Notes
about this comic review: As an amateur script writer, cartoonist, and Sunday
School teacher, I grade against the curve I know. You may ask what the Sunday
School teacher grades against. I’m not trying to be the CCA. As a Sunday School
teacher I use metaphors to bridge the gap in our understand of God. My Sunday
School grade is based on how good of a Sunday School lesson I could pull out of
the story.
COVER GRADE: B
Penciler: Nick Cardy
It’s almost like that my cover art approval is
riding the playground seesaw. Last issue I was down, but this month I’m back
up. This cover is a crisp, simple, straight-forward, attention grabbing
graphic. I love the look of guilt on Superman’s face, while the unknown villain
lurks around the corner gleeful with victory.
My big complaint is that the art just doesn’t
quite have the “life” that normally oversaturates Cardy’s other covers. The
soldiers and doctor seem to be just outline sketches without any detail. That
would be completely fine for an interior page, but not the cover. There’s also
just a big blank white space for a lot of the background. The foreground is big
enough that scenery wouldn’t distract from it, but somehow the emptiness does.
It just seems to dull the rest of the image.
To end on a positive note, the cover does not
conflict with the story which is nice.
STORYTELLER'S GRADE for "Luthor’s Hammer
of Hate": C-
Writer: Cary Bates
Our mystery cover villain is instantly
revealed to be Lex Luthor. It’s not a real surprise, but it made me immediately
forget that the cover had attempted to even spark that question. The shame is
that if the story was reorganized a little then the reveal wouldn’t need to
happen until about page 8 of 15. This story mismanagement is heightened by the
fact that on page 2 we immediately switch settings. Which begs the question,
why start with Luthor at all? Anyways, Clark Kent is visiting Dr. Thames at the
Metro-Institute. Dr. Thames is showing off his mento-graph which measures the
total brainwave activity of every person in Metropolis. If you’re interested,
check out the Wikipedia page for electroencephalography (EEG).
The math critic in me wants to debunk their gross
over-exaggeration of the amount of energy produced by brainwaves, but why
bother to argue on the embellishment of an energy source in a comic that stars
a superhuman that’s solar powered (Superman must be doing a lot better than the
average solar panel efficiency). So let’s move on.
Superman is helping the army test some
experimental artillery when an unidentified armored vehicle “lumbers onto the
scene…”
Superman exclaims, “Uhh…no injury…no physical
pain…but I know some sort of change has come over me.” At that moment, Luthor
pops his head out of the armored vehicle.
Superman goes into a rage at the very thought
of Luthor and destroys the armored vehicle…
…only to find that Luthor has escaped.
Later that evening, Clark Kent goes into a
verbal rampage while reporting on Lex Luthor.
Discovering that Luthor has managed to
transfer his hate to Superman, the man of steel flys off to Dr. Thames for
help.
Unfortunately, the next morning news reports
indicate the encounter didn’t end so well.
Luthor arrives to finish off Superman.
But it seems that Superman has a few tricks up
his sleeve. The news reports were faked to lure Luthor into a trap. But how did
it happen?
The previous night, Dr. Thames transferred all
of Superman’s hatred into the mento-graph. As a result Luthor is now consumed
with more hate than ever, and Superman easily disposes of a rage induced
Luthor.
Off to jail he goes as the last of Superman’s
hate is used up by the mento-graph.
The unfortunate truth is that this story has
too many odd story choices. Let’s look at the big one: I can make some
assumptions as to how Luthor’s hammer works. Luthor’s hate is transferred into
the hammer as he destroys a Superman statue. Then hitting superman with the
hammer somehow transfers the hate while converting it to be directed to Luthor.
But why would Luthor build this emotional transfer technology into a hammer? It’s
a rather odd choice. Perhaps the only reasoning is for Superman’s pun on page
11. “He’s managed to curse me with the hatred he’s carried for me all his life!
Actually HAMMERD it into me!” Even if we assume that a hammer is a logical
choice, why would Luthor shoot it from a cannon? The whole thing could be
solved with a simpler solution like a ray gun.
On its own, the hammer isn’t too bad, but there
lots of other plot holes and dropped storylines along the way. I already
mentioned the instant mystery villain reveal on page 1. Plus the primary
subplot is that Clark, Lois, and Jimmy are required to take acting lessons to
make their on-air presence more relatable to the viewers.
It is revisited later where Clark Kent, under
the influence of the hate hammer transfer, goes into verbal rampage on air. His
boss, Morgan Edge, complains, “Sure I told you to show more emotion to the camera--but
you were showing insanity! …Viewers have called in demanding that you be
committed!” This event begins to unfold Superman’s discovery of the effects of
the hammer, but in the end there are no consequences for Clark Kent’s hate
filled outburst on-air. It is completely dropped from the story.
There’s also a one page side story about a
bank robber pretending to be Lex Luthor which is a great idea but adds almost nothing to the story.
And finally at the end, Luthor puts on a
“mean-looking glove” to deal the deathblow to Superman. How is that possible?
Did Luther add kryptonite to the glove or something? This could be interesting
but I can find no further details of the glove in this issue or anywhere else
online.
It’s a shame because the core story is an
interesting look into how emotion can affect actions, but it’s just weighed
down by too many distractions.
STORYTELLER GRADE for "The Deadly Dancer
Contract": A
Writer: Len Wein
The previous issue included part 1 of this
story which I give a C+ grade for a clichéd but entertaining story. After
having read this story it’s a lot clearer that it was all a setup for this
month’s edition.
Instead of drawing the tale out over two
stories, it may have been possible to replace the fight that
Christopher-disguised-as-Walsh has with the hoodlums with the emotional
backstory from the previous issue. But I think the story as a whole would have
lost two important elements: 1) combining two stories into one would have made
the whole story rushed and probably less emotional. 2) A mini-cliffhanger
allowed for time in between issues to raise the stakes a little. It was
probably close to a month for me in between the two parts of the story (as it
would have been for the reader of the day), and as soon as I began reading, the
thoughts of Dancer came flooding back. It instantly put me in a higher tension
mindset that this story isn’t just about another hobo the Human Target would
combat. This time it’s personal from panel 1!
The quick pace from climax to ending at first
seemed rushed. I don’t consider the confrontation with Dancer as the climax
since we all knew the Human Target would get the upper hand so the true climax
of the story was what will Christopher do with Dancer?
The climax and resolution all happens in one
page so there’s a slight let down as you’re expecting to turn to the next page
for a conclusion to the narrative. Thinking back on it though, the abrupt end
made a more appropriate focus on the crux of the issue. As in the confusingly
simple quote, “hurt people hurt people.”
A thought provoking ending to a fast-paced
action comic. Top marks!
ARTIST GRADE for Superman: C+
Penciler: Curt Swan, Inker: Murphy Anderson
Looking back at the issue I see no glaring
mistakes, but I also don’t see any remarkable visuals. Out of 70 panels there
are only 4 that don’t have a standard rectangular border. It’s kinda like
watching a low budget superhero movie with limited special effects.
There is one panel that caught my attention.
As Clark, Lois, and Jimmy enter Stanismov Acting School (a play on
Stanislavski’s method acting system?), there are actor’s headshots on the wall.
To me it looks like (top row left to right) Bob
Hope, a chubby Clark Gable, maybe James Garner?, (bottom row) ???, and finally Katharine
Hepburn
ARTIST GRADE for Human Target: B
Penciler/Inker: Dick Giordano
The art is rough in places, but there’s a gritty-ness
to it that I’ve come to appreciate. There’s always a great visual to the
action.
SUNDAY SCHOOL TEACHER GRADE: A
This is a pretty easy lesson: hate = bad.
Bible verses are pretty easy to come by on the subject.
Proverbs 29:11 Fools give full vent to their
rage, but the wise bring calm in the end.
Ephesians 4:26-27 And "don't sin by
letting anger control you." Don't let the sun go down while you are still
angry, for anger gives a foothold to the devil.
James 1:19-20 Understand this, my dear
brothers and sisters: You must all be quick to listen, slow to speak, and slow
to get angry. Human anger does not produce the righteousness God desires.
It’s interesting to see how both stories dug
into the topic of anger. It’s easy to see how hate was bad in the battle
between Superman and Luthor. Hate led to a lack of self-control and ultimately
caused lots of problem for whoever was consumed by it. However in the
confrontation between the Human Target and Dancer, hate created drive and
purpose. It’s pretty plain to see how it’s a bad thing that Dancer’s fear and
hate turned him into a mobster, but what about Christopher Chance? Wasn’t it
his anger at not being able to help his father the reason that he trained so
hard so that he could save others from that gruesome fate? Can hate be a good
thing in some cases? I would argue that it was not hate that ultimately drives
Christopher Chance otherwise he would have killed Dancer. Although he was
deeply impacted by the death of his father, it appears that compassion is his
driving factor instead.
CLARK
KENT’S MONTHLY GOOF:
Everyone gets in on the action this issue. As
I mentioned earlier, Clark, Lois, and Jimmy are part of a mandate to all WGBS
newscaster to learn to dramatize their TV-reporting. “React emotionally to the
news! Look sad when the news is bad…smile when it’s good.” Apparently
Stanismov’s method acting only involve animals.
There’s also an obscure reference to “Zoo
Parade,” a TV show from the 1950s. It’s unlikely the core demographic would
have gotten this reference since a child born at the time the show was canceled
would have been 16 when this comic hit the stands.
EXCESSIVE USE OF FORCE:
I had no idea he
could do that. Superman is a computer’s worst nightmare! But can he play Angry
Birds?
DEAR EDITOR (seen in #427):
Nothing much to report, just a lot of people thought the logistics of Hammer of Hate were a stretch.
