Superman: The Man of Steel #17 & 18 (Doomsday) 3 3

[valiantman]

 

That gives us direct numbers for MOS as:

 

MOS #17 - 18,700 = 85,500 copies

MOS #18 - 26,350 = 120,500 copies

MOS #19 - 96,700 = 440,000 copies

MOS #20 - 84,250 = 385,000 copies

 

 

So... my neighbor has gathered himself 0.03% of the estimated print run? Awesome!

 

 

It's funny because MOS #18 was a minor key during the death of Superman days, so it benefits from the "once hot" aspect of nostalgia.

It became nothing within a couple of years due to the market crash, so it was possible to accumulate them (especially the first prints) for cheap.

It has stayed a "basically nothing" book for 20+ years.

 

It seems like the bulk of the copies available to come to market will be from forward-thinking (or deranged) accumulators like your neighbor.

 

There will always be lots of MOS #19 and MOS #20, but the #17 (first fist) and #18 (first walking bodybag) could be surprising.

Seems like MOS #18 is an easy win for anyone who has been buying them a $3 and under for 20 years.

[Lazyboy]

 

That gives us direct numbers for MOS as:

 

MOS #17 - 18,700 = 85,500 copies

MOS #18 - 26,350 = 120,500 copies

MOS #19 - 96,700 = 440,000 copies

MOS #20 - 84,250 = 385,000 copies

 

 

So... my neighbor has gathered himself 0.03% of the estimated print run? Awesome!

 

 

 

That picture obviously contains reprints and newsstand copies, so... no?

[Gatsby77]

Hah -- he's been buying these on spec. over just the last 3 years.

 

As for me, I still have my original owner stash of 8 copies that I bought off the shelf.

 

While the Sept.1992 issue of Previews (Death of Superman cover & solicitation) was the first I picked up as an active comic collector, my LCS did a very good job of informing everyone of the whole storyline -- they posted a huge banner offering one-off pre-order subscriptions to all parts.

 

We all knew that MoS 18 would be big (first "full" Doomsday), as would JLA 69 (less popular than Superman titles, therefore fewer around). So my LCS ordered accordingly.

 

Anyone have the Previews that would show where it fell in the monthly Diamond top 100? Would that be the October issue (Punisher/Venom spotlight)?

[valiantman]

Anyone have the Previews that would show where it fell in the monthly Diamond top 100? Would that be the October issue (Punisher/Venom spotlight)?

Just Googled it and found this:

From this page: http://www.hoknescomics.com/comicstats.htm

 

Man of Steel #18 was in the Top 100 Comics for October 1992 at #79.

 

Man of Steel #17 was in the Top 100 Comics for September 1992 at #88.

 

"All statistics are based solely on Styx International's sales." It isn't clear how well that tracks with the Diamond numbers.

[BettrFastrStrongr]

Predator vs Magnus Robot Fighter #1

[revat]

What's crazy is how much MARVEL was KILLING IT. 55% market share??? with DC barely above Malibu??

 

Seriously Marvel should have just assassinated Mcfarlane and given his money to the other top artists. Image blew up their world...

[Dexter85]

PS. The whole Death of Superman storyline was pretty bad, from a literary standpoint.

 

We have an antagonist who just "shows up", with no back story whatsoever, and in the course of 6 issues, manages to take down the most powerful superhero in the DCU (yes, let's not talk about Spectre, et al.) without any explanation at all. There was no setup, there were no plot elements introduced earlier, there was nothing at all that made us care one whit about "Doomsday", or why he/she/it would or should have A. the motive, B. the opportunity, C. the ability to take down Supes.

 

It was a stunt, a gimmick, and boy did it sell books.

 

But as a literary work, it is awful.

 

It really makes you appreciate the pacing and plotting of storylines like Dark Phoenix, which groundwork was laid beginning in 1976...and didn't culminate until 1980.

 

I imagine, to young teens, it was the thrill of a lifetime.

 

But, just like watching The Poseidon Adventure (1972) as an adult, it wasn't ever very good to begin with.

 

 

Oh yeah! Removing the goggles of childhood nostalgia and replacing them with viewers of an adult who's innocence is long gone, this statement rings true.

 

The Poseidon Adventure...

 

I'm going to go ahead and disagree with both of these points. As far as from a "literary point of view" I don't think the writers were going for anything as deep as, say, Alan Moore's Swamp Thing. I think they wanted to do something BIG with Superman, and the idea snowballed organically into The Death of Superman.

 

If you watch the documentary on the making of DOS, the writers were stone-walled by ABC's Lois & Clark, as they had next planned for the marriage of Lois & Clark to be the next big thing in the comics. However, they were told that because the TV show was going to cover this, they were not allowed to beat them to the punch. So, out their sheer frustration, one of them half-jokingly suggested "Let's just kill him." And to everyone's surprise, everyone kind of agreed that this might be an interesting approach. From there, they hammered out the details that turned into the entire Doomsday saga.

 

As far as being a "gimmick" to sell comics goes, if they wanted to simply move books, they could've just done a one off comic where Luthor, or whoever, shoots Superman with a Kryptonite bullet and slapped "The Death of Superman" on the cover, and in late 1992 that likely would have moved the book just as well. Instead, they spent the better part of a year telling the story with the 7 part Doomsday series kicking it off.

 

Sure, they knew it was going to be huge. But, it didn't do as well as it did start to finish because it was a bad story. Not to mention, be as revered and collected over 20 years after the fact. It's easy to pick DOS because it did as well as it did.

[Gatsby77]

For good or ill, the storyline did lead directly to one of the best movies of the 1990s:

 

 

[kimik]

What's crazy is how much MARVEL was KILLING IT. 55% market share??? with DC barely above Malibu??

 

Seriously Marvel should have just assassinated Mcfarlane and given his money to the other top artists. Image blew up their world...

 

I was shocked by how low Batman sales were considering it was such a huge seller just a couple of years before that. It goes to show how huge the star artists were at the time - Image was killing it.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Hah -- he's been buying these on spec. over just the last 3 years.

 

As for me, I still have my original owner stash of 8 copies that I bought off the shelf.

 

While the Sept.1992 issue of Previews (Death of Superman cover & solicitation) was the first I picked up as an active comic collector, my LCS did a very good job of informing everyone of the whole storyline -- they posted a huge banner offering one-off pre-order subscriptions to all parts.

 

We all knew that MoS 18 would be big (first "full" Doomsday), as would JLA 69 (less popular than Superman titles, therefore fewer around). So my LCS ordered accordingly.

 

You all knew that, huh...?

 

 

Despite the fact that first "full" appearance wasn't really a hobby-wide concept until the advent of CGC...? "Cameo", "full", these were essentially embryonic concepts in the early 90's, and not consistently applied, especially to new characters. The Bronze age wasn't even called the Bronze age on a regular basis until the mid-90's, and the crash stalled these types of conversations for several years.

 

Serious question: how did your LCS order accordingly for MOS #18, when no one had any clue who or what Doomsday was at the time orders for MOS #18 was due (around the time MOS #16 was on the shelves)? After all...in the early 90's, speculation wasn't about new characters. In the early 90's, the conventional hobby speculation wisdom was still "hot artist", "hot character." People didn't focus just on first appearances, but on appearances, period, and it focused on established hits, like Punisher, Wolverine, even Batman appearances in other titles enjoyed a bit of speculation love.

 

There wasn't any way to know who or what Doomsday was, or why anyone would care about him/her/it.

 

Someday, someone will actually have some proof for all these fish tales and kid-colored-glasses memories...

 

 

Anyone have the Previews that would show where it fell in the monthly Diamond top 100? Would that be the October issue (Punisher/Venom spotlight)?

 

It would probably appear in Wizard. I can check my Previews as well. Feel free to post if you find it first.

[Chillax23]

Well fingers crossed that the move will bring more CGC 9.8 copies of the 4th and 5th print of MOS18 to market - I need them both to complete my 9.8 run of all 5 prints.

 

Then I would just need a CGC 9.9 copy and my MOS 18 run would be complete (so no big deal just 3 incredibly tough books hahahahaha )

[RockMyAmadeus]

PS. The whole Death of Superman storyline was pretty bad, from a literary standpoint.

 

We have an antagonist who just "shows up", with no back story whatsoever, and in the course of 6 issues, manages to take down the most powerful superhero in the DCU (yes, let's not talk about Spectre, et al.) without any explanation at all. There was no setup, there were no plot elements introduced earlier, there was nothing at all that made us care one whit about "Doomsday", or why he/she/it would or should have A. the motive, B. the opportunity, C. the ability to take down Supes.

 

It was a stunt, a gimmick, and boy did it sell books.

 

But as a literary work, it is awful.

 

It really makes you appreciate the pacing and plotting of storylines like Dark Phoenix, which groundwork was laid beginning in 1976...and didn't culminate until 1980.

 

I imagine, to young teens, it was the thrill of a lifetime.

 

But, just like watching The Poseidon Adventure (1972) as an adult, it wasn't ever very good to begin with.

 

 

Oh yeah! Removing the goggles of childhood nostalgia and replacing them with viewers of an adult who's innocence is long gone, this statement rings true.

 

The Poseidon Adventure...

 

I'm going to go ahead and disagree with both of these points. As far as from a "literary point of view" I don't think the writers were going for anything as deep as, say, Alan Moore's Swamp Thing. I think they wanted to do something BIG with Superman, and the idea snowballed organically into The Death of Superman.

 

There is, of course, a spectrum, from great literary works (Watchmen) to pablum that's barely readable (say, Superboy comics from the late 50's.)

 

You don't necessarily need to be going for anything deep...but they weren't even going for logical, reasonable, or rational, either. Why Louise Simonson was involved, other than the paycheck, I don't know. But the story isn't just not good...it's terrible. It makes no sense, it isn't logically consistent, there's no continuity, there's no motive for any of the events that unfolded...it's not much better than a college freshman English Lit creative writing project.

 

You don't need to be Alan Moore's Swamp Thing...but Rob Liefeld's Youngblood isn't a goal to shoot for, either.

 

If you watch the documentary on the making of DOS, the writers were stone-walled by ABC's Lois & Clark, as they had next planned for the marriage of Lois & Clark to be the next big thing in the comics. However, they were told that because the TV show was going to cover this, they were not allowed to beat them to the punch. So, out their sheer frustration, one of them half-jokingly suggested "Let's just kill him." And to everyone's surprise, everyone kind of agreed that this might be an interesting approach. From there, they hammered out the details that turned into the entire Doomsday saga.

 

As far as being a "gimmick" to sell comics goes, if they wanted to simply move books, they could've just done a one off comic where Luthor, or whoever, shoots Superman with a Kryptonite bullet and slapped "The Death of Superman" on the cover, and in late 1992 that likely would have moved the book just as well. Instead, they spent the better part of a year telling the story with the 7 part Doomsday series kicking it off.

 

That doesn't make much sense. They started the story in MOS #18, with one-page teasers in the previous 4 weeks' books. Then, 5-6 weeks later, it was over. I was referring only to DOS, not anything else, especially not his "return" three months after FFAF. I don't know where the "better part of a year" factors into it, could you clarify?

 

I'm not sure how doing a "one off comic" shoots Superman with a Kryptonite bullet would have "simply moved books", or anywhere near as well. The stunt was extremely successful, no doubt about it, and there had to be *some* level of buildup.

 

Sure, they knew it was going to be huge. But, it didn't do as well as it did start to finish because it was a bad story. Not to mention, be as revered and collected over 20 years after the fact. It's easy to pick DOS because it did as well as it did.

 

Oh, no, that would be a grave, grave mistake to assume that something that does well must therefore not be bad. It is, in fact, a bad story, badly plotted, badly paced, badly written, and badly executed. It succeeded in spite of it's poor execution, not because of it.

 

There are endless examples of creative efforts that did well, despite the fact that they are terrible. After all, Phantom Menace, Attack of the Clones, and Revenge of the Sith (I had to look that one up, had no idea what it was called, that's how little of an impact it made on me) stand as prime examples of that.

 

There's nothing wrong with having enjoyed it as a kid/young teen. My review wasn't meant to be a condemnation of those who enjoyed it at a young age. However, there does come a time when we should recognize that bad art is bad art, no matter how great we thought it was at the time.

 

I don't know that you'll find many that will hold up DOS as an example of the best the artform had to offer at the time (Sandman, Sin City, Bone), or even good (Hellblazer, Unity), or even mediocre. But, you WILL find people who have reverence for the nostalgia of the event, and there's nothing wrong with that. It was certainly the biggest event to ever happen in comics, certainly before, and probably since.

 

If you disagree, by all means, please discuss specific plot points/elements, examples of quality plotting/pacing, or other elements of the DOS story that you believe make it "not drekky." I'm certainly, as always, willing to hear well-reasoned opposing arguments.

[thedude]

PS. The whole Death of Superman storyline was pretty bad, from a literary standpoint.

 

We have an antagonist who just "shows up", with no back story whatsoever, and in the course of 6 issues, manages to take down the most powerful superhero in the DCU (yes, let's not talk about Spectre, et al.) without any explanation at all. There was no setup, there were no plot elements introduced earlier, there was nothing at all that made us care one whit about "Doomsday", or why he/she/it would or should have A. the motive, B. the opportunity, C. the ability to take down Supes.

 

It was a stunt, a gimmick, and boy did it sell books.

 

But as a literary work, it is awful.

 

It really makes you appreciate the pacing and plotting of storylines like Dark Phoenix, which groundwork was laid beginning in 1976...and didn't culminate until 1980.

 

I imagine, to young teens, it was the thrill of a lifetime.

 

But, just like watching The Poseidon Adventure (1972) as an adult, it wasn't ever very good to begin with.

 

 

 

You could say the same thing about Star Wars: A New Hope. we knew NOTHING and had no back story of the characters or the world they lived in, George just dropped us right in the middle of the action and counted on the audience to fill in the blanks or figure it out, which is what I loved about it. wasn't that the appeal for a long time as well with Wolverine and his unknown Origins, until, that is, Marvel made his origins known. I don't mind not having every thing set up or explained to me before hand. I really enjoyed the Death of Supes storyline and the Funeral for a friend follow up. it's what got me back into comics as a young adult. I did NOT like the Four Supermen storyline that followed, (Cyborg, Superboy, Eradicator, and Steel),

 

 

[GeeksAreMyPeeps]

PS. The whole Death of Superman storyline was pretty bad, from a literary standpoint.

 

We have an antagonist who just "shows up", with no back story whatsoever, and in the course of 6 issues, manages to take down the most powerful superhero in the DCU (yes, let's not talk about Spectre, et al.) without any explanation at all. There was no setup, there were no plot elements introduced earlier, there was nothing at all that made us care one whit about "Doomsday", or why he/she/it would or should have A. the motive, B. the opportunity, C. the ability to take down Supes.

 

It was a stunt, a gimmick, and boy did it sell books.

 

But as a literary work, it is awful.

 

It really makes you appreciate the pacing and plotting of storylines like Dark Phoenix, which groundwork was laid beginning in 1976...and didn't culminate until 1980.

 

I imagine, to young teens, it was the thrill of a lifetime.

 

But, just like watching The Poseidon Adventure (1972) as an adult, it wasn't ever very good to begin with.

 

 

 

You could say the same thing about Star Wars: A New Hope. we knew NOTHING and had no back story of the characters or the world they lived in, George just dropped us right in the middle of the action and counted on the audience to fill in the blanks or figure it out, which is what I loved about it. wasn't that the appeal for a long time as well with Wolverine and his unknown Origins, until, that is, Marvel made his origins known. I don't mind not having every thing set up or explained to me before hand. I really enjoyed the Death of Supes storyline and the Funeral for a friend follow up. it's what got me back into comics as a young adult. I did NOT like the Four Supermen storyline that followed, (Cyborg, Superboy, Eradicator, and Steel),

 

I think you're cherry picking some phrases in the criticism. The bottom line is that there's nothing established within the story either. You can pass on "setup" if your story reveals what the reader needs to know. The Death of Superman storyline didn't do that, from what I remember.

[thedude]

PS. The whole Death of Superman storyline was pretty bad, from a literary standpoint.

 

We have an antagonist who just "shows up", with no back story whatsoever, and in the course of 6 issues, manages to take down the most powerful superhero in the DCU (yes, let's not talk about Spectre, et al.) without any explanation at all. There was no setup, there were no plot elements introduced earlier, there was nothing at all that made us care one whit about "Doomsday", or why he/she/it would or should have A. the motive, B. the opportunity, C. the ability to take down Supes.

 

It was a stunt, a gimmick, and boy did it sell books.

 

But as a literary work, it is awful.

 

It really makes you appreciate the pacing and plotting of storylines like Dark Phoenix, which groundwork was laid beginning in 1976...and didn't culminate until 1980.

 

I imagine, to young teens, it was the thrill of a lifetime.

 

But, just like watching The Poseidon Adventure (1972) as an adult, it wasn't ever very good to begin with.

 

 

 

You could say the same thing about Star Wars: A New Hope. we knew NOTHING and had no back story of the characters or the world they lived in, George just dropped us right in the middle of the action and counted on the audience to fill in the blanks or figure it out, which is what I loved about it. wasn't that the appeal for a long time as well with Wolverine and his unknown Origins, until, that is, Marvel made his origins known. I don't mind not having every thing set up or explained to me before hand. I really enjoyed the Death of Supes storyline and the Funeral for a friend follow up. it's what got me back into comics as a young adult. I did NOT like the Four Supermen storyline that followed, (Cyborg, Superboy, Eradicator, and Steel),

 

I think you're cherry picking some phrases in the criticism. The bottom line is that there's nothing established within the story either. You can pass on "setup" if your story reveals what the reader needs to know. The Death of Superman storyline didn't do that, from what I remember.

 

not necessarily talking about just the setup, but the entire world of Star Wars was foreign to us without much explanation, my point was/is does everything need to be known to enjoy the story? we didn't know much of what "the force" was until of course Midiclorians, (ugh), some of my favorite movies/TV shows/stories are those that don't lay everything out for you. 2001 space odyssey, 12 Monkeys, just to name a few.

[divad]

BTW, it was the Dude's B'day last week - he's 66.

[thedude]

BTW, it was the Dude's B'day last week - he's 66.

 

not really getting the joke, my birthday is in January and I'm 47 years old.

[GeeksAreMyPeeps]

PS. The whole Death of Superman storyline was pretty bad, from a literary standpoint.

 

We have an antagonist who just "shows up", with no back story whatsoever, and in the course of 6 issues, manages to take down the most powerful superhero in the DCU (yes, let's not talk about Spectre, et al.) without any explanation at all. There was no setup, there were no plot elements introduced earlier, there was nothing at all that made us care one whit about "Doomsday", or why he/she/it would or should have A. the motive, B. the opportunity, C. the ability to take down Supes.

 

It was a stunt, a gimmick, and boy did it sell books.

 

But as a literary work, it is awful.

 

It really makes you appreciate the pacing and plotting of storylines like Dark Phoenix, which groundwork was laid beginning in 1976...and didn't culminate until 1980.

 

I imagine, to young teens, it was the thrill of a lifetime.

 

But, just like watching The Poseidon Adventure (1972) as an adult, it wasn't ever very good to begin with.

 

 

 

You could say the same thing about Star Wars: A New Hope. we knew NOTHING and had no back story of the characters or the world they lived in, George just dropped us right in the middle of the action and counted on the audience to fill in the blanks or figure it out, which is what I loved about it. wasn't that the appeal for a long time as well with Wolverine and his unknown Origins, until, that is, Marvel made his origins known. I don't mind not having every thing set up or explained to me before hand. I really enjoyed the Death of Supes storyline and the Funeral for a friend follow up. it's what got me back into comics as a young adult. I did NOT like the Four Supermen storyline that followed, (Cyborg, Superboy, Eradicator, and Steel),

 

I think you're cherry picking some phrases in the criticism. The bottom line is that there's nothing established within the story either. You can pass on "setup" if your story reveals what the reader needs to know. The Death of Superman storyline didn't do that, from what I remember.

 

not necessarily talking about just the setup, but the entire world of Star Wars was foreign to us without much explanation, my point was/is does everything need to be known to enjoy the story? we didn't know much of what "the force" was until of course Midiclorians, (ugh), some of my favorite movies/TV shows/stories are those that don't lay everything out for you. 2001 space odyssey, 12 Monkeys, just to name a few.

Some things don't necessarily need an explanation. A viewer could understand the concept of the Force because it's analogous to religion, and that is made clear, even if everything isn't completely explained. As I remember it, there's not much to go on at all as to why Doomsday was rampaging through Metropolis. He was just something that Superman had to stop. That's kinda cardboard storytelling.

[sd2416]

BTW, it was the Dude's B'day last week - he's 66.

 

not really getting the joke, my birthday is in January and I'm 47 years old.

 

Jeff Bridges. The Dude. Born December 4, 1949. 66 years ago.

[thedude]

BTW, it was the Dude's B'day last week - he's 66.

 

not really getting the joke, my birthday is in January and I'm 47 years old.

 

Jeff Bridges. The Dude. Born December 4, 1949. 66 years ago.

 

Ah, THE dude. Got it.