Loeb and Waid revamps: Iron or Mercury Age?

[Superman Forever]

Acording to this site History of Superman comics, the new Mercury Age started only in 2006 with the One Year Later story after Infinite Crisis and the new Action Comics run with Richard Donner and Geoff Johns. I dot't know if it's too soon to declare this revamp a new Age already, or if the Jeph Loeb (with Superman For All Seasons and Return to Krypton storyline) and Mark Waid (with Birthrignt and Young Luthor in Smallville shoud be considered then a departure from the Iron Age.

From start, Geoff Johns books are influenced by the movies, since the story is a Donner's proposal from a sequel that's never been filmed. That's why we have Zod, Fortress of Solitude and Jor-El versions that are like the classic of 1978. On the other hand, when it's Johns writing the Krypton villains origin in Action Comics Annual, the tale is very Iron Age-ish in tone and style. Also, editor Matt idelson declared in his Superman Homepage columm that in the new continuity, he still views Clark Kent as the real personality, not Superman. That's  Iron Age concepts and execution.

About the failed revamps - currently there's no valid origin of Superman, what is sintomatic about the lack of direction of DC books - Loeb's and Waid's, liking the writer's or not, they were obviously writing a Silver and Bronze Age concept influenced Superman, and the real problem was of editorial control. They've written new origins opposing Byrne's, introduced new versions of Krypton, a new Supergirl, krypto, and the tone of their runs was nothing like Iron Age. Other writers like Joe kelly and Joe Casey played with the iconic and inspirational Superman that never kills and always knows what to do, in creative ways. Kelly''s Action 800 is a very good prove of that. In fact, Iron Age fans were pretty much vocal agains their stories and started to feel betrayed by DC Comics. Running from 1999 to 2006, if it's neither Iron not Mercury Age, what should we call it? And it's Jonns/Donner more a departure from Iron Age than Jeph Loeb and Mark Waid, based on just few issues?   

 

[carmelo]

"Iron age"! Whats the next? The tin age? the butter age? the trash age? This is silly.Superman is not a character like another..He is SUPERMAN is a icon,a modern version of an Olimpic God.The Superman stories cannot be written from ignorants MTV generation kids.Superman is not Wolverine or Lobo.It must respect the myth.You cannot change his suit or his chest logo,you cannot marry it with Lois Lane,you cannot make Luthor President of United States.We don't wont a "iron age",we wont a "Platinium age" in which the elements of the legend are respects.The best story of Superman in my opinion is "Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow?" by Alan Moore.The "silly" elements of Weisinger era are transforms in modern mythology.The main street for  Platinium age is that one.

[Uncle Mxy]

And Ma and Pa Kent must be dead to Superman?

[Super Monkey]

I don't know.

To be honest, I get a lot more excited about new Superman Showcase books than new Superman comics these days.

All-Star Superman is the only series that I genuinely liked. The rest are just better than the crap that came before, but are not as good as All-Star or anything in those Showcase books.

Grant Morrison gives me hope that Superman isn't obsolete and you can still tell fun, great stories with him in a modern style that also stays true to the character.

Another reason why I'm caring less and less about continuity. If Jeff Smith's Captain Marvel series and All-Star Superman isn't really canon and are not part of modern continuity and yet they are countless times better than the current series featuring those two icons, then to heck with current continuity!

I don't care about what is continuity and what is not, at the end of the day all I really care about is if the story is a great read.
Great stories and great artwork together is the only thing that matters to me these days.

So that doesn't answer your question, but I needed to write that



 

[NotSuper]

In my opinion, the Iron Age was about being dark just for the sake of it. When there's an actual meaning to the darkness, I don't consider it to be Iron Age-esque. Not everyone will agree with that, but it's how I see things.

Incidentally, I would consider Birthright to be part of the Mercury Age. But comic ages are an art, not a science. Not everyone will agree with the time periods
or definitions.

[NotSuper]

On the other hand, when it's Johns writing the Krypton villains origin in Action Comics Annual, the tale is very Iron Age-ish in tone and style.

I disagree. The Council was portrayed as morally dubious in the 1978 movie (they were going to banish Jor-El to the Phantom Zone if he warned other Kryptonians) and giving Zod a more sympathetic origin is not Iron Age-esque either. Lots of villains, from Dr. Doom to Luthor himself have had these types of origins. Non has also become a far more interesting character now.

Also, editor Matt Idelson declared in his Superman Homepage column that in the new continuity, he still views Clark Kent as the real personality, not Superman. That's Iron Age concepts and execution.

Everyone has their own opinion about that. I doubt there's an editorial edict stating which version is true. Personally I liked the Waid/Morrison view on the secret ID. The Donner/Johns run seems to contradict Idelson's view, and a new writer might contradict their view. That's the way things work in today's comics.

Plus, look at all the things that have returned: Kal as a non-costumed "Super-Boy" in his youth; Mon-El's relationship with Kal and time in Smallville; Superman's powers are at the highest they've been since 1986; Lex Luthor is a rogue scientist again; Bizarro World is back; multiple Kryptonians; I could go on and on here.

We're definitely in a new age. I'm sure things were just as confusing during the first Crisis and the reboots afterwards. This time DC wants to present their characters in a more mainstream way though, and that means using what's familiar to fans and bringing old concepts back. The Mercury Age, at least in my view, is old mixed with new. It's about respecting the past while also moving forward. Not everyone will like it, but I for one do.

As for DC, the most reasonable approach they can take is to make the vast majority of their fans happy, because they can't make everyone happy. Granted, being a human being, I would like them to just put out stuff I like, but it's not just about what I want. It's not about "my" or "your" Superman--it's about a universally appealing Superman (or as close to one as you can get).

Anyway, that's all I'm going to say regarding this subject. I don't have anything else to add.

[MatterEaterLad]

All the tinkering and mega stories re-writing DC history in the last 20 years just makes continuity too much of a headache even if you like the stories.  Once, it was possible to change Supes with a Sand Creature story, now it takes altering the entire fabric of the comics universe.

I suppose its necessary as modern comic fans are older and a real niche market now.

[carmelo]

And Ma and Pa Kent must be dead to Superman?

Honestly Ma and Pa Kent are great characters.I think that kill they has been  the bigger mistake of Golden and Silver age.Weisinger would have written greats stories on the Kent (Pa Kent that become "elastic dad" After swilling a bottle of an alien liquid,or Martha that gets super-powers temporarily by mr Mxyzptlk in "the Metropolis Ma of Steel").