http://www.avclub.com/article/exclusive-dc-preview-action-comics-41-ushers-new-e-220160

GAWD! They really blew it on that bike origin.

@saintwildcard: I was worried he was going to get given the bike and a leather jacket from a kind old man.

For some reason that sound funny to me.... anyway, I liked the theory that the bike was gonna be Pa Kent's

Pa Kent's...no no no

but wynaut?

I guess it's not a bad idea. it just feels a bit to Wolverine esque to me.

OHHHHH! Now I get your old man joke. It sounded like a sitcom scenario in my head, which is what made it funny. But yeah, I see your point.

Look pretty good

Still nope.

I actually kinda like this. I'm still pretty wary. TBH, I can't wait for Supes to get his real costume and powers back

Οκay, better than I expected. Nothing mind-blowing though.

Nice to NOT SEE him being all mopey.

I just hope all this leads to him improving his H2H combat skills after not being able to rely on his powers.

@soldierofel said:

Still nope.

At least he doesn't seem angsty. The previews and covers gave up a terribly dark tone. While this is quite upbeat.

Dang it! I thought it Wednesday already. I headed off to Comixology to buy the issue :/

On the bright side, DC is having a massive sale right now

@squalleon: Eh, I guess your right. He does seem to be in a better mood which bodes well for the rest of the arc. I just don't like the stupid depower thingy. It's annoying but I suppose I'll have to get used to it.

Yeah, the depowering and the revealing of the identity is just too much and it makes the story look like a gimmick to attract sales rather than a story.

Personally I was mostly afraid about Superman's personality since the B/S and Sm/Ww interviews were atrocious in their context.

@lvenger Any thoughts.

@squalleon: Suffice to say, I'm not any more optimistic or positive towards this crossover than I was before. The over-humanization of Superman into an everyman rather than a super-everyman, his passive aggressiveness, the over-explanatory thought boxes which put even Snyder's Unchained ones to shame and the poorly executed parallels to Golden Age Superman are just making me dread Truth all the more. The preview's just made it plainly clear even moreso that this is not a Superman story for me. Worse, it barely resembles a Superman story at all in my book.

I still see plenty of moodiness and negativity in this story, and you have to remember that whilst this may technically be the better book out of the bunch, BM/SM and SM/WW are probably going to be written in the same ways as their 8 page previews were. I wish I'd seen this sooner, but I had some real life stuff to deal with over the last 5 days or however long I've been off again.

Well, it doesn't make me look forward to it either. But I at least It was better than I expected. Since Truth is here to stay, I would prefer if it didn't hurt the character's personality. Since it has hurt or taken away all else. Ha, on the boxes.
Agreed that it barely resembles Superman. That's because "Truth" is a premise that can be said with every Super-hero, so there is nothing that makes it unique for Superman.

I think Clark was okay character wise. As always Pak goes for over-humanization with the Hot-dog or with the biker a$$h0le but still It could have been worse. It makes it weird to judge because the lack of powers alone make the character completely different in his inner voice. And that's not good when you want to read about "Super"-man.

Given your reaction not being as negative as mine, maybe Paktion Comics won't be the worst of the Truth Superman comics each month. But that overly long exposition on the freaking bike origin (and I hate that Superman is using a bike to get around, I'd have words with whoever thought of that idea) in the preview alone is making me believe Truth might well be harmful on Superman's personality.

But that's the problem, these kinds of gimmicks such as either replacing the hero with someone else calling them the same name (Falcon-Cap or Fem-Thor) or, in Truth's case, taking away everything familiar and recognisable from the character from their powerset and base to their personality and behaviour, is just such a narrow minded method for telling whatever kind of Superman story they want to. Adhering too strongly to the original material isn't that much better but straying as far away from it as possible would be considered even worse IMO, and that's what Truth is doing.

I should've really expected it given Pak's track record to be frank and despite the cliche of the biker A-Hole along with the overdoing it on Clark feeling hungry, I suppose it could have been worse. Like Batman/Superman or Superman/Wonder Woman worse. Moreover, I'm wholly with you on the depowerment somehow changing Superman's inner voice even further from how Pak and co. were writing it before. Which is incredibly strange, Clark has practically appeared as a different character in the Truth previews.

Again, I will have to repeat myself but the whole premise of Truth doesn't fit Superman. We are not used to see Superman ride a bike or drive a car. And we don't want him to. He is Superman, we want to see him fly. So no matter what the writer does it will end up looking odd or bad since you can't fit "Super"man in that context. Morrison's depowered Superman didn't get around in a harley, he leaped tall buildings, he fought alien robots and the next moment he fought the army. That's what made it great. It was still Superman. Just in smaller scale. This is a step further and as you said, it is very far from the core.

Agreed. It seems DC is learning from Marvel. Marvel's sales sky-rocket every time they do something like that and DC has done everything they can to bump Superman's sales. And since nothing worked they had to rely on a gimmick. Never questioning what goes wrong and Superman doesn't sell in the first place.

Superman will feel different as a character no doubt about it. The changes are so sudden and huge, the reader won't be able to acclimate and will feel lost. Personally I don't even recognize Superman. Because being a good man isn't all that Superman is all about. He isn't just a good boy. Part of his charm is his powers, his dilemmas and his view as a god among men. Now Superman feels like any Superhero who suddenly lost his powers.

I don't know, maybe they're purposefully going for, to use Johns or Lee's words in the Superman/Wonder Woman relationship announcement "water cooler conversation" to incite attention, whether that be good or bad, it baffles me that Superman riding a bike was considered a good idea to run with. Smallville made Clark look like a douche when he drove a moterbike but at least he was under the influence of red Kryptonite, this story's being done under Superman's own volition. It is pretty much a step back from Morrison's take on Superman, which was undoubtedly an influence for Truth. Only that they missed the point of why Morrison's Jeans & T-Shirt Superman was good or in my case, tolerable at least. It was at least small scale Superman, this isn't.

I'd assert they rise undeservedly but the fact still remains. Only problem is that when DC tries to play copycat, its sales don't rise nearly as much and plummet to the ground even harder. The current Diamond estimates are enough evidence of how low the Superman Family series has gotten and whilst I don't judge a comic based on its sales, you would expect Superman to be one of DC's biggest sellers. Not barely making over 40,00 in Diamond estimation figures each month for the most part.

Agreed and it's exactly why Truth isn't getting any of my money for however long this crossover goes on for. It's much too unstable and way too inconsistent to be considered an enjoyable or entertaining Superman story for me, and Truth is evolving into the antithesis of what I look for when reading a Superman comic. Your next relevant sentences on Superman being falsely recognised as just the Big Blue Boy Scout remind me of part of Michael Bailey's blog on Superman currently; Superman is both a simple yet complex character at the same time.

I just wanted to point out something in regards to this statement. If you've followed the interviews dealing with Truth on Pak's side then you'd have read this

Matt Santori-Griffith: We’ve seen the prologue for June’s Action Comics, featuring a Superman whose secret identity is now known to the world. What challenges or opportunities does that scenario give you as writers on the book?

AK: It also gives us this awesome opportunity to explore the idea of “What is a super-hero?” with the most iconic of super-heroes.

It comes from this interview http://www.comicosity.com/interview-...action-comics/

So the fact that it has elements that could be crossed over to any archetypal hero mold is intentional. Pak and Kuder are using Superman as both a character that they have made him into and the primal archetype that he's always been. If you leave personal biases at the door when looking at the idea of this, it's actually reminiscent of what a Grant Morrison or Jonathan Hickman would touch on. For my money it's quite the compelling idea, and I've seen nothing to contradict that.

Being the intention doesn't make it better...actually it only makes it worse. And I disagree that Truth is similar to what Morrison would write. He always goes for stories deep into the characters lore that couldn't be said with others. You can pretty much see that in all his works. He sees the characters for the archtypes they are but stays true to that always and still manages to be fresh. You can't see work of Morrison that could have been said with other characters. All Star was based on Superman's Silver age stories and lore. Action Comics on his Golden Age crusader self and his most unique and bizarre villains. His Batman the same, it could only be said with him.

I kinda like it. Considering the bike gets destroyed later by Batmech, I don't think I would have liked it being Pa Kent's old ride. It would needed to have been a permanent feature.

But then you have no idea that this will or will not dig into Superman mythos, but only from a different angle. Also the premise is still very much Morrison and Hickman-like in it's intent to play with the archetype of the superhero. Notice I never say it's like a Morrison or Hickman story in it's entirety. I say these are the sort of big compelling ideas that make most of their books spin.

If you look at All Star Superman it's not a big love letter to the Sliver age like most assume simply because of aesthetics. No, in actuality Morrison has verbally refuted this idea time and time again. What that book was about were bigger and more abstract thoughts that were not completely unique to Superman, but they could be used rather well by him. It was about idea of the everyman, the solar myth, enlightenment theory, and so on. Far more abstract thoughts that were dressed as a superhero. Morrison has time and time spoken about how he uses superheroes and a mouthpiece to speak about the bigger formless thoughts that we as humans have all the time.

His reasons for deciding on using the crazy style attributed to the Silver age was because that's the style that made sense for him and the story. When you look at Truth and it's idea of getting to the heart of what a superhero is by using the archetype hero, Superman, then it on a conceptual level fits into the wheelhouse of a Morrison-like look at the concept. Now past the conceptual stage on to how it plays out will be all Pak and co. But the idea is not something I'd see Morrison thumb his noise at. Pak could very well make this a tor de force on the Superman world but seen from the ground up (due to Superman's current condition). Am I saying it will be as complex and encompassing as a Morrison work? I personally don't think Pak's style lines up like that. It's more of a heart filled affair than anything else.

My point is that this concept is not inherently bad one in the context of Superman. Him not sharing the traits you personally want are just a thing of taste.

Or you know what? I'm hoping Pak and co have a nice balance of establish lore exploration and new all together creation. I respect and love it when a writer can use the established ideas and concepts in a characters myth and re energize them or bend them to great effect like Morrison does. But I love it just as much when a writer goes of the beaten path to chart out new ways of realizing the character. Sometimes it's quite opposed to what has come before, but so long as the story is good I'm in.

I'd recently listened to an interview with Pak and Yang talk about Truth. Yang talks about what it means to be the "Man of Tomorrow" in the 21st century vs what it meant in the 1930s. He wondered how Superman stacks up today.

It's questions like this along with "what does it mean to be a superhero" that I look forward to exploring. I say bring on the new and let the chips fall where they may! Cheers!

We have seen enough previews, sneak peeks and interviews to be able to at least judge. Supposedly the sneak peeks were a small story with the tone and direction of the main books so an idea of what we will see at least is there.

The premise is no Morrison like at all. Again Morrison writes stories that can only be said by the character he is writing. He even revealed Clark's Identity for three issues back in AC but he did it tastefully and made it a very personal struggle of Clark's. And a story that could be said only with Clark. Truth is an un-tasteful gimmick to raise sales. Throwing every thing we have out there so Action comics may rise above 30K.
Truth can be said with anyone. And that's its sin. Its generic. And because Superman is iconic and the first Super-hero doesn't make it any less sinful to use him as generic good guy. You can see it in the thought boxes especially. Change Superman with a Martian Manhunter without his powers, a Green Lantern, a flash and it will sound pretty much the same. TAKE ONE STORY of Morrison you can do the same. You can't.

I don't disagree that All Star was more than a silve age tribute, I actually agree. But you said it yourself these are concepts that can be said very well with Superman. And while Morrison is a bit pompous to make his work sound a bit more cultured you can't deny the influences of the classic Superman lore in the book. Lois as Super-woman, Atlas and Samson, Solaris, Doomsday, Lex, Bizarro, the death of Pa Kent. All those are stories that could be said only with Superman, in their entirety and fit Morrison's context. Playing with ideas is never bad when they are true to the character.

Again, Truth ISN'T the core of the character. Unfortunately, the core of Superman isn't only what a good guy he is. His world, his larger than life magnificence and powers are what make him unique and are part of his core even more than his ever-changing personality. And again Morrison always tries to reach at the core of each character hence All Star, Action Comics etc. And he knows that Clark Kent, the powers are all part of it.

@squalleon: Well you don't seem to understand what I was getting at with the Morrison comparison beyond the superficial and cosmetic. Maybe that's a failing on my part and my ability to clearly explain myself to you. In any case I'll simply let it be, and agree to disagree.

As for your stance on the story, I feel like it just doesn't line itself up correctly with you're taste for the character. This is perfectly fine, obviously. But objectively speaking I don't see how one can deduce the entire worth of a multi month spanning story arc through 32 pages of truncated content. That seems more than unfair. Mind you it's more than fair to use that to check your initial excitement for the arc, but not the meaning, nuances, and execution of ideas in said arc. That seems like a tall tale.

I'm sure you'll respond with how this is an insult to the core of the character and the like, but I simply don't see that. I've yet to take in the story. I've yet to understand the inner working of the idea. I've yet to see what it's all building to. I hear interesting ideas floating around from Yang in a interview. There he talks about the ideological friction created with the meaning of "man or tomorrow" in the 1930s vs today. That seems rather exclusive to Superman, but more importantly it seems like a truly interesting idea to wrap your head around and make a story out of.

My intent in replying to you is not sway you to become excited for this story. That means nothing to me. I simply wanted to give information that you all may have missed. If it and my perception of said information do nothing for you, then that's fine. But anyways I believe this will be my last post to you on the matter. Cheers!

Let's take this from the beginning you said this was an idea that you could see Morrison doing. I disagreed. Morrison always stays true to the characters. And builds from there. When Superman became electric in the 90s Morrison DIDN'T want to work with him. So a depowered, without Secret ID Superman, is something Morrison wouldn't do. Especially with such a generic premise.

Well, I have read the previews, the first issue of the arc and the sneak peeks. We are talking about 50+ pages of content with that premise. And the Sneak Peeks were presented as small autonomous stories to judge what is coming HENCE the point of a preview to begin with.

Well, Interviews aren't enough. I prefer to see the story itself, and as I said, the story itself and premise give a very generic vibe that I just don't like. And while Yang may have all the good intention in the world Pak is the mastermind of the story. And Pak tends to repeat ideas from all his works. Last time he depowered a hero was Hercules and it was the worst part of his run on the character.

If you see in the respective thread I made about discussing the issue, you will see that I enjoyed it. I disagree with the premise, but that's another thing. But reading issue number 1 of Truth made me feel that this issue wouldn't be any different if you put Green Lantern or Flash in Superman's shoes.

@superlad93: The writers can make all sorts of fancy excuses and justifications in interviews and podcasts to last a lifetime, they don't matter when the actual story involves Yang turning Lois into someone whose most important role in New 52 Superman comics will be to betray Superman and Clark, two of her best friends and actually making an unethical journalistic decision in putting Clark and Jimmy in more danger than adhering to any pretense of the 'truth.' Basically, the proof is in the pudding so to speak and this pudding is looking very stale.