I'm not saying I don't love the story but it seems like the series was so that Jim Lee and Snyder could only tell their story. When they leave the book will be meaningless. Why not just give them an arc in Superman?

They should have just put them on Superman, but I think Scott Lobdell has incriminating photographs of DC editorial or something. They also felt like they had to do something comic book related for Supes' 75th. So...no, it's not necessary. I'm dropping Superman until Lobdell leaves anyway, so no skin off my back.

...well this isn't true. There are a lot of people out there who can probably take this title and give us a story that may be just as good and (why not?) even better. Lets try to be optimist, then, i really like the idea of an extra Superman's title. More titles doesn't exactly mean a low quality.

art and story wise im liking unchained over the other superman titles . it should have been agreed all around to do a young inexperienced superman-to-be and then break in the superman we all know , rather than the back in forth in titles without any real warning. example: action comics will have a pre-jl supes fighting a enemy , superman: will have him in the present going against a different enemy to be concluded in action comics . huh? what? i rather stick with unchained .

It is necessary because Superman is allowed to have a book that isn't adjectiveless or Action Comics. Superman Unchained falls in the same category as his former books - Adventures of Superman, Superman: The Man of Steel, and Superman: The Man of Tomorrow. It's another book to tell additional stories for Superman --- much like The Dark Knight, & Robin, and Eternal for Batman.