The Four Color Media Monitor

From the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette, here's another article telling the readers what to think or believe, something that comics companies today seem to be arguing ad nauseum, and which is simply exaggerated:

Superman smiles a lot, but writer Geoff Johns is working through that.

“It’s easier to write a character like Batman who’s tough and gritty than someone like Superman who’s happy with himself,” says Johns, who recently took over the reins of the character’s self-titled comic book.

Over nearly 70 years, writers have had the same problem with the Man of Steel: How do you write adventures about a do-gooder?

“It’s corny, but Superman is so good that (writing him) is difficult,” Johns says.

Still, Superman smiles on – in comics, on TV (“Smallville”) and, again, in movies, with “Superman Returns.” Getting a handle on the character is so hard that it’s legendary in comics to fail at pinning him down.

When DC Comics wanted to revitalize Superman this year, the publishing company turned to Johns, who has had success reworking such time-tested franchises as the Flash and the Teen Titans for DC.

“I took the job because I love the character,” he says.

No kidding. After the way that Johns began to toe the line with DC on its jamming the Identity Crisis outgrowth down the audience's collective throats, I had to question that.

And the part about 70 years worth of writers having a problem in getting a handle on Superman because he's "so good," raises many questions on just what are they talking about. How strange. Didn't Siegal and Shuster do well enough on their part, ditto E. Nelson Bridwell, Cary Bates, Elliot Maggin, Jim Shooter, and even Bob Rozakis? What this whole argument obscures and misses the point almost completely on is that, as the Silver Age can certainly tell, the Man of Steel went through some of the most absurd slapstick adventures you could think of, including getting his head turned into that of a lion's head, and, perhaps even more telling, he wasn't quite as "good" as one might think: he sometimes played unkind tricks on Lois Lane, and vice versa, and whenever I think of it, the Superman-Lois relations at the time were probably the least believable of all the superheroes and their spouses. Barry Allen and Iris West, Adam and Alanna Strange, Hal Jordan and Carol Ferris, Ray Palmer and Jean Loring, Hawkman and Hawkwoman, they were much more "down to earth" than Superman and Lois ever were in their own relations together, which could include rivalry.

Now, here's where the article descends into favoratism for the darkness:

Though Superman’s popularity has gone up and down over the years, he remains one of the most recognized and profitable franchises in comics.

Keeping readers coming back to the racks every month is more than a good idea. It’s essential.

The bright-and-shiny Superman is now facing something deadlier to him than kryptonite – competition. Darker characters such as the X-Men’s Wolverine and even Gotham City’s Batman appeal to younger readers seeking accessible characters.

Haven't we seen this kind of argument before? Time once wrote a puff piece for grittiness and darkness, and I wasn't very impressed with that one either. In fact, if the Man of Steel is facing competition now, surely he wasn't before as well? Very little here is clear, not even just who these "younger" readers are.

And I should note that, while I've got nothing against reading about "dark/gritty" characters, I never read Marvel Comics solely or even squarely for darkness, and difficult as it is to find anything readable from Marvel now, I don't read their comics for darkness even now. Spider-Man's origin may have stemmed from a personal tragedy, but darkness was not what Peter Parker's own world was about, nor was ever built solely on darkness either. But that's what the press would doubtless like for people to think, which makes no sense, and is insulting to no end. Heck, in this cruel world of ours, a bright and enjoyable adventure can do a lot of good for people. I've got a feeling that hospital patients would confirm that brightness does them a lot of good too.

Johns began his career as a movie supervisor for Richard Donner, whose credentials include ultra-violent movies like Lethal Weapon, and most likely that the former was influenced considerably by the latter. That's one of the reasons why I don't see it as a very good idea to hire people from the movie biz to write comic books, since they take it to such an extreme level, far too much for comics to handle.

Topic linked with: Blue Star Chronicles, Cigar Intelligence Agency, Free Constitution, Gribbit's Word, Is it Just Me, The Mudville Gazette, Point Five,

Labels: dc comics