a much-needed breath of fresh-air, since they've been missing from the cannon books for far, far too long. Even his stock villain and his paper-thin (even somewhat illogical) motivation works within the context of the story. Straczynski knows his first book should stand on its own and the story he tells, he presents in a very movie-esque logic, which isn't always a good idea in this format, but it seems to work here.
In addition, there are some great new ideas that he integrates into the mythos. For example, Krypton's destruction was an act of malice, instead of a random tragedy. I like random tragedies, but in the case of Superman's origin story, it never made much sense. If the planet were to explode from within, it should've given plenty of warning (as the villain correctly points out in Earth One). If Krypton died because its sun went nova, then things are even more illogical. For one, if a star goes nova, you can forget about rescuing your kid in a flimsy rocket moments before the big bang; admittedly, a warmhole can correct that problem, but it's still too contrived. Not to mention that for a planet full of brilliant scientists, they certainly fucked up when they didn't realize that they couldn't live forever next to red giant, i.e. A DYING SUN. Furthermore, the Kryptonians were locked in a constant war with a neighboring planet that prevented both civilizations to expand their interstellar flight capabilities outside of their own solar system, giving some credence to the fact that no other Kryptonian tried to escape the planet.
That's just a couple of examples of the steps Straczynski took to inject new stuff into the mythos and ensure they made enough sense to satisfy folks' suspension of disbelief. They also represent the fresh ideas I was hoping for from this book and they're certainly some of my favorite parts in it.
The book also enjoys some truly great artwork, by Shane Davis. Backgrounds are rich and detailed and characters portray their emotions better than the text does. The set-pieces are great and there is some splendid comic book action drawn into it. The only problem with the art, really, is Clark's figure. He's not as big and bulky as he should be. Instead he's shorter than his football mates. He's extremely athletic, with six-packs so defined from beneath his costume, you could see him them space. But he's... well... kind of small. He doesn't have the iconic stature that other iterations of the character have enjoyed. And therein lies the problem.
For as much effort as it has gone into it, it's the whole "younger audience" and "hip" and "sexy" that fuck this book up royally. In its effort to appeal to the jaded new audience, Clark Kent comes off as a whiny little tosser. Straczynski does great with the supporting cast indeed, but he fails with the protagonist.
The irony here is that this jaded young audience isn't something new; John Byrne's Man Of Steel tried to do the same thing in 1986 and oldschool Superman fans crucified it for that. But "Man of Steel" still knew where to draw the line. "Earth One" suffers from severe balance issues and the worst thing is that all these missteps aren't even necessary for the kind of story the writer wants to tell!
Taking a few queues from CW's Smallville, the book features a very conflicted Clark. Right off the bat, let me give the finger to all the fans so high up their own ass that believe that Clark was born an infallible hero. Bullshit. I understand the appeal, but it's crap. While we're on it, if you really want to make Superman irrelevant (like the public already thinks he is) make him like that. He wears a suit in Smallville and saves folks as Superboy. Then he moves to Metropolis and becomes Superman. Character depth?! Who the fuck needs that?
No, bullshit. Clark needs to be conflicted about his place in the world. He just needs to grow out of it. That's what makes him relevant. FUCK, that's what, by Nietzsche's definition makes him a super-man. From a story standpoint, it's why I've always been a big proponent of the idea that he leaves Smallville after high school and travels around the world, learning of the planet he lives in and then returns home and decides to put on the tights and help people that can't help themselves.
So, conflicted Clark? Not a problem. Emo Clark? Fucking huge problem. That's what Smallville never got and it's what Earth One does wrong as well. Clark arrives at Metropolis with two objectives in mind; get a well-paying (or several well-paying) job to take care of his mom (Pa Kent's inexplicably dead here as well) and find a way to fit in and be happy. The thing is, his entire conflict in the beginning of the book seems to come from an entirely selfish point. He wants to help, but he doesn't want to do it at the expense of being happy. It's Smallville Clark all over again.
Two pages in, he walks down an alley and someone tries to mug him. Clark heat-visions his gun and walks away, angry look, hoodie on and whatnot. That's crap right there. That's what even conflicted Clark wouldn't do. Worst-case-scenario, he'd ignore the mugger and if the attack continued, he'd knock him lightly onto a wall and walk away. But here he seems like he wants to burn him alive and its all done for the sake of style. The reasoning for that scene is transparent!
Later, his apartment building is burning up. Clark flies in, saves his suit and a piece of his spaceship and leaves. What the fuck? No other people lived in there? Clark, any Clark however conflicted, would've stayed and helped out. I have to assume it's done for convenience, to save space and time or something. After all, him helping would be consistent with the conflict he's experiencing in this book. For the most part in the story Clark wants to help from the shadows, so that he doesn't expose himself. That moment right there was perfect for adding to his character. Maybe he tries to help from the shadows. Maybe he misses one and a neighbor dies despite his efforts. It's a little contrived, but it's more consistent both with the character in general and the context of the book.
All of his conversations with Ma Kent are about him whining about his situation. There are the shades of a really good kid there; he also talks about how he wants to take care of her. He's the good son Clark has always been. The same goes for his speech over Pa's grave. He's whining, but he does admit he wants to help.
In that monologue lies another small problem; he points out how helping out the world is defined not by his own personal choice, but rather the desire to not let down his father who wanted him to do so. In a flashback where Ma's sewing the costume, Pa's ecstatic about it, but young Clark is... reluctant, to put it mildly.
It's a main problem with Clark's characterization in the entire book (and likely the entire series if it's not redeemed in future books). It appears that Clark becomes a hero not from his core, but the environment around him, be it because Pa and Ma want him to or because of the large-scale alien invasion that's a lot more forceful than your everyday news helicopter crashing. The "promise" to his dead father, in particular, is a contrived reason to motivate him to be a hero, when Superman just doesn't need one. I don't need Superman burdened by a loved ones' death to the point that it drives him being a hero; it's something that was also present during the Silver Age, to an extend, which is why I was happy when they rectified that with keeping the Kents alive in Post-Crisis.
Small things like these are what ruin an otherwise enjoyable book. It's salvageable, though; Clark ultimately does grow out of his depressed state. It's not until the invasion has reached a point where he can't hide anymore that he puts the suit on and, yes, it looks problematic in terms of characterization, something that my peers have pointed out a lot. But in the end of the day, he still decides to reveal himself on his own. He could've run away or keep trying to help from the shadows in vain, but he put on the suit and threw himself out there. It's the turning point of the story that Clark becomes Superman. After he single-handedly repels the invasion, he quits from his very well-paying job as a researcher, which he took in part to help better mankind, in light of his boss' attitude toward the death and destruction around them. He got a low-paying job for the Daily Planet. He put on the glasses and meek attitude. He took his ship in the Arctic and started inquiring its AI for information on Krypton and his origins. By the end of the book, a mere 21-year-old Clark Kent was embracing his destiny in its fullest.
That's why one can't seriously say that this is a bad book. Not even a bad Superman story. It's just that it lacks balance. Between the efforts for the character to appeal to a younger audience, there are the seeds of a great story that ultimately pay off. What it does wrong is that it takes a conflicted Clark Kent and blows him out of proportion, wallowing in Clark's own depression for far, far too long and making an almost light-switch change to the iconic Superman that he's supposed to be. If the character's storyline was laid out a little more carefully over the plot, this would've been stellar work.
This is an on-going series, so there will be a second book eventually. Now that the groundwork has been laid and Superman seems to be in the story as he's supposed to, the series is looking up. So, I will say this. It's certainly a better reintroduction to the character than, say, Smallville, but it still falls short of Birthright because it introduced a character that deviates a little too much from Clark Kent. Still, at the very least it gives us the hero we want by the end, so little damage is done and seeing the rest of the book in terms of quality, I'll be certainly picking up the second book, whenever that comes out. As for you folks... I do recommend you give it a try. Even if you end up hating it, it does offer enough for a new origin that you may want to check out.
Okay, in all fairness, they never quite said that. They said this was going to be a "modern" take on Superman's origin, for a new, younger audience to become familiar with the character. But I guess it would have to do for me, since I needed that. Being a Superman fan that has been let down completely by the post-Infinite Crisis Superman, I needed that. I needed a new Superman origin that was actually new. I did not need a dead Pa Kent, just 'cause Donner did it. I did not need an origin mini-series that featured Christopher Reeve as Superman. I did not need a Clark Kent that's... well... ridiculous. I did not need a holographic Jor-El or a crystal Fortress.
See, for someone who claims to love superhero comic books, Superman has always been my drive to devote time to this troublesome (from a financial and practical standpoint) hobby. I love Batman almost as much and several other titles have had solid runs from both DC and Marvel Comics, but reading everything else and ignoring my personal favorite out of frustration.... eh, it just made me lost interest.
But Earth One seemed like I'd be getting what I wanted. A new take for an origin. A few fresh ideas here and there. A Superman that's closer to my Superman, as opposed to my dad's Superman (if my dad knew who Superman is). In other words, everything Geoff Johns fails to grasp in his nostalgia-bubble of wanking off to his childhood memories and injecting contrived drama and plot points into the mythos (btw, word has it Conner Kent's odd origin was his idea which he had written DC about when he was still a kid).
Alas, I was taken for a fool yet again. And I'm frustrated I didn't realize that sooner, what with DAN FUCKING DIDIO PROMOTING THE SHIT OUT OF THIS AS "HIP" AND "SEXY". Is this guy ever going to get the fuck out of DC, so that it may actually stop sucking again?
Believe it or not, "Superman: Earth One" isn't a bad book by any means. It shows great effort at working the characters, within a contemporary context and a simplistic, but direct story. The dialogue is for the most part top-notch and... well... I had a blast reading all of its 130-odd pages (despite usually getting bored of the standard 24-page-long Superman on-goings before I hit page 5).
Michael J. Straczynski tells a very Birthright-esque origin story that reaches its climax with an alien invasion and does it better than Mark Waid did (and I loved Superman: Birthright). His dialogues are smart and funny, even if sometimes he goes overboard with an abundance of text in a visual medium (an issue that dates several decades back and few seem to have grasped that too many speech bubbles in a comic book are not a good thing). He introduces a few neat ideas into the mythos that I'd like to see adapted in other stories of the Man of Steel as well. Where he really impresses is with the supporting cast. Lois, Jimmy and Perry are all excellent and their interaction both with each other and with Clark are a much-needed breath of fresh-air, since they've been missing from the cannon books for far, far too long. Even his stock villain and his paper-thin (even somewhat illogical) motivation works within the context of the story. Straczynski knows his first book should stand on its own and the story he tells, he presents in a very movie-esque logic, which isn't always a good idea in this format, but it seems to work here.
In addition, there are some great new ideas that he integrates into the mythos. For example, Krypton's destruction was an act of malice, instead of a random tragedy. I like random tragedies, but in the case of Superman's origin story, it never made much sense. If the planet were to explode from within, it should've given plenty of warning (as the villain correctly points out in Earth One). If Krypton died because its sun went nova, then things are even more illogical. For one, if a star goes nova, you can forget about rescuing your kid in a flimsy rocket moments before the big bang; admittedly, a warmhole can correct that problem, but it's still too contrived. Not to mention that for a planet full of brilliant scientists, they certainly fucked up when they didn't realize that they couldn't live forever next to red giant, i.e. A DYING SUN. Furthermore, the Kryptonians were locked in a constant war with a neighboring planet that prevented both civilizations to expand their interstellar flight capabilities outside of their own solar system, giving some credence to the fact that no other Kryptonian tried to escape the planet.
That's just a couple of examples of the steps Straczynski took to inject new stuff into the mythos and ensure they made enough sense to satisfy folks' suspension of disbelief. They also represent the fresh ideas I was hoping for from this book and they're certainly some of my favorite parts in it.
The book also enjoys some truly great artwork, by Shane Davis. Backgrounds are rich and detailed and characters portray their emotions better than the text does. The set-pieces are great and there is some splendid comic book action drawn into it. The only problem with the art, really, is Clark's figure. He's not as big and bulky as he should be. Instead he's shorter than his football mates. He's extremely athletic, with six-packs so defined from beneath his costume, you could see him them space. But he's... well... kind of small. He doesn't have the iconic stature that other iterations of the character have enjoyed. And therein lies the problem.
For as much effort as it has gone into it, it's the whole "younger audience" and "hip" and "sexy" that fuck this book up royally. In its effort to appeal to the jaded new audience, Clark Kent comes off as a whiny little tosser. Straczynski does great with the supporting cast indeed, but he fails with the protagonist.
The irony here is that this jaded young audience isn't something new; John Byrne's Man Of Steel tried to do the same thing in 1986 and oldschool Superman fans crucified it for that. But "Man of Steel" still knew where to draw the line. "Earth One" suffers from severe balance issues and the worst thing is that all these missteps aren't even necessary for the kind of story the writer wants to tell!
Taking a few queues from CW's Smallville, the book features a very conflicted Clark. Right off the bat, let me give the finger to all the fans so high up their own ass that believe that Clark was born an infallible hero. Bullshit. I understand the appeal, but it's crap. While we're on it, if you really want to make Superman irrelevant (like the public already thinks he is) make him like that. He wears a suit in Smallville and saves folks as Superboy. Then he moves to Metropolis and becomes Superman. Character depth?! Who the fuck needs that?
No, bullshit. Clark needs to be conflicted about his place in the world. He just needs to grow out of it. That's what makes him relevant. FUCK, that's what, by Nietzsche's definition makes him a super-man. From a story standpoint, it's why I've always been a big proponent of the idea that he leaves Smallville after high school and travels around the world, learning of the planet he lives in and then returns home and decides to put on the tights and help people that can't help themselves.
So, conflicted Clark? Not a problem. Emo Clark? Fucking huge problem. That's what Smallville never got and it's what Earth One does wrong as well. Clark arrives at Metropolis with two objectives in mind; get a well-paying (or several well-paying) job to take care of his mom (Pa Kent's inexplicably dead here as well) and find a way to fit in and be happy. The thing is, his entire conflict in the beginning of the book seems to come from an entirely selfish point. He wants to help, but he doesn't want to do it at the expense of being happy. It's Smallville Clark all over again.
Two pages in, he walks down an alley and someone tries to mug him. Clark heat-visions his gun and walks away, angry look, hoodie on and whatnot. That's crap right there. That's what even conflicted Clark wouldn't do. Worst-case-scenario, he'd ignore the mugger and if the attack continued, he'd knock him lightly onto a wall and walk away. But here he seems like he wants to burn him alive and its all done for the sake of style. The reasoning for that scene is transparent!
Later, his apartment building is burning up. Clark flies in, saves his suit and a piece of his spaceship and leaves. What the fuck? No other people lived in there? Clark, any Clark however conflicted, would've stayed and helped out. I have to assume it's done for convenience, to save space and time or something. After all, him helping would be consistent with the conflict he's experiencing in this book. For the most part in the story Clark wants to help from the shadows, so that he doesn't expose himself. That moment right there was perfect for adding to his character. Maybe he tries to help from the shadows. Maybe he misses one and a neighbor dies despite his efforts. It's a little contrived, but it's more consistent both with the character in general and the context of the book.
All of his conversations with Ma Kent are about him whining about his situation. There are the shades of a really good kid there; he also talks about how he wants to take care of her. He's the good son Clark has always been. The same goes for his speech over Pa's grave. He's whining, but he does admit he wants to help.
In that monologue lies another small problem; he points out how helping out the world is defined not by his own personal choice, but rather the desire to not let down his father who wanted him to do so. In a flashback where Ma's sewing the costume, Pa's ecstatic about it, but young Clark is... reluctant, to put it mildly.
It's a main problem with Clark's characterization in the entire book (and likely the entire series if it's not redeemed in future books). It appears that Clark becomes a hero not from his core, but the environment around him, be it because Pa and Ma want him to or because of the large-scale alien invasion that's a lot more forceful than your everyday news helicopter crashing. The "promise" to his dead father, in particular, is a contrived reason to motivate him to be a hero, when Superman just doesn't need one. I don't need Superman burdened by a loved ones' death to the point that it drives him being a hero; it's something that was also present during the Silver Age, to an extend, which is why I was happy when they rectified that with keeping the Kents alive in Post-Crisis.
Small things like these are what ruin an otherwise enjoyable book. It's salvageable, though; Clark ultimately does grow out of his depressed state. It's not until the invasion has reached a point where he can't hide anymore that he puts the suit on and, yes, it looks problematic in terms of characterization, something that my peers have pointed out a lot. But in the end of the day, he still decides to reveal himself on his own. He could've run away or keep trying to help from the shadows in vain, but he put on the suit and threw himself out there. It's the turning point of the story that Clark becomes Superman. After he single-handedly repels the invasion, he quits from his very well-paying job as a researcher, which he took in part to help better mankind, in light of his boss' attitude toward the death and destruction around them. He got a low-paying job for the Daily Planet. He put on the glasses and meek attitude. He took his ship in the Arctic and started inquiring its AI for information on Krypton and his origins. By the end of the book, a mere 21-year-old Clark Kent was embracing his destiny in its fullest.
That's why one can't seriously say that this is a bad book. Not even a bad Superman story. It's just that it lacks balance. Between the efforts for the character to appeal to a younger audience, there are the seeds of a great story that ultimately pay off. What it does wrong is that it takes a conflicted Clark Kent and blows him out of proportion, wallowing in Clark's own depression for far, far too long and making an almost light-switch change to the iconic Superman that he's supposed to be. If the character's storyline was laid out a little more carefully over the plot, this would've been stellar work.
This is an on-going series, so there will be a second book eventually. Now that the groundwork has been laid and Superman seems to be in the story as he's supposed to, the series is looking up. So, I will say this. It's certainly a better reintroduction to the character than, say, Smallville, but it still falls short of Birthright because it introduced a character that deviates a little too much from Clark Kent. Still, at the very least it gives us the hero we want by the end, so little damage is done and seeing the rest of the book in terms of quality, I'll be certainly picking up the second book, whenever that comes out. As for you folks... I do recommend you give it a try. Even if you end up hating it, it does offer enough for a new origin that you may want to check out.
No comments:
Post a Comment