Friday, April 19, 2013
There are spoilers ahead ...
The origin story for Superboy has changed.
Originally, Superboy was just a younger version of Superman.
However, about 1993, following the "death" of Superman vs. Doomsday, Superboy became a clone -- with DNA from both Superman and Lex Luthor.
Enter the "New 52" in 2011 and Superboy looked for like just a rogue experiment with Superman's DNA.
However, issue No. 19 of "Superboy" has changed that now.
This story titled, "Unreveling the Secret Origin .. of the son of Lois Lane and Superman," was definitely a surprise.
It falls under a rather complicated story, but the sad part is that I had to suspend one of my core beliefs of Superman for the story to work ....
I fail to see why Superman (and Lois Lane) would leave their seemingly dead, 4-year-old child's body unburied, or taken care of -- before they disappeared for good.
I just don't see that happening with ANY version of the Man of Steel. He would not leave with that undone -- no way, period.
His body would have been protected, guarded at the least.
So, the three writers of this comic, Scott Lobdell, R.R. Silva and Diogenes Neves totally failed in that storyline.
How could DC's editors also have missed this key shortcoming?
No, this is one reason why the "New 52" isn't working out for DC Comics as well as they had hoped.
You can't change the core values of Superman like this and expect strong sales and good reactions. Fans, like me, are upset over this.
Lex Luthor stole some DNA in the previous incarnation of Superboy, buy I don't buy that Superman didn't go to the ends of the universe to try and save, or bring back his dead son!
DC is also trying to elevate a new villain, "Harvest" in all this.
Actually, the current Superboy may be a clone of Superman and Lois' son -- and their original son may also be re-animated if Harvest has his way.
A pretty good story, but not when you have to suspend a core value of Superman for it to work.