Morrison on Superman
That's the link a friend sent me, inquiring about my thoughts. The timing is very interesting, since I was recently in the midst of a conversation with Rude about the fact that I am both in love with, and hating Morrison's work on Batman Inc.
Why bring that up?
Generally because my first reaction now is that I'll have the same feeling about his work on Superman. I'll be honest. I wasn't thrilled when I heard him announced for the new creative team on Action. Grant Morrison does breathe new life into characters, offering fresh perspective and opening up new avenues to the character for development and growth. I cannot deny that, nor would I want to. Those are the strengths of what he does, and very often it works.
Batman Inc was a powerful, brilliant idea.
His execution though can sometimes leave me wanting more. Rude pointed out that Morrison likes to leave the minor details for us to fill in for ourselves. He doesn't need to spoon feed everything out for us. I agree, and sometimes I don't even mind that approach. Unfortunately I have found that in reading stories like R.I.P. and now Batman Inc, that another thing he likes to do is excuse himself from having to 'enter' a scene or 'exit' a scene. We're often left reading story without context, because his transitions within the book are so choppy as to be non-existent. They are disruptive to the story itself.
This concerns me, especially in the context of his new Superman story, because we're going to see something fully original and fresh from him. That should be good news, but if Grant decides that we can 'guess' the context for ourselves, it's going to leave the readers scratching their heads more than clapping their hands.
Also, I don't find his perspective on Superman as intriguing as I found the idea behind Batman Inc.
One of the things that concerns me is that he's going to blur the line between Superman and Batman. I'm not saying it can't be done, or even that it shouldn't be done.....I'm just concerned that in doing it, we're fundamentally changing the most iconic character in comics. For decades Superman has known that Luthor was the bad guy, but he respected the conventions of the United States legal system enough to operate within it. There is an implication in the article that Clark may now be willing to take the law into his own hands, or to decide what justice is for himself.
Doesn't that completely miss the mark?
Aren't we talking about dirtying Superman up a little bit, if that's where we take him?
What do I think of the article?