From DC Comics
July 18, 2011
DC releases info on changes to Superman
This afternoon, the below blog post about ACTION COMICS #1 and SUPERMAN #1 ran on THE SOURCE (http://dcu.blog.dccomics.com/2011/07/18/the-new-man-of-tomorrow). Please feel free to spread the word and to link back to the post.
THE NEW MAN OF TOMORROW
He has been called the Man of Steel, the Last Son of Krypton and a strange visitor from a distant planet.
He is Superman, the Man of Tomorrow. As part of DC COMICS - THE NEW 52, this September will usher in a new Superman for the new century.
In the pages of ACTION COMICS, writer Grant Morrison and artist Rags Morales will present humanity's first encounters with Superman, before he became one of the World's Greatest Super Heroes. Set a few years in the past, it's a bold new take on a classic hero.
* This Superman is very much an alien, one struggling to adjust to his adopted home. In the series, he must come to terms with both the loss of his home world, as well as the loss of both of his adopted parents. He is more Kal-El from the planet Krypton than Clark Kent from Kansas. He's a loner trying to find his place in the world.
* The series' first storyline will explore the origins of Superman's costume, as it evolves from a look that includes jeans and work boots to a new look: a suit of battle armor that pays tribute to his Kryptonian past.
* His great powers have limits. When the series begins, Superman can leap tall buildings, but his ability to fly is in its infancy.
And in the SUPERMAN ongoing comic book series, by writer George Perez and artist Jesus Merino, will be set in present day continuity and will unleash a series of new challenges for Superman and his alter ego Clark Kent.
* Clark Kent is single and living on his own. He has never been married.
* Lois Lane is dating a colleague at the DAILY PLANET (and his name isn't Clark Kent) and she has a new position with the paper.
Timeless and modern, classic and contemporary, but younger, brasher and more brooding, this is Superman. The New Man of Tomorrow.
Replies
LOL! I can't see how they can make the work clothes + cape work at all. He looks like some kind of clownish bumpkin.
Still excited about this though. We're going to get Morrison's 21st Century Seigel and Schuster.
It seems like Geoff Johns' Superman-with-Chris-Reeves-head-transplanted-on reboot has lasted an even shorter time than Waid's Birthright reboot...
I fear the 'Kryptonian Armour' has more to do with looking good in molded plastic than anything intrinsic to this new reboot. (Even though everyone keeps saying that Superman doesn't need armour, but a really tough suit of clothes would be a no-brainer!)
It occurred to me that the only thing that might excuse DC's recent pathetic binning of a 'tolerance towards US muslims' issue of Superman is if they are keeping their powder dry for a really socially conscious and responsible Superman in Morrison's reboot. Like the original was.
We can only hope.
I'll be getting Action Comics. I like Superman but I'm not his biggest fan, I'm just curious to see what Morrison does with it. Morrison is also hit or miss with me. There is a reason why I'm getting this. 4 years ago at Comic-con I sat on a DC panel. Someone from the audience praised Morrison for his Allstar Superman series and asked what he would do if he wrote Superman in regular continuity. He said it'd be just as crazy as his Allstar Superman but maybe crazier because it would all be within continuity.
Granted, this is not exactly the same since he is creating the new continuity. It's good enough for me though.
I'm wondering how much of the changes are predicated on the ongoing lawsuit with the heirs of Siegel and Shuster. Currently the families own part of the first year and possibly all of Action Comics #1. All of which is subject to change, as everything gets appealed. Anyway, Jimmy Olsen, Perry White and the Daily Planet were NOT in the first issue of Action, but Lois Lane & Clark Kent were, and the Kents weren't far behind.
I don't have an answer, but am just raising the question.
I usually tend to cynicism and 'corporate conspiracy' readings of theses things, but the Morrison reboot looks more like the earliest Siegel & Schuster Superman than a later, more DC-owned Superman. Leaping tall buildings, new in town, Lois ignoring him etc.
Perhaps, to keep my cynics hat on, DC are setting up their own ownership of the early Superman?
It very well could be, especially since they are avoiding his original suit like the plague. But again, I have no inside information. All I know is what we all know -- or, rather, guess -- based on observation.
I was excited about these new titles at the very beginning...now, I think I'm down to just getting Batgirl, Batwoman, and Swamp Thing...
Figserello said:
I'm not sure if it works like that, Figs. Wouldn't that be like me making a film similar to Steamboat WIllie and then saying I have part of the copyright on early Mickey Mouse? Maybe I'm missing something, but I'm not sure what their master plan is, there. The elements Morrison uses that Siegel & Shuster created are still created by Siegel & Shuster, regardless, right?
But maybe I'm misunderstanding what you mean. And I'm almost certainly misunderstanding the legal issues involved!
Rob - I'm just babbling. It's in response to those who are trying to link the reboot to the current legal issues. This reboot is a return to the earliest comics, both in the details and in the spirit, as I've understood Morrison's spruiking of his reboot so far.
I don't really understand the legal issues at all myself. Still, if S&S can create a character called Superman, and yet DC owns all the stuff that was done with him since, perhaps there is scope for DC to own all kinds of stuff they do before full ownership reverts back to the S&S estates. Including things they reassert in these final few years before full automatic ownership slips from DC.
The alternative is that Morrison is a highly respected creator who has a vision of paring back everything that has accrued on Superman over the years, to give us a comic that feels something like it would have to those readers in the 1930s who picked it up. Which is very possible.
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next