Which makes for the better "final Superman story", Alan Moore's (from Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow?, (wherein Superman intentionally exposes himself to Gold K, thereby removing his powers permanently), or Grant Morrison's DC 1,000,000 (wherein we find out that Supes lives forever and is the sire to a whole family of Supers).
Each story represents the sort of final chapter that Moore alludes to in his pitch for Twilight of the Superheroes. In the TotS intro, he refers to Dark Knight Returns as being the best capstone to a hero's story (acknowledging that Bruce Wayne didn't stop being Batman, but suggests an end, as opposed to the ever-unfolding, and potentially eternal monthly stories being published in comics).
So which is more satisfying? Which makes more sense? Which did you just plain enjoy more?
I think that, in a totally tempocentrist way, DC 1,000,000 is better because it doesn't (yet, if ever) have to measure up to the test of time. WHTTMOT has the drawback of taking place in, like, 1997, IIRC. Well, here we are in 2007 and we have yet to see the insect-like cars, or the floofy-sleeved shirts, or odd looking coffee pots that decorated Moore's story. The diversion between Moore's envisioned 1997 and the actual 1997 highlights the fictionality of his story, whereas we haven't yet seen what the world will look like 1,000,000 months from now, so that yardstick isn't available for DC 1,000,000.
Plus, despite being a "final chapter" kind of story, Grant's opens up a whole lot of opportunity for fun as we proceed to the end. |