PDA

View Full Version : SUPERMAN #650 REVIEW

Jason Naselli
Mar 20, 2006, 05:15 pm
<a href="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/previews/dc/0306/SupermanCv650.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/previews/dc/0306/SupermanCv650t.jpg" hspace=10 align=left alt="Superman #650"></a>Reviewer: Jason Naselli, jvn213@nyu.edu
Story Title: Up, Up, and Away! Chapter One: Mortal Men

It's One Year Later...when is that?

Writers: Kurt Busiek & Geoff Johns
Artist: Pete Woods
Colorist: Brad Anderson
Letterer: Rob Leigh
Cover Artists: Terry & Rachel Dodson
Cover Colorist: Alex Sinclair
Associate Editor: Nachie Castro
Editor: Matt Idelson
Superman created by: Jerry Siegel & Joe Shuster
Published by: DC Comics (www.dccomics.com)

It is gradually becoming clear that while DC may have fixed some of the problems that usually plague such “jump ahead” events as One Year Later, the main one still remains: the reader is not allowed to know what happened. When such an instance is not simply a matter of dramatic storytelling but is imposed as part of the event, problems such as this issue occur. It was a really good issue (as hard as it is to evaluate setup installments) but it seemed confusing, and not in a good way. Kurt Busiek and Geoff Johns did their best, but it feels like we could have been given the full story if this were only released after Infinite Crisis #7. If that were the case, why not wait until then?

I’m not talking about the “Superman has lost his powers” bit either. That’s an integral part to this particular story it seems and was one of the many things plucked from the Silver Age I enjoyed. (It’s particularly nice to see mad scientists again, especially if they’re creating… The Kryptonite Man!!!) Johns has been mastering updated Silver Age hijinks over in Green Lantern, and it serves him well here (though I can’t help but wonder if they didn’t breeze through a few issues of Grant Morrison’s All-Star Superman to make sure they were getting it right.) It’s things like “68 Years Ago” staring the reader in the face on the first page that make one go into unnecessary mind gymnastics trying to figure out the true meaning of Infinite Crisis right there. Which version of the Man of Steel is this? It shouldn’t matter in his own title.

However, the characterization (whichever version it is) is spot on. Perry White feels like Perry again; ditto for Jimmy Olsen. Clark’s intrepid reporting and overall kindliness evoked George Reeves in the comics for the first time in recent memory. He was getting dangerously indecisive and weepy prior to Infinite Crisis, and luckily Busiek and Johns seem to have righted the ship with one issue. Last but not least, Luthor’s dialogue made me hear Gene Hackman with an edge (and that’s a good thing.) I always liked Luthor-as-businessman, but they inject a classically jovial Lex menace into the character that makes one feel like his best days of villainy are ahead of him.

New artist Pete Woods hits all the marks and his art is easy to look at, but the true test of a Superman artist is how he draws the big S. We get one look at Supes in a classic pose on the third page, but the jury will have to remain out until there’s some action for the Man of Tomorrow.

Speaking of which, that may not be coming anytime soon. This issue was most definitely setup but it feels like all the pieces aren’t yet in place. I imagine Action Comics #837 will still be placing actors on the board before the real game can begin. That’s not a bad thing in the least, as for the first time in a long while in the main Superman titles, it feels like the game is worth reading about.

ART:
http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/reviews/supfull.jpg http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/reviews/supfull.jpg http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/reviews/supfull.jpg http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/reviews/suphalf.jpg http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/reviews/supnone.jpg

STORY:
http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/reviews/supfull.jpg http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/reviews/supfull.jpg http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/reviews/supfull.jpg http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/reviews/supfull.jpg http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/reviews/supnone.jpg

OVERALL:
http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/reviews/supfull.jpg http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/reviews/supfull.jpg http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/reviews/supfull.jpg http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/reviews/suphalf.jpg http://www.comixfan.com/xfan/images/reviews/supnone.jpg

Buy Superman #650 online now from X-WORLD and save! (http://x-worldcomics.com/yourvirtualstore/shopexd.asp?id=18730)
BritishSeaPower
Mar 20, 2006, 05:34 pm
Solid review. I agree to an extent. It was an a good issue but it was vague in just about every avenue it could have been. We have nebulously aged Superman, we have this movie intimating that the Doomsday fight ended differently, possibly. This Superman reminds me very much of how I felt about Superman during OWAW. I could actually get behind the concept, to quote the movie tag-line: I believed a man could fly. I was never so jazzed to read The advent... err I mean SUPERMAN before. And it paid off, if it's still a little unclear as what's going on behind the story.

I did like the return of the Signal Watch, one of my personal highlights from the issue. I agree this is much more of a hodge-podge of less-clumsy George Reeves Clark and Smarter-than-he-lets-on Christopher Reeve Clark.

My favorite moment was with Perry and Clark where Perry makes a crack about Clark being a more focused writer over the past year. It was charming.

All in all, I'd give about the same rating. Maybe I'd've given the art a little stronger, but... ::shrug.::
Zachary J. Morrison
Mar 20, 2006, 05:59 pm
I'm planning to come onboard for this 8-part story arc running also in Action Comics.
DCUnited
Mar 20, 2006, 06:15 pm
In regards to the whole 68 years ago thing...I got the impression that was all a part of the movie that was showing. The first three pages all tell the origin of Superman and have the "radio" dialogue bubbles, and on the fourth page we see that someone has made a movie in tribute to Superman.
Veritas
Mar 20, 2006, 06:27 pm
I concur...this is an interesting, though played out, way of starting things. I'll be ack for the next part...which is more than I can say for the Batman set-up.
the_captain_smiley
Mar 20, 2006, 08:18 pm
I think the 68 years ago refer to when the first Superman issue came out.
BritishSeaPower
Mar 20, 2006, 10:33 pm
Well, yes... I'm resaonably sure the 68 refers to original appearance of Superman, but that would mean that Clark is 68 years old, which he obviously isn't as the issue shows. So it's nebulous as to wheter 68 years is the date of his departure from Krypton or his landing on Earth. Because it makes sense if he's chronologically 68 years old, but only ~ 30 physical years.
Jason Naselli
Mar 20, 2006, 10:35 pm
Yes it's true Superman the character is 68 years old, but I meant it was undetermined what it meant in the context of the story. Also, Veritas, I thought the Batman setup was as good if not better than the Superman situation. Why the ill feelings?
DCUnited
Mar 21, 2006, 12:51 am
Yes it's true Superman the character is 68 years old, but I meant it was undetermined what it meant in the context of the story. Also, Veritas, I thought the Batman setup was as good if not better than the Superman situation. Why the ill feelings?

As I mentioned previously, I believe that the 68 years thing was supposed to be a part of the Superman movie they were showing in the park.
Tan K.
Mar 22, 2006, 04:50 pm
I thought it was pretty straight forward and enjoyable. Superheroes' ages are meant to be nebulous. As for the rest, this whole one year later thing is supposed to have us scratching our heads. One of the best tools in storytelling is the mystery/what happened angle (maybe second to only cloning), and DC has that going company wide. I hope people don't go whiney about not knowing everything up front.

First non-big storyline Supes book I truly enjoyed.
Jason Naselli
Mar 22, 2006, 11:37 pm
Superheroes' ages are meant to be nebulous.

Maybe over at Marvel, but this shouldn't be the case if DC's claims about a more cohesive universe are true. Also, I acknowledged that the "What happened?" angle is a good storyteling strategy, but that it felt muddled here.
Tan K.
Mar 23, 2006, 01:12 pm
Maybe over at Marvel, but this shouldn't be the case if DC's claims about a more cohesive universe are true. Also, I acknowledged that the "What happened?" angle is a good storyteling strategy, but that it felt muddled here.

Being a cohesive universe doesn't change the fact that heroes don't really age. Cohesion is more about cleaning up retcons, confusing backgrounds/occurrences, inconsistencies, etc.
Plasma Charge
Mar 23, 2006, 08:30 pm
Hm... Have to say that I enjoyed this issue. Good characterization from Busiek and Johns and a nice OYL mystery setup. Great art by Pete Woods as well. I'll be sticking around for a while.

Good review!
essex4515
Mar 29, 2006, 02:23 pm
Hm... Have to say that I enjoyed this issue. Good characterization from Busiek and Johns and a nice OYL mystery setup. Great art by Pete Woods as well. I'll be sticking around for a while.

Good review!

I couldn't agree more! This issue was fantastic!! I think I'm on this book for the long haul as long as this keeps up.

I'm surprised no one mentioned the newspaper headlines that were in the Daily Planet. "Who is Batwoman?" and "Supernova sighted again." THOSE I thought were one of the most interesting parts of the issue! I couldn't say enough about this issue. PS - I just started picking up Superman b/c of the Crisis crossovers. I'm a monthly man now!