[QUOTE=BMalion]
Yeah, count me as someone who doesn’t give a fig for his personal behavior, I loved his X-Men run, heck I remember buying After Doomsday with the great back up feature Rog2000 at my local quickie-mart (damn I wish I’d kept those!).
[/QUOTE]
You mean Doomsday +1 
And Rog2000 backed up E-Man. What? You don’t remember the minutae of books published 25+ years ago?
[QUOTE=Fenris]
You mean Doomsday +1 And Rog2000 backed up E-Man. What? You don’t remember the minutae of books published 25+ years ago?
[/QUOTE]
I realized my mistake soon after, but was too lazy to correct myself, leaving it to see who would win the no-prize. 
You’ll have to forgive me, I recently sold my collection and I’m dealing with the sense of loss.
Still hung on to my copy of Flash #105!
[QUOTE=Fenris]
Here’s the problem I have with much of Byrne’s stuff.
Based on the books he wrorked on after his FF and Supermen runs, it seems to me like Byrne
A) Doesn’t play well with others* and
B) Refuses to allow characters to grow or change past what they were when he was 15 years old.
[/QUOTE]
I agree with you on “A”; I just looked through the galleries on his website and was reminded how so much of his work is defined by its overwhelming contempt for–well, somebody. There’s something of the wimpy kid who wishes he could be a bully to the man’s character.
As for “B”: Well, there are some counterexamples. The Johnny Storm/Alicia Masters romance was touched on earlier, and God was that more interesting than the route subsequent writers took. Byrne and, later, Claremoint, are the only FF writers who gave Johnny credit for any degree of depth (It’s official; I am the only person who read and enjoyed Chris Claremont’s run on FF). And he shook Superman out of decades of stagnation. He’s not pure suckitude. He’s adulterated suckitude. And he can draw well; he just inexplicably chooses not to.
[QUOTE=Krokodil]
(It’s official; I am the only person who read and enjoyed Chris Claremont’s run on FF).
[/QUOTE]
raises hand I enjoyed Claremont’s FF run, too, when old skool fans were having fits. Really, I didn’t (and still don’t) see how Claremont was any worse than, say, DeFalco. He certainly had his faults but he seemed to be having fun writing the series, poked fun at himself, and benefited from Larocca’s beautiful artwork. His worst quality was a tendancy to be all “U Go, Gurl!” with the female characters.
[QUOTE=ululate]
IIRC, she took out the Hulk by putting a forcefield around his head (feats of superstrength use up a lot of air in a hurry), and threatened Doctor Doom into standing down by quipping that she could put a forcefield bubble inside his armor and expanding it. She’s basically a Green Lantern, only with invisible soldified energy constructs.
[/QUOTE]
I was one of those who wished she had remained MALICE 
[QUOTE=Krokodil]
I agree with you on “A”; I just looked through the galleries on his website and was reminded how so much of his work is defined by its overwhelming contempt for–well, somebody. There’s something of the wimpy kid who wishes he could be a bully to the man’s character.
As for “B”: Well, there are some counterexamples. The Johnny Storm/Alicia Masters romance was touched on earlier, and God was that more interesting than the route subsequent writers took. Byrne and, later, Claremoint, are the only FF writers who gave Johnny credit for any degree of depth (It’s official; I am the only person who read and enjoyed Chris Claremont’s run on FF). And he shook Superman out of decades of stagnation. He’s not pure suckitude. He’s adulterated suckitude. And he can draw well; he just inexplicably chooses not to.
[/QUOTE]
But excluding She-Hulk, I can’t think of a single example that’s after his Superman reboot. Note also that when Byrne was briefly on the Unadjectived X-Men, his first priority was to retcon Magneto back into a psycho who’d been mellowed by Moira and or Xavier messing with his brain or genetics or whatever (which is a change I approve of, btw. But it does demonstrate the “If it’s not like it was when I was 15, I don’t like it” mentality)
Also, several quibbles; I enjoyed the Claremont FF run except for the “I’m a grown-up future kid of yours (with a possibly misspelled name) come back to the past” bit and I think that was handed to Claremont by someone else.
Also, Waid gave Johnny some depth too–more than Byrne did and I liked Byrne’s Johnny.
Finally, I’d quibble about the “decades of stagnation” bit. Elliot S! Maggin was telling damned great Superman stories into the late '70s. Heh–if you’d said “Half a decade of stagnation” I wouldn’t have been able to say a word. My only other point (and I don’t blame Byrne for this–he was expliciltly ordered to reboot Superman) was Byrne’s stance that Superman HAD to be rebooted to destagnate him. Lookit Alan Moore’s “Whatever Happened To The Man Of Tomorrow” or Moore’s (brilliant) Supreme rune or hell, Grant Morrison’s wonderful All-Star Superman run to see why a reboot wasn’t “necessary”. (Again, I know that’s what the editors wanted him to do, I’m just arguing the word “necessary”.)
[QUOTE=Krokodil]
His behavior at Marv Wolfman’s trial (making faces and sticking his tongue out at Wolfman from the gallery while Wolfman testified) made many people question his mental and emotional stability.
[/QUOTE]
This is something I was unaware of. Could you elaborate, please?
[QUOTE=The New and Improved Superman]
This is something I was unaware of. Could you elaborate, please?
[/QUOTE]
seconded, what trial?
The trial would have to be the fight over the character of Blade between Wolfman and Marvel. I’m not familiar with the incident in question though.
[QUOTE=The New and Improved Superman]
This is something I was unaware of. Could you elaborate, please?
[/QUOTE]
Marv Wolfman created a fairly obscure supporting character in Tomb of Dracula, Blade, who eventually became the first Marvel character to carry a money-making feature film. Wolfman had reason to believe that he, not Marvel, owned that character and a couple dozen others. In 1997, he initiated a lawsuit to this end; in 2002, it was decided in Marvel’s favor. While Wolfman’s claims had what appears to non-lawyers to be surprising merit, Wolfman had one or two industry pros testifying in his favor, but Marvel had several, including John Byrne. Wolfman talked with The Comics Journal about the trial here.
Here’s an excerpt, dealing specifically with Byrne:
You beat me to that exact same link by seconds, Krododil!
:: shakes fist angrily at Krokodil ::
I WILL have my revenge! I vow ETERNAL vengance!
Or, y’know. Maybe not.
But since when has the Luthor-As-Kingpin-On-Slimfast been anything but Byrne’s? The character first appeared in the 6 part Man of Steel mini-series and that was ALL Byrne’s, IIRC. The first real interesting change in Luthor came from Grant Morrison in his JLA run when Luthor got a motive beyond “Bah! That Webcrawler big blue boyscout has foiled one of my business deals FOR THE LAST TIME!”
[QUOTE=Fenris]
But since when has the Luthor-As-Kingpin-On-Slimfast been anything but Byrne’s? The character first appeared in the 6 part Man of Steel mini-series and that was ALL Byrne’s, IIRC.
[/QUOTE]
According to Byrne, and, I believe the PTB of DC at the time.
Wolfman’s story’s different. As he tells it, he consulted with Byrne on MoS (and, IIRC, was originally supposed to share the writing credit), and the rebooted Luthor (about whom I have to disagree with you about, but that’s beside the point) was one of Wolfman’s suggestions (and the only one that survived into the final version).
I can’t remember where I read that, though. <_< Perhaps Wolfman’s afterward from the Crisis on Infinite Earths hardcover.
[QUOTE=Fenris]
But since when has the Luthor-As-Kingpin-On-Slimfast been anything but Byrne’s? The character first appeared in the 6 part Man of Steel mini-series and that was ALL Byrne’s, IIRC. The first real interesting change in Luthor came from Grant Morrison in his JLA run when Luthor got a motive beyond “Bah! That Webcrawler big blue boyscout has foiled one of my business deals FOR THE LAST TIME!”
[/QUOTE]
Around 1985, DC solicited proposals for its major books and characters from the major creators of the day. Steve Englehart and Denny O’Neil submitted proposals for a direction for the Batman titles, and DC went with O’Neil’s proposal, resulting in two decades of grim ‘n’ grittiness and textbook psychosis. Steve Gerber and Doug Moench submitted proposals for a Spectre series. Gerber was distracted by the HTD movie, and Moench’s proposal was selected. George Perez did the Wonder Woman reboot, and Steve Englehart did one for Green Lantern.
John Byrne and Marv Wolfman submitted dual proposals for a direction for the Superman books. Instead of choosing one at the total expense of the other, the editors decided to mix and match. Byrne got Superman: Man of steel, Superman and Action and Wolfman and Jerry Ordway got the new, renumbered Adventures of Superman. Each title incorporated elements of both proposals. Byrne brought the comic in line with the films (sterile, colorless Krypton; living Ma and Pa Kent), and Wolfman Dallas-ized the three primary characters, making Luthor a business tycoon. In his proposal, Lois Lane was introduced as Luthor’s mistress, to be lured away by Superman. This part was not retained. Both writers were given wide lattitude, but not a completely free hand.
I also recall that it was Marv Wolfman’s pre-Crisis reinterpetation of Vandal Savage as a corrupt multibillionaire industrialist that directly inspired John Byrne’s revamp along the same lines. I’m pretty sure businessman Savage appeared in some Superman comics in the early-to-mid 80s, though.