[legiongeekswoon]Science Police...![/legiongeekswoon]
Spoilers Supergirl - Season 2
- Thread starter Commander Richard
- Start date
To be fair, though, Peter was working on Supergirl at a time when the DC higher-ups were adamant that Superman was the sole survivor of Krypton. So Supergirl had to be something other than Clark's cousin Kara, no matter who was writing the book. I mean, the version of Supergirl before Peter's run, as created by John Byrne and developed by Dan Jurgens and other writers later, was a purple shapeshifting blob named Matrix that ended up as a gullible, doting sex toy of the clone of Lex Luthor while he was pretending to be his own heroic, long-lost Australian son. It's hard to think of that as Supergirl either. Peter inherited Byrne's Matrix Supergirl and brought her closer to her pre-Crisis roots by merging her with Linda Danvers.
^ And had the post-Crisis Linda actually meet and switch places with the pre-Crisis Kara Zor-El, retroactively making it so that pre-Crisis Kara actually took her 'Linda Lee' alias from post-Crisis Linda (whose middle name was Lee).
Didn't they introduce her before Gotham premiered? Although I guess that doesn't rule out the ban since Amanda Waller and the Suicide Squad had to be gotten rid of even though they had been introduced long before the movie came out.
I wasn't a fan of that Supergirl either. I'd rather they left the character alone or gave Power Girl the title.
Gotham'season licensing agreement doesn't give them 'exclusive' access to Batman characters; it gives the unrestricted access to said characters.
But they do military cops "Military Police".
That said, I prefer the name Special Crimes Unit as well.
It's pretty clear that the Science Police are going to exist separately from the DEO, which has been in existence for over a decade at this point.
At the end of COIE, Power Girl replaced Supergirl as Superman's cousin. That was IN the last pages of COIE. The problem came later when Byrne rewrote Superman, he directly contradicted what was in the Crisis. Byrne was also responsible for making a mess out of the LSH by removing Superboy from Superman's history.
One of the things that people tend to forget is that it wasn't really COIE that messed up continuity it was what came after.
In retrospect I really don't think Byrne did very much good for Superman, outside of making Superman's adopted parents still be alive. besides that, he mostly seemed to create the worst of the stuff that's stuck with Superman. His Marvel work was great, but he just seemed to have some weird ideas about Superman.
I think his reboot would have worked better if he had been under greater editorial control. One of the points of the editors is to make sure everything fits together. Somebody had to be there to tell --hey Superboy needs to exist because backstories of all these other characters are dependent on him. --hey there has to be at least one other survivor of Krypton because Power Girl has already been established as his cousin.
What really worked for Superman was keeping the Kents alive as a moral compass, bringing down his power levels to something more akin to Thor's level, making Kryptonite more scarce, his take on Lex Luthor, and removing the clumsy Clark Kent.
I believe they originally substituted Valor (formerly Mon-El) for Superboy. Superboy was eventually reintroduced about eight years ago just before the new 52 reboot.
I don't know really as I didn't read those books--I think it had something to do with the post Infinite Crisis changes.
Nope. Basically, the original Legion (from before the 5 year gap Keith Giffen wrote, which was before the other two complete reboots of the Legion) came back during their Final Crisis tie in, and they are the future of the main (originally pre-New 52) Earth. Geoff Johns reintroduced Superboy's adventures with them back into continuity by saying that Clark was Superboy, but only in the future. Basically, when Superman was a teen (probably around 15) he met the Legion when he was just Clark Kent in Smallville, hiding his powers. Saturn Girl, Lightning Lad and Cosmic Boy just wanted to say hello and say they admired him for who he'd become, but seeing people his age with powers made him want to spend time with them.
So, they let him join the Legion and he would periodically go with them to the future (spending time there and then coming back the second he left, because of time travel) and he'd fight crime with them as Superboy, then come back to Earth and just be Clark Kent. So, he was Superboy, but only in the future. This means that the "present day" Earth only ever knew him as Superman, and Superboy technically didn't exist as far as the people in Clark's present were concerned. But, the Future adventures with Superboy all happened.
Byrne was more than aware what would happen if he eliminated Superboy. He even had a plan that didn't require it. DC Editorial said go ahead and eliminate Superboy. Byrne asked about the impact on the LSH and Editoral told him don't worry about it they'll handle it.
I dont think PG was set up as Superman`s cousin in COIE. At the end they're mourning the deaths of the E-2 Superman and the E-1 Supergirl. They recall them and the old continuity. The end of COIE presents a very different universe than the one we see in Man of Steel and other books that started after COIE.
I dont think PG was set up as Superman`s cousin in COIE. At the end they're mourning the deaths of the E-2 Superman and the E-1 Supergirl. They recall them and the old continuity. The end of COIE presents a very different universe than the one we see in Man of Steel and other books that started after COIE.
I think it's a fair bet that most people who remember the Disney animated Hercules movie, remember it more for James Woods as Hades than the title character. I've seen that movie twice and can barely recall any non-Hades related details, beyond the superficial.
I suspect part of the trouble is that there's no *definitive* version of these characters. Sure, depending when you grew up some versions might to come mind soon than others be they Costner, Flynn, Fairbanks (or for me, it's this guy, because this!) but none of them *are* Robin Hood the way Chris Reeves is still Superman for most people. Same goes from King Arthur despite according to this, new versions of him are coming in thick and fast. It's like trying to think of a definitive portrayal of 'Romeo and Juliet', 'Sherlock Holmes' or any of those fictional characters in the nativity play. The characters are simply more famous than the people playing them for anything to have any real traction.
I think I'm going to call this the 'reboot event horizon', that is the point beyond which people stop bitching about all the reboots and just accept it as the next in an endless series of retelling of a timeless story.
So by that highly scientific and precise metric, Superman, Batman and Spider-Man ain't quite there yet.
While it's certainly possible, I think it's still waaaay too early to make that assertion. Give it another century or three.
That said, when I listed Arthur and Robin Hood, I realised those were pretty Anglocentic examples so I tried to think of some American examples and came up dry...apart from Superman. So I guess what I'm saying is that at least as far as the US is concerned, Superman is the closest thing they have to such a figure that's all their own. So at the moment, while he's not quite on par with those others, there's not much in the way of long term competition...except perhaps Darth Vader. But still, time will tell.
Mind you, I couldn't think of many other such figures period. Oh sure, I know me some Greeco Roman myths, some ancient Egyptian cosmology and even some random fables from Norse, African, Chinese, Japanese and Australian Aboriginal, but no figures that were anywhere near as well known (at least in vague terms) as those three.
Give it another century or 3? Hmm. I wonder what 23rd century versions of DC Heroes and other modern fiction would even be like? What would Superman stories and fiction be like for the denizens of the Federation? Haha.
If they survive at all they'll probably be about the same in terms of content. It's not like Robin Hood has changed massively in the last four or five centuries. What will change is the tone and context since that's usually a reflection of the times they're made and reinterpreted in.
Maybe the story of Superman will be re-interpreted to emphasise the politics of interplanetary refugees, which becomes relevant once the Tenctonese show up.
Similar threads
