Issue Review: Supergirl 25

The Oracle watches as parts of the time-stream are being destroyed by H'el, while Superboy, Supergirl, and Superman try to prevent it.  In the distant past H'el attempts to stab Kara with the Kryptonite shard she used on him, but she breaks free.  Meanwhile, in the more recent past, Superman watches his mother tell his father that they are about to have a baby (him).  Superboy and Kara from before she became Supergirl fight against the Eradicator, who Superboy sends to Smallville through a space-time portal.  The H'el of two time periods merges, bringing Superboy and present-day Supergirl back together.  Then Supergirl launches a final attack to destroy H'el.

The people in charge at DC Comics need to have their heads examined

When I was a kid, and I did something that didn't make any sense, my mother would say to me, "You really should have your head examined."  This was her way of asserting that I wasn't thinking clearly -- that, in fact, I was engaging in such murky thinking that my illogic rose to the level of a clinically diagnosable condition.  She was, of course, using hyperbole. But to this day, whenever someone does something that is so illogical that I can't imagine anyone thinking it makes sense, I will wonder out loud if he should have his head examined.

Today, I am wondering just that about the people in charge of DC comics -- the editors and "front office" people.  Only in this case, I am not using hyperbole. I am actually wondering whether these people are in need of honest-to-goodness psychiatric evaluation.  And I find myself believing strongly that they do need professional help.

Why do I say the people in charge of DC need to have their heads examined?  Because they have been making decisions, for years now, that I just don't think anybody sane could possibly make under any circumstances.   I could cite any number of obvious examples about their bone-headed decision-making process, but today, I want to focus on their refusal to hire incredibly talented creators, while giving jobs on title after title to people whose abilities are mediocre at best.

Case in point: a blog entry last week by long-time comic-book writer and artist Jerry Ordway.  In the blog, he describes, as a fifty-something creator, how difficult it has been for him to get work over the years -- hell, how difficult it is to even get a polite "no thank you" when he inquires as to whether he can have work at all.  That he should be in such a state, groveling for work from DC and getting "talk to the hand" treatment, is incredible to me.

Jerry Ordway, in case you've never heard of him, has been in the comic-book industry (at least nominally) since 1980, although he has gone for more than 10 years without steady, reliable work.  Jerry was well known as an artist, and later a writer, primarily for DC comics.  He inked over Geogre Perez in the famous Crisis on Infinite Earths mini-series, and after that series ended, was responsible for the reboot of the Shazam! franchise, both writing and drawing the Power of Shazam! series for several years.  He also drew many other comics, including Superman and the Justice Society.

At all times, Jerry Ordway turned in top-notch, classical comic-book creations.  His stories were good, and his art was beautiful.  When people my age think of comic-books with fond memories, we are thinking of the creations made by folks like Jerry Ordway.  His work defined many of DC's greatest characters. You would think that someone like this should be in high demand, just as veteran actors or directors are in Hollywood.

But that's not the case.  Instead, Jerry Ordway has been spending years scraping the bottom of the barrel, begging DC comics to give him work.  DC, for their part, has mainly spent the last 10 years ignoring him. And they've ignored many of the other talented guys who came up with Jerry as well.

Their reason for this?  DC would tell you that they are "moving forward" to "better" things.  By this, we must infer that they mean they are hiring "better" artists and writers than Jerry Ordway (or his colleagues like Chuck Dixon, another famous writer from the 80s and 90s who still wants to work in comics but can't find anyone to hire him).

Now I ask you... if you read the New 52 -- where is this "better" talent they claim to have? Who in DC is drawing better layouts than Jerry Ordway used to draw? Who is writing better stories than Chuck Dixon?  About what "talent" does DC have to boast?  They've given the silent treatment to geniuses like Jerry Ordway, but then given top-flight titles to the Scott Lobdells, Grant Morrisons, and Ken Rocaforts of the world.  I ask you... can anyone seriously compare Jerry Ordway's Power of Shazam! from 20 years ago, both in writing and in art, to the absolute sewage being passed off as Superman since New 52 issue 13, and possibly say the new stuff is better?

I submit that anyone who honestly believes Rocafort's indecipherable nonsense scribbling is better than the beautiful lines of Jerry Ordway should have his head examined (or at least his eyes).  I won't even mention Lobdell's impenetrable writings... I don't think anyone with more sanity than the Joker could look at his scripts and find them comprehensible.  And when the two of them team up the produce such a swirling vortex of poor quality that it has made even a die-hard Superman fan like me cry "uncle" and stop collecting the title, you know it has to be bad.

Is that what DC means by "moving on" to "better" things? Incomprehensible stories and indecipherable art?  If they think "talent" means "never letting your readers understand what they are reading", then I guess I can see why Jerry Ordway is having trouble finding work.  But I don't think most comic fans want to be confused and nauseated by what they are reading. I think we want to enjoy good stories and beautiful art -- at least I do.

Here's a news flash for the people at DC: Lobdell and Rocafort aren't from the same planet -- hell, the same universe -- of talent as Jerry Ordway.  Jerry Ordway is whole alternate dimensions better than they are.  Anyone who would employ Lobdell and Rocafort instead of Ordway is crazy.  And that's why I think the higher-ups at DC ought to have their heads examined.

If you are a fan of old school comics -- comics the way they used to be, the way they were meant to be -- please visit Jerry's blog and "+1" his article.  And if you wish, leave him a note to let him know you support him. We can't control what DC does, nor can we force them to get professional help, but one thing we do know is that they always listen to their marketing gurus.  If the marketing types see enough support for Ordway, maybe, just maybe, they will convince the editors to throw him some more reliable work.  Maybe, just maybe, if we're really lucky, we'll see a collaboration between Jerry Ordway and Gail Simone, to boot. Wouldn't that be something special?

And while you're at it, as a sign of protest, join me in refusing to buy any more Superman issues by Lobdell and Rocafort.  It's time we sent a message to DC.

Why I've given up on Superman

Since getting back into the comic-book reading and collecting hobbies, I have been playing catch-up on the +DC Comics New 52 titles.  I began with a number of series I thought I would like, based on my years-past enjoyment of the starring characters.  I began with Supergirl, who is my all-time favorite character, and Batgirl, based on the recommendation of a friend.  After I'd caught up with them, I started working on some other titles.  The next title with which I've gotten caught up is Superman, another long-time favorite of mine, and a series I collected off and on for probably 20 years prior to giving up comics in 1999.

Just a week ago, I reviewed the first year's worth of New 52 Superman issues.  I said then that I had mixed feelings about the title, and that I was still not sure, after 13 issues, whether I was going to be with it for the long term.  The first two story arcs had been problematic, and I felt that the re-told story of Superman had been too fragmentary, broken up between two different books (Superman and Action Comics), and told in a confusing and non-linear fashion within each title.  Character personalities were inconsistent from writer to writer, and the tone of the stories was variable from arc to arc.  Still, last week I was reserving judgment on Superman until I saw what the next creative team was able to do.

I have to say that the new creative team of Scott Lobdell (writer) and Ken Rocafort (artist) made my decision very easy.  I bought digital versions of Superman 13-16, their first four issues, from ComiXology on Tuesday.  Here it is Friday, and I've already made my decision.

I'm done with Superman.

Given that Superman is right up there as one of my favorite classic superhero characters, and that for much of my collecting life I have at least casually read comics involving Superman, you might think that ditching Superman from my pull list would be a difficult decision.  And for sure, that nostalgia for the character kept me with the series for the first 12 issues, despite their decided mediocrity.  However, I don't think I've ever had an easier time dropping a comic-book to which I had previously been attached than I have saying so-long to Superman after issue #17 concludes the H'el story arc.  I have Scott Lobdell to thank for that.

Since returning to reading comic-books, I have read some 100 comic books (ouch, have I really spent that much money in under 3 months?).  Without question, the absolute worst comic-books I have read of the bunch -- even worse than the mess that Grant Morrison created over in Action Comics -- have been the Lobdell/Rocafort Superman issues.  I can't recall when I have seen worse writing in a comic-book than Lobdell's Superman, and Rocafort's art, although perhaps not "bad," is certainly weird.  Indeed, Lobdell's writing is so bad it led one friend of mine to wonder if the guy secretly has some sort of anti-Superman agenda.

If you're wondering why I look with such contempt upon Lobdell's writing on Superman, I will list just a few problems I have with issue #13.  First, the beginning shows Superman at the center of the earth (which incidentally should be solid iron, though it's drawn as if it's regular rock, and which by the way is over 4,000 degrees C). He's being tested by a scientist friend, Dr. Veritas. She tells him that for five days, he has been doing the equivalent of lifting the mass of the earth.

Where do I begin with all the things wrong with just this first couple of pages? How the hell is Veritas' lab in the center of the earth? How did Veritas and whoever built the lab get through 3,000+ miles of molten magma and liquid iron to build it? How does Veritas get in and out?  Why the hell would she build a lab down there in the first place? And why isn't all her equipment in her lab being turned to melted slag from the temperature?  And even assuming such a lab existed, how is she able to determine that Superman can lift the mass of the earth from inside the earth?  I realize that comic-books often play fast and loose with science, but come on.

Worse, even if we allow for all the science mistakes in just that first scene, it wouldn't make the scene any less objectionable, for one reason:  the power level Superman is stated to have.  For many years before the 1985 Crisis series, Superman was a wildly overpowered character. He could move planets around, among other things.  When he was reinvented after Crisis, +DC Comics wisely (yes, I know, using "DC" and "wise" in the same sentence seems an oxymoron, but they were in this rare case) de-powered him.  Sure, he could still lift battleships or juggle 747s, but that's way less powerful than moving planets around.  For decades this more reasonably powered Superman was one of DC's signature heroes -- still the most powerful on Earth, but at least not more powerful than the Earth.  Apparently, DC has decided, of all the "Silver Age" concepts out there (many of which are wonderful), to go back to the "Superman is stronger than a planet" model.  With that very first line of dialog on the very first page of the very first regular issue of Superman that he wrote, Lobdell basically broke Superman as a character.

But if you think that is the end of the problems Lobdell created in this one issue (#13), think again. Because the next thing that happens in the story is that Metropolis is attacked by a giant monster.  And I mean giant. You think Godzilla is big at 30 stories (300 feet) tall? Well, Scott Lobdell is not to be outdone. This creature is a mile long.  Suck on that, Godzilla "king of the monsters." Anything you can do Scott Lobdell can do 10 times better, Godzilla baby.

Honestly after reading this issue, I could not figure out what Scott Lobdell was thinking, or if he was even thinking at all.  One of the supposed hallmarks of modern comic-books is their "gritty realism."  We keep being told that "gone" are the days when superheroes perform silly, Silver-Age style, over-the-top feats like pushing planets around or punching someone into orbit.  And yet, here we have Superman, able to "lift" the earth, fighting a monster that is one mile long, and being hit by the monster so hard that, from Metropolis (USA), Superman lands in Ireland.  These events would be quite at home in Acton Comics from the 1950s... but do they really have a place in Superman of the 2010s?

And yet, the over-exaggerated power level of Superman and the monster in this book pale in comparison to how poorly the characters themselves are written. For example, no sooner does Clark Kent return to his newspaper than he has an argument with Perry White and Lois Lane, and then with the owner of the Daily Planet (Mr. Edge).  In the space of a few panels, Clark erupts with completely unjustifiable rage, ranting about how the news is being confused with entertainment, and how he's not going to take it anymore. He turns to his colleagues to convince them to rise up, to show management who's really in charge, and take back their newspaper.  Leaving aside how badly written the speech itself was, the entire situation was contrived.  If Lobdell wanted to get Superman off the paper and into a different job, fine.  But the way he executed it was simply absurd.

Clark Kent is not Scott Lobdell's only characterization bungle, either.  His portrayal of Lois is ridiculous, making her seem like a petulant child.  And he has completely ignored Jimmy (who is mentioned but never shown). And by the way, when is the last time Jimmy's partner, Miko, was seen in this comic?  Lobdell's not the only one who ignored her (Jurgens and Giffen did in #7-12 also).  I thought comics were serialized fiction. If so, characters shouldn't vanish without explanation (no matter how much the new writer might not "like" them), and they shouldn't change personalities from issue to issue.  Whatever problems I may have had with George Perez's plot in the first Superman story arc, at least the characterization was impeccable.  Lois might have been news director, but she was recognizably Lois, the same Lois you can read about in my early 1980s issues of The Daring New Adventures of Supergirl, or that you can watch in re-runs of the Lois and Clark TV show.  Lobdell's Lois Lane is unrecognizable -- but then, so is his Clark Kent/Superman (and his Supergirl, and just about every other character).

I've read a lot of comic-books in my day (by my estimate, well over 2,000), and many of them were poorly written (some were down-right terrible).  I remember many awful stories, like the Armageddon 2001 crossover, and I've seen many stupid things done to the Man of Steel (like watching him be killed by a mindless brute in a battle where the two of them basically punch each other to death).  But Scott Lobdell, in record time (by the end of his first issue) has vaulted to the very top (or perhaps I should say "bottom") of the pile as the absolute worst writer of Superman I have ever seen.  What the hell he is doing on DC's payroll, let alone writing for their flagship character, I honestly cannot fathom.

Oh, and in case you're tempted to leave a comment to complain that I have made this snap judgment in only one issue (#13), I have read the rest (#0, #14-16) -- 5 issues total by Lobdell -- and it's not gotten any better.  His stories are disorganized. His dialogue is stilted. His characterizations are wildly inaccurate (no, it's not OK to take over a comic book that has gone 13 issues already and just make a character act completely different -- comic books have something called continuity that is supposed to be respected by writers and editors).   And his insistence on using throw-back Silver Age over-the-top power levels for Superman and the villains is indefensible -- it would only work if the New 52 reboot had made the entire universe return to a Silver Age setting (which is not the case).

And so, less than a week and five issues after Perez, Jurgens, and Giffen left me saying "I don't know" about Superman, Scott Lobdell has caused me to wave good-bye, and good-riddance, to the Man of Steel.  I may check back one day when Lobdell leaves the title, but until he does, there is no way in "H'el" that I will ever buy a Scott Lobdell-written Superman again.

The good news is, with Superman off my 'pull list,' I will have room for something else.  DC has screwed their universe up so much, I think it's time to look at some indies...