Messages

Started a reading project last week of Geoff Johns's run on Green Lantern. I first read it start-to-finish about twelve years ago. I adored it back then. And so far, it has DEFINITELY held up.

I started with Rebirth and have worked my way up to Green Lantern v4 #04 and Green Lantern Corps- Recharge #05.

What strikes me about this run is how instantly familiar the characters and concepts seem. Hal, John, Guy and Kyle all have their own unique identities as Lanterns that distinguish them from each other (which can't be easy to do since they essentially have the same "powers"). But the characterizations are done in a way where you can pretty easily believe that they're capable of working together in spite of their differences.

As most of you probably know, the stuff I've read is pretty much just the tip of the iceberg. The Geoff Johns run on GL is among the biggest, most epic storylines (or series of storylines) any comic book publisher has ever attempted.

I somewhat criticized Geoff Johns's run on Superman as STM fanfiction. Others agreed with that sentiment. And I think it's a fair criticism of his Superman work if I'm being honest.

But frankly, I simply do not see much room to criticize his GL work. It is true that Johns wiped Emerald Dawn I and Emerald Dawn II right out of continuity. But aside from that, the amount of retconning he DIDN'T do is pretty impressive. Hal Jordan was Parallax, Kilowog was killed, the Corps got wiped out, Kyle became a Green Lantern, Hal became possessed by The Spectre, etc. And Johns doesn't back away from any of that.

Most impressive of all (at least to me), Johns gave Hal a REAL characterization. Before Johns, Hal was pretty bland. Even Denny O'Neil couldn't find a satisfactory way of writing him. But Johns reimagined the character as a sort of Maverick/Top Gun figure. Hal can be a little freewheeling, he can be a bit of a horndog and commitment-phobe, he can be all those things. But he is still a true hero and you can see how he earned his reputation as the best of the Corps.

Another cool aspect of this run is how early on Johns foreshadowed the Blackest Night storyline. He wasted virtually no time in setting up the fact that something BIG was coming. And I can't wait to get Blackest Night... which is arguably where his run should've concluded. It's not that what came later is bad. But I don't remember it being as good as the lead-up to Blackest Night. But who knows, maybe that stuff has improved with age?

Something else is that the energy and excitement is immediate in these comics and it even shows on the covers:

Every single one of the covers demands to be read. They're simply exciting to even look at.

It was around 2008-2011 that DC began trying to position Hal Jordan/GL as DC's replacement for Superman as the company's main mascot. It's not hard to guess why that ultimately failed. But it's also not hard to see why somebody ever wanted it to happen in the first place. Because the GL titles were firing on all cylinders and it was a pretty exciting time to be a fan and follow those comics.

Not sure if anyone else is as in love with the Johns era of Green Lantern as me. But if you've never read these comics before, I can't more highly recommend them to you. Because from 2004 to 2013, the Green Lantern titles were regularly in the top five most exciting comic books coming out.

Can I be happy that Judith Hoag WAS there?

Seems interesting. I'll give it a look when it hits streaming.

What works for me about that scene is Batman's planning and risk management. Yes, some part of him wants to fight them. But ultimately, he understands that this health is the most powerful weapon in his arsenal and it's the one thing he protects above everything else.

Also, this trait is one of the reasons why I adore Marv Wolfman's relatively meager amount of work on the character. Wolfman's Batman, like the pages you posted, doesn't take stupid risks. Instead, he always stacks the deck in his favor to ensure he comes out on top.

I find that more persuasive than a Batman who knowingly goes out into the field when he's less than 100%. That's not courage; that's stupidity. And I never bought it when Batman was written to do that.

Carl Newman (AKA 'Ballet Bat') was Keaton's movement double on Batman '89 and portrayed the Dark Knight in many of the film's most iconic shots.

Boy, I'll say. These five...

... are some of my favorite shots in the entire film. And I never even heard of this guy until I opened this thread. I guess I just assumed that those shots featured Keaton in the suit. Anyway, thank you for posting this. This is great!

Is this Gotham PD show still happening? Because it's starting to look like the only TB project with any momentum is The Penguin show. It's been forever since we heard anything about TB2 as well.

Yes, Last Son. That sort of reinforces my view that UUAA is a reaction to SR.

And aside from the fact that Superman has a surrogate son in LS, it's generally known that Bad Hat Harry Productions protected the spoiler about Jason being Superman's son from EVERYONE. Apparently, it was only confirmed to a handful of upper level WB execs. Other than that, only Singer, his cowriters, Routh and possibly Bosworth knew the secret.

That policy heavily impacted the SR comic book and novel adaptations. Neither of which include the plot point concerning Jason's paternity. THAT is how closely guarded the secret was.

So, it makes sense that Johns probably never knew about the Jason part of the story until he saw the film in theaters. And only then would he have realized his critique of the film in UUAA was incomplete. Which, I'm convinced, was part of the impetus behind creating the Last Son storyline in the first place.

As a personal preference, I will pretty much ALWAYS disagree with giving superhero characters biological offspring. That's the main reason why the Last Son storyline works for me. Chris can get whisked away to the Phantom Zone at the end of the story without Superman and Lois literally losing their literal child and grappling with the literal consequences of that. It would play very differently if Jason suffered the same fate. It would be very hard for a writer to believably move Lois and Superman beyond that so that they can go back to having wacky adventures in Metropolis.

So, yes, Johns definitely made the right call by positioning Chris as a surrogate child rather than a biological child of Superman and Lois.

Another SR reference in Up, Up & Away. Superman's powers are not only returning, but he seems to be more powerful than he was before. And he needs to take a minute to adjust to his new (increased) limits.







This moment is reminiscent of a scene from SR where Routh spies on Lois without her knowledge and then flies high up to listen for emergency situations that might require his attention.

In UUAA, you get the idea that Superman is several thousand feet above ground level whereas in SR, it looks more like he's tens of thousands of feet in the air.

Again, it like someone from DC is using the comics to lecture Bryan Singer on how this type of storyline ought to be done.

Alright, so I'll just own it. Evidently, I have a bee in my bonnet when it comes to Superman Returns. But because I'm a comic book fan first, naturally, I have to find a way to relate everything to comics.

Now, what I want to say here is kind of the opposite of what this thread is supposed to be all about. We're supposed to talk about how the comics influenced the film. But my post here is more about how the film influenced the comics. Specifically, how the comics reacted to the existence of Superman Returns. And it doesn't paint a very rosy picture.

But first, for the sake of context, I need to reiterate that in 1986, John Byrne gave Superman the first real starting point the character had ever been given. I mean, yes, in theory, Superman debuted in Action Comics #01 back in June 1938 and his adventures were chronicled on a monthly basis from then until 1986.

But were they? Because from 1938 to 1986, there were innumerable retcons. So many retcons, in fact, that it's fair to question when Action Comics #01 stopped being canon for the character. The latest anybody seems willing to say is 1958. But frankly, I would argue it was MUCH earlier than that. Possibly as early the mid-Forties.

But that's neither here nor there. The point is that Byrne gave Superman a scorched Earth, page 01, comprehensive reboot. Everything you need to know about the Post-Crisis Superman begins with Man Of Steel #01. No need to consult anything prior to then. And that was the state of affairs for many years.

But then Infinite Crisis happened in 2006. And in the aftermath of Infinite Crisis, right off the bat, it became clear that Superman's history had been massively retconned AGAIN.

And obviously, that's not the only significant Superman thing that happened in 2006. Because that's when Superman Returns was released.

As a linewide thing, all of DC's major titles jumped a year forward. That allowed the various creative teams to do their own spin on the One Year Later concept.

The Superman titles were certainly no exception to the One Year Later bit of business. But reading those comics in 2006, and certainly in the aftermath of Superman Returns, it became pretty apparent to me that I wasn't the only one dissatisfied with the direction the film ultimately took.

Because reading Up, Up & Away, the Superman titles' tie-in with One Year Later, I couldn't shake the suspicion that someone from DC Comics despised the concept of Superman Returns just as much as I did. In fact, it's hard to not read Up, Up & Away as a critique of Superman Returns.

First, there's the concept of the story itself. Superman has been missing. Involuntarily for one year in the comics; voluntarily for five years in SR.

Clark experiments with his powers, particularly leaping. In the comics, his powers are gradually returning; in SR, young Clark discovers it in a flashback. Neither experiment is completely successful.

Superman #652, pg. 03

Superman's return to active duty is a big triumphal moment in both Up, Up & Away and SR.

In an attempt to mount a "comeback", Lex Luthor gets his hands on Kryptonian technology. Specifically, crystals. This is true for both Up, Up & Away and SR.

Using those crystals, Lex menaces Metropolis. But his REAL goal is defeating Superman once and for all.

The parallels seem pretty obvious to me. And considering that Up, Up & Away was cowritten by Geoff Johns, a protegé of Richard Donner, it only stands to reason that he would have a perspective on SR. Probably a not very favorable one, I should imagine.

So, there are similarities at times. Almost as tho the writer is trying to say, "No, you idiot, THIS is how you do it!"

But the differences in tone and attitude also seem like an indictment. Superman #650 kicks off with Lois and (powerless) Clark watching a fictionalized bio film about Superman. Clark playfully comments that the movie's tone is affectionate toward Superman for his absence rather than criticizing him for abandoning the world.

Superman #650, pg. 05

You know, a very different philosophy from that shown in SR, where Lois is shown winning a Pulitzer for writing a column titled "Why The World Doesn't Need Superman".

Gosh, if I didn't know better, I just might think Geoff Johns was trying to make a point there.

Now, I can't prove any of this. Everything I've written here is total speculation on my part. But consider. It's a no-brainer that DC's management would've had some sort of awareness of what Singer was planning to do with the film. Perhaps not an involvement with the film so much as an insight behind the scenes of where the film was ultimately going to go.

This isn't science-fiction. Al Gough and Miles Millar have repeatedly mentioned the number of times they had conversations with Paul Levitz and his remarks about Smallville. Christopher Nolan has likewise gone on the record about meeting with/talking to Jenette Kahn.

It takes exactly zero imagination to think that Singer would've also had interactions with DC's upper management. And from there, it's just a hop, skip and a jump to word of SR's creative decisions filtering back to Geoff Johns.

Or perhaps Geoff Johns heard everything from Lauren Shuler Donner, Singer's own producer and Donner's wife.

Whatever the case, I firmly believe that Up, Up & Away was intended at least partially to be a commentary on SR.