Superman and Kirby. The fusion makes a whole.

[TerryMcGuiness]

I just finished watching the two parter Apokolips..NOW again and the more I watch it any of the Superman aniamted series it occurs to me more and more just how well this fusion of Jacks Fourth World with Superman works.

In many ways, they give each other things that both very much needed and as a result make a greater whole.

In Apokolips, Superman finally has villans that are worthy of him. In Darkseid he even has a Satan to his Jesus. (and yes I'm aware that Jack Kirby was jewish. :P) He even tries to tempt him with the world on a mountain top during the movie.

Jacks Fourth World is an endless sea of fantstic ideas and with Superman in the protagonist role, its like this stream of ideas gets a story and a hero. Not to dismiss Orion, but putting Superman in the mix I think takes the epic scope of it all to the level Kirby wanted to achive.

Myself, I'd even take it a step further and literally make New Genesis and Apokolips the heaven and hell of the DC Universe. There could be a section of New Genesis thats like a Agean Feilds for human souls, and the Hunger Dogs and Parademons could literally be the imprisoned souls of the damned.

Now obviously the mix can be taken too far. I've never really liked Superman running around with the Guardian and the Newsboy Legion. But Bruce Timm doing what he does best, managed to take only the best ingridents of both mythologies and mix them a dramatic,fun,intresting, and even innovative way.

I really think that Bruce Timms assesment of the anti-life equation is dead on as well as the idea of Darkseid feeding off despair. Here's a super-villan who actions make perfect sense. Its not enough for him to just come in and blow Earth up, he *has* to break its spirit, and of course to accomplish this he tries to destroy is greatest hero(s). Thus trying to make the people of Earth cower. After all, what could be more anti-life than the absence of hope? (something alot of nihilistic comics creators could learn from)

Lastly, I can't say enough good about the episode itself. Everything from the pure epic drama of it, to the fun nods to all of Kirbys inkers.

"This episode is deciated in loving memory of Jack Kirby. Long live the king."

Indeed. Even in the face of a cynical and dismissive world, long live the King. Forever.

[Karkull]

Well put, TerryMcGuiness--you beautifully sum up the redesign of Jack Kirby's Fourth World for the Superman: TAS. My only quibble, however, is your apparent dismissal of the rest of Superman's rogues gallery. While they may not have the scope of Darkseid or his minons, I felt that their iconic redesigns were perfect opponents for the Man of Steel. For example:

Lex Luthor--Superman's human counterpoint. He's the most powerful human in Metropolis, but he can't help but envy the powers possessed by the supermen. His struggles against them are, in essence, attempts to either tame them or to elevate himself to their level.

Brainiac--An adversary inherited from his father. Also, not only is Brainiac the other last surviving piece of Krypton, but it was indirectly responsible for its destruction.

Metallo--Another human counterpoint, this time manufactured. Metallo has strength equal of Superman, none of his values or morals, and possesses one of his major weaknesses.

Parasite--the bully to Superman's nice guy. He's also the jerk who borrows stuff and doesn't want to return it.

Bizzaro--Superman seen through the cracked looking glass. He tries to be Superman, but he'll always be imperfect.

But, once again, I think that you are right: attaching Darkseid and his world to Superman was a great choice (I never really cared for Orion either).

[The Mad Hatter]

A loooooong time ago, probably around the time S:TAS first came out, Timm and co. made up a bunch of plans to do a movie (likely direct-to-video) of the Fourth World, but it never came to pass. So you weren't the only ones who thought it was cool...

[DR. BELCH]

--Livewire. Since she was sort of created from Superman (via a stray lightning bolt that reflected off him and hit her) she's rather his Eve. Not exactly created by God from a rib, and no apple-like fruits being proffered, but....

[TerryMcGuiness]

Actually it wasn't my intent to be dismissive of Supermans rouges gallery, *especially* where TAS version of them are concerned.

Brainiac as the Kryptonian computer is nothing short of absolute genius on the part of Timm and co.

But outside of the characters mentioned is where his rouges gallery starts to become lackluster. By bringing in Darkseid and hs hierarchy, Superman at last as a *full* rouges gallery. I mean truthfully, worst case scenario give me Granny Goodness over Terra Man or Conduit any day.

If I may be so bold: 'dat ***** is scary!

TAS Luthor was nicely done and actually made the Fisk Luthor of post--Crisis into something unique. Though I'm extremely glad they're using this as a platform to launch him into something resmebling his more classical version. I've grown weary of untouchable billionare Luthor *but* his having been that at one point really does enrich the character and add to his motivation for wanting to destroy Superman.

and ya gotta love Bizzaro. How can ya not love the poor stupid mug?

Livewire, I both like and hate at the same time which I guess is a sign of the writers doing a good job of bringing her cynical anti-Superman shock jock character to life. Very nice jab on her generation to if I might add. ;)

I never disliked Orion, but I just feel he's works better as a supporting character. I think thats part of why Fourth World needs Superman.

Its like Superman provides a placement for this wonderous tapestry of ideas to actually go. Not to say you can do New Gods stories that are *just* New Gods stories. Certainally not.

But I think the synthesis of the two makes both alot stronger than they are by themselves.

I also think its intresting that Bruce Timms Superman basically operated on sort of what I might term Kirby-physicality.

He was neither under powered like Post Crisis or a god like Pre-Crisis.

Yeah he was invunerable but things could still hurt him (just not kill him) he was strong as hell but still had to struggle. You kind of get the sense that this Superman *could* push a planet if he needed to, but he'd have to get really pissed off first.

Basically the classic strength via adrenalin that Kirby always had at work. ^^

[TerryMcGuiness]

Typo correction: "Not to say you *can't* do New Gods stories that are just New Gods stories. Certainally not."

Sorry about that. ^^;

[Karkull]

I always pictured Livewire as the feminist antithesis of Superman. In her first appearance she kept ragging on him as if she hated the fact that a man possessed those powers. Then, when she got hers, her first inclination was to attack him. She's almost Superman's "Poison Ivy" villain--she hates him, but there's also that fixation there because she can't defeat him.

(I think it's funny that, in a way, she's also his doppleganger because she has electrical powers similar to the ones that that he had for a while. I actually thought that they were going to introduce her when they created Strange Visitor.)

[TerryMcGuiness]

Yeah but sensical decision making and mainline DC are rarely two things that mix.

Thats why TAS is such a wonderful alternative. ^^

[Karkull]

Originally posted by TerryMcGuiness
Yeah but sensical decision making and mainline DC are rarely two things that mix.

Thats why TAS is such a wonderful alternative. ^^

You're damn right.

[JusticeLeagueLegion]

I think they should make Dan Turpin (who "dies" at the end of Apokolips...Now Part Two) return as a villain being controlled by Darkseid. It's quite obvious that Darkseid can teleport people with his omega beams. He did it with Bruno Manhiem and he obviously teleported Kalibak as well, even though they made it look like he died in "Fathers Day." They should make him have some superpowers that Darkseid gave him and he has to fight the JL on the upcoming series. Then somehow, they can bring him back.

[JLU Dude]

Originally posted by JusticeLeagueLegion
I think they should make Dan Turpin (who "dies" at the end of Apokolips...Now Part Two) return as a villain being controlled by Darkseid. It's quite obvious that Darkseid can teleport people with his omega beams. He did it with Bruno Manhiem and he obviously teleported Kalibak as well, even though they made it look like he died in "Fathers Day." They should make him have some superpowers that Darkseid gave him and he has to fight the JL on the upcoming series. Then somehow, they can bring him back.

Darkseid also did that with Steppenwolf.

[Karkull]

Originally posted by JusticeLeagueLegion
I think they should make Dan Turpin (who "dies" at the end of Apokolips...Now Part Two) return as a villain being controlled by Darkseid.

That's a great idea. It's been established that Darkseid's eye beams can either kill, transport, or bring somebody back to life. I always figured that Turpin was transported to Apokolips, where Dessad could torture him at his leisure. If the series went on I figured that he'd be back.

[Joe Tully]

I don't think that's a good idea. Reviving deceased characters is an idea that's been done to death (pun intended). I've spent so many years reading comics, and at this point it just makes me sick to see characters revived. And IMO it would make it even worse to make Turpin a villain. What would be his motivation? And superpowers? No, that just isn't needed. I expect the writers to be able to come up with something more imaginative than that. Leave Turpin's death as it was, a tribute to Jack Kirby. Bringing back Turpin, to me, just desecrates the original story and the emotional impact viewers felt upon seeing Turpin's death.

Sorry, but after hearing about this stuff happening so much in comics, I don't want to see it anymore. Don't substitute bringing back a dead character for good writing.

[The Mad Hatter]

Good call. Turpin's death was truly powerful, as it was a testament to his heroism and the sacrifices he was willing to make.

[JusticeLeagueLegion]

Quote:

I don't think that's a good idea. Reviving deceased characters is an idea that's been done to death (pun intended). I've spent so many years reading comics, and at this point it just makes me sick to see characters revived. And IMO it would make it even worse to make Turpin a villain. What would be his motivation? And superpowers? No, that just isn't needed. I expect the writers to be able to come up with something more imaginative than that. Leave Turpin's death as it was, a tribute to Jack Kirby. Bringing back Turpin, to me, just desecrates the original story and the emotional impact viewers felt upon seeing Turpin's death.

Sorry, but after hearing about this stuff happening so much in comics, I don't want to see it anymore. Don't substitute bringing back a dead character for good writing.


----Joe Tully

_________
For one thing, as far as I know, Dan Turpin wasn't even created by Jack Kirby, so what kind of a tribute would Turpin's death be if he didn't have anything to do with King Kirby, the episode was dedicated to the king because it was him who created the Fourth World. He didn't create Dan Turpin. And another thing, what was Superman's motivation to be a villain in "Legacy"? Granny Goodness brainwashed him, that's all it would take for Turpin. As for his superpowers, Darkseid would give them to him...probably they would be similar powers to what Darkseid has...or maybe Darkseid would just give him a special battle suit that would make him stronger and more powerful, so he could fight heavy hitters like Superman and Martian Manhunter. But I do understand what you mean...about the emotional impact thing, and for that, I have no explaination. But,...oh well...it just depends on what the producers would like better, Dan to stay dead or not. As for me, I really don't mind what they do, this was just an idea I had.

[Joe Tully]

Originally posted by JusticeLeagueLegion

_________
For one thing, as far as I know, Dan Turpin wasn't even created by Jack Kirby, so what kind of a tribute would Turpin's death be if he didn't have anything to do with King Kirby, the episode was dedicated to the king because it was him who created the Fourth World. He didn't create Dan Turpin. And another thing, what was Superman's motivation to be a villain in "Legacy"? Granny Goodness brainwashed him, that's all it would take for Turpin. As for his superpowers, Darkseid would give them to him...probably they would be similar powers to what Darkseid has...or maybe Darkseid would just give him a special battle suit that would make him stronger and more powerful, so he could fight heavy hitters like Superman and Martian Manhunter. But I do understand what you mean...about the emotional impact thing, and for that, I have no explaination. But,...oh well...it just depends on what the producers would like better, Dan to stay dead or not. As for me, I really don't mind what they do, this was just an idea I had.

Well, I got that idea from this post that we had in a past discussion at http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=552&highlight=turpin+Kirby


Originally posted by Dick Grayson Dini & Timm said Turpin was gone for good, and the episode was a tribute to Turpin's inspiration, Jack Kirby. They said his death would be permenant. Superman even mentions the death in LEGACY.

And no offense, but IMO that idea has been really overdone. The first example that comes to my mind is Lyja from DeFalco's Fantastic Four, in which case it was really terrible to read, and I can't see it being much better in this case. Having a somewhat convoluted storyline just to get that little betrayal angle doesn't work for me. Plus plenty of other resurrections which just didn't work (the original Green Goblin's resurrection in Spider-Man was just plain w-r-o-n-g, Mysterio and Aquaman's bodies weren't even allowed to get cold before their resurrections) IMO there are many better stories that could be told that would not take away from past stories and were more original.

No offense, but that's my take on it. But hey, a lot of comic writers have gone down similar paths in the past, so I guess it isn't that wacky of an idea. It's just something that, if it ever was done well, has now just been overdone, and I think we now need to start letting dead characters stay dead.

[Karkull]

Originally posted by Joe Tully
...and I think we now need to start letting dead characters stay dead.

Let's not get the television shows mixed up in the comic books, okay? I think that the Superman and Batman shows have done a good job of keeping dead characters dead. For example, characters such as the Ninja, the Stalker, and Bruno Manheim have stayed dead and not returned. Other characters, such as Brainiac, Metallo, and HARDAC; can make reappearances because they're, for the most part, machines that can be reconstructed. These shows haven't fallen into the trap of reviving dead characters just for the hell of it.

This kind of stuff falls into the category of obsessive continuity. If they come up with a new use for Dan Turpin they'll use him. If not he stays dead. Either way it doesn't really matter.

[Joe Tully]

Well, point taken, and I actually wasn't trying to combine different continuities previously as you seem to have interpreted it. But even if you don't want to blame the shows for the cliches of comics, you still have to admit that resurrection is far from an original idea.

As for resurrected characters...well, even if you don't want to count Brainiac or Hardac, Joker has seemingly died at least twice that I can think of (Laughing Fish and World's Finest) and Clayface did it too. And IMO just because it hasn't been overdone already isn't a good reason to continue doing it.

[Toddman]

Did Mannheim really die? He was near an explosion in a boat, but the boat did not blow up and he wasn't shown drowning. And I know the explosion was supposed to be nuclear, so wouldn't that have done a LOT more damage to most of Metropolis? Anyway, I think we have seen a lot more "definitive" deaths in the past (Clayface, Joker, Metallo) and some have come back.

Case in point-- Stalker did not "stay" dead. It sure looked like he bought it at the end of "Bloodsport", but there he was, alive and well (and a prisoner of the government no less) in "Plague."

Toddman

[Karkull]

Originally posted by Toddman
Case in point-- Stalker did not "stay" dead. It sure looked like he bought it at the end of "Bloodsport", but there he was, alive and well (and a prisoner of the government no less) in "Plague."
Toddman

Oops, I never saw that episode. Sorry.

[JusticeLeagueLegion]

Joker and Clayface didn't actually die, they just appeared to, they fooled them somehow, or they just survived somehow, as for Stalker, I don't know.

[Toddman]

Originally posted by JusticeLeagueLegion
Joker and Clayface didn't actually die, they just appeared to, they fooled them somehow, or they just survived somehow, as for Stalker, I don't know.

Well, that's kind of my point. Some characters only "appear" to die or have an "implied" death. Others actually croak. Turpin and Det. Bowman definitely died. The Ninja character disappeared when Batman was looking away during a volcanic eruption. HE could've easily showed up later.

If a writer can come up w/an explanation for how Clayface came back or ignore the solution for why the Joker is not chum right now, almost any character who was not on Krypton when it blew up (Jor-El & Lara) or was not Joker-venomed (Sal Valestra) or has not had part of an oil rig fall on him (Dr. Belson) might make a come back at any time.

Toddman

[JusticeLeagueLegion]

We don't actually know that Turpin definitely died, all we know is that he vanished when Darkseid's omega beams made contact with him...Darkseid's omega beams can destroy as well as teleport people anywhere.

[Joe Tully]

Yeah, but it still counts as resurrection. By the same argument, you could say that Bowman didn't necessarily die because we didn't see it onscreen and something could have happened that caused the chair to malfunction. If you tried to argue hard enough, you could find loopholes in the death of nearly anyone who's died in the series, since the censors would never let you see anyone actually die onscreen. Your argument is that we never knew that Turpin died, but the fact is, we never really know that anyone dies. Anytime I see anyone "die" in the stories, I half expect them to show up later. As soon as I finished watching Mudslide, I had to wonder whether Clayface would ever be brought back, and sure enough he was, which was really a shame because I felt that doing that was sort of an insult to the original story as well as the fans.