How a classic back issue of Action Comics was stolen from actor Nicholas Cage, and when later returned, he sold it on auction

Far Out Magazine wrote about the history of actor Nicholas Cage's onetime ownership of an Action Comics premiere issue, which was once stolen from his estate but later tracked and returned:

Cage is such a big fan of DC’s flagship hero that he named his son Kal-El, which is Superman’s name on his native planet. He was famously tapped to don the famous blue suit in a movie directed by Tim Burton, but this never came to pass. He did voice the ‘Man of Steel’ in Teen Titans Go! to the Movies and appeared as the character via CGI in The Flash, although he wasn’t too pleased with this cameo.

Considering what a fiasco that movie was in more ways than one, it's no wonder the film would be such an embarrassment. Most angering is that it drew from what terrible writer Geoff Johns set up around 2009. DC may have moved back to spotlighting Wally West more than Barry Allen 12 years after that, but the damage had long been done, and Johns was among those responsible for starting it.

At one point in time, Cage owned a pivotal piece of Superman history. In 1997, he paid $110,000 for a copy of Action Comics #1, the comic book in which Clark Kent made his debut. This must have been a dream come true for the self-professed superhero nut, but his bliss wouldn’t last for long. Just two years later, a number of comics were stolen from Cage’s private collection, including Action Comics #1. One of the most valuable and important comics in history was now missing, never to be seen again…or was it?

Vincent Zurzolo, President of Metropolis Comics and Comic Connect and the man who sold the issue to Cage in the first place, warned the actor to keep an eye out.

It’s unlikely that whoever pinched the comic did so because they were a fan; they stole it to sell it, so all they had to do was wait. Sure enough, in 2011, Zurzolo and his partner Steve Fischler stumbled across a seller flogging what looked suspiciously like Cage’s copy of Action Comics #1.

Law enforcement saw to it the copy was returned to Cage, who later sold it again on auction to pay off some debts, and he was lucky to retrieve the stolen items, but it's still regrettable he's among many people who're setting poor examples by keeping old back issues around and not donating to museums. I'm sure there's plenty of archives that'd pay just as good as an auction can for products they can put on display for history exhibits. Yet all these prominent people only think of storing them away for who knows what reasons, and it sure doesn't speak well for Hollywood any more than more ordinary speculators.

CB Cebulski hires some very disgraceful choices for writing assignments

Comic Book Club Live announced that Marvel and editor C.B Cebulski have hired and re-hired some of the worst writers to litter comicdom in the past quarter century for new writing assignments:

Hot on the heels of DC’s Superman/Spider-Man, Marvel has announced their half of the crossover with the April debuting Spider-Man/Superman #1. And alongside the reveals of the covers, we’ve also got the creative teams for the book, including Geoff Johns delivering his first Marvel work in two decades, and Brad Meltzer writing for Marvel for the first time ever. [...]

Meltzer will write the lead story alongside artist Pepe Larraz, featuring the title characters. In addition, Dan Slott and Marcos Martin will takcle Spider-Man Noir meeting Golden Age Superman, Geoff Johns and Gary Frank send the Super and Spider families against each other, Jason Aaron and Russell Dauterman bring on The Mighty Thor and Wonder Woman, Louise Simonson and Todd Nauck pit Steel against Hobgoblin, Joe Kelly and Humberto Ramos cross over Gwen Stacy and Lana Lang, and Brian Michael Bendis and Sara Pichelli are back at Miles Morales, and I can’t believe we had him on our live show last night and didn’t know about this. Harumph.

There may have been times when bad writers working at Marvel went over to DC later on (and J. Michael Straczynski certainly did in the late 2000s), but this could be described as the opposite. Either way, it's an utter disgrace that a "novelist" who penned Identity Crisis, one of the most repellent comics minimizing sexual assault and delivering a leftist metaphor for 9-11, is now being hired to work at Marvel on a project, and equally disgraceful that the writer who soiled the Flash, Hawkman and Green Lantern, along with Justice Society, is now returning to work at Marvel, where he also made a shoddy mess of Avengers. Looking at the list, it's certainly quite a Who's Who of horrible, overrated writers, and surely also artists, some who're taking part in a joint project of new team-ups between the Man of Steel and Web-Head. No thanks, I'd rather read the original Spider-Man/Superman teaming from the Bronze Age instead. And how interesting there's at least a dozen variant covers conceived for this project. It does hint they lack faith in anybody taking interest in the brand new special as opposed to the original, if variants are their last trick in the bag.

As for Simonson, there may have once been a time she made a decent scribe, but she's been irrelevant for years now, and it's unlikely she'll deliver anything palatable under Marvel/DC's modern leadership now. Also, is that the original Gwen they're talking about, who was sent to the afterlife in 1973 when the Green Goblin murdered her in Spider-Man? If so, then no matter how you look at this, it clashes with what Tom Brevoort recently said about persuading Joe Quesada they shouldn't revive Gwen. Speaking of which, it may not be surprising if Mary Jane Watson is left out of the new proceedings, but if she is in the story, could anyone be surprised if she gets treated awful?

Based on whom Cebulski's hired, the time couldn't be better to boycott Marvel, and the lineup is certainly an embarrassment.

Some fishy and troubling panels from the portfolio of the disgraced artist Justiniano

In past years, I'd taken a look at the shoddy resumes of terrible writers like Gerard Jones and Neil Gaiman, who were both accused of sexual misconduct, but until now, I don't think I'd ever looked at the works of artists who were accused/prosecuted/convicted of similar offenses. So now, I thought it could come in useful to take a look at a number of panels from the portfolio of the disgraced artist Justiniano (whose real name is said to be Josue Rivera), the earliest comics contributor I know of to be arrested and convicted for possession of child porn, which was almost 15 years ago.

To be sure, figuring out the mindset of a corrupt artist can be trickier than that of a corrupt writer, since the artist's job is primarily to realize the visions of the writer for a comic, but of course there are plenty of artists who're as much part of the creative process in developing a story as there are writers, and can be just as responsible for certain ingredients going into the script, maybe even more. So I guess that's what I wanted to investigate here, and while some of the fishy going-ons in these samples could be more the responsibility of the writers, the artist still could be just as responsible for anything terrible that occurs in them. Justiniano, from what I know, originally began his undeserved career in 1995, and most interesting is that while he was in the business for 15 years, much of his pretentious resume was largely guest roles; almost none of his portfolio contains any regular runs, save for maybe 2 miniseries, which are decidedly some of the worst stuff I've ever seen, having reevaluated whatever artwork he did within that time. One can also wonder if the abusive mindset Justiniano went by that got him jailed for at least a few years explains why he signed almost his entire resume under a pseudonym. He began with at least 2 stories for Marvel, and much of the rest of his career in mainstream was for DC. So, let's take a look for starters at a panel he drew for Incredible Hulk #434, which had been written for over a decade by the late Peter David:

Now, I know David was, sadly, quite a leftist himself, and this looks rather oddly like an early insult to Donald Trump, but for all we know, even Justiniano could've been just as negative towards conservatives back in the day. Next is a fishy item from What If's 2nd volume, issue 69:

So there's an odd comment made about who designed the costumes in this tale, as though Justiniano was trying an absurd defense for how uninspired they really are, and a precursor to something else that came along a few years later, which is coming up next. But first, from Young Justice 80-page Giant, written by the aforementioned David:

Viewed in the context of Justiniano's offenses, one could say the irony here is that somebody may have to watch in horror at how Justiniano turned out to be somebody abusive to children. Something which, if realists want to prevent it, should not be just a distant memory, nor any of Justiniano's other insults to the intellect when he was working in mainstream comicdom. And then, look at how the dialect speaks of "evil preying upon the weak", and somebody having "no imagination". Because that can just as easily sum up what a scumbag like Justiniano was doing, and what he was like too. Now, for a 4-part miniseries spotlighting Beast Boy from the Titans, which was co-written by Geoff Johns and Ben Raab, and decidedly did no favors in the long run for Flamebird/Bette Kane. For example:

The story is weak, and decidedly so is the whole cliche of a woman who turns out to be a villainess being drawn as sexy, not to mention how the sexual harrasment scene in the story turned out to be a setup. Based on Justiniano's behavior, or viewed in that context, that's why it could be argued what he did here was almost like a bizarre denial that sexual misconduct exists, making it look like, not only do all women lie about being victims of sexual misconduct, but that such lies are routine, and this was about 4 years before the offensive Identity Crisis miniseries was published.

And here, what's annoying is how Flamebird's made to look stupid, as though she couldn't figure out the police won't take checks by masked superdoers if they don't have the actual identity and credentials of the signer. In other words, the writers and artist made Bette look like a bimbo, and certainly worse than "ditzy". Also, regarding the costume design, did I mention it looks like she's wearing trousers in this story? When George Perez designed her post-Crisis outfit in the late 80s, it had bare leg style. I guess this was Justiniano's way of virtue-signaling, by toning down how hot Bette could be under better creators. (Update: there do also appear to be some early art samples from the times where Bette does appear to be drawn with trousers, but the poorly designed outfit by Justiniano seen below still stands as a shoddy example of virtue-signaling.) And then:

So first, Nightwing puts her down, and her way of proving she's up to the task of being a "serious" crimefighter is to design a more modest outfit - with decidedly unappealing shades of color, I might add - and she even has shorter hair in this redesign. This too, if to focus on the artist, reeks of another example of tasteless virtue-signaling. Obviously, even the writers have to shoulder blame for what I think is a most shoddy costume design, but again, if the artist has fault here, then this is quite possibly another example of how Justiniano sought to conceal what a scumbag he really was, an early example of wokeness, and for the time, it's amazing he still drew Bette as busty, because today, without a doubt, the disgraceful people now minding the store at DC would make sure even that was destroyed. Back at the time, I may not have particularly minded the costume design when I first saw it, but today, I think it's one of the most horrible I've ever seen, and an insult to the original creators of Bat-Girl/Flamebird. Next is another atrocious scene, along with one more panel:

Gee, that's all we need, a shoddy excuse to see Beast Boy hitting a woman, in a comic illustrated by a man who was arrested/convicted for child porn possession, right? As for that panel where Bette is helping unpack accessories and furniture, perhaps based on Justiniano's rancid behavior that got him jailed and destroyed his career, it could be argued he had no business drawing the alleged cousin of Gar staring at her rear, though even that's watered down, along with her hair. Also, the whole idea of Madame Rouge having a daughter who's as shape-shifting as she was is contrived, as the scene where Gar socks her is disgusting. I don't think the daughter character was ever seen again, but regardless of that, this was an early example of how DC was losing direction when Geoff Johns became a writer for them. Here's also a letter page from the miniseries:

What makes Justiniano's artwork here a "revelation"? His art for the time was otherwise uninspired and overrated. And neither Johns nor Raab did a good writing job here. The miniseries may have been reprinted as part of the subsequent Teen Titans series Johns also wrote, but today I'd recommend it not be reprinted for a long time so as not to finance Justiniano's wallet, and besides, IMO, nobody would be missing anything; it's just so tiresome.

Now, since the Titans are one of the items to which Justiniano had art credits, here's at least 3 panels from issues 3-4 of the 1999-2003 series for starters, which was initially written by Devin Grayson, and the 1st annual, which was again written by Johns and Raab:

Now, as you'll notice here, Starfire's wearing a less revealing outfit. How fascinating, viewed in the context of Justiniano's offenses, that one of the most beloved cast members of the Titans is being drawn with an outfit that conceals her legs and arms, if anything. It's certainly enough to wonder why Wonder Woman sometimes seems like the only DC superheroine whose hot outfit anybody in or out of the company is willing to respect and defend. This is also what some tend to call a form of virtue-signaling, and obviously, an attempt by the artist to hide behind "morality" while concealing his dark side. Oddly enough, when Johns and Mike McKone penned their shoddy take on Teen Titans in 2003, they actually had Starfire wearing the classic outfit, but by the following decade, DC were forcing designs similar to what Justiniano drew here onto her and the stories. Perhaps we have Scott Lobdell, another creator with a questionable record of his own, to partially blame for that.

Now here, we see a guy making a lewd-looking pass at whom I think is the "Joker's Daughter", and next comes a very questionable moment where sexual abuse is brought up, and there's 2 reasons why that part's been damaged: one is Justiniano's being the artist, but there's also Grayson's own embarrassingly bad subsequent story in Nightwing where she depicted a crook named Tarantula sexually assaulting the former Teen Wonder, although to Mrs. Grayson's credit, she did later apologize, unlike Brad Meltzer, who to date has never apologized for minimizing the subject in Identity Crisis. Next, from the Titans annual:

There's 2 reasons why this would-be "joke" tanks - one is because of the artist, and the second is because it also evokes an Islamic belief that it's okay to have sex with goats. Let's also recall Johns later came up with a Muslim character in Green Lantern, all written for the sake of making a political statement, so perhaps it's not too surprising he, along with Raab, would come up with a "joke" involving animals that doesn't hold up well when one considers what goes on in the Islamic world.

I don't like what reeks of an allusion to video games like Mortal Kombat either, and the way the Japanese guy is written calling Flamebird "stupid American" is decidedly also annoying. Also notice how the flat-tire sex jokes continue here. (Also, the way the name of the team uses logo-style letters in the word balloon was laughable long ago.) That aside, note how Justiniano's shoddy, poorly colored redesign of Bette's costume is also on display here, and funny how Flash and Arsenal are written insulting both the costume and her "new attitude", which in the following panels includes bleeped profanity:

Wow, so in order to depict her as more "serious", she has to be portrayed as more profane too? More of what the world needs, naturally. Johns, Raab and Justiniano's take on Flamebird is decidedly one of the worst. Now, here's some panels from 2 issues of the Flash's 2nd volume that were illustrated by Justiniano, 190 and 219. First:

Now, if we were to comment on Justiniano's behavior through this stuff, one could say he didn't listen to victims of sexual abuse when he hoarded child pornography that later got discovered after he accidentally gave a computer memory plug to a staffer at a funeral home. Also, if to comment on the premise of the Trickster himself becoming an FBI agent, even by the surreal standards of a fictional world like the DCU, that's still asking readers to buy a lot, based on all the criminal activities James Jesse performed in earlier stories. And the way the Pied Piper, Hartley Rathaway, is depicted calling upon rats as a backup is honestly disgusting. It should be noted this story alludes to the homosexual status William Messner-Loebs bestowed upon the Piper back in 1990, and one can only wonder if Justiniano took the job guest-penciling this issue as another way to virtue-signal from a leftist perspective. Now from issue 219:

In addition to crude and overrated the artwork looks here, a sign of how Justiniano's art was becoming more mediocre over time, we see for example the disgusting sight of how the Cheetah appears to have murdered a man for the sake of blood as a sacrifice ritual, and then, if we put in again in the context of Justiniano himself, that's awfully rich to depict somebody claiming he's not a villain, when the artist must've thought the same in his own insane way at the time, his criminal offense notwithstanding. Also note how this issue alludes to the repellent Identity Crisis and Dr. Light made out to sound like he's the victim, not Sue Dibny. And then:

How can the artist have committed a serious crime and thought he wasn't crazy? His brain clearly didn't grow with the rest of himself either. Not to mention that again, his artwork looks increasingly galling here too, as is the next panel:

Which again alludes disgustingly to Identity Crisis, and the way some heroines are dragged into the mess in the dialogue is also atrocious. So too is the following:

A few pages prior, Johns' shoddy caricature of the Reverse-Flash told Cheetah he was only seeking to make the Flash a "better hero", but here, this is the result of his causing a police car to explode, murdering 2 officers inside. And then:

An elderly woman is murdered by the Cheetah, making for another atrocious example of how death-violence was becoming much too emphasized at the time. This story was wrapped up in an issue of Wonder Woman it crossed over with. But even there, it was embarrassingly bad, and this story hints at how Justiniano was lending his "talents" to increasingly dark storytelling. On which note, here's another something horrific, a page from Day of Vengeance, which was closely tied to the Infinite Crisis crossover, and written by none other than Bill Willingham:

This is decidedly the only page I'll be posting here, because the way it forced Jean Loring into such a repulsive position - turning her into a much more twisted female version of Eclipso, was unbearably sick. I remember an Ohio newspaper writer saying it looked like one end of a conversation in which a woman is being sexually harassed. This is another example of the kind of increasingly dark and vile stories Justiniano was contributing to, and he must've really enjoyed what he was doing, based on how negative the scripts were to women. As for Willingham, this is exactly why, to date, I couldn't bring myself to buy Fables, because his willingness to write such repellent stories that contradict whatever positive messaging he allegedly had to offer in the Fables series. As a right-winger, one could say he gave the standing a bad name, and in an industry now dominated by leftists, he has to shoulder some blame for perpetuating some of the tactics they uphold, like insulting fanbases. How does Willingham feel about having worked with an artist who turned out to be a pervert? Who knows? All I know is that any continued refusal of his to apologize for participating in Dan DiDio's repellent conduct 2 decades ago speaks volumes. If there's something that shouldn't be reprinted based on the artist's offenses in real life, this would have to be it. Now, here's at least 2 panels from Justiniano's work on a volume of the Creeper back then:

Somehow, this reeks of more liberal propaganda, and honestly sounds stupid regardless. Yet that could explain why the disgraceful Justiniano took this art task.

And when this scene more noticeably makes it sound like the Creeper is some sort of a right-wing villain controlling a left-winger, that's got to be telling too. All that aside, it's disgusting. Now, here's some panels from a miniseries Justiniano drew called - are you ready for this? - Reign in Hell, and it was written by Keith Giffen:

Another disgusting example of where Justiniano was going in terms of art assignments, and the part about the lead "not getting married" decidedly speaks volumes too; notice how the girl's made to look like she's an idiot and the guy with the hat implies women are all jerks or worse. In context of Justiniano's offenses, that could be giving another vital clue what was wrong with him. Now, here's some panels from one of the last projects he worked on, some series DC published based on Will Eisner's Spirit, in a sad example of how a mainstream company that's no longer qualified to handle a famous artist's creations got their mitts on them...and has now tainted them with the art of a bad man:

There's something troubling about the above panels for starters when it involves "bratty" kids causing an annoyance with their sobbing.

And then, what's this? Some attempt to make it sound like the villain called Octopus is trying to brainwash the lady into something perverse? When an artist as awful as Justiniano turned out to be draws something like this, something is terribly wrong.

Oh, and is this some kind of subtle insult to Ellen Dolan, made worse by conveying it through the mouth of another woman? It certainly serves as an example of how profanity was really becoming used in ridiculous, heavy handed ways by this time.

"Through with female bodies"? Again, we have something that, viewed in context of the scoundrel artist, winds up being fishy.

And what's this, an attempt to disguise the artist's twisted mindset by having a woman be the one to do something potentially scummy? Well, it's certainly fishy and irritating viewed in that context. I know there were a number of Golden Age stories where Dennis Colt took on villainesses, but here, it all takes on a whole new meaning under Justiniano.

Now here, this is a rare example for its time where Islamic terrorism is alluded to, but they make it look like even Indians pull such monstrosities, for example, and that's offensive. Also disturbing is the realization the Octopus here could be a metaphor for the USA, which would make it another leftist example of claiming westerners sell and fund their own destruction.

Now it's not like the French are saints, but the way this story makes them out to look bad, as in the case of the lady crook, or just plain stupid, as in the case of the male detective, has gotten old and rotten 10 million years ago. And again, when somebody like Justiniano is the artist, what's seen here takes on a whole new meaning. Not to mention that by today's standards, considering what France has been victimized by today, that's another reason this story hasn't aged well.

Here's another something that's been massively damaged viewed in light of Justiniano's crimes. Also note how the broadcast is on "Pox News", apparently their idea of a stealth insult to Fox broadcasting, and the following character in the next panels reeks of a potential metaphor for conservative-run companies:

It wouldn't surprise me if the bigwig Dennis Colt is confronting were a metaphor for figures like Rupert Murdoch. Otherwise, chances DC would actually publish this drivel misusing Eisner's creation are minimal. And then, look how they bring up Andy Warhol's point about 15 minutes of fame. That's what Justiniano brought himself in the end when he was arrested for illegally storing child porn.

Anyway, it's been about 15 years since Justiniano's worthless career collapsed, and while I realize the above panels may not all entirely reflect his political outlook alone, since the writers obviously are the primary source of such viewpoints, it's still possible they could offer what to think about when it comes to Justiniano's twisted viewpoints, and could explain why he took the assignments in his shoddy career that was built almost entirely upon guest penciling, and became increasingly mediocre or worse by the time he was arrested. What he did to Flamebird - and especially to Jean Loring - is decidedly inexcusable. I find it embarrassingly bad that any artists on Deviant Art would draw illustrations of Bette Kane wearing the outfit Justiniano concocted, which pales horribly next to the design Perez drew for her in the late 80s, and hope there's artists out there who're willing to draw something dedicated more to Perez's designs. It'd also be highly appreciated if there's any artists willing to draw illustrations of Jean Loring dedicated to her image as a good girl too. Thank goodness what I've seen of Starfire on Deviant Art has more that's dedicated to Perez's costume designs for her from 45 years ago.

And let's hope we never see Justiniano trying to reenter the art profession again. He really was a bad influence, and his use of a pseudonym has to be quite telling too.

More examples from specialty forums of people who criticize fictional characters instead of how they're written

I decided to look around at what message boards dedicated to discussion of comicdom there are on the web, and of course there are still some, long after sites like Silver Bullet Comics have vanished, and see how people talk about how the old and new are written. And if the following example from Classic Comics Forum is any indication, sadly, there are still only so many misguided souls out there who vehemently refuse to recognize the distinctions between fiction and real life, and don't recognize that a fictional character's not at fault for how he/she has been written, or even illustrated, by the writers/artists. Here, we have a sad example of somebody ragging on Jean Loring from the Silver Age Atom as though she were a real person on January 18, 2025, and the 5th line is particularly laughable as it's pathetic:

Did anyone actually ever like Jean Loring?

Because i didn't.

Even before the whole cheating on him deal…

…in 1983’s Sword of The Atom #1 (and everything that came after), i honestly never cared for the character.

She wasn’t (imo) on the same level as Lois Lane, Sue Dibney, Iris Allen, or even Steve Trevor in terms of supporting the hero, or just being likable, really.

In a time when it was standard operating procedure for the hero to have a love interest, Ray’s relationship w. Jean always seemed forced to me even as a kid.

Ahem. By that logic, virtually every hero's relationship of the times with the fairer sex was forced, even Spider-Man's and Captain America's with their lady fairs. So instead of delivering the criticism to the doorstep of writer Gardner Fox, and artist Gil Kane, whoever began that thread "projected" onto their creations, all without the slightest consideration that there are real life contributors to DC/Marvel who worked overtime to develop all these characters and whatever personality traits they might've had, and their livelihoods practically depended on it. Furthermore, it sounds like the poster is saying that, because Jean "wasn't on the same level" as the other aforementioned ladies like Lois, and was a cast member in what may be considered a "minor" book and star character, that too, alone, literally makes her "inferior". And the poster also obscures that even Lois was portrayed as a jerk during the Silver Age, quite possibly even more, yet it's Jean who takes the brunt because her minor status makes her the easy target. One of the respondents said:

I didn't read enough to have an opinion. But I HATED what they did to her in Identity Crisis.

Thank goodness we're in agreement on the IC topic. And a vital point can be made that, instead of developing an improved personality or anything more palatable for Jean, they went the classically cheap, shoddy route and made a monster of her. When in whatever stories I read where she appeared, she was far from being written as obnoxious or vulgar, and if she was depicted as law abiding and believing in civilized values, isn't that at least a silver lining? Here's another response:

Jean was a self-assured, very competent criminal attorney who, given the cultural and artistic expectations of the time, was almost a feminist. She was dedicated to her profession, but also by the desire to prove herself in what was obviously a man's world. Ray Palmer, meanwhile, wanted desperately to marry Jean and di[d] all he could as the Atom to help her solve crimes, etc. If their relationship seemed forced in the original series, it may have been because to a certain extent Jean and Ray were switching roles.

It was quite the opposite of what a reader might have expected. Jean and Shierra Hall were good friends to and for each other, both bright, brave women who were forced to live within the now ridiculous standards of both the Silver Age and the America in which it took place.

Her cheating on Ray was just not in character. Might it have occurred as it does in "real life"? Well, sure, probably, but not without laying just a tad more groundwork than what happened in "Sword of the Atom." And what happened to her in the abomination that was "Identity Crisis?" Lurid shocks piled on ridiculous characterization piled on disrespect for what had gone before. Jean and Sue Dibny, both bright successful, strong women became just two more girls in refrigerators. Just no refrigerators in the JLA satellite.

I would argue that, while you may not agree with the notion of divorcing Ray and Jean - and a point can be made that the editorial staff involved was making use of easy examples for DCU cast members with which to carry out this direction - they at least provided the characters with some dignity, and in the Sword of the Atom Special where the divorce comes about, biographer Normal Brawler's book contains Jean's voluntary confession she screwed up. Does that not count as a positive detail on the part of the writer, Jan Strnad? Here's another:

She was annoying at times for sure, but so was Lois. I think if Atom was popular a little later in time so she wasn't always the 'girl lawyer' and fighting to be heard she would have been less annoying.

Agree 100% they did her wrong in Identity Crisis.

But again, let's remember it's the writer's fault, not the non-existant character's. This comment does allude, however, to the hypocrisy of implying Jean was "inferior" to Lois simply because Jean was more of a minor character as opposed to Lois being the co-star of a major, much more widely recognized character like Superman. "Recognizability" is not a reason to be so condescending, which the beginning message is guilty of doing. What should matter is the story merit, which the beginning post doesn't focus on. At least the topic starter thanked those who supported Jean. On which note, if she were depicted as an allusion to feminists of the times, the reason today's SJWs would despise her is because Fox depicted her as a woman who did want to have a child, something that's since become taboo among the more Orwellian leftists. Of course, if Jean and Sue were Black/Latina/Asian, the chances IC would've been published as it was would be far less, which only enforces the perception there's a certain segment of society that's always looking for easy targets, and when they see one isn't so easy to go after, they prey on another. As a result, white protagonists were the foremost cast members turned into scapegoats, but no matter the ethnic background of the victims, that's disgusting, and come to think of it, if the writers thought they could get away with it, even Black Lightning's ex-wife, Lynn Pierce, would've been subject to exactly the same horrific results as Sue and Jean were. Why, even Sapphire Stagg from Metamorpho's stories would've. Next, here's an earlier post from April 27, 2015, where Gambit is brought up:

I'm still reading The Age of Apocalypse: The Complete Epic, Volume Three. It's OK at times. I find Generation Next to be by far the best series. There was one chapter (not Generation Next) that had two of the worst "accent" characters talking with each other and I just about skipped those pages.

I'm also reading Showcase Presents: Wonder Woman, Volume Three, and I'm loving the Andru/Esposito art. And the Mouse Man appearances. I wish there were more of those! What I'm not loving are the "Wonder Family" Impossible Tales. There are too many of these.

The big question I'm dealing with now is: Who do I hate more? Gambit or Wonder Tot?

I'm going with Gambit. One of the worst characters ever.

No, it's the writing that's loathsome, not the character. If this poster said that was Gambit was "the worst written character ever", that would've made more sense logically. If anything is to be disliked, it's the scriptwriting by scribes like Scott Lobdell, if to name a notable example. How strange he doesn't come up in discussion in the above messages, if anywhere. Oh, and how did the characters get their accents, by the way? Don't they know the scriptwriter's at fault for that? Pathetic. And, here's a post from a thread on December 12, 2024, another where Gambit is spoken about:

I can cure you, folks. (£50 via PayPal)

I used to want complete runs of, say, Iron Man (one of my favourite Marvel characters growing up), but as I got older, I realised, do you really need EVERY issue? I don’t like Gambit, so if one issue was to feature an Iron Man/Gambit crossover, I could quite easily let that one slip by.

The completist mentality still exists in some form for me. I had to read every Peter David Hulk story (which I did, a mixture of Marvel Unlimited and physical copies) because I like how David handled the character, one arc aside. I’d like to read the complete runs of DC Comics’ Star Trek and Star Trek: TNG as I have enjoyed what I did read. But I’m trying not to be completist about everything. I used to be very, very pedantic about it.

Tsk tsk tsk. Again, even a fictional character like Gambit, supposed to be a reformed thief, is not at fault for what mistakes Scott Lobdell and maybe even Fabian Nicieza made over 30 years ago. It would be the fault of whoever would be writing even an Iron Man issue guest starring the Ragin' Cajun, and even the fault of the editors, if they wouldn't allow the writer to develop a personality more palatable for Remy LeBeau. Oh yes, even Wonder Tot from WW's Silver Age stories, is just a work of fiction, and if the whole approach doesn't appeal to you, that's one thing, but to say an infant-like character is the guilty party is just another shoddy substitute for logic and objectivity. Why, even science fiction animals like Krypto the Superdog aren't at fault, if it matters. Now, here's another thread about the Flash from February 24, 2025, and the victim of illogic this time, perhaps unsurprisingly, is Barry Allen:

My brother read The Flash in the mid- to late 1970s. I mostly read Marvel, but I read my brother’s comics just because they were in the house. I’ve never collected Flash comics, mostly because I think Barry Allen is kind of dull, but I have long had a certain affection for the rogues gallery.

My brother was not reading comics anymore by 1981, but I was, and I remember seeing the ads for the Trial of the Flash, and I probably flipped through a few issues at the drugstore. I seem to remember buying an issue from around #315 where Grodd was the villain. I can’t resist Grodd.

I’ve read a little bit about this era online, and I have long been kind of curious about how they sustained the storyline for such a long time. But not curious enough to actually seek out these comics or look to see if there’s ever been a reprint collection.

Well waddaya know, here's somebody else who fell into one of the worst traps of illogic in readership history, and instead of arguing he thought Cary Bates' writing was dull, he claims a fictional character is. And makes matters worse by implying villains are more worth celebrating. Even if the Flash's rogues were written more with a sense of honor than some other villains may have been, that's still no excuse. Most sickening is that what the person is saying there could also have been said about Spider-Man's rogues' gallery, and entirely possible Peter Parker could've been belittled too. That's right, let's not think it impossible. However, here, amazingly enough, is a message where the writer/artist do come up:

As I said elsewhere, Flash was a sporadic book for me, through the 70s. I generally liked the character and read the Bates/Novick stuff and Bates stories with other collaborators, up through the death of Iris and the apparent death of Prof Zoom (both recovered). It was a nice book to visit, now and again, but I never amassed a sustained run, apart from digital files of everything, in more recent years.

I had issue #300, my last pre-Crisis issue, which was marred by printing issues, in the copies I had (my original and a later replacement). Later Infantino, I find, depends greatly on his inker. I've seen bits and pieces that I liked, but a lot more I didn't. I liked the bulk of his Marvel output, especially when inked by Steve Leialoha. I had work that he did for Archiie/Red Circle (The Comet), Eclipse (The Heap back-up story, in Airboy) and Pied Piper/Innovation (Power Factor) and the results were not good. However, I thought he and Frank McLaughlin did a bang up job on the Danger Trail mini, from 1993, with a King Faraday adventure (one of Carmine's previous books). I suspect deadline and enthusiasm had a lot to do with how his later stuff worked, in conjunction with the inker and any health factors at play.

Here, the poster will earn points for acknowledging the existence of writers/artists like Cary Bates and Irv Novick, and the first issue of the Flash I read (230) was from around the Bronze Age, at the time the latter was the artist, much as the former was the writer. And a valid/reasonable argument could be made that likability depends on how the writer handles everything too. It sure is funny though, how Golden Age characters all but escape these kind of shoddy "my hero is better than yours" quarrels on these message boards. Just because by the Silver Age, they were no longer considered most relevant compared to their successors of the times, the message boarders will give the Golden Agers a pass up to a point, but not the Silver Agers? Weird, but lest we forget that, if so-called readers let the illogic of attacking fictional characters get the better of them, they can't be surprised if the end result of modern comics is bottom of the barrel in terms of story quality.

Someday, I may need to go post on boards like Classic Comics Forum in order to bring my arguments about why fictional characters aren't guilty of "boredom" directly to the people espousing the illogical rants, which they most likely wrote all for the sake of virtue-signaling. And why it's the writers/artists/editors who have to be recognized as the guilty party in all this mess. But if I do, will they listen? That's the sad question that only time can answer, so someday, we'll see how things turn out. For now, a terrible shame some people still stick with lack of logic in their dubious fandom.

Jackson Guice, RIP

Some news of the passing of another comics artist I missed is Jackson Guice, who died at age 63 earlier this month, according to ComicBook:

Comic artist Jackson “Butch” Guice died at the age of 63. Guice worked for Marvel and DC Comics over his decade spanning career. Guice came to prominence on the X-Men book X-Factor, where he was one of the co-creators of Apocalypse, one of the greatest X-Men villains ever, and The Flash, where he helped kick off Wally West’s tenure as the Flash. Guice also drew Action Comics in the early ’90s, drawing chapters of the blockbuster “The Death of Superman”, “World Without a Superman”, “Funeral for a Friend”, “Reign of the Supermen”, and “Return of Superman”. [...]

Chuck Dixon also wrote about his experiences working with Guice. I think there were some impressive moments in Guice's career, like the revival of the Flash solo title in 1987, but The Death and Return of Superman's not what I'd describe as a collosal classic, mainly because of the storyline where the Toyman murdered Cat Grant's son, something which, till this day, hasn't been reversed. And not all Guice's partnerings with writers are something to admire:

Guice’s best work for a lot of fans was Resurrection Man. Written by the team of Dan Abnett and Andy Lanning, Resurrection Man followed Mitch Shelley, a man who resurrected after he died with a different superpower each time. Resurrection Man ran through 1997 to 1999 for 28 issues — #1-27 and #1,000,000 — and Guice’s work really gave the book its own visual identity. Guice was that kind of artist; his work seemed simple, but his style was one of a kind. Guice worked with some of the best writers in the history of the modern comic medium — Mark Waid, Brian Michael Bendis, Chris Claremont, Warren Ellis, Abnett and Lanning, and many more. While his output slowed down in the ’10 and ’20s, he’s a true legend and will be dearly missed. Go find his Resurrection Man; you’ll be happy you did.

Resurrection Man may be worth the price of admission, but his work with Bendis, and even Ellis? Please. Once again, a case of sugarcoatings in effect. Even Waid's not exactly somebody we can fully appreciate at this point. It should also be considered that while the Death and Return of Superman may have been a "blockbuster", this obscures any objective view of the story merit, which was not enough. And lest we forget, the story also set up what was to come with Green Lantern in Emerald Twilight and Zero Hour.

There are some good examples of work in Guice's resume, including X-Factor from the late 80s. But he also unfortunately - yet perhaps not surprisingly - has some pretentious items to his record as well from since the late 2000s. And it's a shame a talented artist has to lend his skills at all costs to products that are more like spam, and have only dampened the medium since the turn of the century.

Mark Waid brings back Gorilla Grodd long past the time it might've once worked

In this Newsarama interview on Yahoo Entertainment, Mark Waid talks about DC's new variation on Marvel's "One World Under Doom", here being a Justice League story spotlighting Gorilla Grodd as a prime adversary:

The past and present of the DC Universe are colliding in the upcoming story We Are Yesterday, in which Justice League Unlimited and Batman/Superman: World's Finest will crossover as heroes of multiple eras take on Grodd, the psychic gorilla warlord, and his new/old incarnation of the Legion of Doom.

Mark Waid is writing both titles, and along with artists Travis Moore, Clayton Henry, Dan McDaid, and Dan Mora, he's crafting a four part event that brings the underrated Grodd to the forefront, pulling together threads that have been dangling throughout his Justice League Unlimited run as well as World's Finest.

Well he's doing so far too late, though it's worth noting Geoff Johns' take on Grodd from the early 2000s was very poor, and made the anthropomorphic ape look more like a violent brawler - and potentially carnivorous - than a cunning master planner for world conquest. That told, a company wide crossover spanning issues from every possible title is not the way to go, and if that's the case here too, they're only perpetuating a bad farce by keeping on with something they know perfectly well only makes it harder to afford on the one hand, and takes away stand-alone storytelling value on the other. And as for "underrated", even there, writing merit must apply before making the argument.

Newsarama: Mark, We Are Yesterday is the first big Justice League crossover of the current era of the DC Universe. Contrasting that with the final event of the previous status quo, Absolute Power, this story feels like a much more straightforward hero vs. villain story with the League taking on Grodd. How did you come to this concept as the way to go for this story?

Mark Waid: It actually began with the fact that World's Finest #38 and #39 and Justice League Unlimited #6 and #7 needed different artists to give the regular artists time to catch up. So I said, well, let's make it special. Let's do something where those four issues don't feel like fill-ins in their big events.

It sprang from that, and then I realized, OK, I need a menace big enough. Who can we get? Well, the Legion of Doom makes sense… Except they're not around in the current day. So how do we fix that? Everything became a domino toppling over another domino. And when it's all said and done, we've got a story.

Well gee, isn't Darkseid from the New Gods a pretty good example for a formidable warlord? I'm sure the Legion of Super-Heroes has some examples too. But again, under the kind of management DC's had for too long, corporate or otherwise, this just won't work out, and won't be as "special" as Waid wants it to be.

You've done stories that connect the past and future of the DC Universe before - I'm thinking of the Devil Nezha arc that led into Lazarus Planet, for example. In the case of We Are Yesterday, the connection is even more direct between past and present. What led you to want to bring these two timelines together in such a tangible way?

Well, like you said, I like doing that with World's Finest to remind people that it is not an Elseworlds. It is not, you know, it is not out of continuity. Even though it takes place a few years ago, we remind you every once in a while that it has a place in the DC Universe. So that was my starting point. But then I started thinking about Grodd and his motivations and his goals. You know, Grodd wants something big. I mean, he's got to take on the entire Justice League Unlimited. So to do that, he really wants to put the band back together, right? But he can't really. Luthor's reformed. Sinestro is off planet. You know, Joker is god only knows where - there's no way to put them together the way they are today.

But he, with the help of Airwave, he realizes he can put them back together, back in the day, go to them and say, "I got news for you. I'm from the future, and not much happens in the next five years. You know, you don't make a whole lot of headway. As a matter of fact, you lose a lot of ground. So why don't you come with me to the present day, and we will shake things up."

And here's something very sad about this story: Airwave, the hero whom, IIRC, is a cousin of Hal Jordan/Green Lantern with a similar name, is being turned criminal, just like GL himself was in 1994. More on that soon. For now, let me note it's obviously laughable if they want to depict Lex "reformed", because that was already done with the Green Goblin 15 years ago in one of Marvel's crossovers (Siege), and was nothing more than a forced storyline for the sake of suddenly depicting a scummy villain as a goody.

I'm glad you brought up Grodd, because I feel like he's such an underrated villain, with so much potential to be this kind of mastermind at the heart of a threat to the entire DC Universe. I just want to talk a little bit about Grodd and how you came to him as the main threat here. Obviously you have a long history with his arch-enemy the Flash.

Well, I mean, it made sense to me, in that I like Grodd's motivation. Grodd's motivation is, humans keep screwing up the world. So why do we have them? Let's make it not just Gorilla City, but Gorilla Planet.

I'm also reflective of the fact that he was Flash's first really big villain. People don't remember that he appeared in three consecutive issues of Flash. When he first appeared, Mirror Master was showing up like every five issues, and you know, Captain Boomerang is showing up every 10 issues, but Grodd right off the bat was meant to be his arch-enemy, and that's kind of fallen by the wayside over the years.

So let's get that back on the table, because he is a lot more powerful than most people give him credit for, especially now that his powers have augmented to the point where he is now the most powerful telepath and mentally powered character in the DC universe.

Ahem. There is potential to depict Grodd as a formidable villain in such stories, but not if the writing is terrible, and Waid hasn't exactly proven himself the best writer in years already. And as for claiming "nobody remembers"? That's not the case. Rather, it's if nobody knows the history or does the research. I have some Silver Age Flash archives (and someday, might be able to replace them with the new DC Finest archives), so I'm familiar with some of this history. Perhaps if Waid were to encourage audiences to look for reprint archives, then we could be getting somewhere in terms of story knowledge, but I guess he'd rather everybody pay more attention to his modern writing than that of the past, including his own 90s Flash stories. And as for augmentation, I assume that's alluding to a more recent storyline, but again, DC's output has been worthless for 2 decades now. And now, here's the sad part about where Waid took a certain minor player, whom I think was created by the late Denny O'Neil in the late 70s:

Back to We Are Yesterday, this story is happening in part because the Justice League were betrayed by someone they trusted. Airwave.

Sadly true.

Yes, sadly true and sad for Airwave. I like that character. I hope it's not the last we'll ever see of him here.

That's really a shame, isn't it?

Grodd was pretty ruthless.

Yes.

What I want to ask though is, how will what's happening in this story and what happened with Airwave affect the Justice League Unlimited mission going forward, with this massive roster and the way they've been approaching heroes and building out the ranks?

They are going to have to re-examine their protocols, and they are going to have to be a little more judicious about vetting the candidates. At first it was, let's throw the doors open to everybody, which was a good instinct. But Superman trusts everybody. You know you have to earn Superman's mistrust, whereas Batman is the exact opposite. You have to earn Batman's trust. And Wonder Woman is somewhere in the middle. So this is going to spill out into a confrontation between all three of them, which, by the way, gives me the idea for issue 10, which is great. I should write this down real quick.

This is another example of a "hero gone bad" story that's become very irritating, mainly because of how obvious it is that, because Airwave's a minor character, they think that alone makes it instantly okay to exploit him like tissue paper and turn him into a criminal, all because they believe not a single person who reads this will give a damn. It's also supremely silly at this point how Superman's depicted as more naive than trying to judge by personal character, and couldn't his superpowers make it possible for Kal-El to detect whether somebody's lying, or couldn't there be a story written where he builds a lie detector? Or, where WW uses her enchanted lariat to determine anything? If I'm correct, her creator William Marston invented an early version of polygraphs in his time. For now, what matters is how writers like Waid keep sticking to some very absurd traits for the heroes in focus, all for the sake of shoving them into a conflict, and if memory serves, this kind of insulting direction was also taken during the Infinite Crisis crossover too, in an example of forced storytelling where heroes are clashing with each other, with the worst part being that at the time, it had what to do with the repulsive Identity Crisis. At the interview's end:

On that note, how will We Are Yesterday kind of set up what's coming next in the DC Universe? We've heard about a crossover with the JSA, the next stages of what's going on with the Omega Energy. How is We Are Yesterday a key to that?

How do I answer this? I mean, it's absolutely key to this. The events of We Are Yesterday are a complete story. I don't want to give anybody the impression that we're only giving you part of a story that leads into the next part that, leads into the next part, like you're never getting a sense of closure. It is a complete story, but there are consequences to it that will very much, starting with Justice League Unlimited #9, lead out into the next big happening in the DC Universe. So there is a definite connection there.

They vehemently refuse to stop relying so heavily on crossovers, and that's saying all one needs to know about what's long gone wrong with corporate-owned universes and their storytelling efforts. The interviewer, predictably, raises nary a query about whether this is a healthy practice, and indeed it's not. That Waid so willingly participates even remotely in these line-wide crossovers is telling too, explaining why he's long become irrelevant, and that this story with Grodd is in any ways a crossover is why it won't age well either.

The history of Mike Baron's Flash run (volume 2)

Cowboy State Daily tells the history of the 2nd Flash volume's storyline where the villainous Vandal Savage antagonized 3rd Flash Wally West, in a storyline written by Mike Baron at the time the Scarlet Speedster series was being relaunched in 1987:

Former Thermopolis resident Brett Belleque was shopping for comics at a Goodwill store in Salem, Oregon, when he picked up the oldest one it had: 1987’s The Flash (Volume 2) No. 2: “Savage Showdown!,” written by Mike Baron.

“I’m a Batman and Flash guy, so I picked it up and started looking through the pages,” he told Cowboy State Daily. “Lo and behold, there was Thermopolis, Wyoming. I had to read it twice. It blew my mind.”

Thermopolis is a genuine point of contention in this comic book clash between Wally West, the third Flash, and perennial DC Comics villain, big-bad Vandal Savage.

In a story where a supersonic speedster fights an immortal caveman, Thermopolis might be the strangest thing in the story.

I own the whole tale myself as part of a paperback titled "Savage Velocity", and it's pretty good (one day, I may want to buy an omnibus reprinting this and some of William Messner-Loebs' followup work). Baron's work on Flash at the time was impressive, though some may understandably question the wisdom of depicting Wally West running an affair with Christina McGee, a scientist who was possibly a dozen years his senior. (This of course was subsequently dropped, and Linda Park, who was more around his age, became the girlfriend when Messner-Loebs took up writing.) The run was also notable for depicting Wally developing a massive need to eat, in order to keep his superpowers working properly. This would continue under Messner-Loebs, though afterwards, it was certainly downplayed.

When the reporter takes to interviewing Baron, Nexus and Badger are brought up:

Baron’s other comic achievements include Nexus, an award-winning comic series he co-created with Steve Rude, the costumed crimefighter Badger, a Vietnam War veteran with multiple personalities that he continues to write for today, placing it among the most successful and longest-running independent superhero comics.

“Badger’s only superpower is that he can talk to animals,” he said. “Jeff Butler wanted to draw Druids, but Capitol Comics wanted a costumed superhero. So, I thought, ‘why would anybody put on a costume and fight crime? They have to be crazy.’ And bam!”

Regarding the former, one can only wonder if it would win awards or any kind of positive regard today from leftists, since there were some who turned against Baron later, and refused to give him any kind of support, moral or otherwise, when he developed Private American as a crowdfunded independent comic. Nexus was a sci-fi metaphor for the Communist era, and in the past decade, Communism became more acceptable among leftists, ironically or not. I wouldn't be shocked if the same bunch had no interest in Badger either.

When Mike Gold was hired as an editor by DC Comics, he hired Baron to write for Wally West’s version of the Flash. With an immense toy chest of characters, settings and plots at his disposal, he wrote Flash with the same approach he always used when writing comics.

“I take their characters very seriously, try to stay in character, and honor the heritage,” he said. “I approached Punisher as a straight crime comic. There was no time travel or dinosaurs or nonsense like that.

“I ripped stories from the headlines, so Punisher went up against drug smugglers, serial killers, motorcycle gangs, and crooked reverends and bankers. He fought Daredevil and Kingpin, but those are also fairly realistic characters.”

Baron took Flash seriously too. Even with the superpowers, magic and the immortal caveman, the story is pretty grounded for a comic.

Though depending how you see it, the storyline with Chester P. Runk (Chunk), the chubby engineer who gets combined with a matter transmitter that enables him to become a human teleportation device was surreal as you can get. If there was something I appreciated about Loebs' followup run, it's that he brought back Chunk, and made use of him as a recurring cast member for some time, and it's a terrible shame that later writers like the overrated Geoff Johns forced Chunk into a mighty awful story or two years later.

As for the Punisher, a shame they don't get into how, by the turn of the century, Marvel's contributors by that time were ruining everything the Punisher was all about, including Garth Ennis and Jason Aaron, whose stories should be avoided at all costs. It's decidedly also a shame if Baron never wrote about topics like Islamic terrorism, unless maybe Marvel editorial refused to accept any such story pitches. Nor do they get into the whole issue surrounding Private American. But, here's why Baron stopped writing Flash after a year or so:

Baron wrote 14 issues of The Flash before moving on to other projects. Even in the infinite possibilities of the DC Universe, there were only so many places he felt he could take Wally West.

“The only reason I gave up Flash was that I didn’t know what to do with the character,” he said. “That would not happen today, but I gave it up because I didn’t know what to do with the character.”

This brings up an interesting subject that's not really new: writers who don't know what to do, or what kind of storylines they can write employing specific characters. IIRC, it was the reason given by Gerry Conway when he was writing Spider-Man in 1973 that led to Gwen Stacy dying at the hands of the Green Goblin at the George Washington Bridge in NYC, and I think Marv Wolfman once said he left writing Superman after a year or so in the late 80s because he didn't know what else he could write for the Man of Steel. There's something worrisome about saying you don't know what to do with a major or minor character, because it may have led to later, corrupt editorials exploiting such notions for casually killing off any character they thought was expendable, which is objectionable, because it's not like writers are or should be obligated to make massive use of a character they can't think of what do with. All they and the editors need do is just put the characters in limbo if it really matters, or they can just relegate them to minor use like brief conversations around an office.

That said, I'm convinced such a notion as not knowing what to do with various characters was really a shield for taking character drama apart, by the very same who pretend they do want to specialize in character drama. Such laziness has to cease, and editors/writers who defend such reprehensible conduct have to be called out for it.

Anyway, that said, I highly appreciate that a press source is drawing attention to one of the more overlooked storylines in comics history, one that writers post-2000 did not respect in any way. And those who'd like to read Baron's take on the Scarlet Speedster are lucky it's been available in trade collections for some time.