Comic Book Resources

Brian,

I think it’s way too early to speculate the “reason” for the story, as much as it would be to speculate how this story will play out, its long-term effects, and the relative success of the concept. I mean, the story came out today.

If I had to venture a guess, it would be the latest change in Johns’ series of changes that really draws from the whole history of Superman. Specifically, he’s probably drawing from the Donner films, since he’s obviously a huge fan (come on, Donner co-wrote his first two arcs). Johns has done a bit of work on Smallville, so that could be an influence also, but Smallville in turn probably took the idea from the Donner series to begin with.

But I think we need to see how it plays out or at least an interview from Johns to find out the “origin.”

I think it holds potential. Dead Pa Kent/Alive Ma Kent has never really been explored in the comics.

I think the point was to have a big event in Action Comics 870.

Well, I have my suspicions, but they’ll be confirmed if Gus Gorman shows up by this time next year.

The impetus is probably to sync the current comics up with virtually every other piece of the Superman mythos out there (the only exceptions I can think of are the Lois & Clark TV show and the DC Animated Universe).

It was probably a team-Superman plan dating back to when the teams started back for One Year Later. There seems to be a bit of foreshadowing in the backup story in Superman Annual #13 which was by Busiek; so I think Meltzer just got let in on the details. (There may even be hints in that Supergirl issue of Action Comics - 850, I think? I have no desire to dig through a bunch of unsorted piles of comics, so I can’t check it)

I’d assume there is a storyline point as well - 870 isn’t where an event for the sake of an event belongs, the first part of New Krypton is. I guess we’ll see where it goes from here - I’m excited to see what’s next.

Pa Kent, Black Lantern?

Having Superman deal with the lose of a parent is something most people can relate to or will have to deal with at some point in their lives. One of the big complaints about Superman is that people can’t relate to him.

Also, Black Lantern.

Of course Superman can always make a deal with Neron and….[insert your own joke about BND].

When I read the title I thought you meant a different kind of ‘what was the point’– the fact that it’s been obvious this was going to happen. It’s the sort of moment that should surprise the reader but even leaving aside JLofA 0, they signposted it for months now including devoting several covers leading up to this issue to Clark and Pa Kent. When it happen, I just found myself more surprised it hadn’t happened already.

My vote is for making the status quo more like the Donner movie in any event.

I think that since he and Brad Meltzer are so palsy, he probably told him that he was planning on killing Pa and Meltzer just stuck it in.

I think making Pa a Black Lantern would be a horrifying mistake. Major event in Superman’s life, and nine months later back from the dead as a bit player (or even worse - a big role) in a Green Lantern story? That would be an event just for the sake of an event. If this is to be anything other than a cheap stunt, he absolutely cannot come back in something that’s been in the works for ages, and conveniently happens to occur after he dies.

The point is probably to synch up with the Donner-Singer film cycle and “Smallvile”. Both versions are more popular than the comic has been in at least 20 years.

Done right, it strikes me as a good idea. Clark Kent having one surviving parent who lives in Smallville, KS has more dramatic potential than two happy, living parents (or two dead ones). I mean, how does she operate the farm? Does Clark help? If so, does that adversely effect his work at the Planet, home life with Lois, or performance as Superman?

The point is probably to synch up with the Donner-Singer film cycle and “Smallvile”. Both versions are more popular than the comic has been in at least 20 years.

And yet neither were/are that popular…

Shows how desperate they must be.

“Done right, it strikes me as a good idea. Clark Kent having one surviving parent who lives in Smallville, KS has more dramatic potential than two happy, living parents (or two dead ones). I mean, how does she operate the farm? Does Clark help? If so, does that adversely effect his work at the Planet, home life with Lois, or performance as Superman?”

Not bad Dean, but then what happens in the next panel after the one you just described?

They did it to bring him back later and get another headline

And yet neither were/are that popular…

Shows how desperate they must be.

#1 - Adjusted for inflation, Superman: The Movie is among the top 100 grossing movies ever. It’s had , and continues to have, a tremendous shelf life on television, video, and DVD. To say it wasn’t/isn’t popular is flat-out wrong.

#2 - Smallville is in its eighth season. Television shows that aren’t popular generally don’t get through half a season. Again, to say it wasn’t/isn’t popular is flat-out wrong.

I guess your definition of “desperation” is “copying a single element from two very popular alternate media depictions of the character.” I guess DC was equally “desperate” when they lived Harvey Quinn and the Mr. Freeze origin from Batman: The Animated Series. After all, that shoe didn’t last eight seasons, so it must not have been “that popular.”

i chalk it up to Johns’s need to revert all DC continuity to the way it was when he was a kid (see Jordan, Hal and Allen, Barry), regardless of the cost.

However, clearly it’s reasonable that an old man die at some point. That’s progress, as letting Aunt May die would have been. It’s not as senseless as returning her and Hal and Barry to life. And I say that as someone who grew up with Hal and Barry and LIKED them and was sorry to see them go. Ollie Queen could have been left dead too.

I’m of two minds about the Silver Age reversion stuff. Basically, I admit, it comes down to which versions I liked better, which I came up on. My first Green Arrow was Ollie, so I was glad to have Ollie back. My first Green Lantern was Kyle, so needless to say, the way he’s been treated has pained me. My first Flash was Wally, so needless to say, the way he’s soon to be treated will be painful as well (and don’t even pretend that they’ll get anything even remotely resembling equal treatment.) And for me, Jonathan Kent was a great character, a relatable character, actually written like some Kansas farmers I’ve known, and suddenly he got all old and dead. Wasn’t too happy to see that.

#1 - Adjusted for inflation, Superman: The Movie is among the top 100 grossing movies ever. It’s had , and continues to have, a tremendous shelf life on television, video, and DVD. To say it wasn’t/isn’t popular is flat-out wrong.

Actually I meant the Singer part of the Donner/Singer cycle - his attempt to get back to Donner’s Superman, although a commercial success, was well less than anyone was expecting it to make, and I’ve not heard or read too many nice words about it.

#2 - Smallville is in its eighth season. Television shows that aren’t popular generally don’t get through half a season. Again, to say it wasn’t/isn’t popular is flat-out wrong.

As for Smallville… okay I might be wrong, but it seems to jump all through the schedules here, and whilst it isn’t put into the worst slots, doesn’t seem to go up against anything big… ie. didn’t really set the world alight here the way Lois & Clark did, so isn’t necessarily one I’d be looking to crib from.

I guess your definition of “desperation” is “copying a single element from two very popular alternate media depictions of the character.” I guess DC was equally “desperate” when they lived Harvey Quinn and the Mr. Freeze origin from Batman: The Animated Series. After all, that shoe didn’t last eight seasons, so it must not have been “that popular.”

No, for an animated series, that was quite popular, although when moved to a sunday night timeslot it failed to compete, and DC was right to lift from it at the time - if not for the hope of making the books more popular by cashing in, then because the show was at a higher quality to the book in some cases.

I don’t think he did it to synch up with any movies or tv shows. Pa Kent being dead in the movies didn’t exactly shoot their box office numbers through the roof. I think he did it for the sake of the story. Superman loses his father just as Kandor comes back, and he regains a piece of his homeworld. It will make some interesting stories.

I think it (in most cases) all boils down to which version of Superman you were introduced to first. My first exposure to Superman was in the form of “Lois and Clark”, so I hold a strong belief that Pa Kent should be alive, because I saw what an influence he was to Clark on that show. Others’ first exposure to Superman was the Reeve films, and so the Superman without a father rings true for them. Likewise, there’ll be a group in the future who grew up with Smallville and so will feel the same way. I’m just glad they didn’t kill off Ma Kent as well, and that they didn’t make this part of some huge event, because it has more significance this way, I think.

Also, I’d be all for Jonathan Kent being a Black Lantern, because it’d be interesting to see how Superman would react to him (and honestly, I don’t think Superman could fight him).

Maybe this will become a Comics urban Legend in a few years?

Well, I keep writing about this, but only because it’s so relevant. In the Morrison, Waid, et al “Superman 2000″ pitch, which Geoff Johns seems to be inspired by in a lot of ways, it says this:

“Ma lives on to play an important role as the connection to Superman’s lost past, his own ‘golden age.’
Pa should die. It seems right somehow that his death should mark Superman’s passage into a grander, more iconic phase of his career. Pa gave Clark his values and Superman will carry them to the stars.
Superman needs a little bit of tragedy here. The character works best and stands most tall when he’s forced to deal with things even his powers cannot help with. Frankly, the post-’86 Superman, death aside, has had a pretty sweet life, and the greatest heroes of myth and legend are always shaped as much by adversity as by triumph.

“Moreover, as nice as it’s been to have the Kents around as supporting characters, when used poorly, they have a tendency to actually weaken Superman by making him less independent. We’d like to see him wrestle with moral and emotional struggles on his own without always being able to so easily talk them out with the infinitely wise Jonathan and Martha over a piece of rhubarb pie.”

So there you go.

Jonathan Kent = Jean Grey? I just hope he doesn’t start being reincarnated in thigh-high boots…

I thought it was already clear since the first X-Men movie that comics want to sync up with TV and movies as much as possible, probably in order to ease up the transition from those larger audiences into the comics.

Because comics were apparently perfect in 1976 or something? I don’t know. Taken on its own you can go with the sync up with other media or whatever, but it’s part of this MASSIVE nostalgia trend that DC has over the last few years. Seriously, does anyone under 33 even care about Barry Allen? Just saying. DC seems to be attempting to slowly cut down their base through the process of elimination until their only fan left is one guy living somewhere in Iowa.

“came up with the idea”?

Because Johns hadn’t killed off or maimed any other characters this month?

Because writer’s like to play up the Father/Son relationship between Jor-El and Superman more than with Pa Kent and Superman. Now that Pa Kent is out of the way, expect more scenes of Superman talking to Jor-El’s holographic floating head.

I don’t want to speculate on the whole resurrection/afterlife/living-dead possibilities of Jonathan Kent — at least, not yet. I’d rather focus on what it means, as close to real life, for one to lose a parent (without the genre’s possibility of bringing him back).

In short, what does Jonathan’s death do? It does precisely what it did in the original Superman movie and *should* have done on Smallville: It pushes Clark into a new chapter of his life. Specifically, for the Superman mythos, it totally distinguishes him from Superboy/Smallville-Clark. My comment should not be understood as saying that mothers do not matter or that anyone’s “Smallville” is synonymous with his/her connection to a father.

But that *is* the effect it can/should/will have on Clark. His wife in is Metropolis, his job is in Metropolis, and his primary jurisdiction is Metropolis. Clark’s life, with the *exception* of his mother, is no longer in Smallville. Jonathan’s death proves to a near-immortal Clark that things change and even beloved family members depart; in fact, this was executed exquisitely by Johns focus on Earth’s value to Kal-El. This loss will test and, ultimately, steel Superman’s humanity, the best gift that his adoptive planet has given him.

Kal-El lost his birth parents untimely. Say what you will about cardiac failure and whether Jonathan did have a few more good years in him, but this loss of a parent for Clark is far more natural. Shattering and greiving but relatively natural. It will further make him a super *man*.

Actually I meant the Singer part of the Donner/Singer cycle - his attempt to get back to Donner’s Superman, although a commercial success, was well less than anyone was expecting it to make, and I’ve not heard or read too many nice words about it.

Certainly Singer’s movie didn’t meet expectations in several ways, but I think Singer’s problems went a lot further than trying to continue the Donner franchise — although that was probably a problem, too. Certainly having barely any big action sequences and the whole son of Superman thing were two problems. Having Pa Kent dead wasn’t something that hurt the film more than some of the other major issues.

Still, it did better at the domestic box office than the two Schumacher Bat-films, the Blade movies, the first X-Men, Hulk, Fantastic Four, Incredible Hulk, Daredevil Ghost Rider, etc…. and yeah, this is SUPERMAN, but these were all popular movies…

Dark Knight or Iron Man or Spider-Man popular? Of course not, although a Superman movie *should* be among them. But that doesn’t mean Superman Returns wasn’t all that popular.

As for Smallville… okay I might be wrong, but it seems to jump all through the schedules here, and whilst it isn’t put into the worst slots, doesn’t seem to go up against anything big… ie. didn’t really set the world alight here the way Lois & Clark did, so isn’t necessarily one I’d be looking to crib from.

But again… regardless of shifting time slots, it remains in production. That suggests it is popular enough for fans to keep it going because they’re willing to following the series. Is it as popular as Lois & Clark? Probably not, but just because it isn’t as popular as a show that was on one of the major networks doesn’t mean it isn’t “that popular.” Again, that’s like saying that the last few animated Batman shows weren’t “that popular” because the Adam West Batman series was hugely popular and a cultural touchstone.

I’m not trying to go after you or anything, I’m just trying to point out that a) these series are/were “popular” and b) Johns is far from turning the comics into Superman Returns or Smallville … as some have speculated … this is a single element that is shared among some popular alternate media versions of the character. Who knows, it’s possible (but probably unlikely) that Johns just decided to do it because it has never been done in the mainstream comics before — Clark has never had a single parent.

(Urban Legend time?)
Were they going to kill off Jonathan during the incomprehensible gibberish that was “Our World At War,” but then rethought it? It seemed like they were *really* heavily telegraphing that for a while, and they had him “missing” for a while, I think. Apparently he came back or got better or something after I’d given up on the Superman books of that era.

For that matter, it seems like they’ve been heavily telegraphing his death since, oh, One Year Later, maybe even before that? Every story with him has had a vibe of “This is the last time Clark will be doing (x) with his father.”

“Every story with him has had a vibe of ‘This is the last time Clark will be doing (x) with his father.’”

Yeah, and the poor guy got cheated out of even having a beer with his dad!

Pa Kent being alive is DC’s “Spider-Marriage”. They just wanted him dead for a long time, despite there being no real reason for it to happen. This only makes me LESS likely to read Superman titles now (even if I weren’t boycotting DC comics anyway.)

At least they didn’t make it so history changed and Pa had actually been dead for years now, so BND is stlll worse.

“It does precisely what it did in the original Superman movie and *should* have done on Smallville: It pushes Clark into a new chapter of his life.”

Except it doesn’t. Clark’s life will not change one whit. He moved away from Smallville years ago. He’s married and has an established career in Metropolis. Superman is known far and wide as the world’s greatest hero. In the movie, in All-Star Superman, in the Silver and Bronze Age mythos, Jonathan’s death DID close the door on Smallville and adolescence, and for the reader it meant that Jonathan wouldn’t get to see Clark become an adult. The death of a parent is always an incalculable loss, but when you’re in your mid-30s, as Superman is usually written these days, it has a completely different sort of impact than it does when you’re 19.

I honestly don’t know why they did it and don’t think it will matter except to give Superman a frowny face for a year or so. Then again, I don’t follow Superman enough to know the dead-Kents continuity.

I wonder if it has anything to do with the return of Superman’s uncle Zor-El, seen previously in this storyline. His felling of loss over his “real” father should provide a poignant contrast to his mixed feelings for his uncle, as wel as making him want to reach out to him more.

I wasn’t thrilled about this development, but Johns has been doing such good work lately I’m willing to give him the slack to see where he’s going with the story. He’s earned it.

While I think there’s an opportunity to tell some good stories out of it… one of my favourite lines ever is Ma Kent’s “I bet Batman doesn’t treat HIS parents his way” bit, which is a great illustration of a contrast point between the big two. Having Pa killed, and by freaing BRANIAC of all things (instead of the “look how vulnerable these humans are” point from the death in the movie), just kind of trivialises it.

I think this is another sign that they’re moving away from the Byrne-era interpretation of Superman as being tied more to his Earth heritage than his Kryptonian one - by taking away his father, he’s not as tied to Earth. Personally, I don’t like that since as a child of immigrants I like the whole Superman-as-immigration-metaphor aspect more than the Christ figure metaphor of Donner, but Johns obviously great up looking up to the Donner movies so that’s the way he’s taking things.

(And I don’t think that even this is equivalent to BND, since the Kents were, at best, occasional supporting characters in the Superbooks. To pull off a BND, you need to go after Jimmy or Lois.)

They did it because Johns has gotten unhunged and is obsessed with comics from back in the day to the point of not being able to see the present, let alone the future. He got big at DC making GL and Hawkman retro, and he thinks that is the answer to everything, even if there isn’t even a question that needs answering. Seriously, how much impact can this hav e if the next time we see Superman, he is in a 9-part cross over with 100 thousand Kyrpotnians? They even got the funeral out of the way on the cover before Pa was even dead.

If I were Lois, I’d be worried. DC revertigo is going to turn her into a flightly gal in a pillbox hat who can’t believe that Superman is Clark Kent and keeps falling out of windows.

Also, this reeks of Fathers in Refrigerators

He got big at DC making GL and Hawkman retro, and he thinks that is the answer to everything, even if there isn’t even a question that needs answering.

It’s kinda fucked up that he thinks that way after the two you mentioned were big commercial successes and all…

Still, it did better at the domestic box office than the two Schumacher Bat-films, the Blade movies, the first X-Men, Hulk, Fantastic Four, Incredible Hulk, Daredevil Ghost Rider, etc…. and yeah, this is SUPERMAN, but these were all popular movies…

The two Hulks, Fantastic Fours, Daredevil and Ghostrider weren’t really popular movies… I mean they made their money back and such, but they didn’t launch a cultural phenomenon which says ‘people really like this and are going to want more of it’ like with Spider-man and Batman (Under Burton or Nolan), so it wouldn’t be a must to change anything to suit.

But again… regardless of shifting time slots, it remains in production. That suggests it is popular enough for fans to keep it going because they’re willing to following the series. Is it as popular as Lois & Clark? Probably not, but just because it isn’t as popular as a show that was on one of the major networks doesn’t mean it isn’t “that popular.”

Yeah, but if Smallville hasn’t set the world alight, and has already had eight seasons to send people to the comics, and yet hasn’t, then why bother with it at all?
If something is Lois & Clark big, then I’d try match up with it (and DC did), but if it’s a show that’s just on… then why bother?

Again, that’s like saying that the last few animated Batman shows weren’t “that popular” because the Adam West Batman series was hugely popular and a cultural touchstone.

Well, Batman Beyond wasn’t that popular…

But in perspective, West’s Batman was huge, Burton’s Batman was huge, Nolan’s Batman is huge… the animated series can’t really live up to that can it?

Of course, the animated series is where you could get kids, so keeping the two in line would make more sense - an adult is going to be less troubled by differences than a kid.
But on the other hand, the books tieing in with the animated series don’t sell that well, which would be DC’s reason for not going closer to that - personally though, I think they should have taken more cues from that animated series, it was good stuff - but more in style and approach than plot lines or characters.

So, which thing that Johns might be nicking this from should we be most mad at? Movies, TV, old comics, old comics pitches? I’m still not sure, although I started skimming after awhile. TELL ME WHERE TO CONCENTRATE MY RAGE!

“If I were Lois, I’d be worried. DC revertigo is going to turn her into a flightly gal in a pillbox hat who can’t believe that Superman is Clark Kent and keeps falling out of windows.”

If you were Lois you’d be literally 2 dimensional and made of ink, so, there’s that to take in to consideration.

Looking at them strictly in terms of “storytelling engine”, Martha and Jonathan are redundant characters. The characters are almost always seen as part of a couple, and while there’s some difference between the two, their story function is pretty much the same - as a source of parental advice, reassurance, “grounding”, for Superman.

Either parent alone can fill that function, and the *removal* of either won’t change the storytelling engine much. So killing one of them (but not both) is an obvious way to get a dramatic death without shaking things up *too* much.

I’m kind of neutral to the *idea* (the execution of the idea is another matter, and remains to be seen), but it doesn’t seem automatically out of bounds or gratuitous or anything. Parents do die, and that’s something that’s as proper to deal with in Action Comics as anywhere else.

One side issue that maybe has me a little less emotionally invested in the death than I otherwise might be is that for some reason, somewhere along the line, for no particular reason that I can discern, they changed Jonathan from the kinda portly, cheerful guy he was between 1986 and 200? to this gaunt, craggy guy who just died….

Well, I’m not going to stay up all night crying about it or anything, and I won’t even get to read it for a few weeks when my monthly shipment arrives, but I have to say I’m a little disappointed with this and a few other recent decisions.

For my money the best things Byrne has ever done in his life are:

A) Made him Clark first and Superman second.
B) Made Clark into an actual person instead of a slouching, always pushing his glasses up his nose caricature.
C) Left Jonathan and Martha alive.

All three seem to be in my rearview mirror these days. I understand that comics that run for 10,000 years like Superman are cyclical in nature and that Johns and Metzler and the rest are currently nostalgic for how they remember it and in 15 years the hot guys at DC will be people who grew up during the Man of Steel era and will be nostalgic for how the remember it and change it all back, etc. forever.

I’m not even sure what my original point was any longer, but I will say that I am honestly enjoying the Johns Action book, but I do cringe every time I see Clark hunched over while Steve Lombard acts like a bombastic jackass. Somethings we shouldn’t go back to especially when they sucked the first time.

It has happened to me a couple of times already.

A character dies in the comic book and I believe “he/she’s not dead, next issue he/she will be in the hospital or a soft heartbeat will be the sign of a coma or something”. Thing is, I found out the character was dead after reading it in a couple of places in the web, and not after reading the book.

Is it that death is so hard to believe in comic books that I already deny it or was it that the actual death so non-believable that I skipped it altogether?

Weird, uh? It kind of takes away the excitement of reading the actual book.