The finale to this three issue storyline is rather mediocre. It feels very by the numbers, and while you can tell it’s supposed to be some sort of moving, “gray area” thing to “challenge” Superman it comes off very pedestrian. There’s no real insight, it just feels like something you’ve read before. Had the characters involved been more significant it would’ve had more impact. It’s not something that can be pulled off within three issues effectively without a deeper connection for the reader. more

This storyline was a waste of time and resources. I barely cared about any of the characters or their motivations. Poorly plotted, very little character development of any depth, no action except for a weak page or two of a very lame fight with paper-thin villains. John Ridley shouldn’t be writing Superman stories. Such a comedown after Waid’s epic.

Quick review. I didn't hate this ending, the build up to this entire story was garbage but the ending was decent, art wasn't horrible. Just having Lois be smarter or a therapist to Clark was totally forced. Don't forget without Lois he can't act on his own...Would have made more sense with him talking to Pa Kent instead of Lois. We can't have that though because we have to push that agenda of "Strong female characters" in comics. So yeah, would have been better if not bogged down with dogma pandering that no one wants to pay for. more

I didn't hate this issue as much as some people did. I thought some of the jokes didn't land like the MIB reference and I do agree that there are too many human characters in the book. I did like some of the interactions. I liked the reveal as I'm a fan of the relationship between Hawkgirl and Stewart, however, I don't like the designs on either. Everyone said that Jeremy didn't really write this issue. I'm not sure how true that is.

My Comic Review Channel - https://youtu.be/Nyak3h_Gg6c more

Very disappointing that Jeremy Adams chose to pander to the DCAU fans who don't buy comics and ruin Shayera's character development. John/Shayera is just a shit pairng that has done dirty to the Hawks franshise. Also it is really a bummer that while every fan wants to see is Hal/Sinestro dynamics, Jeremy Adams stole Hal's frenemy relationship with Sinestro and gave that to John. Come on, hasn't John taken enough things away from Hal? more

Who is this garbage written for? The demographic that dosen't exist and that DC Comics will never create? A waste of paper and ink.

As if you needed another reason to hate the character of Alexander Rodchenko. His "Errand of Valor" is little more than an anti-capitalist fan fiction. Usally this book is one that I enjoy, this issue made me want to throw up. Yes, Star Trek has been progressive but it has been done in context of the story and in subtle details of the story. This just craps it out on the page and calls it Art. I don't know if this was an attempt and pandering but it missed the mark big time. Do better Mr. Cantwell. more

The sole saving grace of Action Comics #1028 is that it exists outside the current "All In" disaster, sparing readers from that incoherent mess of a storyline. Unfortunately, any relief is short-lived, as this issue replaces one set of problems with another, offering up a misguided attempt to "modernize" Superman's world in ways that completely alienate long-time fans.

The central issue here is the portrayal of Lois Lane, who, in this story, is framed as the all-knowing sage tasked with helping Superman recover from—brace yourself—losing hope. Yes, Superman, the Man of Tomorrow, the symbol of resilience and optimism, apparently needs to be lectured back into shape by Lois, who draws on her "vast experience" as an award-winning journalist to play therapist to the greatest hero on Earth. This dynamic is not only absurd, but it completely undermines Superman as a character. If this is the writing that had greeted me when I first started reading Superman, I would have stopped right then and there.

Lois has always been a key part of the Superman mythos, but her role is simple and effective: she gets into trouble, cries for help, and Superman saves the day. How hard is it to understand and stick to this formula? It's classic, it works, and it gives readers what they want—a heroic Superman. Instead, this issue flips the dynamic, turning Lois into the alpha figure and Superman into a lost puppy, as if the writers are deliberately trying to invert the roles to push some kind of modern messaging. The result is a story that feels alien to everything Superman fans have come to love about these characters.

And let’s not ignore the elephant in the room: this kind of storytelling is a major reason why sales are in the toilet. The people in charge seem to have no idea who their audience is or why Superman has endured for decades. Readers don’t come to Superman for forced ideological posturing or "message over myth." They come for stories of hope, heroism, and inspiration. When you discard those core principles for the sake of fixing what isn’t broken, you alienate the very audience that made these characters iconic in the first place.

In conclusion, Action Comics #1028 is a case study in how not to write Superman. It takes everything that made the character and his world timeless and replaces it with a heavy-handed attempt to reshape the dynamic into something unrecognizable. It’s frustrating, disappointing, and another sad example of why the Superman franchise is struggling to connect with readers today. more

Another strong issue. I like the beginning banter that allowed the villain to slip up. I almost thought they were going to submit to his request. The villa looks a bit too much like Dr. Manhattan, however. Poor Jimmy, always in the wrong place at the right time. I'm still not a fan of the Superwoman character and I am looking forward to everything going back to normal with Lois soorner rather than later. Which will also mean a conflict with Zod.


Jeremy Adams interview - https://youtube.com/live/GUqtOTR4GHY?feature=share more

Joshua Williamson has been killing it in Superman. And I love how Dan Mora is still going strong and puts out beautiful work on Superman as well. Dan Mora is slowly turning into one of my favorite artists of all time. I love the coloring and the writing for the characters.

Superman has long stood as the ultimate symbol of strength, virtue, and the responsibility that comes with great power. But in Superman #22, none of that seems to matter. Instead of a compelling story that respects its characters and mythology, we are subjected to a cringeworthy exercise in ideological pandering, where the actual Superman is sidelined to make way for Lois Lane—now rewritten as an insufferable feminist propaganda tool. Worse yet, in an absurd and completely unearned twist, Lois is inexplicably given the same powers as Superman, further diminishing any remaining sense of stakes or meaning.
It is difficult to overstate just how grating and poorly written Lois Lane is in this issue. Gone is the sharp, tenacious journalist who earned her place in Superman’s world through intelligence and determination. In her place, we have a smug, self-righteous, and utterly flawless figure who exists solely to be admired, praised, and elevated above all others.

The most baffling moment in this issue is when the villain calls her a “Queen.” This is already absurd enough, but then Superman—Superman—repeats it as though it is some sort of divine truth. It is as if the comic is demanding the audience acknowledge Lois as the true central figure of this universe, no matter how undeserving she may be.

And now, as if forcing every character to grovel before her wasn’t enough, the writers have decided to give her Superman’s powers. Yes, Lois Lane, without the background, the training, or the decades of self-sacrificing heroism that define Clark Kent, is simply handed godlike abilities. This is not earned. This is not compelling. This is nothing more than ideological wish-fulfillment, designed to push an agenda rather than tell a good story.

Just when you think this issue couldn’t get any lazier, the writers drag out Doomsday—once a legendary villain, now nothing more than a cheap tool used whenever a story lacks substance. There was a time when Doomsday’s presence meant something. He was the ultimate test of Superman’s strength, a force of destruction that required the hero to make the ultimate sacrifice.

But now? He’s just there, serving no real purpose beyond adding superficial stakes to an already pointless story. His inclusion does not build tension, nor does it advance the plot in any meaningful way. It is yet another symptom of a book that has no real ideas and is simply pulling from the most predictable bag of tricks.


more

This is practically unreadable. It is quite evident that Torunn doesn't understand the Catwoman character. Catwoman should stay in Gotham, having her galavanting around Europe dilutes the character. I like Torunn's Red Sonja, but even that got nonsensical by the end. This is a drop for me. It's sad that no one can write Catwoman or Wonder Woman right now.

Jeremy Adams interview - https://youtube.com/live/GUqtOTR4GHY?feature=share more

I'm not a big fan of this superstars thing going on. Back and forth on writers and jumping to stories that take place before current events doesn't make me want to come back every month and John Ridley is certainly not a Superman superstar. This feels as boring as Straczynski's grounded run to me and the art is a bit of a let down. This is no where near a $5 book.

New writing style for those who don't know how to constuct a proper story. Garbage

This was purely a filler issue and was pretty disappointing. Playing darts on the moon by throwing boulders. I'm not sure if that would create tidal waves on Earth. From there they stop a war. it was good to see Amythest. Not sure about the costume though. There was no progression of the story whatsoever. And the Lex storyline of losing his memory is pretty stupid. Hopefully, we get back on track next issue.

My Comic Review Channel - https://youtu.be/10EqsPRa2aM more

Superman #21 continues the baffling trend of sidelining Superman in favor of propping up Lois Lane as a superhero—a narrative choice that not only feels forced but actively undermines the timeless dynamic that has made this duo iconic for decades. The issue is yet another example of modern storytelling prioritizing novelty over the essence of what makes Superman’s world so compelling: his unwavering strength, his compassion, and, yes, his role as the savior and protector of those he loves.

The synopsis teases an “epic date night” between Clark and Lois—a much-needed moment of respite after the chaos of Doomsday’s attack. But instead of giving us a meaningful exploration of their relationship, the story shoehorns Lois into the action as Superwoman yet again. This misguided attempt to transform her from the intrepid reporter who challenges Clark with her wit and courage into a superpowered peer feels unnecessary at best and distracting at worst.

The magic of Superman and Lois Lane has always been their complementarity. Lois, grounds Superman, reminding him of the humanity he fights to protect. Meanwhile, Superman inspires Lois to see beyond the limits of human frailty. By turning Lois into a second-rate superhero, the story erases that dynamic and reduces her to a participant in generic action scenes. Instead of being the woman who challenges Superman emotionally and intellectually, Lois becomes a character who needs to throw punches to be “relevant.”

The alien invasion—a massive armada seeking revenge on Superman—should be a grand, dramatic affair. But the focus remains scattered, bouncing between Clark, Lois, and the alien threat without giving any one element the attention it deserves. The result is a narrative that feels disjointed, with Superman’s heroism diluted by Lois’s unnecessary attempts to share the spotlight.

And let’s talk about this "secret" Clark has been keeping about the future. If the creative team was looking to inject some drama into their relationship, they could have explored themes of trust, vulnerability, or the burden of being Superman. Instead, it’s treated as another chance to keep Lois in the thick of things, a move that feels more like a gimmick than a meaningful plot development.

Verdict: If you’re looking for classic Superman storytelling with heart, gravitas, and compelling character dynamics, Superman #21 isn’t it. This issue seems more interested in checking boxes than honoring the legacy of the Man of Steel. Let Superman be Superman—and let Lois be the Lois. more

I genuinely believe Joshua Williamson is the greatest modern Superman writer of all time. He puts so much life and energy into superman that we desperately need in this polarized toxic divisive world. I hope he keeps on writing even after James Gunn releases his Superman movie so we can have a template on what a good Superman book is.

Superman #20 is the kind of issue that feels like it's going through the motions without offering anything truly memorable. The story has all the trappings of a high-stakes showdown—a philosophical tête-à-tête with Doomsday, globe-spanning battles, and ominous foreshadowing—but it’s all executed with a distinct lack of emotional weight or creative flair.

Let’s start with the highlight: Time-Trapper Doomsday. The concept is intriguing—Doomsday as a self-aware force of evolution, grappling with his own limitations and confronting Superman with existential questions about purpose and morality. Unfortunately, this promising setup never quite lands. The dialogue feels perfunctory, skimming the surface of deeper themes without exploring them. Doomsday’s plea to be killed and reborn as a god should be a moment of chilling gravitas, but instead, it comes across as little more than a plot device to kickstart the fight.

The battle itself, while visually dynamic, lacks stakes. Superman laps the globe for an "earth-shattering punch," which sounds cooler than it feels in execution. Meanwhile, Lois (as Superwoman) fights hellhounds, Luthor and Steel play support roles, and Parasite shows up just to be gruesomely dispatched. It’s action-heavy, but none of it feels earned or impactful. Parasite’s death, in particular, is gratuitous—shocking for shock’s sake, with no lasting emotional or narrative consequence.

The issue’s quieter moments fare no better. The scene at Lois’s apartment, where Clark tends to her bruises, could have been an opportunity to deepen their relationship in the wake of shared trauma. Instead, it feels rushed and awkwardly sandwiched between plot threads. Jimmy Olsen’s revelation that Supercorp is hiding Superwoman’s identity adds some intrigue, but it’s quickly brushed aside for Clark’s vague warning about future horrors.

And then there’s the final tease—a masked figure atop a golden tower in Calaton. It’s clear the creative team is trying to build suspense for the next arc, but this cliffhanger feels disconnected from the rest of the issue. Rather than leaving the reader eager for more, it feels like yet another dangling plot thread in an already overstuffed narrative.

The issue’s core problem is that it tries to do too much without excelling at anything. The themes of evolution, morality, and sacrifice are muddled in the shuffle, while the action sequences—though visually engaging—fail to deliver any real tension or stakes. Superman and Superwoman’s dynamic continues to feel imbalanced, with Lois’s role as Superwoman coming across as more of a narrative gimmick than a meaningful addition to the story.

Superman #20 isn’t bad, per se. It’s competently written and illustrated, with flashes of potential in its ideas. But it’s also unremarkable—a forgettable entry in a series that seems to be spinning its wheels. For a title that promises to “shape the future of Superman,” this issue feels oddly directionless.

Verdict: Meh. Read it if you’re a completionist, but don’t expect to be wowed more

Superwoman angle is pointless and unnecessary

In Superman #19, we are presented with yet another chapter in the gradual unraveling of Superman’s core identity—this time, through a narrative structure that seems more interested in diminishing the Man of Steel than celebrating his unique heroism. While the synopsis promises an "exciting new story arc," what we receive instead is a thinly veiled attempt to marginalize Superman in his own series, elevating Superwoman as a centerpiece in what can only be described as an ideological re-engineering of the mythos.

Let’s start with the premise: Superman faces the return of Doomsday, the monstrous force that once represented the ultimate challenge to his might and moral resolve. And yet, this existential confrontation—an opportunity to remind us why Superman is the paragon of heroism—takes a backseat to Lois Lane’s sudden acquisition of powers. The narrative choice here is striking, not because Lois wields powers (a trope we've seen before), but because the story appears desperate to redirect the audience's admiration from Superman to Superwoman.

Consider the implications: Superman, the archetypal symbol of masculine virtue—strength, responsibility, and self-sacrifice—stands diminished as his role is reframed in secondary terms. Lois, imbued with temporary superpowers, is thrust into the foreground, leaving Superman as little more than a passive observer in his own title. This is not a story about partnership or balance; it is a story that seeks to eclipse the hero whose name graces the cover.

The introduction of the Time Trapper as a lurking antagonist offers little to mitigate these concerns. Instead of grounding the story in the timeless moral struggles that make Superman compelling, the narrative meanders through convoluted time-travel elements and half-baked power dynamics. The result is a confused and unsatisfying arc that feels less like a celebration of Superman's legacy and more like a deliberate deconstruction.

It’s worth noting that this isn’t merely a question of storytelling preference but a reflection of broader cultural currents. Superman’s greatest strength has always been his clarity of purpose—his ability to serve as an aspirational figure who shoulders immense responsibility with humility. To dilute that by reducing him to a supporting character is not just a disservice to the character but to the audience who seeks inspiration from him.

Superman does not need to be overshadowed, emasculated, or sidelined to accommodate other characters. He thrives as a hero precisely because he embodies universal values that transcend fleeting cultural trends. Yet, this issue seems intent on subsuming those values into a framework that prioritizes subversion over substance.

In conclusion, Superman #19 is a frustratingly misguided installment that fails to understand—or worse, actively undermines—what makes Superman resonate across generations. Instead of offering a narrative worthy of the Last Son of Krypton, it delivers a shallow spectacle of misplaced priorities. Superman deserves better, and so do his readers. more

We are now seeing the pitfalls of a weekly comic. The art is lacklustre and the story feels like it’s plodding along with filler specifically to make it work weekly. If this was a 6-8 issue monthly book the story and art could be tight and really good but as we get further along the quality has dropped across the board.

As for the Supergirl backup well it’s gotten more interesting these past few issues but should it really take Nine issues for anything to happen?

I said it when Action was announced weekly that I thought it was madness doing this at a time when they were launching the Absolute Universe and when people’s disposable income is less. People will have choices to make about what to keep or drop and like another reviewer said, at this point if you were a long time collector of Action Comics that may be the only reason to continue with it at the moment. more

Action Comics #1077 is, regrettably, a perfect example of how a story can promise grandeur yet deliver nothing of substance. The issue postures as though it has something significant to say, yet it leaves readers with what can only be described as a "Big Nothing Burger"—a hollow and unsatisfying narrative experience. Its flaws are manifold, but the most glaring offense is the utterly wasteful B-story featuring Supergirl, which not only fails to add value but actively detracts from the overall narrative.The supposed drama of uncovering the secrets of the Phantom Zone and escaping its clutches fails to generate any meaningful stakes. What should have been an exploration of identity, legacy, and moral fortitude instead feels like an uninspired checklist of clichés. Yet even this lukewarm effort pales in comparison to the absolute misfire that is the Supergirl subplot. Billed as an exploration of "the crime that started it all," this B-story instead serves as little more than an afterthought—a filler segment devoid of purpose or intrigue.In sum, Action Comics #1077 fails on multiple levels. Its Superman narrative is a shallow, unfocused exercise that lacks the courage to delve into the deeper themes it hints at. Its Supergirl B-story is not just a missed opportunity but an active detriment to the issue. Together, they form a book that gestures toward significance but ultimately delivers nothing of value—a true "Big Nothing Burger" that leaves readers hungry for the substance this iconic series deserves. more

Action Comics #1076 is a glaring example of squandered potential—a work that promises depth and grandeur yet delivers a shallow, disjointed experience riddled with narrative missteps and character mismanagement. The solicitation alone raises expectations for a tale brimming with existential stakes and familial tension, yet what readers receive is a muddled exploration that undermines the very essence of Superman and his supporting cast.

Jor-El himself is rendered as little more than a plot device, stripped of complexity or gravitas. Here is a figure whose legacy looms large over Superman's identity, and yet, his involvement feels perfunctory—his role reduced to a tired cliché rather than a meaningful exploration of fatherhood, guilt, or the burdens of knowledge.

And then we come to Supergirl’s subplot, which purportedly unveils "the crime that started it all." One might expect this revelation to carry dramatic weight, shaking the foundation of Kryptonian lore or providing a fresh perspective on the familial ties that bind these characters. Instead, it reads as a perfunctory afterthought, offering neither intrigue nor resonance. Supergirl herself is treated as a narrative accessory, her agency diminished in service of an uninspired twist that fails to justify its inclusion.

In sum, Action Comics #1076 exemplifies the dangers of lazy storytelling, where grand concepts are introduced but never realized, and beloved characters are mishandled in service of hollow spectacle. It is a disservice to readers and to the Superman mythos—a shallow offering that promises much but delivers little. more

the supergirl backup story drag this issue down hard

Action Comics #1075 is an alarming example of narrative disarray, a collection of tales that stumbles over its own ambitions and ultimately collapses under the weight of its shortcomings. The issue suffers from a glaring tonal and thematic inconsistency, largely due to the contributions of Mark Waid and Mariko Tamaki, whose stories are, at best, indulgent distractions, and at worst, exercises in narrative irresponsibility.

And then there’s Mariko Tamaki. What can be said about her portion of this issue except that it is wholly unnecessary? Her story reeks of misplaced priorities, focusing on tangential subplots that neither enrich the Superman mythos nor engage the reader. It’s storytelling as filler—an afterthought masquerading as substance. Tamaki’s penchant for turning every exchange into an opportunity for introspective navel-gazing leaves the narrative feeling sluggish and bereft of momentum.

The stark contrast between Williamson’s work and that of his co-contributors underscores the fundamental problem with Action Comics #1075: a lack of cohesive vision. The issue fails to coalesce into a meaningful whole, instead feeling like a patchwork of competing priorities, most of which fall short of the mark.

In conclusion, Action Comics #1075 is a deeply flawed publication that squanders its potential by allowing mediocrity to overshadow brilliance. While Williamson’s story shines as a beacon of what could have been, the rest of the issue drags it down into the mire of creative mismanagement. It’s a disservice to the legacy of Superman and to the readers who deserve so much more. more

This book is in the crapper right now. Get Mark Waid off this book. Mark Waid’s Action Comics #1074 represents a profoundly perplexing exercise in storytelling, wherein the boundaries of narrative craft are disregarded in favor of an imposed ideological framework. Now, let me be clear: storytelling is a means by which we articulate truths—truths about human nature, about struggle, and, indeed, about heroism itself. But this issue, instead of wrestling with those universal themes, seems preoccupied with something else entirely: the author’s uninvited commentary on societal issues that derail the plot and alienate the reader. more