Mark Millar's Ubermensch

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not the one he wrote in Superman Adventures, not the one he pitched w/ Mark Waid & GM & Tom Peyer, but what he'd do w/ the keys to the Fortress of Solitude.

David R. (popshots75`), Tuesday, 30 November 2004 14:24 (twenty years ago) link

"nitch"

The main impression I get from that is that Mark Millar does a lot of cocaine.

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Tuesday, 30 November 2004 14:41 (twenty years ago) link

Superman is God, Jor-El is the Holy
Spirit and Clark Kent is Jesus. The Kents are Mary and Joseph and Lois is Mary Magdelene. She's the NYC girl who's
fucked her way around the city and found nobody who measures up.

And clearly, he learned everything he knows about women from Sarah Jessica Parker.

Huk-L, Tuesday, 30 November 2004 14:45 (twenty years ago) link

I don't know if I dislike the way Millar talks about his ideas as much as I do because I dislike Millar's work to begin with, or if he's genuinely annoying. Either way, dud. He sounds like any of a hundred Usenet weenies.

Tep (ktepi), Tuesday, 30 November 2004 14:55 (twenty years ago) link

He sounds like any of a hundred Usenet weenies.

IOW he sounds like a comic book creator?

The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 30 November 2004 16:32 (twenty years ago) link

No, that's what I'm saying -- well, I guess I didn't actually say it: he sounds like the guys who outline their "obviously fantastic plans" for resurrecting/reconciling/redoing a character, with no real consideration for the stories you tell after the Big Events have passed. Millar would be a very poor writer for actual Big Two serial fiction, I think -- the stuff where you need a new story every month and at some point you have to establish a legitimate status quo instead of shaking things up, and you haven't really done it right if you can't do it for four years. Whether that's the way the business should work or not, it does: and Millar's approaches lend themselves best to single or double arcs -- miniseries, one-shots, Elseworlds, and stuff where he can make his own characters, even if they're based on others (Ultimate X-Men, etc).

His Swamp Thing arc is probably my favorite of his work, but it has no connection to any of the previous work on the title except Moore's run in the vaguest sense -- which would be like landing the Captain America job and ignoring everything since Englehart -- and it's taken every Swamp Thing appearance since then just to make the character writeable again. It's no big deal to end a character's mythos with a bang -- Christ, I could make Speedball into an epic hero if I didn't have to worry about people wanting to use him after I was done.

Tep (ktepi), Tuesday, 30 November 2004 17:15 (twenty years ago) link

If Millar played D&D, every adventure would end with the end of the world, the death of a god, or a zombie emperor being resurrected; all his conversations would start with, "Let me tell you about my character ..."

Tep (ktepi), Tuesday, 30 November 2004 17:17 (twenty years ago) link

That's a good point, Tep. I haven't read enough of Millar's writing on established titles to debate or agree, but this is where his good buddy Grant shines - he 'shakes things up', yeah, but in a way that ends up being the new way to do things for his unlucky successors (New X-Men, JLA, et al).

Jordan (Jordan), Tuesday, 30 November 2004 17:25 (twenty years ago) link

Yeah, I have no doubt Morrison could outline a dozen different brief X-Men or JLA stories that wouldn't have to take place in a specific order (or could leave blanks to be filled in according to their order) -- stories that don't depend on being part of One Big Sweeping Arc.

Tep (ktepi), Tuesday, 30 November 2004 17:28 (twenty years ago) link

From what it sounds like, Seven Soldiers is him flashing these chops to the extreme - "hey look, take any ONE of these issues as a complete story that doesn't affect anything, but it ALL FITS TOGETHER!" I can't wait.

Jordan (Jordan), Tuesday, 30 November 2004 17:41 (twenty years ago) link

Yeah, I have no doubt Morrison could outline a dozen different brief X-Men or JLA stories that wouldn't have to take place in a specific order
(or could leave blanks to be filled in according to their order) -- stories that don't depend on being part of One Big Sweeping Arc.

I think that's the beauty of the JLA, in concept. That it's just big adventure and doesn't need to adhere to whatever's going on in the characters' individual nor, necessarily, what's happened previously in JLA. It should be a book that you can pick up at random and always see superheroes save the universe.
Like, when I was a young kid, before I was seriously reading comics, if I only had enough money for one comic one week or whatever interval, I would always go with JLA, because it was guaranteed big superhero action. Green Lantern that month might be about some Guardian mindfuck-ripoff of Conan, and Action might have an 8-page Superman story surrounded by 13 pages of Lois Lane teaching Jimmy Olson how to drive standard, followed by a Supergirl story where she dreams she married Beppo. But JLA would have The World's Greatest Superheroes holding off an invasion of starfish!

Huk-L, Tuesday, 30 November 2004 17:50 (twenty years ago) link

But JLA did have arcs! Okay, arc (Kyle Rayner).

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Tuesday, 30 November 2004 17:52 (twenty years ago) link

Even the old JL of A had arcs (rare more than two-part NOVELS though), but you were always guaranteed a solid issue of action!

Huk-L, Tuesday, 30 November 2004 17:53 (twenty years ago) link

Tep, are you seriously advocating telling reset-button stories with no repurcussions and no character advancement? Because that's what I would describe the type of storytelling you are saying Millar sucks at.

The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 30 November 2004 20:03 (twenty years ago) link

Not reset button - PAUSE button.

David R. (popshots75`), Tuesday, 30 November 2004 20:08 (twenty years ago) link

That is, y'know, if you're playing a long adventure-type game, and you know you're going to have to give up the controller to the next kid in line eventually, don't be a punk and shut the thing off before giving up the stick.

David R. (popshots75`), Tuesday, 30 November 2004 20:11 (twenty years ago) link

Tep, are you seriously advocating telling reset-button stories with no repurcussions and no character advancement? Because that's what I would describe the type of storytelling you are saying Millar sucks at.

Not at all, no. But we got through sixty years of comics without needing every issue to be part of a Big Event or to redo the character (except we didn't, quite, because Millar isn't new in his attempts to do those) without needing Millar to save us from ourselves. Gleefully going on about how much Superman will suck until you get a chance to change him isn't an investment in character advancement.

The alternative to "don't thrash around in the mythos like a bitch" isn't "hit the reset button on your way out."

Tep (ktepi), Tuesday, 30 November 2004 20:14 (twenty years ago) link

Character advancement is a completely different axis anyway, and it doesn't seem to be something Millar is very interested in (how often does he stick around long enough to do much with it?) What I'm talking about is his desire to redo the defaults and basics of the characters he gets ahold of -- the Swamp Thing run, to namecheck it again, had nothing you could call character advancement (and ignored all the character development that had come before it), and was just a long string of power-ups and shake-ups to the mythos.

Tep (ktepi), Tuesday, 30 November 2004 20:18 (twenty years ago) link

But was actually interesting to read, and great horror, unlike the runs that had come before it.

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Tuesday, 30 November 2004 21:53 (twenty years ago) link

I disagree -- it had its moments, but the title had ten years worth of fans who'd been following it, and Morrison and Millar snapped off half a dozen long-running plots abruptly enough that it may as well have been an Elseworlds. That's terrible serial writing -- it's the kind of thing you can only get away with if you're the first or second person to do it, and Millar isn't good enough or popular enough to be that indulgent. If everyone wrote that way, it would all fall apart.

Tep (ktepi), Tuesday, 30 November 2004 22:01 (twenty years ago) link

They ignored the plots because the plots were unimportant, just distractions from what Swamp Thing is about. Though we've had this argument before. I think we might be differing over degree: would you agree that every ongoing serial character has a period before they "set", before they become an icon? I mean, what sort of pervert wants to see character advancement in a Superman story? Save it for Supreme.

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Tuesday, 30 November 2004 22:21 (twenty years ago) link

If not for the plots they ignored, the book wouldn't have been around long enough for them to ignore them! A title doesn't survive that long because people are waiting around hoping someone comes around to save the day.

And again, if everyone took that attitude, the whole notion of serial comics would be tossed out the window, because writers would pick and choose which previous runs they wanted to pay attention to.

Different characters have different "demands," I guess, but ultimately it doesn't matter very much: a series of drastic changes made to any character, with no time off from them, is nearly always bad fiction, and likely to be much worse as serial fiction, in which enormous amounts of story are told. It's not that you can't change things -- but if you can only tell stories in which major changes are the focus, you shouldn't be writing comic books with other peoples' characters.

Tep (ktepi), Tuesday, 30 November 2004 22:27 (twenty years ago) link

(And it's not just the fact that Millar ignored the stuff that came before him: it's that he made such enormous obstacles for the possibility of anything following him. Even if M&M improved the sales of Swamp Thing over the course of a year, what did it matter if their run ended the title and made a revival of the character so difficult? Collins writing for four more years would still have earned DC more money than Millar writing for one and then closing the shop; the sales argument doesn't justify enough.)

Tep (ktepi), Tuesday, 30 November 2004 22:30 (twenty years ago) link

ha, well as you know you can blame me for Mark Millar having a career in comics. I still really like his work. I haven't read his long run on the Ultimate X-Men, which seems the closest thing to what you're saying he can't do. Anyone read that?

Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Tuesday, 30 November 2004 23:11 (twenty years ago) link

Ultimate X-Men's different because he's essentially made his own characters, though -- there's no back story he needs to worry about that he doesn't insert himself, and maybe when the glee of fixing other peoples' work isn't there, he's better able to focus.

Tep (ktepi), Tuesday, 30 November 2004 23:21 (twenty years ago) link

A title doesn't survive that long because people are waiting around hoping someone comes around to save the day

Counterexample: the X-universe

And again, if everyone took that attitude, the whole notion of serial comics would be tossed out the window, because writers would pick and choose which previous runs they wanted to pay attention to.

(shrug) The good stuff would stick.

a series of drastic changes made to any character, with no time off from them, is nearly always bad fiction,

Turn this around: if it's bad fiction, why should the next writer have to waste an issue or two fixing it?

I agree completely about comics which are made with big changes as a goal in and of itself: I really think this Superman is going to blow.

As regards the sales, I don't give a shit as long as the comic is entertaining. Considering what the relaunch was like, if Mark Millar's run meant that they couldn't release the title again for three years, my only regret is that it wasn't six.

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Tuesday, 30 November 2004 23:27 (twenty years ago) link

The X-books are an exception to so many rules of thumb, though -- possibly another example of "it works here, but it wouldn't work if everyone did it" (and "works" is debatable maybe, but there's no denying that the line is strong).

The problem with "the good stuff would stick" is that it assumes everyone agrees what the good stuff is, and they don't. There were people who loved Clark Kent as a TV news anchor who could push the Earth out of orbit if he felt like it -- but on the whole, DC felt the concept had become unmarketable. That was "fixed" along with everything else by Crisis, and starting somewhat from scratch, but you can't usually do that with just one book -- (although it does seem to be Millar's intent this time around).

But when you've got a continuous line, and you have people picking and choosing, you could end up with me writing Swamp Thing, let's say, and ignoring Millar -- and then you writing it after me and ignoring everything but Millar and the parts he depended on. They may as well be two separate titles.

He chose to write a company-owned character, after all, with a significant history -- the job is a collaborative one whether you have an active collaborator or not, and writers who don't like it shouldn't pursue it.

Tep (ktepi), Tuesday, 30 November 2004 23:39 (twenty years ago) link

(Look at the derision Byrne gets on ILC for ignoring Morrison's -- and post-Morrison -- Doom Patrol, for instance.)

Tep (ktepi), Tuesday, 30 November 2004 23:40 (twenty years ago) link

I wouldn't write from Millar's version of Swamp Thing at all, that would be hypocritical (and probably imposssible) of me. I'm just saying that past a certain point no-one should assume that their stories stick. I mean, I wouldn't even have much of a problem if Rick Veitch had declared that Alec Holland was comatose in a coccon at the bottom of the swamp all the time - it isn't going to damage the Moore Swamp Things on my shelf.

I think people were deriding John Byrne because he was John Byrne, and also because his attitude was "This book had gone way wrong, and I'm the man to fix it (stand up, pants fall down, trombone)"

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Wednesday, 1 December 2004 00:37 (twenty years ago) link

They may as well be two separate titles

Except (I'd assume) that they would both have as a base Moore's issues. Which is a problem with my vision, admittedly: it assumes that reasonable people can agree on what really defines a character (as opposed to what's just a good story).

Also it requires that John Byrne be formally recognised as a crazy man.

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Wednesday, 1 December 2004 00:46 (twenty years ago) link

I think how you (the generic you) respond to the Millar ST depends in large part on how you felt about the runs immediately preceding him -- that's what that part seems to come down to. We've moved away from "big sweeping changes, one on top of the other" in more general terms or as present in Millar's mysterious Superman plans (how many times does he say "trust me, it'll work when you see how I do it"?)

A lot of this is why I kind of wish we did have a Crisis -- if not the event, at least the reboot -- every 20 years or so. That lengthy continuity and accumulated back story is a weakness in comics -- I just don't think ignoring it works in practice, and I think writers who make things more difficult for their successors -- since it's a job where you know you're only there for a brief period of time, you're just a seatwarmer -- should be docked some of their pay.

Tep (ktepi), Wednesday, 1 December 2004 00:52 (twenty years ago) link

> (Look at the derision Byrne gets on ILC for ignoring Morrison's -- and post-Morrison -- Doom Patrol, for instance.)

Byrne catches flak because he rolled back *all previous* incarnations of the Doom Patrol. His is effectively the premiere appearance of these characters in the DCU now. Don't ask me how he got that one past editorial.

As for continuity, it's largely made to be broken and then remade, it appears. I'm far more interested with people keeping the essential spirit of the characters (or having a good reason for bending 'em), not keeping every single continuity nugget in place or worrying about what comes after. The status quo can always be remade. Swamp Thing has been effectively rebooted to the Wein/Wrightson days (though more thinglike than human in a suitlike), even after Millar made the character unworkable. You can always get superheroes back to their origin points somehow.

Matt Maxwell (Matt M.), Wednesday, 1 December 2004 02:54 (twenty years ago) link

Millar's schtick has become increasingly obvious with his most recent work, I think : in Wolverine and his Spidey especially. Somebody pointed it out on another thread - that he seemed to be basing his approach on the Batman arc "Hush" with a tokenistic trip round the rogues gallery, a guest-star or two etc..

I liked his Swamp Thing, I liked his Authority, I really like the Ultimates. But the nastiness and crudeness I've started to see in his work (especially in the last few issues of the Ultimates and all of Wanted) really bother me...from reading his own site and his pieces here and there it all seems like publicity-seeking stuff, which just makes it seems worse, somehow.
And, whether it was meant to be funny or ironic or not, the "You think this "A" on my head stands for France?" bit from Cap in Ultimates seemed cheap and childish.

God, even writing this makes me feel old...

David N (David N.), Wednesday, 1 December 2004 03:24 (twenty years ago) link

Just because you can fix something doesn't make it okay to break it. That's like justifying hiring the bad temps because you have people on payroll who can clean up after them later.

Tep (ktepi), Wednesday, 1 December 2004 03:49 (twenty years ago) link

Tep, I'd counter with "If it can always be fixed, then is it ever really broken?"

Your moment of zen...

Matt Maxwell (Matt M.), Wednesday, 1 December 2004 17:01 (twenty years ago) link

Sure it is, though -- otherwise you could spend a character's whole history going back and forth between fixes and breaks, like Wolverine (whose marketability never faltered, granted) or Hawkman (who pretty much became an untouchable until the JSA series). I mean, I can get my microwave fixed when it breaks, but it would still be better to have one that didn't break in the first place.

Tep (ktepi), Wednesday, 1 December 2004 18:41 (twenty years ago) link

FYI - the Millar Superman stuff is all hypothetical; it's what he'd do if he were (finally) given the chance to right all the supposed wrongs w/ the Superman franchise. I think I (mistakenly) got the idea that some of you think this is actually happening. Supposedly, from the rumour mill (HI G00GLING RICH JOHNSTON), there's another Crisis in the works (by Geoff Johns & Phil Jiminez), & the post-Crisis Superman team is to be Grant Morrison & Frank Quitely. (PS - HELL YEAH!)

Millar's Ultimate X-Men is just odd. Some great bits, some bits where everything drags on, some bits where stuff just happens seemingly because it's convenient to get it out of the way. Also, it bites A LOT from the movie (the way Gus Van Sant "bit" Psycho).

Also, conveniently enough - the 1st issue of the new Ultimates series is out today. I loved the first Ultimates arc, vaguely adored the 2nd arc (that A = France thing notwithstanding), & am hoping for a return to the good stuff w/ the 2nd season.

David R. (popshots75`), Wednesday, 1 December 2004 18:42 (twenty years ago) link

Dude, Morrison should so do Crisis. I mean, I don't know, have the editors get together and figure out what the final outcome should be -- and take their time doing it, and actually figure it out in advance instead of having that weird transitional time like during/after the last Crisis -- but Morrison has shown plenty of times that he can do Big Crazy Cosmic.

Plus, if Morrison did Crisis and a Superman reboot, they could logically be connected -- which makes sense if you want to preserve Superman's status as the preeminent DC superhero despite his post-Golden Age lack of seniority.

Also: you googlepoofed GOOGLE! Of all the people to google themselves, they ... well, just might.

Tep (ktepi), Wednesday, 1 December 2004 18:49 (twenty years ago) link

As much as I love both of them, Quitely on a monthly book = uh-oh!

As politically insensitive as the A thing is, I did think it was very funny. And acceptable in someone who's been frozen since 1940.

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Wednesday, 1 December 2004 20:40 (twenty years ago) link

Yeah, that's what I came around too, Andrew, re: justifying it - Ultimate Cap's a square jingo rah-rah soldier, so of course he's liable to say something dopey like that. (Also, doesn't he say that to the head Skrull, which adds a certain li'l something to its absurdity?)

As for FQ on a monthly - if they give him a head start, and have a fill-in art issue every so often (by, oh, I dunno, Philip Bond), then it could be sweeeeeeeeeeeeeet.

David R. (popshots75`), Wednesday, 1 December 2004 21:42 (twenty years ago) link

I guess the "A != France" statement in the latter half of Ultimates (Season I) is equal to the "HULK HORNY" stuff in the first half of Ultimates.

David R. (popshots75`), Wednesday, 1 December 2004 21:47 (twenty years ago) link

I am amusing myself imagining Quitely doing all the Superman books. There is little that would excite me more (well, in comics at least) than the prospect of a lengthy Morrison run on Superman.

Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Wednesday, 1 December 2004 22:14 (twenty years ago) link

Poxy fule ate this earlier, but: I assume it's impractical for reasons beyond just "we want to not do it this way" (i.e. writers and artists don't want to wait a year or two for their royalties, etc), but if you could get Crisis written and a year or two of Superman both written and drawn -- in their entirety -- before going live with them, you'd have plenty of time to properly build the relaunch titles around your flagships, avoid the 80s' post-Crisis disasters, and preempt the possibility of delays (or the more likely possibility of fill-in artists).

Tep (ktepi), Wednesday, 1 December 2004 22:25 (twenty years ago) link

A=France thing: if Cap remembers fighting alongside French resistance fighters like it was yesterday, but doesn't remember the demonisation of France over the intervening years, then yeah, it looks silly. But aside from the occasional depression reference, nobody ever examines Cap's cultural sense, so Millar's not committing any new crimes there.

I think his Superman thing deifies Elliott S! Maggin just a little too much. The guy had an awful lot of good ideas but I think his total negation of Clark Kent wasn't one of them. All this "Yeah yeah he's jesus but he's an alien jesus" thing feels really cold and dispassionate. Not quite as dispassionate as Byrne's cold, joyless sexing-up tactics, but still, not somebody who'd actually interest me on any human level.

Vic Fluro, Wednesday, 1 December 2004 23:37 (twenty years ago) link

The "but he's an alien!" thing sounds like his Superman version of the "but he's from the 40s!" thing he seems to be doing with Cap (I'm basing that latter only on what's been said in this thread and the assumption that Millar's rhetoric is not significantly different from the other people who've advocated the take) -- even on a surface level it doesn't quite work (I'm not convinced any writer who has harped about the need to portray Cap as "a man out of the past" has had much of a handle on history or what men of the past were like, and making any kind of "but he's an alien!" argument that's expected to stand on its own merits needs more than handwaving), and beyond that I'm not sure it leads to any good stories. No one gives a crap how the character's bio reads in Who's Who -- they just want the stories.

You can certainly formulate an argument for a new version of Superman who's more attracted to dogs than to Lois (or Cat Grant or Lana or Wonder Woman) because of the biology of Kryptonian physical attraction and the coincidental similarity of canine pheromones. You can come up with perfectly good science for it, and you can write a couple issues that will be funny and make people talk about it on the internet. That doesn't make it a good idea.

Tep (ktepi), Thursday, 2 December 2004 00:06 (twenty years ago) link

That also doesn't make it a bad idea.

The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 2 December 2004 15:03 (twenty years ago) link

Arf!

Huk-L, Thursday, 2 December 2004 16:18 (twenty years ago) link

On a certain level I am of the opinion that anything which angers fanboys is automatically a Good Idea.

The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 2 December 2004 16:55 (twenty years ago) link

(For example, I loved the brief period in the X-Men when Wolverine devolved into a mute dogman.)

The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 2 December 2004 16:56 (twenty years ago) link

Dan for Emperor!

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Thursday, 2 December 2004 17:22 (twenty years ago) link

I'm almost afraid to ask, but what on Earth do fanboys have to do with anything?

Tep (ktepi), Thursday, 2 December 2004 18:24 (twenty years ago) link

The type of storytelling you're reacting against is the type of storytelling that fanboys react against; shaking up the status quo of an established character for the sake of shaking up the status quo. Invariably these are my favorite types of stories, particularly when the go out of their way to smash series taboos (for example, in Doctor Who fiction there was a series of stories the built out of a writer explicitly paradoxing one of the televised stories into oblivion, including a story arc where both the Doctor's TARDIS and Gallifrey were destroyed).

The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 2 December 2004 19:08 (twenty years ago) link

Gotcha. That's only part of it, though. My problem with Millar's approach isn't that he sometimes does that; it's that it seems to be the only thing he knows how to do. If he's hired accordingly, that works out, but when your schtick is shaking up the status quo, and you have your sights set on rebooting Superman ... it just isn't going to work. Your job in that position is to establish a new status quo, and you can't just define that as "Byrne was a nob."

I'm not saying the status quo can never change at all, or temporarily, but you need other things going on in between the shake-ups, and if you don't want constant traffic of readers coming and going, you need to use the shake-ups conservatively or have some reason for them. (One of the reasons the X-books work, I think, is because the cast is so large -- if all that stuff happened to the FF, you'd really be pushing it.)

Even in the terms you've just described them, they're limited-use stories -- you can't constantly smash series taboos without taking the time to establish those taboos in between.

It's like Tivo -- there was a long article on Tivo the other day about how a lot of the appeal of it is to bypass commercials, but broadcast television is paid for by commercials, so if everyone had Tivo, there wouldn't be anything to watch with it. Guys like Millar only have stories to write when the industry keeps them in the minority.

Tep (ktepi), Thursday, 2 December 2004 19:16 (twenty years ago) link

Even in the terms you've just described them, they're limited-use stories -- you can't constantly smash series taboos without taking the time to establish those taboos in between.

I'd think that's an obvious point. It's also something that Millar does, from what I've read ("The Authority", "Ultimate X-Men"); Millar more than Ellis was the one who planted the seeds of The Authority as liberal fascists in that book and shortly after deviating from the mainstream X-template he set relatively firm parameters on the types of stories he was going to do in UnlXM.

The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 2 December 2004 22:07 (twenty years ago) link

I was thinking about this on the way to work this morning, and the reason for Clark Kent seems to be that he's the personality who can do all the good that the Superman persona can't. Superman can't bust into the Oval Office and beat up the President, or even run protection rackets like he used to do back when he couldn't fly - he's only able in that mode to be a general example to humanity of an all-purpose Good Guy. Clark then becomes the Superman who has power on levels Supes himself doesn't - the power of the press. He should be a one-man Woodward and Bernstein, fighting for Truth and Justice using his superpowers in the role of reporter, because that's the role in which he can make real social changes. Lois, meanwhile, is as interested in celeb-Hello style scoops as she is in real news, so she's equally into getting Superman's real identity as she is in joining him and Clark on their quest for Truth. Heroine and villainess in one gal!

Luthor, meanwhile, is utterly pro-human and for that reason is determined to destroy this freaky alien who's skewing human development with his very presence. He should have been a hero of humanity, only Superman turned up and now he's determined to wipe out this evolution-retarding anomaly by any means necessary, including robbing banks/killing people/assassinating the President.

I AM THE NEW MARK MILLAR.

Vic Fluro, Thursday, 2 December 2004 23:54 (twenty years ago) link

That completely works, though! That's exactly the kind of take that can feed a reboot that would survive for more than just a couple years. The Luthor part alone is something you could run with for storyline after storyline, especially if he's sort of Superman's Jameson -- he likes other superheroes, just not this Kryptonian creep. (Maybe he likes Superman until it's revealed the dude's an alien, if that's not something that's made clear in his public debut.)

Superman'll talk about how Luthor keeps trying to sic giant robots on him, and the Justice League gets all awkward and looks away and is like, "Well look, Kal, thing is, he bought us this geosynchronous defense satellite, and we didn't even ask for it, Lex seems pretty cool ... maybe you guys should just talk or something..?"

Tep (ktepi), Friday, 3 December 2004 00:02 (twenty years ago) link

it's completely ripped off from both Elliott S Maggin and Grant Morrison. I might have mentioned that my favourite Luthor story EVAH is 'The Einstein Connection' (available free for the googling online, and connected with a grate Supes-in-the-future story which works really, really well). That's the one where every year Luthor breaks out of prison (like he can do every day if he feels like it) and does something Einstein-related on Einstein's birthday, and at the end he saves a kid's life ("I can't let him die - not today!") and Supes captures him again because of that, and takes Luthor to Einstein's statue (where he can never, ever go because he'd be instantly arrested). AND LUTHOR CRIES! "Happy Birthday... Sir."

And then at the end, Luthor thanks Superman, and Superman says "My pleasure, but do try to be good!" It's two people who have no option but to try to defeat each other, but have respect for each other anyway. (Actually, Supes sounds like a smug git, but he always does due to his Superness.)

Maggin's finest hour by a long way.

Vic Fluro, Friday, 3 December 2004 00:17 (twenty years ago) link

Plus I love the idea that Superman can think at superspeed and do these incredibly complex calculations about ballistics and magnetism and whatever else he needs to do for his super-feats to work properly and not kill anyone - AND LUTHOR IS STILL SMARTER THAN HIM, without even trying hard.

Vic Fluro, Friday, 3 December 2004 00:27 (twenty years ago) link

two months pass...
They already did it! Check this page out.

http://superman.ws/tales3/president/?page=17

Unfortunately this sequence is spoiled somewhat by him using his Kent power to tear down a nuclear plant and replace it with the environmentally-friendly alternative of... a coal-burning plant. Yay Superman.

Vic Fluro, Wednesday, 23 February 2005 23:55 (nineteen years ago) link

six months pass...
This seems like a good thread to revive to talk about Millar's "Holocaust Wolverine" issue.

Jordan (Jordan), Thursday, 22 September 2005 13:43 (nineteen years ago) link

Which, really, is pretty good. And not very Millar-like, it seems to me.

Jordan (Jordan), Thursday, 22 September 2005 13:45 (nineteen years ago) link

Although, you'd think Wolverine could be doing something more proactive during WWII than using the concentration camps to satisfy his masochistic tendencies and waiting for the Germans to kill themselves.

Jordan (Jordan), Thursday, 22 September 2005 13:50 (nineteen years ago) link

holocaust wolverine?!

s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 22 September 2005 14:16 (nineteen years ago) link

"A very special issue of Wolverine"

ihttp://www.buzzscope.com/reviews/4919/4919_1.jpg

Jordan (Jordan), Thursday, 22 September 2005 14:28 (nineteen years ago) link

403 FORBIDDEN

s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 22 September 2005 14:30 (nineteen years ago) link

that should probably be 403 VERBOTEN huh

s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 22 September 2005 14:30 (nineteen years ago) link

Ha, try this:

http://www.buzzscope.com/reviews.php?id=4919

Jordan (Jordan), Thursday, 22 September 2005 14:34 (nineteen years ago) link

i wanna read this now! uh... YSI?

s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 22 September 2005 14:37 (nineteen years ago) link

Sorry dude, I've only got it on paper.

Jordan (Jordan), Thursday, 22 September 2005 14:39 (nineteen years ago) link

pa-per?

s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 22 September 2005 14:40 (nineteen years ago) link

the comic shop was sold out of this issue :(

anybody got a cbr?

s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 30 September 2005 18:10 (nineteen years ago) link

seventeen years pass...

At some point between this thread and 2008 I decided Millar was an objectively terrible writer but I’m not sure when I made that decision. I’m very surprised to see myself arguing in favor of the existence of Ultimate X-Men, which aged at the time like an armpit full of sour cream and that I actively hated after like 3 issues.

castanuts (DJP), Friday, 27 January 2023 22:18 (one year ago) link

Yeah, sometime after Ultimates 2 (which I remmeber as being excellent but have no wish to revisit) he got bad and stayed bad IMO.

Chuck_Tatum, Wednesday, 1 February 2023 19:13 (one year ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.