WHO SHOULD TAKE OVER SUPREME NOW?

Results 1 to 60 of 433

THREAD: WHO SHOULD TAKE OVER SUPREME NOW?

01-13-2013, 02:30 PM #1 chastmastr Who should take over Supreme now? Now that Erik Larsen's run on Supreme has ended, who would you like to see take over Supreme now.
The one I'd root for would be Grant Morrison.
01-13-2013, 08:29 PM #2 Talisman I'd love to see Joe Casey & Ladronn.
01-15-2013, 06:12 AM #3 Dark-Flux Yeah Casey would be a good choice.
Hopefully he'd do for Supreme what he did for WildCATS.
01-15-2013, 10:23 PM #4 Captain Midnight Warren Ellis and Ed Benes, it will be an incredible read
02-04-2013, 02:02 PM #5 Green Arrow Jr. I'd like to see Neil Gaiman & John Cassaday take a shot at Supreme.
02-04-2013, 02:11 PM #6 chastmastr Neil Gaiman would be excellent.
02-04-2013, 06:27 PM #7 md62 Mark Waid/Ian Churchill.
Joe Casey/Doug Mahnke.
Warren Ellis or Jeph Loeb/Dale Keown.
My Top Choice:
Williams/Hairsine. The team that did Cla$$War by Com.X
02-05-2013, 07:29 AM #8
sonicx1977 It doesnt matter. Erik is out and me too.
02-05-2013, 02:25 PM #9 The Adventurer Originally Posted by sonicx1977 It doesnt matter. Erik is out and me too. I'm sort of in this boat as well. His writing was pretty much the only reason I cared about Supreme at all.
02-05-2013, 04:15 PM #10 chastmastr For me it was Moore as the only reason I cared about Supreme at all. What I'd seen of the earlier material put me completely off, but I felt that Moore took a sow's ear and made a silk purse out of it.
Maybe Moore could fix DC's New 52...
Petition for classic Wonder Woman to return!
Tired of arguing about EVERYTHING for now.
02-05-2013, 10:32 PM #11 dupersuper Moore
Morrison
Waid
Peyer
Kelley
Casey
Ellis
Hickman
Abnett&Lanning
Giffen
etc...
.
02-19-2013, 03:33 PM #12 Amy Racecar Mark Waid would be a great choice but how would he do it without rehashing Irredeemable ?
02-19-2013, 08:19 PM #13
Mr. Holmes BANNED No way would Morrison be interested in writing a second rate Superman when DC gave him the keys to reboot the real deal to his whims.
02-19-2013, 09:57 PM #14 chastmastr Originally Posted by Mr. Holmes No way would Morrison be interested in writing a second rate Superman when DC gave him the keys to reboot the real deal to his whims. While Morrison has had a fair amount of control over the "New 52" Superman, I don't think he had complete control. If he had it would have made the current version much cooler (and probably more like the classic version, a la All-Star Superman).
Indeed, I thought the New 52 Superman might be more along the lines of All-Star Superman. What a fool I was.
Well, at least I'm enjoying the Morrison Action issues. But after he's gone, that's it for a while...
02-19-2013, 10:00 PM #15 Hound of UIster Morrison had pretty much a blank check to do what he wanted on Action.
02-20-2013, 12:27 AM #16 Mr. Holmes Originally Posted by chastmastr While Morrison has had a fair amount of control over the "New 52" Superman, I don't think he had complete control. If he had it would have made the current version much cooler (and probably more like the classic version, a la All-Star Superman).
Indeed, I thought the New 52 Superman might be more along the lines of All-Star Superman. What a fool I was.
Well, at least I'm enjoying the Morrison Action issues. But after he's gone, that's it for a while...
That's not because Morrison was restricted, it's because he's not a one-trick pony. There are shades of All Star Superman in his run, but ultimately he approached it differently for a reason. All Star was Superman at the end of his career, fully realized and mature. Action Comics Superman just started, and is more brash and finding his way.
02-20-2013, 12:08 PM #17 chastmastr Oh, Morrison's stuff is great, don't get me wrong, but it's still a sort of alternate-Earth Superman, weird costume and all. But obviously he couldn't set up Superman's world for later than his run on Action and make the main Superman title, well, good. I'm assuming he wasn't allowed to show Clark and Lois dating, for instance, because the powers that be wanted them not to be--that sort of thing. I don't think Grant's Superman would tell Lois that her boyfriend was a "booty call." No idea how he views the JLA issues which show Superman punching off parademons' heads--everyone was arguing for a while that they weren't really alive, but certainly on Earth Two there are references to them being in internment camps, which raises the troubling possibility of their being living, sapient beings. Grant's Superman wouldn't be killing them.
I think Grant has taken a sow's ear and made a silk purse out of it, but I don't expect that quality to continue in his absence under the current DC administration.
02-20-2013, 03:17 PM #18 Rabidwolfdog Question, how was Alan Moore's take on Supreme?
02-20-2013, 07:29 PM #19 md62 Michael Originally Posted by Rabidwolfdog Question, how was Alan Moore's take on Supreme? A tasteful homage to the Silver Age Superman/DC. I liked it.
02-20-2013, 07:46 PM #20 chastmastr Originally Posted by Rabidwolfdog Question, how was Alan Moore's take on Supreme? Unbelievably fantastic. :)
02-21-2013, 10:55 PM #21 DubipR Brandon Graham and Ross Campbell.
02-24-2013, 10:53 PM #22 gregesis I would love to see Jim Krueger and Alex Ross do this story they had planned way back when:
"Date:_ Tue_Jul_27,_1999_ 11:55 am
Subject:_ [Super Hero News] ALEX ROSS & JIM KRUEGER ON SUPREME
ROSS, KRUEGER ON SUPREME
by Rob Allstetter
Awesome Comics' Rob Liefeld said that Earth X collaborators Jim Krueger and
Alex Ross will be working on a Supreme mini-series to be released next year.
"I'm a huge fan of these two gentlemen's work and we're going to be doing a
huge project with them in the middle of 2000," Liefeld said. "Alex Ross and
Jim Krueger are doing a Supreme Prestige Format, three-issue mini-series.
"I can't tell you the title, but Alex called me months ago and said, 'I've
created a hundred new characters for this series.' I said, 'You did not.
Don't tell me a hundred because I'll go repeat that.' He said, 'I'm telling
you, it's a hundred new characters.'
"It's a story I've never seen done in comics before. Alex will be doing the
third book. He's designing all the characters, painting all the promotion
pieces, he's painting all the covers and he's doing the third book of the
series."
Liefeld said he couldn't announce the other artists for the project's first
two issues because the deals haven't been signed yet.
"You're going to see a lot of build-up over the next year," Liefeld said. "I
think of it as our Kingdom Come. I'm extremely flattered that someone as busy
and talented as Alex and Jim have decided to do this for us.
"Alex has shown me some of the sketches and they will blow you away. Alex
continues to cement himself as one of the most versatile creators in the
field and this stuff is going to take him to the next level.
"He said, 'Rob, this will be the most controversial thing I've ever done.'
And I said, 'Well, if you're doing it with me, I can guarantee that will be
the case - whether you want it to or not.'"
_ Message 1379 of 8345
Amazing!"
*
Jim Krueger replied to this story way back in 2004 on Comixfan forums:
"We did speak to Rob about this possibility. Both Alex and I were giant fans of Alan Moore's work on SUpreme and the idea of doing something with it. And Rob's a lot of fun. But unfortunately, things just never worked out."
I would love to see this material!
02-25-2013, 12:07 AM #23 The Adventurer Ohhhhh. That sounds sweet.
02-25-2013, 07:09 AM #24 Ron Cuthbert I'd only like to see Morrison on Supreme if he was in his "Let's get really passionate and homagey" (ala Batman and All-Star Superman) mode rather than his "Let's see how much acid I can do at once tonight" mode.
02-25-2013, 07:00 PM #25 pitt55 I dont care who it is or what they do with the character/title.
As long as it's someone who's actually READ THE FRIGGIN' BOOK this time!!

02-25-2013, 10:10 PM #26 Erik Larsen Originally Posted by pitt55 I dont care who it is or what they do with the character/title.

As long as it's someone who's actually READ THE FRIGGIN' BOOK this time!! As opposed to a guy who read the friggin' book last time? I couldn't very well have used so many characters from Moore's run without having read it, could I? Sheesh.

02-26-2013, 12:47 AM #27 chastmastr Erik! Any idea who's on the book next?
02-26-2013, 03:15 AM #28 davidgrantlloyd Frank Miller ... tho I don't see it happening ... but it's probably the closest he'd ever come to writing a Superman-type book
02-26-2013, 11:47 PM #29 chastmastr Originally Posted by davidgrantlloyd Frank Miller ... tho I don't see it happening ... but it's probably the closest he'd ever come to writing a Superman-type book He's gotten too messed up over the last few years for me to be interested in anything he's doing now anyway.
03-01-2013, 04:05 PM #30 pitt55 Well then what is this "mean supreme"?
I'll let you give your answer....
03-01-2013, 04:41 PM #31 chastmastr Originally Posted by pitt55 Well then what is this "mean supreme"?
03-01-2013, 04:41 PM #31 chastmastr Originally Posted by pitt55 "Mean Supreme" is a bit of an understatement--he's actually pretty evil and a bit insane.
03-01-2013, 04:59 PM #32 pitt55 HA! Sure is!
But i just cant swallow this character appearing out of thin air. Dont get me wrong, I know this is a comic book and i have absolutly no problem with characters appearing out of thin air per se, but there has to be some form precedent established before or explanation afterword. Some kind of [at least semi-] logical cause and effect.
03-01-2013, 07:48 PM #33 Adam O. Pruett Originally Posted by pitt55 I dont care who it is or what they do with the character/title.
As long as it's someone who's actually READ THE FRIGGIN' BOOK this time!! Originally Posted by pitt55 Well then what is this "mean supreme"? Originally Posted by pitt55 But i just cant swallow this character appearing out of thin air. Dont get me wrong, I know this is a comic book and i have absolutly no problem with characters appearing out of thin air per se, but there has to be some form precedent established before or explanation afterword. Some kind of [at least semi-] logical cause and effect. Uh... it's not as though Erik ignored the universe Moore created. Moore's concepts and characters were utilized heavily. Moore's Supreme is still the hero of the book.
And Mean Supreme's reintroduction is thoroughly explained and quite clear.
Your posts sound as though you haven't read the title you're complaining about.
03-01-2013, 08:04 PM #34 Erik Larsen Originally Posted by pitt55 Well then what is this "mean supreme"?
I'll let you give your answer.... When the Supreme book started--you know, pre-Alan Moore--the high concept could be boiled down to: What if Superman was something of a dick? And up until Alan took over--Supreme was quick to get into a fight and often viciously killed his opponents--the high concept was that he was an egotistical and violent twist on the Superman archetype. Hell, his letters page was called "Ego Trip." Alan shoehorned in decades' worth of Supremes, which had been, up until that point, never mentioned.
Reading through Alan's issues, it struck me that it would not be inconsistent to assume that the Supreme which preceded his run could be another such character, cast into the Supremacy when the last revision took place. A "mean" Supreme (for lack of a better word).
Don't tell me that it's okay for Alan to introduce hundreds of previously unseen versions of Supreme in his run, establish that they pop into the Supremacy whenever there's a shift in continuity, and casually disregard the fact that Supreme was anything other than a noble Superman knockoff but that it's not okay for me to actually reference and acknowledge the book's printed continuity.
03-01-2013, 08:07 PM #35 Erik Larsen Originally Posted by pitt55 HA! Sure is!
But i just cant swallow this character appearing out of thin air. Dont get me wrong, I know this is a comic book and i have absolutly no problem with characters appearing out of thin air per se, but there has to be some form precedent established before or explanation afterword. Some kind of [at least semi-] logical cause and effect.
So...you had no problem with Alan introducing hundreds of Supremes out of thin air--but you're not okay with me reintroducing one.
I see...
03-01-2013, 09:44 PM #36 pitt55 The thing that threw me was this-
It's established that when a given Supreme and supporting cast gets revised they are transported to the Supremacy/limbo and replaced in reality by new versions. Who, in turn, eventually get revised to end up at the Supremacy/limbo, so on and so forth.
Now when "our" Supremes' continuity had IT'S revision only the supporting cast characters [Probe and Kid Supreme] got revised and transported to the supremacy/limbo. For some reason Supreme himself WASNT transported, which was a unique event. The revision wasnt working on him. Sister Supreme, Squeek, Superion, and Original Supreme had to actually go and bring him to the Supremacy themselves. And we go along with him on the trip. He's also aware of the revision happening, another thing unique to this Supreme's situation.
We proceed to follow the one Supreme straight through as he "becomes" the "Moore" Supreme, privy to his thoughts as chunks of new memory surface. He leaves the Supremacy for the newly revised continuity and HE slowly becomes that new continuity's Supreme. As opposed to automatically REPLACING the previous one as had happened in all previous revisions. Theres no spot or reason for a double to be created in this instance.
I wouldnt stress it though. The characters' history got just so impossibly convoluted at one point that they had to bring in someone, Valentino, to do what he could to make some form of logical linear continuity out of it. Did a damn great job too, so i'm just sayin' theres hope for this mess yet as long as the next guy knows whats up.
03-01-2013, 10:04 PM #37 pitt55 This is coming across a lot more d**k-ish than intended. Not trying to hurt feelings, insult, or otherwise. This comic coming back was something I never imagined happening and I appreciate you bringing to us. Just that one detail screwed things up for me and I kept looking for an explanation.
03-01-2013, 11:07 PM #38 Erik Larsen Originally Posted by pitt55 The thing that threw me was this-
It's established that when a given Supreme and supporting cast gets revised they are transported to the Supremacy/limbo and replaced in reality by new versions. Who, in turn, eventually get revised to end up at the Supremacy/limbo, so on and so forth.
Now when "our" Supremes' continuity had IT'S revision only the supporting cast characters [Probe and Kid Supreme] got revised and transported to the supremacy/limbo. For some reason Supreme himself WASNT transported, which was a unique event. The revision wasnt working on him. Sister Supreme, Squeek, Superion, and Original Supreme had to actually go and bring him to the Supremacy themselves. And we go along with him on the trip. He's also aware of the revision happening, another thing unique to this Supreme's situation.
We proceed to follow the one Supreme straight through as he "becomes" the "Moore" Supreme, privy to his thoughts as chunks of new memory surface. He leaves the Supremacy for the newly revised continuity and HE slowly becomes that new continuity's Supreme. As opposed to automatically REPLACING the previous one as had happened in all previous revisions. Theres no spot or reason for a double to be created in this instance.
I wouldn't stress it though. The characters' history got just so impossibly convoluted at one point that they had to bring in someone, Valentino, to do what he could to make some form of logical linear continuity out of it. Did a damn great job too, so i'm just sayin' theres hope for this mess yet as long as the next guy knows whats up.
As you may know, Supreme has gone through several creative teams and several new directions along the way. Rob's original Supreme could just have easily gone to the Supremacy before Alan's run and this latest revision took place.
03-01-2013, 11:44 PM #39 chastmastr Erik, does this mean the Supremacy is still around after all? Losing that was what really put me off the new series. Particularly as it meant--or seemed to mean--one of the basic tropes of the Moore run--that each iteration of Supreme and his supporting cast gets to live happily ever after no matter what changes in continuity take place--ends in ghastly, tragic misery as they all die horribly.
03-02-2013, 12:24 AM #40 Erik Larsen Originally Posted by chastmastr Erik, does this mean the Supremacy is still around after all? Losing that was what really put me off the new series. Particularly as it meant--or seemed to mean--one of the basic tropes of the Moore run--that each iteration of Supreme and his supporting cast gets to live happily ever after no matter what changes in continuity take place--ends in ghastly, tragic misery as they all die horribly. You really owe it to yourself to read #68.
03-02-2013, 12:44 AM #41 pitt55 Originally Posted by Erik Larsen As you may know, Supreme has gone through several creative teams and several new directions along the way. Rob's original Supreme could just have easily gone to the Supremacy before Alan's run and this latest revision took place. I suppose thats true, but he didn't.
Somebody really should have caught that. Rob maybe? I dont know.
There's nnooo way around it being there, it's just now a matter of working out an explanation.
Moore took on the book with the intention of changing up the status quo, turning the whole thing on it's ear. Giving it a revamp.
And not only did he ingeniously revamp the character using nothing less than the very concept of revamping characters, he was also respectful of what came before, ensuring that all THAT continuity didnt end up in the "it was all just a dream" category despite a COMPLETELY new continuity coming into existence.
If you look, from his very first appearance to his latest, through all the creative teams and convoluteness, Supreme has been the one character.
The only little hiccup in all this is what exactly is the origin of this Mean Supreme?
[those capitols make it look like yelling, i think i'm meaning to slant those but not 100% on how]
03-02-2013, 12:58 AM #42
The Batman Sorta. The guy that Keith Giffen wrote in Legends of Supreme and Supreme Annual, for example, was more than a little bit different than the guy that showed up in Supreme #1 or Supreme: Glory Days or Supreme #23.
Also, I'm really unsure why, if previous versions of Supreme enter the Supremacy once revised, why the "Mean Supreme" that we met in Supreme #1 wouldn't be there once the Moore Supreme took over. It seems to play well within the established rules of the Supremacy....
03-02-2013, 01:23 AM #43 Erik Larsen Originally Posted by pitt55 I suppose thats true, but he didnt. And you know this how? We didn't see Supreme poop in any issue--are we to think he never poops because that was never established? Just because you didn't see something happen--it doesn't mean it didn't happen. There were hundreds of Supremes--thousands--if we were to witness their adventures would we have witnessed the revision again and again and again? No, of corse not--this was the first time we saw it. In theory there could be a new Supreme with every new artist--every new writer--and thousands in the Supremacy with slight variations. There's absolutely no reason that my story couldn't work but you're too stubborn or unimaginative to accept it.
And Eric Stephenson was the editor--both during Alan's run and after.
03-02-2013, 01:26 AM #44
Erik Larsen Originally Posted by The Batman Sorta. The guy that Keith Giffen wrote in Legends of Supreme and Supreme Annual, for example, was more than a little bit different than the guy that showed up in Supreme #1 or Supreme: Glory Days or Supreme #23.
Also, I'm really unsure why, if previous versions of Supreme enter the Supremacy once revised, why the "Mean Supreme" that we met in Supreme #1 wouldn't be there once the Moore Supreme took over. It seems to play well within the established rules of the Supremacy....
There you go. But you're the Batman--I expect you to be able to figure things out.
03-02-2013, 10:05 AM #45 pitt55 Originally Posted by The Batman Sorta. The guy that Keith Giffen wrote in Legends of Supreme and Supreme Annual, for example, was more than a little bit different than the guy that showed up in Supreme #1 or Supreme: Glory Days or Supreme #23.
Also, I'm really unsure why, if previous versions of Supreme enter the Supremacy once revised, why the "Mean Supreme" that we met in Supreme #1 wouldn't be there once the Moore Supreme took over. It seems to play well within the established rules of the Supremacy....
To the first point- Sure, different writers took the character in different directions, emphasising and/or ignoring this or that character trait and the character DOES come accross "more than a little different" through the various writers, [as do most other comic book characters] but it's still the same character.
Second point-I explain above EXACTLY why he shouldnt be there and why his presence/existance is just totally inconsistant with EVERY ESTABLISHED RULE of the Supremacy.
03-02-2013, 11:29 AM #46 pitt55 Originally Posted by Erik Larsen And you know this how? We didn't see Supreme poop in any issue--are we to think he never poops because that was never established? Just because you didn't see something happen--it doesn't mean it didn't happen. There were hundreds of Supremes--thousands--if we were to witness their adventures would we have witnessed the revision again and again and again? No, of corse not--this was the first time we saw it. In theory there could be a new Supreme with every new artist--every new writer--and thousands in the Supremacy with slight variations. There's absolutely no reason that my story couldn't work but you're too stubborn or unimaginative to accept it.
And Eric Stephenson was the editor--both during Alan's run and after.
Oh I'm stubborn alright, but I also know that we wouldnt be having this conversation if we didnt love this stuff!!
Imagination isnt all that relevant here, I can only go by whats published/ set in concrete.
Well, if we were to witness each alternate Supreme's full adventure we absolutly WOULD see each continuity come to it's end and undergo it's revision. This is even shown happening in flashback. The characters talk about the fact that they were once in their own continuity and are now here. The entire continuity undergoes a revision, and an entirely seperate set of characters is created each time, hence all the "doubles".
This is the clearly established mechanism for the revisions in the story.
Whats also clearly established is that that's NOT WHAT HAPPENED this time. We're following along, the revision happens as usual, but instead of the current [Extreme] Universe and that continuity's Supreme being REPLACED by the Moore Awesome-verse and IT'S newly come into being version of Supreme, as normally would be the case, Supreme merely travels from one continuity to another. [Think Superman of Earth 1 travelling to the Supermanless Earth Blah-Blah to becoming that earth's Superman.]
The Extreme Universe and the Awesome/Moore-verse are obviously two completEly sepArate universes, as different from each other as all the various Supreme's of the Supremacies' universes are different from one another. [The Moore-verse came into being with the revision but the Extreme-verse still exists;Kid Supreme follows Supreme out of the Supremacy and ends up back in his own continuity.]
So of course all those other revisions happened, whether we see them or not. The one revision we DID see, "for the first time", in the actual narrative was the one that DIDN'T happen the way EVERY PROCEEDING ONE happened; a given continuity/Supreme being replaced by a newly created one.
That's my issue with it. There was no new Supreme created this time meaning there's no old Supreme to be replaced.
03-02-2013, 12:35 PM #47 The Batman Originally Posted by pitt55 To the first point- Sure, different writers took the character in different directions, emphasising and/or ignoring this or that character trait and the character DOES come accross "more than a little different" through the various writers, [as do most other comic book characters] but it's still the same character.
[ Yes, DESPITE the fact that between Supreme 22 and 23 Supreme goes from solely relying on Thor's hammer to being fully powered in Legend of Supreme 1-3/ Bloodwulf Summer Special 1. This was given a real world explanation rather than a story driven one; That those stories were plotted out long before the changes implemented at the onset of Supreme Madness. But it's still determined by the narrative that it's the same guy.] Sure, but only by using a convoluted scheme by Loki to try and hammer everything together after the fact. Legends of Supreme was meant to be an out-of-continuity book and Giffen's 'Supreme as divine manifestation on Earth' was meant to be a different version of the character from the arrogant and ruthless guy unable to acknowledge a power higher than himself that showed up in Supreme #1. The book prior to Moore had spots of over-the-top fun, but it was wildly inconsistent and the wrap up where Loki did it was really unsatisfying as a way of making sense of it all.
Second point-I explain above EXACTLY why he shouldnt be there and why his presence/existance is just totally inconsistant with EVERY ESTABLISHED RULE of the Supremacy. The problem with your reasoning and rules are that if we go by them, Original/Golden Age Supreme or any of the Supremium variants shouldn't be in the Supremacy when they very clearly are. By your reasoning Original/Golden Age Supreme should've just morphed into Silver Age Supreme and the Supremium variants like Lionhead Supreme were just weird allergic reactions that the main guy had and so wouldn't exist in the Supremacy either. Your own "EVERY ESTABLISHED RULE of the Supremacy" doesn't fit the evidence we're being given.
Nevermind that the guy we see flying towards Earth at the beginning of #41 is already behaving differently from the Supreme (any of them) of the first forty or so issues, even before he's caught up in the Revision. Does anyone really think the Supreme that we saw flying to Earth in Supreme #1 would've reacting with such equanimity to having his reality revised? Of course not, he'd have to be locked up the Supremacy kicking and screaming.
03-02-2013, 02:40 PM #48 pitt55 Originally Posted by The Batman Sure, but only by using a convoluted scheme by Loki to try and hammer everything together after the fact. Legends of Supreme was meant to be an out-of-continuity book and Giffen's 'Supreme as divine manifestation on Earth' was meant to be a different version of the character from the arrogant and ruthless guy unable to acknowledge a power higher than himself that showed up in Supreme #1. The book prior to Moore had spots of over-the-top fun, but it was wildly inconsistent and the wrap up where Loki did it was really unsatisfying as a way of making sense of it all.
The problem with your reasoning and rules are that if we go by them, Original/Golden Age Supreme or any of the Supremium variants shouldn't be in the Supremacy when they very clearly are. By your reasoning Original/Golden Age Supreme should've just morphed into Silver Age Supreme and the Supremium variants like Lionhead Supreme were just weird allergic reactions that the main guy had and so wouldn't exist in the Supremacy either. Your own "EVERY ESTABLISHED RULE of the Supremacy" doesn't fit the evidence we're being given.
Never mind that the guy we see flying towards Earth at the beginning of #41 is already behaving differently from the Supreme (any of them) of the first forty or so issues, even before he's caught up in the Revision. Does anyone really think the Supreme that we saw flying to Earth in Supreme #1 would've reacting with such equanimity to having his reality revised? Of course not, he'd have to be locked up the Supremacy kicking and screaming.
Um, can't really disagree with anything here and I'm not seeing anything that disagrees with me.
I wouldn't say wildly inconsistent though, theres really only the one- the aforementioned Supreme mysteriously getting his powers back between issues 22 and 23 of his title.
OK none of this is MY reasoning or rules. This stuff is all right there in black and white for all to see.
Why in the world would ANY of the other Supremes in the Supremacy have "morphed" into the new incarnation? That's not how it works. Otherwise, like you say, there wouldn't BE any doubles to speak of in the first place.
Again, because it's looking like this just isn't getting through, when a revision happens the current reality ceases to exist and a new one is created. Good so far?
AN ENTIRELY NEW continuity, Supreme and all, comes into being. With nothing surviving of the previous one save for Supreme himself along with sundry supporting folks who are then relegated to the limbo Supremacy.
It didn't happen that way this time. This time the Supreme of the Extreme universe [ who's character arc can be definitively traced from his first appearance up till that point] travelled to the Supreme-less Awesome universe.
And dude WE SAW how the character introduced in Supreme #1 [ earliest appearance Youngblood 3, earliest chronological appearance Supreme Annual 1 ] reacted to having his reality revised. And we also saw that in fact, he wasnt locked up. He was sent through the portal to the Awesome universe.
03-02-2013, 03:19 PM #49 The Batman
Originally Posted by pitt55 Um, can't really disagree with anything here and i'm not seeing anything that disagrees with me.
I wouldn't say wildly inconsistent though, theres really only the one- the aforementioned Supreme mysteriously getting his powers back between issues 22 and 23 of his title. So you didn't find Giffen Supreme with his view of himself as a divine agent of judgement and his fondness for quoting scripture to be inconsistent with the Liefeld/Murray Supreme who did none of those things? Really? Because Giffen offered a fundamentally different version of the character.
OK none of this is MY reasoning or rules. This stuff is all right there in black and white for all to see.
Why in the world would ANY of the other Supremes in the Supremacy have "morphed" into the new incarnation? That's not how it works. Otherwise, like you say, there wouldn't BE any doubles to speak of in the first place.
Again, because it's looking like this just isn't getting through, when a revision happens the current reality ceases to exist and a new one is created. Good so far?
AN ENTIRELY NEW continuity, Supreme and all, comes into being. With nothing surviving of the previous one save for Supreme himself along with sundry supporting folks who are then relegated to the limbo Supremacy.
It didn't happen that way this time. This time the Supreme of the Extreme universe [ who's character arc can be definitively traced from his first appearance up till that point] travelled to the Supreme-less Awesome universe.
And dude WE SAW how the character introduced in Supreme #1 [ earliest appearance Youngblood 3, earliest chronological appearance Supreme Annual 1 ] reacted to having his reality revised. And we also saw that in fact, he wasn't locked up. He was sent through the portal to the Awesome universe. The shift over from Extreme to Awesome was part of the Revision. Supreme, in that universe, like Superman in the DC universe, is the point of rotation around which these realities pivot. Supreme didn't travel to the Awesome universe, the Awesome universe formed around him as reality and Supreme himself were revised.
Besides, Moore's Supreme was even further apart from the Liefeld/Murray Supreme than the Giffen version was. Could you see Moore's Ethan Crane tearing Bloodstrike limb from limb? Could you see him incinerating a cell block of incarcerated super-criminals with laser vision and a Bible verse? Could you see him blinding an opponent? The Liefeld/Murray Supreme -- Larsen's "Mean Supreme" -- was clearly revised and as such, why wouldn't he wind up in the Supremacy with every other revised version of Supreme?
03-02-2013, 05:50 PM #50 pitt55 Originally Posted by The Batman So you didn't find Giffen Supreme with his view of himself as a divine agent of judgement and his fondness for quoting scripture to be inconsistent with the Liefeld/Murray Supreme who did none of those things? Really? Because Giffen offered a fundamentally different version of the character.
Oh, Supreme is absolutely shown to consider himself a divine agent of judgement/cleansing/retribution,ect., along with quoting scripture, in stories written by other than Giffen. Given the Giffen written ones did blow the evangelical aspect beyond any sane level. HA!
But THAT'S COMIC BOOKS! Say Dale Keown [just using examples here] took over the writing chores on Amazing Spider-Man from Bill Mantlo. Does that automatically mean that the Spider-Man written by Bill Mantlo is a completely separate character from the Spider-Man written by Dale Keown? No. It's still the same character.
Why would we be going under the assumption that every time a different writer wrote on the Supreme book they were all writing for their own individual, unique "double" of Supreme?
03-02-2013, 06:57 PM #51 pitt55 Originally Posted by The Batman The shift over from Extreme to Awesome was part of the Revision. Supreme, in that universe, like Superman in the DC universe, is the point of rotation around which these realities pivot. Supreme didn't travel to the Awesome universe, the Awesome universe formed around him as reality and Supreme himself were revised.
Besides, Moore's Supreme was even further apart from the Liefeld/Murray Supreme than the Giffen version was. Could you see Moore's Ethan Crane tearing Bloodstrike limb from limb? Could you see him incinerating a cell block of incarcerated super-criminals with laser vision and a Bible verse? Could you see him blinding an opponent? The Liefeld/Murray Supreme -- Larsen's "Mean Supreme" -- was clearly revised and as such, why wouldn't he wind up in the Supremacy with every other revised version of Supreme?
The Extreme universe didn't get revised into the Awesome universe. Rather the Awesome universe comes into being and Supreme then travels to it. This is shown.
Now if it's so clear to you that Supreme undergoes one of these revisions between the time we meet him and the one that was actually shown, show me where.
Because if that IS the case I have no problem swallowing it, but SHOW ME WHERE.
WHERE IN THE NARRATIVE COULD THIS POSSIBLY HAVE HAPPENED??
"His Majesty" Supreme Supreme says they hadn't had a revision in "almost thirty years", and when Original Supreme takes Supreme to "meet" "Mean Supreme" he tells him "when the last revision happened he [ Mean Supreme ] was relegated to the Supremacy". This establishes exactly WHEN this Supreme arrived at the Supremacy but whats never shown is where exactly did he come FROM?
I challenge any who may care enough- go read the series and see for yourself.
03-02-2013, 08:35 PM #52 pitt55 Originally Posted by The Batman Sure, but only by using a convoluted scheme by Loki to try and hammer everything together after the fact. The Loki scheme had zero involvement or impact on the Legend of Supreme story.
03-02-2013, 11:43 PM #53 chastmastr Originally Posted by Erik Larsen You really owe it to yourself to read #68. I will seek it out. Fingers crossed...
03-02-2013, 11:47 PM #54 The Batman Originally Posted by pitt55 The Extreme universe didnt get revised into the Awesome universe. Rather the Awesome universe comes into being and Supreme then travels to it. This is shown.
Now if it's so clear to you that Supreme undergoes one of these revisions between the time we meet him and the one that was actually shown, show me where.
Because if that IS the case I have no problem swallowing it, but SHOW ME WHERE.
WHERE IN THE NARRATIVE COULD THIS POSSIBLY HAVE HAPPENED??
"His Majesty" Supreme Supreme says they hadnt had a revision in "almost thirty years", and when Original Supreme takes Supreme to "meet" "Mean Supreme" he tells him "when the last revision happened he [ Mean Supreme ] was relegated to the Supremacy". This establishes exactly WHEN this Supreme arrived at the Supremacy but whats never shown is where exactly did he come FROM?
I challenge any who may care enough- go read the series and see for yourself.
Given that Larsen's Mean Supreme is the version of the character from issues #0 through #40, logic would suggest that he entered the Supremacy sometime around when the revision to the Moore Supreme occurred. That Moore didn't focus on the previous Supreme's reaction to being revised makes sense, he was focused on his version of the character and had taken over Supreme with the understanding that he'd be free to ignore the previous forty-odd issues. It did leave a hanging question for Larsen to explore however.
03-02-2013, 11:48 PM #55 The Batman Originally Posted by pitt55 Oh, Supreme is absolutly shown to consider himself a devine agent of judgement/cleansing/retribution,ect., along with quoting scripture, in stories written by other than Giffen. Given the Giffen written ones did blow the evangelical aspect beyond any sane level. HA!
But THAT'S COMIC BOOKS! Say Dale Keown [just using examples here] took over the writting chores on Amazing Spider-Man from Bill Mantlo. Does that automatically mean that the Spider-Man written by Bill Mantlo is a completly seperate character from the Spider-Man written by Dale Keown? No. It's still the same character.
Why would we be going under the assumption that every time a different writter wrote on the Supreme book they were all writting for their own individual, unique "double" of Supreme?
Which issues was he quoting scripture and viewing himself as an avenging angel? It's also worth noting that viewing yourself as a god and viewing yourself as an agent of the Judeo-Christian God isn't the same thing. It's actually pretty different.
And yeah, they'd be two different versions of Spidey, the Keown version and the Mantlo version. Just like Morrison's version of Batman is his and Miller's is his.
03-03-2013, 12:13 AM #56 Erik Larsen Originally Posted by The Batman Moore's Supreme was even further apart from the Liefeld/Murray Supreme than the Giffen version was. Could you see Moore's Ethan Crane tearing Bloodstrike limb from limb? Could you see him incinerating a cell block of incarcerated super-criminals with laser vision and a Bible verse? Could you see him blinding an opponent? The Liefeld/Murray Supreme -- Larsen's "Mean Supreme" -- was clearly revised and as such, why wouldn't he wind up in the Supremacy with every other revised version of Supreme? Moore's Supreme was clearly a new version of the character. He spoke differently, acted differently, dressed differently and even made remarks indicating things were amiss "With my memory gaps..." "'micro-sight' how long have I had micro-sight?" being a couple examples. The original Supreme says, "You probably popped into being just a few weeks back!" and other lines throughout Alan's first issue indicate that THIS Supreme is an altogether NEW Supreme and that he was being delivered to a new revised reality.
So if THIS is a NEW Supreme...what happened to the old one?
It was my conjecture that when he arrived in the Supremacy that the others locked him up and threw away the key, never to be mentioned again. He was a bad seed and he was being hidden from Ethan Crane in particular. How long does a revision take? Days? Weeks? Months? Who knows?
It is my supposition that there was time for Rob's Supreme to blink out and Alan's to blink in and make his way home. And since my story saw print--and is canon--whether you agree or disagree with it--that's what happened.
03-03-2013, 12:23 AM #57 Erik Larsen Originally Posted by pitt55 The Extreme universe didnt get revised into the Awesome universe. Rather the Awesome universe comes into being and Supreme then travels to it. This is shown.
Now if it's so clear to you that Supreme undergoes one of these revisions between the time we meet him and the one that was actually shown, show me where.
Because if that IS the case I have no problem swallowing it, but SHOW ME WHERE.
WHERE IN THE NARRATIVE COULD THIS POSSIBLY HAVE HAPPENED??
"His Majesty" Supreme Supreme says they hadnt had a revision in "almost thirty years", and when Original Supreme takes Supreme to "meet" "Mean Supreme" he tells him "when the last revision happened he [ Mean Supreme ] was relegated to the Supremacy". This establishes exactly WHEN this Supreme arrived at the Supremacy but whats never shown is where exactly did he come FROM?
I challenge any who may care enough- go read the series and see for yourself.
I did. And you're wrong. In Supreme #41 the Silver Age Supreme points to the sky to single out "Grim 'eighties Supreme" --how could there be a grim '80s Supreme if the last revision was 30 years ago and Supreme #41 was published in 1996? Silver Age Supreme was referencing when HE popped into the Supremacy when he mentioned "Almost thirty years ago" NOT 30 years since the last revision. You don't read the material as carefully as you claim to and you certainly don't seem to understand what it is you're reading.
03-03-2013, 12:24 AM #58 pitt55 Originally Posted by The Batman Given that Larsen's Mean Supreme is the version of the character from issues #0 through #40, logic would suggest that he entered the Supremacy sometime around when the revision to the Moore Supreme occurred. That Moore didn't focus on the previous Supreme's reaction to being revised makes sense, he was focused on his version of the character and had taken over Supreme with the understanding that he'd be free to ignore the previous forty-odd issues. It did leave a hanging question for Larsen to explore however. No, it's a given that the character from issues #0 through #40 travelled from the Extreme universe to the Supremacy, and from there to the Awesome universe. We saw these events happen.
Your showing a complete lack of grasping the revision concept as laid out in this story.
And like i said in a previous post, Moore, while completely revamping everything about the book and yes being free to ignore the previous forty-odd issues, was still respectful enough to the readership and/or medium to NOT simply dump everything that came before in the trash and start from complete scratch. As had happened with every previous revision.
The book DOES show one Supremes' arc from first appearance to present day.
The book DOES NOT show this Supreme going through more than one revision.
Thats published cannon.
03-03-2013, 12:26 AM #59 Erik Larsen Originally Posted by pitt55 Oh, Supreme is absolutly shown to consider himself a devine agent of judgement/cleansing/retribution,ect., along with quoting scripture, in stories written by other than Giffen. Given the Giffen written ones did blow the evangelical aspect beyond any sane level. HA!
But THAT'S COMIC BOOKS! Say Dale Keown [just using examples here] took over the writting chores on Amazing Spider-Man from Bill Mantlo. Does that automatically mean that the Spider-Man written by Bill Mantlo is a completly seperate character from the Spider-Man written by Dale Keown? No. It's still the same character.
Why would we be going under the assumption that every time a different writter wrote on the Supreme book they were all writting for their own individual, unique "double" of Supreme? Because Supreme isn't Spider-Man and Spider-Man isn't Supreme and the two books have different rules. If Marvel established a limbo reality where characters were hurled that might very well be a place where things changed but since that hasn't been established yet you can't apply one book's rules to another.
03-03-2013, 12:32 AM #60 Erik Larsen Originally Posted by pitt55 No, it's a given that the character from issues #0 through #40 travelled from the Extreme universe to the Supremacy, and from there to the Awesome universe. We saw these events happen.
Your showing a complete lack of grasping the revision concept as laid out in this story.
And like i said in a previous post, Moore, while completly revamping everything about the book and yes being free to ignore the previous forty-odd issues, was still respectful enough to the readership and/or medium to NOT simply dump everything that came before in the trash and start from complete scratch. As had happened with every previous revision.
The book DOES show one Supremes' arc from first appearance to present day.
The book DOES NOT show this Supreme going through more than one revision. No, YOU don't get it. You're the problem. Alan wrote his story to provide wiggle room for a subsequent writer to say than Ethan Crane was not the same guy who appeared in previous issues of Supreme. He did that purposefully. He did that to essentially say, "if I got anything wrong--THIS is why--it's a different guy who THINKS he's the same guy just like all of these other Supremes thought THEY were the original Supremes up until they popped into the Supremacy."
That was the whole POINT--and you missed it.