Valdosta Daily Times fawns over Bendis' Superman run
The Valdosta Daily Times wrote a short but biased take on Brian Bendis' beginnings for his Superman run, now compiled in a trade called the Unity Saga:
The writer sums up his position in one mere sentence:
Bendis' "Action Comics" run, so far, is more about the personalities of Clark Kent and his supporting cast from The Daily Planet. "Action" has been more about his earthbound adventures and foes.And the Superman who sheds his secret identity to mimic what happened in Bendis' run on Daredevil over 15 years ago. For all the good it's done with Super-fans to date. Why, he even tried to phase Lois Lane out as a prominent co-star, and while she may have been restored following fan objections, the harm Bendis is causing is still tangible (so too is the harm Greg Rucka's caused for her, for that matter).
"Superman," so far, with "The Unity Saga," is the Superman dealing with cosmic threats. The Superman who is too busy being Superman at that moment to spend much time being Clark. The Superman dealing with threats so large he needs the Justice League.
Bendis started his Superman run with the "Man of Steel," a miniseries that introduced Rogol Zaar, a being that claims to have destroyed Krypton and wants to destroy all Kryptonian remnants.We've heard that story before too in the late 60s, in a storyline featuring an intergalactic criminal named Black Zero. Not impressed, because all they're doing so far, until they decide it's worth undoing, is touting political correctness; the notion a superhero must have the gravest story backdrop possible, or "nobody will take it seriously". This is exactly what's brought down many famous superhero comics.
The writer sums up his position in one mere sentence:
Bendis proves he's adept at handling both sides of the Superman ledger.About as adept as he proved when he was writing Avengers and X-Men. But it doesn't take much to figure out this is another mainstream media source that just won't take an unbiased, objective view of the material at hand, and can only fluff-coat modern stories that aren't making a real impact.
Labels: dc comics, dreadful writers, moonbat writers, msm propaganda, Superman
"another mainstream media source that just won't take an unbiased, objective view of the material at hand,"
How can an opinion about what you like or don't like be unbiased and objective, and why should it be? Some reviews are intelligent and explain what the reviewer liked and why and inform you about what's being reviewed and its history and background. Others are just thumbs up or down. But objective and unbiased? Nope.
Posted by
Anonymous |
3:33 AM