Pretty, Fizzy Paradise

I'm back! And reading! And maybe even blogging! No promises!

Wednesday, September 19, 2007

I hate Starman (JSA version)

Okay, I've held it in long enough.

Starman is really fucking irritating. And by Starman, I mean the JSA ex-old Legion member not the Robinson version.

It's particularly annoying because I really am enjoying JSA right now. Yes, even with the gratuitous Kingdom Come stuff...(as I see it, defining KC as a separate universe and bringing in THAT Superman pretty much firmly separates this DCU from that one anyway, so I can enjoy the parts that were borrowed with impunity.) I'm particularly looking forward to seeing KC Superman turn evil.

I'm just extrapolating from the Countdown image here, but that's my guess.

I've been really enjoying the other new characters too. Jessie and Grant aren't NEW new characters, but they're coming into their own on the team. And Nathan and Maxine are just incredibly cute. As is new Baby!Wildcat.

But Starman? Has LONG worn out his welcome.

Part of it's just that I have very little patience for "zany" characters. I only have room in my heart for one character who is "crazy" in the sense of abject silliness, non-sequiters and wisecracks and that's H.M. Murdock. I don't need anymore, thank you.

See, I like crazy. I do. Crazy is interesting. Mental illness is interesting. Characters that see the world just that bit off kilter are interesting. The thing is, there's a difference between "crazy" and "wacky".

Or god help me, "crazy" and "stupid".

Oh and don't get me started on the interspersing a "wacky" character with "OMG!SERIOUS" moments. The only thing more annoying than a poorly done wacky character is when people try to argue "No! Really! He's SERIOUS AND TRAGIC!" (I don't care how much you make Slobo go blind and have insight, a TEENAGED LOBO created from the blood of a TEENAGED LOBO made so during Sins of Youth is NOT a tragic character, Mr. David.)

I was willing to give Starman a pass early on, and during the Lightning Saga because he did have a fairly decent role to play in that plot. But that was with the expectation that at the end, there would be either the payoff of him BECOMING SANE* or GOING AWAY NOW.

*I would not necessarily say ALL crazy characters should become sane. Just...again, difference between "crazy" and "wacky". "Wacky" gets really really old MUCH faster.

Seriously, I read JSA for the characters, legacies, and the continuity porn. Starman's a redundant legacy (Stargirl's perfectly fine as Ted Knight's legacy thanks), if he's a legacy at all. (Despite Mr. Robinson's fine work tying it all together, I personally think "possible descendant from parallel universe who may or may not be that one guy" is a bit of a stretch.) And heck, even if gravity is the "signal from parallel universes", Stargirl's got a damn cosmic rod! Why not let HER yank out KC Superman?

Hell, if gravity's that important, at this point I'd take GEOFORCE over Starman! He may lack the legacy and be an arrogant doofus, but at least that's an actual personality!

Honestly, at this point he's actually approaching Dick Grayson level annoyance for me. He could miraculously become sane, save the world, have tea with the Shade and shove his tongue down my favorite character's throat (hey, it'd mean panel time!) and I'd still probably be all "Okay, fine, go away."

Especially since there are actual interesting, well developed characters with strong ties to other JSA members going neglected. And yes, I admit, some of this bitterness is probably because my favorite JSA-er got one page of monologue in about two years. But it's not just him!

Let's say we cut all Starman's panel time and split it evenly among Sandy and Obsidian? I bet even if I'm the only one happy about the first, lots of folk will be pleased by the second. Heck, you can even give it ALL to Todd! Please?


Darnit. Oh well, I'm still going to be reading of course. But I reserve the right to whine about it!


  • At September 19, 2007 9:11 AM, Blogger G & A said…

    I totally, totally agree! I'm new to the JSA world, and for the life of me, I can't figure out what the point of Starman is. Exploring a character's mental illness, if written well (and that's an important point), can be interesting, entertaining and informative. This drivel, however, is just plain irritating. Thanks for so clearly articulating what's been bugging me since his appearance.

  • At September 19, 2007 9:38 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    You pretty much mentioned my problem with current JSA. It's still good, but it could be much better.

    And yes, there are plenty of perfectly good characters who can be used instead of Binky the Clown. (He's about as annoying as Binky)

  • At September 19, 2007 10:28 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I don't mind Starman that much yet, but I am wishing we'd see some of the other characters who've been pretty much forgotten or ignored since the first issue, like Sandman, Ma Hunkel, Obsidian, and Jakeem Thunder (whose only recent appearance has been in a "JSA Classified" issue).

  • At September 19, 2007 10:45 AM, Blogger SallyP said…

    Awww...I don't mind Starman so much. I give serious points to anyone who can use Superman's cape as a napkin.

    I do however, completely agree with you about Sandy and Obsidian. They haven't been around at ALL! I even miss Ma Hunkel.

  • At September 19, 2007 12:44 PM, Blogger Ununnilium said…

    I like Starman, but then again, I liked Slobo, too.

  • At September 19, 2007 12:46 PM, Blogger kalinara said…

    Okay, Ununnilium, clearly you are my nemesis. We must fight to the death!

    Just as a warning, I cheat. :-P

  • At September 19, 2007 1:37 PM, Blogger Zaratustra said…

    'Oh and don't get me started on the interspersing a "wacky" character with "OMG!SERIOUS" moments.'

    Eh, don't worry, in a few years they'll retcon his origin to have both his parents raped and killed and then there'll be no more wacky.

  • At September 19, 2007 1:49 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I don't mind Starman that much yet, but I am wishing we'd see some of the other characters who've been pretty much forgotten or ignored since the first issue, like Sandman, Ma Hunkel, Obsidian, and Jakeem Thunder (whose only recent appearance has been in a "JSA Classified" issue).

    I agree with you, Scott. I'd love to see some of the others (especially the ones you listed) get some more screen time for a change. Also, I don't think JSA will be able to keep Starman interesting at all if they never allow him to develop. If they never explain how he wound up here, why he hears voices, or why he isn't getting effective treatment, and if they just keep him as "crazy people are wacky", then he'll reach waste of space status. Hopefully, we'll get some more for him soon to justify his spotlight.

  • At September 19, 2007 2:22 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Wow, I think Starman is far and away the best thing about the current JSA series. I'm mostly indifferent to the other younger members (although Damage is interesting as a tragic figure), and as in most Geoff Johns books there's precious little characterization to start with.

    But Starman has an honest-to-gosh interesting background and setting, and he's easily got the most interesting continuing storyline (not that there's much competition). Handled well, it could have a terrific payoff (although, again, Johns' books tend to be pretty even-keeled rather than building to a big climax, so I'm not getting my hopes up).

    I rather wish Roy Thomas would come back and write the JSA. He wrote the last JSA series I fully enjoyed, and I'm curious to see if he's still got it.

    Oh yeah, and: The KC Superman's going to turn evil? Lame!

  • At September 19, 2007 4:19 PM, Blogger Anthony Strand said…

    Michael - when you reference Roy Thomas, are you talking about All-Star Squadron or the America vs. the Justice Society mini?

    Either way, I heartily endorse that opinion.

  • At September 19, 2007 4:22 PM, Blogger kalinara said…

    As long as you guys aren't talking about Young All-Stars. That was DREADFUL. Such nifty ideas, such horrible, horrible execution. And one-dimensional characterization to boot.

    (And you know it's bad if my favorite actually gets panel time and I'm still saying that. :-P)

  • At September 19, 2007 4:45 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I'll be honest. I like the idea of a superhero with disorganized schizophrenia.

    I however, do not like the Leigon of Superheroes, so I'm hoping this Starman is really a Darkseid controlled zombie in disguise.

    Replace him with Shining Knight II.

  • At September 19, 2007 5:09 PM, Blogger Anthony Strand said…

    I've never read Young All-Stars. It just looks awful. And I say that as a guy who owns every issue of All-Star Squadron.

    To actually get back to the topic at hand, I thought Starman was really funny and entertaining at the beginning of the series, but here we are 9 issues in and I'm sick of him. He doesn't detract from my enjoyment at all, but he's just kind of there.

  • At September 19, 2007 5:33 PM, Blogger Ununnilium said…

    In This Issue... Somebody DIES!

    (note: it's me)

    Also, Roy Thomas has done good work, but by God, JSA in his hands would turn into pure continuity porn.

    (I've been reading through All-Star Squadron. It's like circus peanuts: good, but I can only eat so much at a time, or I get sick and shove it in the back of the pantry for six months.)

  • At September 19, 2007 5:35 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Well, I was thinking of All-Star Squadron. I also liked Last Days of the Justice Society for what it was (which is to say, a company-mandated story which Thomas pulled off about as well as could be expected, with fantastic artwork), and America vs. The Justice Society (which was a nice summary of the JSA's history in the days before the Archives collections were available).

    Yeah, Young All-Stars was a debacle. Since it was a debacle whose genesis was in the elimination of Earth-2 by the Crisis, and which got worse when the main artist couldn't meet the deadlines, and I think it also had significant interference from higher up, I cut Thomas a fair amount of slack. Crisis really eviscerated all the neat stuff that was going on in All-Star Squadron.

    Anthony: My feeling is that the whole current JSA series is "just kind of there". But again, this is a feeling that I tend to associate with Geoff Johns books generally: They're very even-keeled with few highs or lows.

  • At September 19, 2007 6:05 PM, Blogger Stone Mason said…

    At the start of the new series I actually really liked Starman, I'm not generally a fan of wacky characters (I was never overly fond of Plastic Man in the JLA for example) but he made me laugh for the first few issues and so he didn't really bother me. I can't really pin point when but his appeal really declined since then, the whole concept just got really old, really fast, I can only take "look how CRAZY I am" for so long.

    I also question the merits of taking a man, who clearly isn't all there, into a burning building.

  • At September 19, 2007 6:35 PM, Blogger kalinara said…

    Michael: You're nicer than I am. When he's on, I think Thomas is on fire, but Young All-Stars wasn't just bad because of timing issues with artists or single universe things though. It was bad on a whole new lazy level.

    Cue my favorite rant ever:

    From the very beginning of the Tsunami plot, for example. Okay, we're taking the risky decision of a Japanese-American on the team. Cool. But oh, by the way, the team is ALL okay with it. Except the one kid...whose mentor studied heavily in Asia...

    ...getting a little twitchier there, but okay, the mentor's philosophies don't need to mesh with the kid's...even though he's shown no deviation thus far. But let's extend this a bit! This kid's been a hero for years already despite being younger than 15 and is already loosely a JSA/All-Star member.

    Which could still work, since anti-racism sentiment was pretty wide spread and pervasive during the time. Even certain adult JSA members were leery of Tsunami.

    BUT, let's set it up so every other character is fine with her! Even though ALL of these characters are supposed to represent fairly ordinary, standard youth type characters, they somehow ALL are resistant to propaganda that these pre-established heroes aren't. (Seriously, Dan the fucking Dyna-Mite is somehow enlightened enough to never buy into the propaganda that's affecting people like *Ted Knight*?) And have them all bitch out the one guy for being "a bigot".

    Oh and let's define each character by one thin wisp of characterization: Iron's got a chip on his shoulder. Helena has Fury angst. Dan has no confidence. Oh. Except the character that's gratuitously racist. THAT character is actually really well done, relying heavily on the original Kirby/Simon stuff...except the bad tacked on racism of course. But since he can't spend every scene with the Japanese girl being racist, he's actually characterized quite brilliantly otherwise.

    So literally the only appealing 3d character is the racist who disappears the issue after he resolve things with Tsunami!


    Also, there's a line that went something like "Oh! We don't have elevators in Greece!" And I'm NOT MAKING THAT UP.

    Sorry, YAS is one of my favorite rant topics. When Thomas is good, he's very very good. (And hell, tacked on racism aside, his Sandy was exquisite even there!) But when he's bad, he's not just horrid. He's LAZY.

    Ye gads, what an awful book. :-)

    While I actually really like Johns on the main book though, I'd die of joy if they got Thomas on Classified. I'm sick of the single character portraits of characters that almost invariably get way too much screen time already. Thomas could do some really great true-ensemble stuff, maybe even flash-backy stuff that'd be AWESOME.

  • At September 19, 2007 6:39 PM, Blogger kalinara said…

    As a more on topic comment: yeah, Stone and Anthony, that's pretty much what I'm getting at.

    He started off interesting to me, but the wackiness quickly outweighed the story stuff to the point where I KNOW his story must be interesting: how he got there, why does he hear voices, IS he crazy?!

    But I just don't care. Too much "look how crazy I am" too little substance.

    I did totally lie in my original post though. I would totally like Starman more if he shoved his tongue down Sandy's throat. It'd mean more panel time for Sandy!

    ...the fact that I'm willing to hypothetically prostitute out my favorite fictional character for more panel time ought to disturb me more than it does. :-)

  • At September 19, 2007 7:59 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Kalinara: Frankly, I haven't read YAS since it came out, so you've got it all over me as far as the details go. Mostly I just remember struggling with the fill-in artwork, and also not being able to get past the premise of the series, since none of these characters seemed capable of filling the shoes of the golden age heroes they'd replaced.

    I'm sure I didn't read the whole series. I think I bailed on Infinity Inc. around the same time (early McFarlane art was intriguing at the time, but the stories went into the tank after the Ordway run).

    I'm still something of a pre-Crisis purist where the JSA is concerned: The group lost a lot of its appeal for me once Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman were retconned out of it. Though somehow I keep coming on-board for each new relaunch, hoping that a new writer will somehow recapture the magic. (Sigh, there's really not much hope for us DC fanboys who grew up in the 1970s!)

  • At September 19, 2007 9:11 PM, Blogger kalinara said…

    Heh, I'm the exact opposite really. I was never happy with the big three linked to the JSA, since in my opinion they tend to overpower the others who deserve the spotlight more. (Since the big three had JLA anyway.) Besides, their presence is pretty much a Silver Age retcon anyway. Of the three only WW ever was actually involved with the Golden Age JSA.

    So I'm very much a pre-Multiverse/post-Crisis purist. :-) I like the JSA having started everything and inspired everything, with Hippolyta as the Golden Age WW and the others far far away.

    I'm sympathetic really, but I think our goals are mutually exclusive. Though at least for now there is still the Original Earth-2 type universe with Helena Wayne, so maybe there's still hope...which I support, as long as my legacy-centered, trinity-free forerunner JSA still stays as the main one. :-)

    (At least until the next generation becomes the main audience and changes are made that tick BOTH you 70s fanboys, and us 80's born delinquents off. :-))

  • At September 19, 2007 10:46 PM, Blogger Ragtime said…

    Oh, have a little heart! How can you not love the man who guilts Superman into drinking his milk!

  • At September 20, 2007 1:40 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Actually, their presence in the JSA wasn't a Silver Age retcon: Superman and Batman were both established as honorary members early in the run of All-Star Comics, and they appeared in two issues (including a featured role in one of the best stories in the original All-Star run).

    It's hard to take their presence in the 60s JLA/JSA crossovers seriously, since there's very little continuity in those appearances. But once the 70s All-Star run started up, I think that established them as integral to the team: They were both shown as the standard that the younger heroes looked up to, and as fallable figures who were also quite different from their Earth-1 counterparts.

    (Roy Thomas tried to tap into a similar sentiment in the early issues of Infinity Inc., but it never really worked.)

    Flash, GL and the others never successfully filled that role successfully, especially after the Crisis, because they ended up being just a few more heroes among many. Without the full roster of golden age heroes, and the tight ties to World War II, the JSA is just another super-team. (I mean, geez, how can it be the JSA if Hawkman and Flash aren't bickering with Doctor Fate every few issues?)

    So I actually think the 70s JSA was much more successful in demonstrating a legacy for new heroes to live up to, while the 90s and 2000s JSA pays lip service to that notion, but never really shows it. I think that's because it has no sense of history, and that's because the remaining old-time characters have been reduced to generic figures who by definition have no sense of history.

    Where's James Robinson when you need him? (Oh yeah, he turned the previous JSA series over to David Goyer after the first few issues. Alas.)

  • At September 20, 2007 2:12 AM, Blogger kalinara said…

    Honorary members aren't the same as the core of the team. The majority of Golden Age comics didn't feature those two in their roster at all, and didn't need them.

    For me, I get no real sense of history from the Silver Age comics. And very little sense of team. There really isn't nearly as much strong interaction, in my opinion. Silver Age had a lot of strengths, but the team dynamics really weren't among them for me.

    I also never felt that Silver Age JSA Superman and Batman felt terribly tied to WWII. Not in the sense of the other team members. Even in All-Star Squadron, the majority of the team members that felt connected to the thematic elements of the war and 1940s society weren't those two but the others. Flash and Green Lantern, possibly because they're so different from the Silver Age versions, are really where the core of the time element comes in.

    Post-Crisis didn't just pay lip service in my opinion, it's proven over and over again, constantly, how these people, absent Superman and Batman, managed to inspire the current crop of heroes. It's a lot more true to the spirit of the Golden Age comics, in that sense, and I think the character dynamics are much more fleshed out.

    I thought also that the Silver Age really made JSA "just another team", casting them as just "our counterparts from the 40s who we team up with for adventures." In the modern age though, JSA is something else entirely. They're the FIRST TEAM and the best, even if they don't tackle the same sort of large scale altercations that the JLA does. By setting them in the same world, they've found a way to expand both teams characterizations beyond "this world's primary superheroes team-up".

    The JSA tackle the threats close to home. Family is a much heavier theme. Generations and time are far more important aspects. The JSA existed in the 1940s and it still exists sixty years later because of the strength of its members and the names that are sometimes greater than they are.

    Besides, the presence of inherited roles among the characters that have stayed the same are really what makes it feel generational and strong. Infinity Inc did something like that, but not to the same extent. Having Alan Scott and Jay Garrick alongside Courtney Whitmore and Michael Holt means something more.

    :-) And to be honest, I thought Robinson's arcs on JSA were disappointingly weak in terms of character interaction and dynamics. (In stark contrast to Starman, but I think in the end, Robinson's much better with single hero/center stories rather than full ensemble.) The series only really started to shine for me under Goyer and Johns. That's when Hawkman returned, Power Girl joined and the team dynamics really felt their strongest.

    :-) I hate to say it but we may need to agree to disagree here because this is one subject where I will never waver. :-)

  • At September 20, 2007 1:58 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Yeah, I just don't see any of what you're describing in the modern JSA.

    For me, the core arc for the JSA is the 1970s run of All-Star Comics (recently collected in two TPB). Although it has some rough edges, the core themes of age and youth, and interactions between the generations, were never stronger than here: Superman and Batman were heroes who had been around a long time, and whose paths had diverged significantly. Flash, GL, Hawkman and Wildcat were the keepers of the flame of the old team, trying to work with younger heroes as well as their contemporaries, and with varying degrees of success. Doctor Mid-Nite and Hourman had come out of retirement but both seemed to feel out-of-place among the newer heroes.

    (By the way, Wildcat was never part of the core of the original JSA - he appeared in only one issue, which is one fewer than Superman or Batman. His current status is almost entirely based on the 1970s run of All-Star.)

    The only post-Crisis JSA series which has convinced me at all of the "inspired and mentored" aspect of the old team was Len Strazewski's 10-issue run from the early 90s (which was deeply flawed in other respects).

    But neither the Goyer JSA series or the current series have worked for me. Both of them seem to fervently wish that the JSA somehow inspired today's heroes, but this is not at all evident in other DC titles, and barely evident in the JSA series. Creating some new heroes and tagging them with the names of previous heroes isn't inspiration, it's lack of creativity (this is especially true in the case of Doctor Mid-Nite, who is just a carbon copy of his predecessor).

    I keep hoping that someone like Mr. Terrific or Sand will step up and become a fleshed-out character, but they never do; they're just generic heroes. I'm rapidly running out of hope for Cyclone, too. And the series has this bizarre lack of a sense of history which seems completely out of place for a team book which is supposed to be about this group with a long and rich heritage (the occasional time travel story isn't a substitute for a true sense of history). It feels like just another team book, albeit with an uncomfortably large cast.

    And that's why I enjoy Starman in JSA: He's got some personal history, he's got a story arc that could go somewhere, and he presents problems for the team to deal with which makes the book more interesting. (Damage is similar in these respects, too.) As opposed to Cyclone and the new Wildcat, who both seem like pretty generic second-generation heroes. I'd like to see less of them and more of the characters who, well, have character.

    That's what it really comes down to for me: The 70s JSA was one of the first comics I read that had very strong characterization, and I'm sad that this team that I loved back then hasn't had much characterization since the All-Star Squadron days (unless you count the heavy-handed portrayal in the early Infinity, Inc. issues). I hate that the team has become some sort of superhero "family" book, only without the sorts of quirky interplay that actual families have. It's just... people fighting villains.

    So yeah, I think we're going to agree to disagree, because whatever you're enjoying in the recent JSA comics, I just don't see it. :-)

  • At September 20, 2007 3:56 PM, Blogger kalinara said…

    Probably for the best, since I personally see a LOT of characterization (especially for Sand, despite his general recent lack of panel time), which is something I actually thought felt very flat in the Silver Age comics...including All Star Squadron. :-)

    I liked All Star as an adventure comic, but felt it lacked something in the other aspects. (And I never said ALL seventies developments were bad. I personally think Wildcat brings more to the table than Superman or Batman though, especially in terms of attitudes and class examinations of the era. Batman's role in terms of action's easily filled by Sandman or Wildcat, while his socioeconomic status is also reflected by the aristocratic characters like McNider or Wes, again. Superman's powers can be compensated for with increased focus on Alan, Jay and even Hourman. And his particular social change reflection of the forties is easily covered by characters like Alan or even Al Pratt. Wildcat though brings a more street level perspective that only really the Atom shared, and as Al is not an issue anymore that aspect is very useful.)

    Besides, aside from the new Terrific/Hourman, the others are still keepers of the old flame, for me. The replacement of the others allows for an aspect of generation and true time passing that the SA issues lacked for me. I've honestly never thought Superman or Batman EVER brought much to the table in that respect.


    Starman has potential plotwise, but he's not a compelling or even remotely three-dimensional personality. Sand's had more characterization in issue 5 of the 2000s JSA than Starman's had in nine issues. (More evidence for both Terrific and Sand is that one is a brand new character and the other so completely re-envisioned as to almost count, and both are very vividly used throughout the Goyer-Johns and later runs, in my opinion.) Starman's plot seems like it's fairly generic to me, any member of the first Legion could have worked, or heck any member of Earth 2 with a counterpart in KC either. (Jade, for example. With the "real" one dead, Earth-2 Jade could have easily filled Starman's role here. She doesn't have gravity powers, sure, but something could be done with the cosmic rod or her powers in a different way). Where Damage's personal issues DO have a genuine effect on team dynamics, I don't see that with Starman. At most the others just roll their eyes and shush or go along with him. He's probably closest to Guy Gardner in the JLI era for team dynamics, without even the antagonism or longer character history to attribute any sort of depth.

    Doesn't work for me, though the rest certainly does. :-)

    I think the appeal to Cyclone and Citizen Steel to me is that they suit the legacy/family aspect more. They provide different angles on what it's like growing up beneath the shadow of the greater legacy, akin to Infinity Inc, but with more emphasis on how they fit within the JSA proper. Each one represents a different personality, with different experience, dealing with the different elements their life has brought them. I also think that both add more to the overall team dynamic. Of the newer team members, Mid-Nite and Terrific joined pragmatically, Courtney and ultimately even Jakeem with relative enthusiasm. Nathan's the first character who's really had primarily negative experiences behind his joining of the team, which lends to a very different dynamic that I'm interested in seeing develop. (So far though, his legacy has primarily manifested itself in a very negative way.) In contrast, while Maxine's enthusiasm reflects the more general enthusiastic attitude (though hers is tinged with a more desperate need for acceptance than Courtney or Jakeem's general defiance ever showed), she also adds an additional aspect to Stargirl's character, allowing the formerly junior member to mature into a wiser/older sister figure while taking a place as the cute newbie to ask all the necessary questions that Courtney's, by now, probably too experienced to ask.

    Both of which I find a far more appealing element than the "oh, Starman's being weird again" vibe I've been getting from that plotline.

    As for Silver Age versus Modern Age:

    You never know, with Earth-2 back in existance, you may still end up getting the type of stories you want to see. Which, as I said, I'm all for as long as my JSA gets the primary focus.

    After all, the seventies are over. It's my generation's time now. :-)

    (Heh, in thirty years, I'LL get to be the one irked by how it's not as good as I remember only to be dismissed by enthusiastic and unsympathetic newbies. I can't wait. :-))

  • At September 21, 2007 1:32 AM, Blogger Ununnilium said…

    Late comment, but:

    Yes. Thomas on Classified would flat-out rock.

  • At September 21, 2007 2:27 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I think I'm way more cynical than you: I don't believe DC will ever bring back Earth-2 in any meaningful way. They teased me with the possibility a decade ago (c.f. "Hypertime") and nothing came of it. I've long since given up hope.

    As much as I enjoyed Crisis on Infinite Earths, I quickly realized that the Crisis wiped out any investment I had in DC's characters by essentially destroying their backstories (and often their personalities and settings). Now I follow creators around rather than characters, which overall I think is for the better anyway.


    I see Starman as being essentially a tragic figure: What happened to him? What demons is her really fighting? What's his destiny, assuming he follows the general direction towards greatness suggested at the end of James Robinson's Starman? I see him as completely different from Guy Gardner (and a good thing, too, since I hated the Giffen Justice League - 10 issues was all I could take), and the visual of a grown man in a serious dramatic comic book suddenly breaking out into dance is just downright weird. I do hope they start moving on his story sometime soon (obviously the Kingdom Come Superman's arrival might spur this on), but I think he has a lot more potential than anyone else on the current team.


Post a Comment

<< Home