Talk:Superman: Secret Origin

Not the true Origin
Alright, so frankly put, this story is a product of the results that came from the lawsuits of Siegel Estate vs. DC Comics, correct? In which the Siegel Estate has won the court battles, and everything revolving around Superman's TRUE origins (Krypton, the Krypton Science Council, Jor-El, Brainiac, General Zod, Non being lobotomized by the Council, Sunstone crystals including the one that erected the Fortress of Solitude) revert back to the Siegels in 2011. So this story includes NONE of that info. So then, how is this the "Definitive Origin," as Dan DiDio puts it? This would leave many plot holes and inconsistencies with the origin, therefore it would not be definitive. It would be lackluster. It seems with them taking away anything Kryptonian in heritage and the exact nature of his homeworld, and the fact that they are including things such as Lex Luthor knowing Clark in Smallville as a teen, they are only trying to save themselves from future lawsuits in the future and also taking the opportunity to add some elements from the "Smallville" TV show into comic continuity. This is not the idea of a "Definitive Origin." "Superman: Birthright" should still be the Definitive Origin tale, not this weak off-shoot.


 * You're mistaken in pretty much every respect. Everything the Jerry Siegel created for issue #1 of Action Comics will (should the ruling stand), become the legally held copyright of his estate. Since "Krypton, the Krypton Science Council, Jor-El, Brainiac, General Zod, Non being lobotomized by the Council, Sunstone crystals including the one that erected the Fortress of Solitude," etc. were not created by Siegel prior to the publication of Action Comics #1- and in fact, were mainly not created by Siegel and Shuster AT ALL, they are not affected by the ruling. Most of what you are referring to, such as Zod, Non, the crystals, etc, were created forty years after Superman was for the Richard Donner movie, long after Siegel and Shuster were no longer associated with the title. This origin, like it or lump it, is an amalgamation of several different stories, just like Birthright was, and just like Man of Steel was before that. It might be a good idea to actually know the facts (both legally and with regards to comic book history) before you atart complaining about them.

At any rate, the discussion page is supposed to be about the ARTICLE, not about people's opinions of the work. And the article is barely intelligible. I would copy edit it myself, but having not read the comics in question I fear I would be factually inaccurate in redoing the origin. 69.45.100.129 (talk) 19:25, 29 June 2010 (UTC)