-
Re: Why so many people complain about comic books they don't read?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Avilan the Grey
True. She has used Mjolnir at at least one other occasion, though. And still wasn't "Thor" while holding it.
Anyway, the complaint still stands. Thor, the person, existed before the hammer was forged (even if there was a redheaded variant "long ago"). He is also named "Odinson", which means he is (and this has not been disputed in the comic, AFAIK) actually, physically, the son of Odin (like in the real myths). He doesn't stop being Odin's son, just because he loses his powers. Nor does this new woman become Odin's Son (Odinsdottir?) because she takes up the hammer. If that was the case, she should also automatically become married to Sif, for example.
Nobody has ever suggested this. Thor Odinson will still be Thor Odinson. He'll cease being Thor: God of Thunder (incidentally, Thor is the Old Norse word for God of Thunder, not merely a name), so he'll just be Thor Odinson, and not Thor Odinson, Thor of the Asgardian pantheon.
It really is not that complex.
-
Re: Why so many people complain about comic books they don't read?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SaintRidley
Nobody has ever suggested this. Thor Odinson will still be Thor Odinson. He'll cease being Thor: God of Thunder (incidentally, Thor is the Old Norse word for God of Thunder, not merely a name), so he'll just be Thor Odinson, and not Thor Odinson, Thor of the Asgardian pantheon.
It really is not that complex.
Yeah, he'll even keep being a superhero! People are trying really hard to dislike this thing.
In other news, have you seen the cover for the crossover between Deadpool and non-super-soldier Steve Rogers? Looks pretty cool.
-
Re: Why so many people complain about comic books they don't read?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jayngfet
Except for the same arguments being about Ben Riley. Or about Kyle Rayner before he was retconned into being irish-mexican. Or all those people who hated Jason Todd enough to want him killed off. Or any of the dozens of examples that make this post seem just as ridiculous as it is.
Trying to pull the race card when someone calls out a publicity stunt for what it is is really, really cowardly.
I didn't say they were all racists. I said racists would also complain because...well they're racists. Just like when Idris Elba was chosen as Heimdall. You had people making legitimate comic book continuity complaints but you had plain old racists who likely hadn't read a comic in their lives complaining as well (http://www.theguardian.com/film/2010...s-boycott-thor).
-
Re: Why so many people complain about comic books they don't read?
Let me see if I can clear this up based on my limited knowledge of superhero comics:
There is Thor, the person/god/being/whatever who is from time to time incarnated in mortal bodies, but is nonetheless still the same guy as the mythological entity Thor Odinson (except when he's an alien, but the aliens inspired the myths, so whatever).
Separate from this, there is the superhero identity Thor, which is in part the powerset conveyed by wielding Mjolnir but is also a conscious decision to accept that identity. Generally, the person that does this is Thor Odinson himself. Ororo Munro or Steve Rogers didn't become Thor when they picked up Mjolnir because they already had superhero identities that they didn't want to swap out, but whomever the "new Thor" in the Thor comics is decided to take on both the hammer and the superheroic identity. She is not Thor Odinson the Asgardian alien/deity/whatever, but she is Thor the superhero.
Am I making any sense here?
Captain America, meanwhile, is a less troubled identity issue. Steve Rogers has been Captain America for most of his career, but there's no reason someone else couldn't use that identity if Steve's not doing so.
-
Re: Why so many people complain about comic books they don't read?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SaintRidley
Nobody has ever suggested this. Thor Odinson will still be Thor Odinson. He'll cease being Thor: God of Thunder (incidentally, Thor is the Old Norse word for God of Thunder, not merely a name), so he'll just be Thor Odinson, and not Thor Odinson, Thor of the Asgardian pantheon.
It really is not that complex.
But it starts becoming complex when you end up with two thors: Thor Odinson, powerless god of Thunder, the Thor of the myths and the son of Odin on the one hand, and Thor, the female and god(dess?) of thunder entirely different from the previous Thor. When you ask the question "which one is the real Thor?" the answer would be "both!".
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Nerd-o-rama
Captain America, meanwhile, is a less troubled identity issue. Steve Rogers has been Captain America for most of his career, but there's no reason someone else couldn't use that identity if Steve's not doing so.
Exactly! I've said this earlier but that's because Captain America is not a person, but an icon or superhero alter ego. If someone else tried to become Steve Rogers, then we have something silly on our hands.
-
Re: Why so many people complain about comic books they don't read?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kaeso
Exactly! I've said this earlier but that's because Captain America is not a person, but an icon or superhero alter ego. If someone else tried to become Steve Rogers, then we have something silly on our hands.
DC had two Batmans for a while, Marvel has two Hawkeyes, two Spider-Men and had two Captain Americas for a while. How is that complicated?
-
Re: Why so many people complain about comic books they don't read?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Shinken
DC had two Batmans for a while, Marvel has two Hawkeyes, two Spider-Men and had two Captain Americas for a while. How is that complicated?
Because Batman, Hawkeye, Captain America, and Spider Man are titles, roles somebody is playing, rather than Names.
A Name is used to refer to a person, a Title is used to refer to a role a person takes on.
With Hawkeye, they're both Hawkeye, when there is a chance of confusion you can call them Clint and Kate. c
With Thor, Thor is a title AND a Name. Let's say new Thor's real name is "Ingrid" or something. If you say 'Ingrid", you are referring to the new, female thor. However, if you say "Thor" you could be referring to Ingrid, goddess of thunder, or Thor Odinson.
That said, all that is irrelevant.
Right now, the X-Men comics feature not only the X-Men, But time traveling younger versions of the original X-Men. Battle of the Atom featured THREE different Beasts, and Four characters who could be considered Iceman. Despite looking, at most, no more than 20 years younger than their "Current" counterparts, the Young X-Men brought from the past were apparently from Before the moon landing.
Captain Marvel is dealing with the plight of a bunch of interstellar refugees trying to fight off the Spartax empire, and has a scheduled rendezvous with the Guardians of the Galaxy, at the same time she's apparently rescuing Peter Quill from the clutches of the Spartax, while the rest of the Guardians are captured.
IIRC, the Kate Bishop sections of Hawkeye are supposed to take place before Young Avengers volume 2, but a recent comic clearly indicated her California adventures as taking place AFTER the events of Young Avengers.
Steve Rodgers was originally thawed out sometime in the 60's, and the date of his thawing keeps being pushed forwards.
The Marvel Universe is an incrediably confusing, and often internally inconsistent place.
Having to specify which Thor you are talking about is a drop in the bucket.
-
Re: Why so many people complain about comic books they don't read?
...All this makes my feeling that Superhero comics basically is Days Of Our Lives All My Circuits with stoned writers even stronger.
-
Re: Why so many people complain about comic books they don't read?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Avilan the Grey
...All this makes my feeling that Superhero comics basically is Days Of Our Lives All My Circuits with stoned writers even stronger.
Eh, kind of.
What you have with Big Two comic books, is a bunch of writers having different ideas about stories to tell, and then trying to haphazardly make it all fit into a single world so you can do crossovers every few months.
Generally speaking, within a single writer's run on a single book, everything makes sense.
It's when you step back and realize "Hold on, all of this is supposed to be taking place in the same universe at approximately the same time", that you realize how absurd everything is.
I mean, some stuff is just absurd.
-
Re: Why so many people complain about comic books they don't read?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Avilan the Grey
...All this makes my feeling that Superhero comics basically is Days Of Our Lives All My Circuits with stoned writers even stronger.
again, I'm strongly considering a superhero parody comic:
A crossover happens!
Global Villain: MUAHAHAHAHA! I have a big bomb that is going to DESTROY THE UNIVERSE! No one can stop me!
Superheroes show up!
Deity Man: Not so fast! We're here to stop you!
Global Villain: Not again!
Deity Man: But First- we must have DRAMA!
Global Villain: Yes, let us have climactic battle between good and-
Deity Man: No not you, I mean between the other heroes
Global Villain: Wait what.
Deity Man: Quiet, we're building DRAMA! First we must fight each other pointlessly!
Deity Man punches Fire Guy
Fire Guy: Dude! What the heck!? I'm going to punch you back SO HARD for that!
GV: Um......
Deity Man and Fire Guy fight with one another.
Deity Man: Now that is finished, we must kill someone off to show this crossover is serious!
GV: What!
Deity Man: I'm thinking Ring Man.
Deity Man kills Ring Man with a laser blast from his eyes.
GV:.....um....aren't I supposed to do that......
Deity Man: No! There must be DRAMA between us all to make stopping you harder!
GV:.....but.....
Deity Man: Now we must fight each other over our love interests and relationships! I'm in love with Ultrawoman!
Ultrawoman: but I'm in love with Plastic Guy!
Plastic Guy: But I'm in love with Tool Man!
Tool Man: But I'm in love with Cat Girl!
Cat Girl: But I'm in love with Mr. Robot!
Mr. Robot:But I'm in love with that magical kangaroo!
Magical Kangaroo: But I'm in love with Ultra Woman!
They all fight one another, then suddenly:
Grimdark Deity Man: I am Deity Man from an alternate universe! Ultrawoman died in my universe, so I'm going to take your Ultrawoman instead!
Big Man: I suddenly remember being mindwiped of my love for Plastic Guy! I am going to get my revenge on you for that- MAGICAL KANGAROO!
GV:......um......guys? bomb about to destroy the universe over here? Shouldn't you know.....be stopping me? or something? Guys?.......Y'know what screw it. This isn't fun anymore.
GV turns off the bomb and then goes to watch TV with all the other villains.
GV: Remember when the heroes gone around stopping us from taking over the world?
Other Villain: Yeah. Those were the good ol' days....
-
Re: Why so many people complain about comic books they don't read?
@Lord Raziere
Here, have all the Internets I have collected. You won them fair and square.
-
Re: Why so many people complain about comic books they don't read?
I'm not a fan of shallow parodies, but they are considerably better when they are not referencing self-aware material from 10 years ago as if it was released last week.
-
Re: Why so many people complain about comic books they don't read?
Cultural relevance. The trickle down effect into greater geek culture that impacts people even if they don't purchase the comics.
Something current that they can complain about which isn't a Gordian Knot of Politics and/or Religion.
-
Re: Why so many people complain about comic books they don't read?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Shinken
I'm not a fan of
shallow parodies, but they are considerably better when they are not referencing
self-aware material from 10 years ago as if it was released last week.
ok, what is this, this is twice now on this forum I have shared my ideas and have gotten nothing but rude citations of tvtropes and a dismissal, I wasn't even parodying any specific work! for years this forum proclaims a hatred of the website, and suddenly when I start sharing my ideas, people suddenly start citing it in response? do I just have the worst luck? have I completely missed all the people who like tvtropes here, and are quick to jump the tropes gun on everything? I'm not going to ask if I'm obvious or not because tvtropes catalogues everything as a trope, you could cite the website in response to a general setting description!
jeez you try to make people laugh, and you get somebody who decides to ruin it for no reason, why did you even post this? what was the point of this post? why assume that I was referencing a specific work? this post just baffles and angers me! what does this contribute? you didn't even SAY which one you thought I was referencing, you didn't even explain how they were self-aware, or how the parody didn't work in detail! you just left two citations here and assumed that I was supposed to care, just because of that! I don't. Sure, you could say that because I didn't much effort into my little parody that you don't have to- but guess what? You really went out of your way to be dismissive and post LINKS to another website twice, in response to a casual forum joke! When you could have just been silent, and not commented if this all you had to say about it! Thanks a lot for ruining my idea, now I don't feel like making it anymore. I hope your happy, because I thought it was a good idea to point things out and be funny, but....now my passion for it is gone, thanks a lot. :smallyuk:
-
Re: Why so many people complain about comic books they don't read?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Coidzor
Cultural relevance. The trickle down effect into greater geek culture that impacts people even if they don't purchase the comics.
While I understand that, most of the time these uninformed opinions are concerned about things which are actually addressed in the books.
Using the Thor thing, most of the comments (in this thread, even) are about people confused by Thor being a name, while it has been a title in Marvel comics since at least the 80s. While this has been pointed out several times (in this very thread, even) people remain confused about it.
I don't know, I think I just want people to make more informed complaints. Saying you're on the fence about Rick Remender writing a minority character makes sense, since he has a bad track record on this. Dismissing a storyline he is been building up for two years as "just a publicity stunt" doesn't.
-
Re: Why so many people complain about comic books they don't read?
Oddly enough, during this whole Thor conversation, it never occurred to me that they've been doing this exact thing with Captain Marvel for over 30 years now. The character's name was Mar-vell and his military rank was Captain. Sure, it's misspelled because people couldn't pronounce it well and he thought "meh, I'll work with it", but it's not really any different than, say, calling Colonel Steve Rogers Colonel Steven Rogers instead. Yet, it became a legacy title that went through six characters, half of which were women.
-
Re: Why so many people complain about comic books they don't read?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kitten Champion
Oddly enough, during this whole Thor conversation, it never occurred to me that they've been doing this exact thing with Captain Marvel for over 30 years now. The character's name was Mar-vell and his military rank was Captain. Sure, it's misspelled because people couldn't pronounce it well and he thought "meh, I'll work with it", but it's not really any different than, say, calling Colonel Steve Rogers Colonel Steven Rogers instead. Yet, it became a legacy title that went through six characters, half of which were women.
I specially like how Steve Rogers calls Carol Danvers on that on Captain Marvel #1: "You've taken his name a long time ago, Carol."
-
Re: Why so many people complain about comic books they don't read?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Shinken
I'm not a fan of
shallow parodies, but they are considerably better when they are not referencing
self-aware material from 10 years ago as if it was released last week.
Considering that - counting only Marvel - that Lord Raziere's little parody WAS every major crossover event in the last ten years (though sometimes, the presence of an actual villain was superfluous), I think that's a little unfair.
(Yes, I DID read those - or at least the early ones, befoe I got so heartily sick of watching the heroes fight each other, then I just skimmed through any issues of them that my standing orders had and snorted derisively.)
I can't speak for all of DC, but THEY certainly had several of their major events involving tedious hero-on-hero fighting, too, didn't they?
(And as DC have on track record, actually done hero-on-hero in a way that wasn't stupid once in the past (the Technis Imperative, which I went out and acquired after a hearty recommendation from Linkara) they really don't have any good excuses why they did such a frack-poor job of it later.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Shinken
I don't know, I think I just want people to make more informed complaints.
Which is coming close to tactily saying "if you haven't spent money on it, you're not allowed to have an opinion."
Yes, knee-jerks reactions are not usually a good sign, but conversely, you don't need to experience something in its entirity to recongise it is whether or not you dislike it.
Quote:
Dismissing a storyline he is been building up for two years as "just a publicity stunt" doesn't.
Then Marvel shouldn't be trying to make a such a controversial publicity stunt out of it, then, should they?
There would have been FAR better, accurate and informative ways to phrase things than they did, especially with Thor. Which would have avoided (more of the) the knee-jerk backlash. If you are going to do something like that and you KNOW that there is potential for backlash, you make sure you minimise it... Or if you decide any publicity is good publicity and make an announcement in the most controversial way possible, knowing it'll get people angry, then you deserve every bit of flak you get (justified or not) for acting like a trolling asshat, in my opinion.
(Personally, on either of the recent specific issues with regard to Thor and Cap - I mostly don't care particularly: Marvel are down to their very last chance with adjectiveless X-Men so long as Jubilee remains in it. Double-especially since there's not much chance it will last especially long in the lime-light as Marvel have historically shown they try very hard to make their comics echo the movies... 'Cos it was funny when the first X-Men movie came out how suddenly they were all in black spandex... I would be a bit surprised if they don't "clear the deck" in some way shape or form before the next Avengers/Cap/Thor movie (in the latter case, as least as far as present-day Thor getting the hammer back if female Thor is indeed set in the future as I'm gathering, anyway. (If I'm getting it wrong, having Thor and Thor around at the same time is going to get very confusing...))
-
Re: Why so many people complain about comic books they don't read?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Aotrs Commander
Considering that - counting only Marvel - that Lord Raziere's little parody WAS every major crossover event in the last ten years (though sometimes, the presence of an actual villain was superfluous), I think that's a little unfair.
Nah, not really. Secret Invasion, Spider-Island, Infinity, Original Sin, Doomwar and Chaos War are nothing like that. In fact, only Civil War and Avengers vs X-men even fit the mold. Even Shadowland, Fear Itself and World War Hulk, which did involve heroes fighting each other, were focused on ways to avoid all the fighting, because everyone in-universe knew it was pointless. The same is true about Civil War, even.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Aotrs Commander
Which is coming close to tactily saying "if you haven't spent money on it, you're not allowed to have an opinion."
You can read a comic without buying it. Borrow it or read it in the store. Or don't get mad when your uniformed opinion is called out for being an uninformed opinion. :smalltongue:
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Aotrs Commander
Yes, knee-jerks reactions are not usually a good sign, but conversely, you don't need to experience something in its entirity to recongise it is whether or not you dislike it.
There is a world of difference between saying "I don't like X" and overreacting by writing shallow parodies of things you haven't read, I believe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Aotrs Commander
Then Marvel shouldn't be trying to make a such a controversial publicity stunt out of it, then, should they?
That's not what they are doing. They are announcing what is going to happen in their major books, like they have been doing since the beginning of the century.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Aotrs Commander
There would have been FAR better, accurate and informative ways to phrase things than they did, especially with Thor. Which would have avoided (more of the) the knee-jerk backlash. If you are going to do something like that and you KNOW that there is potential for backlash, you make sure you minimise it... Or if you decide any publicity is good publicity and make an announcement in the most controversial way possible, knowing it'll get people angry, then you deserve every bit of flak you get (justified or not) for acting like a trolling asshat, in my opinion.
You should blame that on people not reading the articles, because in any of the articles it is veyr clear what it is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Aotrs Commander
(Personally, on either of the recent specific issues with regard to Thor and Cap - I mostly don't care particularly: Marvel are down to their very last chance with adjectiveless X-Men so long as Jubilee remains in it. Double-especially since there's not much chance it will last especially long in the lime-light as Marvel have historically shown they try very hard to make their comics echo the movies... 'Cos it was funny when the first X-Men movie came out how suddenly they were all in black spandex... I would be a bit surprised if they don't "clear the deck" in some way shape or form before the next Avengers/Cap/Thor movie (in the latter case, as least as far as present-day Thor getting the hammer back if female Thor is indeed set in the future as I'm gathering, anyway. (If I'm getting it wrong, having Thor and Thor around at the same time is going to get very confusing...))
You realize they had more or less the same thing going with the first Avengers movie? The 616 Avengers were basically unrecognizable compared to their movie versions. Instead of undoing everything they had going on, they simply released Avengers Assemble featuring that same group. I'm guessing that's what they are going to do again, since Hickman is certainly not finished with his Avengers story yet.
You're missing out on some great comics by not giving Marvel a chance, I think. Ms. Marvel, She-Hulk and Daredevil are specially good and if you like Jubilee I think you would have a great time reading the Sunspot/Cannonball duo in Hickman's Avengers.
-
Re: Why so many people complain about comic books they don't read?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Shinken
Nah, not really. Secret Invasion, Spider-Island, Infinity, Original Sin, Doomwar and Chaos War are nothing like that. In fact, only Civil War and Avengers vs X-men even fit the mold. Even Shadowland, Fear Itself and World War Hulk, which did involve heroes fighting each other, were focused on ways to avoid all the fighting, because everyone in-universe knew it was pointless. The same is true about Civil War, even.
Which is still quibbling over the actual point.
That is to say, ridiculous hero vs hero battles have become the norm for events, and villains themselves are basically an optional extra in modern storytelling.
I mean look at the mess that is the modern justice league and tell me they're a cohesive or unified team. None of them are even friends at this point, since Superman and Batman have basically done little but antagonize each other, Flash and Lantern have teamed up like once and never spoken since(even that took a hostile tone for most of the story), and Lantern burned his other main bridge by mocking Green Arrow to hell and back for no reason other than Geoff Johns thought it sounded cool.
None of these people are friends, or even like each other. In fact, they're all pretty consistently unlikable between Clarks mewling nice guy act around Lois, Bruce punching out a teenaged girl for daring to help him, and Diana currently leading a band of slaving murder-rapists. Which I could buy, if the writers weren't trying to push them as still being unshakable paragons of justice, and every vision of the future treats them as being smiling best buddies they've never actually acted like.
-
Re: Why so many people complain about comic books they don't read?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jayngfet
Which is still quibbling over the actual point.
That is to say, ridiculous hero vs hero battles have become the norm for events, and villains themselves are basically an optional extra in modern storytelling.
No, they haven't. That's what I said in the post you were replying to.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jayngfet
I mean look at the mess that is the modern justice league and tell me they're a cohesive or unified team. None of them are even friends at this point, since Superman and Batman have basically done little but antagonize each other, Flash and Lantern have teamed up like once and never spoken since(even that took a hostile tone for most of the story), and Lantern burned his other main bridge by mocking Green Arrow to hell and back for no reason other than Geoff Johns thought it sounded cool.
The nu52 Justice League is bad.
It's also only one among many super teams.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jayngfet
None of these people are friends, or even like each other. In fact, they're all pretty consistently unlikable between Clarks mewling nice guy act around Lois, Bruce punching out a teenaged girl for daring to help him, and Diana currently leading a band of slaving murder-rapists. Which I could buy, if the writers weren't trying to push them as still being unshakable paragons of justice, and every vision of the future treats them as being smiling best buddies they've never actually acted like.
You should notice this has very little to do with crossover events and more to do with DC having a bunch of bad editorial mandates which apparently only Azzarello and Morrisson were allowed to break.
I dislike nu52 fiercely, but their first crossover event had the theme of "divided we fall" and their most recent crossover event is everyone (even the villains) working together against the bad guys.
-
Re: Why so many people complain about comic books they don't read?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Shinken
You can read a comic without buying it. Borrow it or read it in the store. Or don't get mad when your uniformed opinion is called out for being an uninformed opinion. :smalltongue:
From who?
What store?
Both of those options would assume that people you know also read comics (they don't) and that you have a local comic store (I don't).
The other option would be piracy, I suppose; but I am LAWFUL Evil.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Shinken
You're missing out on some great comics by not giving Marvel a chance, I think. Ms. Marvel, She-Hulk and Daredevil are specially good and if you like Jubilee I think you would have a great time reading the Sunspot/Cannonball duo in Hickman's Avengers.
I gave them plenty of chances and knocking on for nearly twenty years (and that's not counting the seminal masterpiece that was Transformer's Marvel UK run). But aside from the brief spike that was the Heroic Age, all-to-quickly dumped and forgotten for more Teh Dramaz, the quality dropped off steadily. Jubilee is quite literally the ONLY thing that means Marvel is getting anything from me anymore. And when they frack that up (and note I do say "when" and not "if")...
(If they write about characters I give a frack about doing something non-stupid, I might be prepared to give them the time of day again. Otherwise, I have better things to spend my money on.)
This leaving aside the assumption that... Were I to read, say, Superior Spider-Man or any of the New 52 or something (i.e. not, for example, something I have seen reveiwed), my opinion would even slightly change. Which it wouldn't; I know what I like and those ain't it.
(As for the Cap and Thor issue tangential to this thread and what I presume started it... I kind of don't care, since I'm not a particular fan of either character. And compared to what both have had done to them before or what sort of thing has befallen other characters, it's kind of getting off lightly even IF the worst nay-sayer's nightmares come true.)
The thing with Sunspot and Cannonball falls apart, as far as I'm concerned - like pretty much the rest of the Marvel Now! stuff which was where I gave up when all the older titles ended - is it's about two characters I don't really care about (other than in the sense that I would hope they don't suffer the ignominity of the fates of some of their contemporaries, e.g. Banshee, because I wouldn't wish that sort of patheticly mean-spirited character death on any X-character that I can currently bring to mind).
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jayngfet
Which is still quibbling over the actual point.
That is to say, ridiculous hero vs hero battles have become the norm for events, and villains themselves are basically an optional extra in modern storytelling.
Exactly.
It stopped being clever after the first time.
Actually, I'm not sure it was even then.
-
Re: Why so many people complain about comic books they don't read?
[QUOTE=Shinken;17818126]No, they haven't. That's what I said in the post you were replying to.
[QUOTE]
Just because there's a half assed justification doesn't mean it's suddenly ok. World War Hulk absolutely counts. If we count identities primarily, then I believe Reign still counts. Or secret invasion, which had a couple of such fights and wound up with a hero dead. Or a million others that, if not following the plan exactly, then at least crib from it heavily.
Quote:
The nu52 Justice League is bad.
It's also only one among many super teams.
Half of which are also now named some variety of Justice League, and most of the old ones now no longer exist. Even other books like Demon Knights kinda stop existing after a while.
Quote:
You should notice this has very little to do with crossover events and more to do with DC having a bunch of bad editorial mandates which apparently only Azzarello and Morrisson were allowed to break.
I dislike nu52 fiercely, but their first crossover event had the theme of "divided we fall" and their most recent crossover event is everyone (even the villains) working together against the bad guys.
Azzrello's decisions were probably the most extreme on that list. Lets not pin everything on editorial and put some of the blame where it's due.
-
Re: Why so many people complain about comic books they don't read?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jayngfet
Just because there's a half assed justification doesn't mean it's suddenly ok. World War Hulk absolutely counts. If we count identities primarily, then I believe Reign still counts. Or secret invasion, which had a couple of such fights and wound up with a hero dead. Or a million others that, if not following the plan exactly, then at least crib from it heavily.
The theme for World War Hulk is the futility of conflict the whole time. You don't get one issue where someone doesn't say "hey, Hulk, why are you doing this?". Also, Hulk fighting other heroes has been his point since day one. That's how the Avengers got together, even.
Secret Invasion is about fighting Super Skrulls who were disguised as heroes. That's what the skrulls do. That's the whole point. Reign is about fighting villains dressed up as superheroes.
"Heroes shouldn't ever fight heroes" doesn't make sense. There are times when heroes are mind controlled, times when villains disguise themselves as heroes and times when heroes just plain disagree. That goes back to Namor vs Human Torch in the Golden Age. Of course it's OK - it's one of the foundations of the genre.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jayngfet
Half of which are also now named some variety of Justice League, and most of the old ones now no longer exist. Even other books like Demon Knights kinda stop existing after a while.
Oh, you misunderstand. I'm not saying there are good groups in the DC universe. nu52 sucks hard.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jayngfet
Azzrello's decisions were probably the most extreme on that list. Lets not pin everything on editorial and put some of the blame where it's due.
Azzarello's decisions created, probably for the first time ever, an engaging Wonder Woman story that stands by itself. The amazons are a very small part of his run on WW, so I'm guessing you are only familiar with the first few issues, anyway.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Aotrs Commander
From who?
What store?
Both of those options would assume that people you know also read comics (they don't) and that you have a local comic store (I don't).
The other option would be piracy, I suppose; but I am LAWFUL Evil.
There is also the option to accept that your uninformed opinion holds little to no value, as I mentioned before. It's equivalent to all those "D&D is the devil's work" folks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Aotrs Commander
I gave them plenty of chances and knocking on for nearly twenty years (and that's not counting the seminal masterpiece that was Transformer's Marvel UK run). But aside from the brief spike that was the Heroic Age, all-to-quickly dumped and forgotten for more Teh Dramaz, the quality dropped off steadily. Jubilee is quite literally the ONLY thing that means Marvel is getting anything from me anymore. And when they frack that up (and note I do say "when" and not "if")...
Heroic Age has certainly not been dropped. I've already mentioned several Marvel books which are just plain fun. DC is the one with all the grimdark, maybe you're mixing it up.
I mean, it's OK if you don't want to read it, but at least admit you have no idea what you're talking about. :smalltongue:
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Aotrs Commander
The thing with Sunspot and Cannonball falls apart, as far as I'm concerned - like pretty much the rest of the Marvel Now! stuff which was where I gave up when all the older titles ended - is it's about two characters I don't really care about (other than in the sense that I would hope they don't suffer the ignominity of the fates of some of their contemporaries, e.g. Banshee, because I wouldn't wish that sort of patheticly mean-spirited character death on any X-character that I can currently bring to mind).
I'm pretty sure Banshee predates the New Mutants by a good 10 years, but whatever.
Like I said before, it's your loss.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Aotrs Commander
Exactly.
It stopped being clever after the first time.
Actually, I'm not sure it was even then.
Oh, yeah. Kingdom Come, Watchmen and The Dark Knight Returns are horrible stories after all, right? :smallamused:
-
Re: Why so many people complain about comic books they don't read?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Shinken
Oh, yeah. Kingdom Come, Watchmen and The Dark Knight Returns are horrible stories after all, right? :smallamused:
Kingdom Come is mostly famous for it's visuals, because Alex Ross and art it up with the best of them. Watchmen's attention to detail and intricacy make the story far more than it's overall plot, which is actually a pretty straightforward whodunnit once you gut the pirate comic, Dr. Manhattans weird viewpoint, and all the little details. DKR is less about superheros punching each other and more about then-current events and ideas, with Superman being a head-in-the-ground Baby Boomer and Batman trying to guide the violent and directionless urban youth of the era(and building on earlier story successes besides).
The quoted examples haven't really got any of that. They aren't terribly intricately written or designed. They don't have the same tier of amazing visuals so much as just use the same art as everything else. They aren't even really about anything, except perhaps for the most basic of concepts possible, once you go beyond the surface level. Those three stories aren't actually about superheroes punching each other and getting into weekly soap opera drama, they tell specific stories with a beginning, middle, and end and a message to take away.
Something like Planet Hulk, however, is basically just pure spectacle. There's no unified artistic direction across everything due to the overblown scale of the story across so many different issues per month. There's no underlying societal commentary, as the random townspeople of New York show up once to talk to the camera and then dissapear, while people in funny costumes or soldiers with fancy ammo talk about fantasy items and fictional events with no real world roots. It's not even that unified in it's writing since so much of it had to be handled by different teams, and there wasn't much care for detail as every character faces the camera directly and says what their motives are and why they do things at first opportunity.
And that's Planet Hulk, something planned well in advance largely by a single Auteur and executed with a whole lot of details in mind and accounted for before or after, and the core story boiled down to one main paperback. Most of Marvel and DC's other events wind up with the same fights and overblown speeches and splash pages being spread out across way more trades as nobody has any idea what the hell is supposed to be going on. There's no real care or planning that goes into this, because for gods sake DC in particular can't keep their details straight day to day at this point, and Marvel is especially bad about you needing to buy multiple trades from multiple series in an event just to keep track of things if you even can.
Quote:
Azzarello's decisions created, probably for the first time ever, an engaging Wonder Woman story that stands by itself. The amazons are a very small part of his run on WW, so I'm guessing you are only familiar with the first few issues, anyway.
Nice try, but I've read the whole run. I'm genuinely a bigger fan of older issues. Mainly because Azzarello's run kind of lacks a whole bunch of things that I find actually engaging. The central antagonist is flat and boring. The comic mythos is simplified to hell and back and lost most of it's charm as a result, since most of the stuff that sells Diana as being who she is in her origin got cut in favor of the same demigod plot we've seen play out a million times elsewhere. As a result, the story just assumes the reader buys into a whole bunch of ideas it never actually sold us(Diana's supposed to be loving and merciful, but we never see her save Steve's life. She's supposed to be daring, but never does the masked tournament thing. The Amazons are meant to be both powerful and noble, despite never actually being shown winning a battle or displaying nobility of character. Her bracers are supposed to deflect things, but this is basically never done successfully.), then whenever an idea is supposed to be subverted, the audience is meant to be shocked despite never having seen it played straight. Or when it's supposed to be played straight, it's hard to buy into it(See again: Amazons are the greatest warriors in the world, despite having no actual victories under their belt without heavy outside help). It's not a bad run, per se, but it's sloppily told, particularly when it veers off course for several issues at a time on weird tangents like New Genesis.
If you want a Wonder Woman story that's actually told competently, Perez is still the way to go. The setting is properly established early on so we know who the Amazons are and why they're supposed to be important. We know why Diana herself is supposed to be both compassionate and daring, because this is shown before the audience. He's a writer that actually cares enough to establish groundwork and give the later events weight, so that when we see a group of less-than-saintly Amazons we can see why it's both so unusual and so dangerous. Or why each antagonist is supposed to be so dangerous, beyond just scowling and having a giant army of doom or a super high powerlevel. Each element of the story means something in regards to the greater whole and each is carefully selected to reflect the character's essence from previous, yet no longer canon runs that it doesn't lazily rely on to fill baseline expectations.
-
Re: Why so many people complain about comic books they don't read?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jayngfet
Kingdom Come is mostly famous for it's visuals, because Alex Ross and art it up with the best of them. Watchmen's attention to detail and intricacy make the story far more than it's overall plot, which is actually a pretty straightforward whodunnit once you gut the pirate comic, Dr. Manhattans weird viewpoint, and all the little details. DKR is less about superheros punching each other and more about then-current events and ideas, with Superman being a head-in-the-ground Baby Boomer and Batman trying to guide the violent and directionless urban youth of the era(and building on earlier story successes besides).
The quoted examples haven't really got any of that. They aren't terribly intricately written or designed. They don't have the same tier of amazing visuals so much as just use the same art as everything else. They aren't even really about anything, except perhaps for the most basic of concepts possible, once you go beyond the surface level. Those three stories aren't actually about superheroes punching each other and getting into weekly soap opera drama, they tell specific stories with a beginning, middle, and end and a message to take away.
The best part about Kingdom Come is Mark Waid's criticism of 90s antiheroes, but that's missing the point. I'm not saying "superhero fights superhero" makes a story good - I'm saying it doesn't make a story bad. And it doesn't, like these stories (that feature hero fighting hero prominently) prove.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jayngfet
Something like Planet Hulk, however, is basically just pure spectacle. There's no unified artistic direction across everything due to the overblown scale of the story across so many different issues per month. There's no underlying societal commentary, as the random townspeople of New York show up once to talk to the camera and then dissapear, while people in funny costumes or soldiers with fancy ammo talk about fantasy items and fictional events with no real world roots. It's not even that unified in it's writing since so much of it had to be handled by different teams, and there wasn't much care for detail as every character faces the camera directly and says what their motives are and why they do things at first opportunity.
And that's Planet Hulk, something planned well in advance largely by a single Auteur and executed with a whole lot of details in mind and accounted for before or after, and the core story boiled down to one main paperback. Most of Marvel and DC's other events wind up with the same fights and overblown speeches and splash pages being spread out across way more trades as nobody has any idea what the hell is supposed to be going on. There's no real care or planning that goes into this, because for gods sake DC in particular can't keep their details straight day to day at this point, and Marvel is especially bad about you needing to buy multiple trades from multiple series in an event just to keep track of things if you even can.
You're mixing up Planet Hulk and World War Hulk, stories with a very different tone and theme, even if one is a sequel to the other.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jayngfet
Nice try, but I've read the whole run. I'm genuinely a bigger fan of older issues. Mainly because Azzarello's run kind of lacks a whole bunch of things that I find actually engaging. The central antagonist is flat and boring. The comic mythos is simplified to hell and back and lost most of it's charm as a result, since most of the stuff that sells Diana as being who she is in her origin got cut in favor of the same demigod plot we've seen play out a million times elsewhere. As a result, the story just assumes the reader buys into a whole bunch of ideas it never actually sold us(Diana's supposed to be loving and merciful, but we never see her save Steve's life. She's supposed to be daring, but never does the masked tournament thing. The Amazons are meant to be both powerful and noble, despite never actually being shown winning a battle or displaying nobility of character. Her bracers are supposed to deflect things, but this is basically never done successfully.), then whenever an idea is supposed to be subverted, the audience is meant to be shocked despite never having seen it played straight. Or when it's supposed to be played straight, it's hard to buy into it(See again: Amazons are the greatest warriors in the world, despite having no actual victories under their belt without heavy outside help). It's not a bad run, per se, but it's sloppily told, particularly when it veers off course for several issues at a time on weird tangents like New Genesis.
It looks like you want Diana to be her pre nu52 self with her pre nu52 background.
Diana is loving and merciful because she is risking her life to save a woman she doesn't know. Diana is daring because she is facing foes more powerful than herself without flinching. I have no idea why you think we're supposed to think the amazons are noble, because they are quite explicitly not - you just want it to be the way it was before.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jayngfet
If you want a Wonder Woman story that's actually told competently, Perez is still the way to go. The setting is properly established early on so we know who the Amazons are and why they're supposed to be important. We know why Diana herself is supposed to be both compassionate and daring, because this is shown before the audience. He's a writer that actually cares enough to establish groundwork and give the later events weight, so that when we see a group of less-than-saintly Amazons we can see why it's both so unusual and so dangerous. Or why each antagonist is supposed to be so dangerous, beyond just scowling and having a giant army of doom or a super high powerlevel. Each element of the story means something in regards to the greater whole and each is carefully selected to reflect the character's essence from previous, yet no longer canon runs that it doesn't lazily rely on to fill baseline expectations.
I remember reading the Perez run as a kid, but I can't remember anything special about it (while I even remember stuff about Byrne's Superman and Titans Fall), so I'm just going to say it didn't impress me. Maybe if I read it again I would like it, but I'm a big fan of Azzarello's run and I don't think I'm ever reading another Wonder Woman story after that.
-
Re: Why so many people complain about comic books they don't read?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Shinken
The best part about Kingdom Come is Mark Waid's criticism of 90s antiheroes, but that's missing the point. I'm not saying "superhero fights superhero" makes a story good - I'm saying it doesn't make a story bad. And it doesn't, like these stories (that feature hero fighting hero prominently) prove.
Right... when it's one element among a whole. Which, quite often it isn't. Or else it's oversized due to a story being made very simply.
Quote:
You're mixing up Planet Hulk and World War Hulk, which were written by different people, which makes me think you haven't even read either of them.
A minor error that you've latched onto like a water bottle in a desert. If you're going to argue pick a point instead of picking a nit. I've got both of them with me right now.
Quote:
It looks like you want Diana to be her pre nu52 self with her pre nu52 background.
Diana is loving and merciful because she is risking her life to save a woman she doesn't know. Diana is daring because she is facing foes more powerful than herself without flinching. I have no idea why you think we're supposed to think the amazons are noble, because they are quite explicitly not - you just want it to be the way it was before.
No, I want her to be the character she consistently is with the traits she consistently has. Perez didn't make most of that up, he's transcribing and modifying origins from the earlier bronze age origin, which was a transcription of the silver age origin, which modified the original golden age origin.
For all her concept reboots from this to that writer, Diana up until now has had a number of very consistent traits. She's smart, but she's smart in a specific way. She's daring, but also in a way that's usually consistent. Her relationship with her mother is ever so slightly strained, but in a way that's usually pretty identifiable. Each time a reboot happens these traits are established for an audience before they can be played with.
New 52 Wonder Woman mostly just assumes you're familiar with the character and tries to keep things implicit that probably shouldn't be. Especially considering New 52 is supposed to be about introducing the concepts to new readers.
It's an alright stand alone story, but it's going to be hell on the next writer to try to salvage whatever comes next.
Quote:
I remember reading the Perez run as a kid, but I can't remember anything special about it (while I even remember stuff about Byrne's Superman and Titans Fall), so I'm just going to say it didn't impress me. Maybe if I read it again I would like it, but I'm a big fan of Azzarello's run and I don't think I'm ever reading another Wonder Woman story after that.
That's your problem. But don't have the gall to say I don't read specific comics when you'll freely admit to doing the same yourself.
-
Re: Why so many people complain about comic books they don't read?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jayngfet
Right... when it's one element among a whole. Which, quite often it isn't. Or else it's oversized due to a story being made very simply.
Quite often when?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jayngfet
A minor error that you've latched onto like a water bottle in a desert. If you're going to argue pick a point instead of picking a nit. I've got both of them with me right now.
You have ignored that Hulk fighting other heroes is the Hulk's whole shtick, as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jayngfet
No, I want her to be the character she consistently is with the traits she consistently has.
Diana has never been consistent. Every writer makes her something else. She has been the JLA's secretary, she has said that women should be submissive, she has been a non-powered kung-fu spy, she has been someone who never kills, she has been someone who kills when there is no other option, she has been someone who kills just because, she has been incredibly efficient, she has been incredibly inefficient, she has had a mortal identity, the list goes on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jayngfet
Perez didn't make most of that up, he's transcribing and modifying origins from the earlier bronze age origin, which was a transcription of the silver age origin, which modified the original golden age origin.
And that is better because...?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jayngfet
For all her concept reboots from this to that writer, Diana up until now has had a number of very consistent traits. She's smart, but she's smart in a specific way. She's daring, but also in a way that's usually consistent. Her relationship with her mother is ever so slightly strained, but in a way that's usually pretty identifiable. Each time a reboot happens these traits are established for an audience before they can be played with.
I'm pretty sure that's an exaggeration, since none of those themes were central to the Deodato reboot in the 90s.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jayngfet
New 52 Wonder Woman mostly just assumes you're familiar with the character and tries to keep things implicit that probably shouldn't be. Especially considering New 52 is supposed to be about introducing the concepts to new readers.
New 52 is a mess, but I doubt that was the idea. I don't even know who was really rebooted (maybe just the JLA and the Titans) - Batman carries all of his previous baggage and more or less the same happens to Green Lantern, Aquaman and Animal Man.
It's basically a big mess, so I wouldn't blame it on Azzarello.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jayngfet
It's an alright stand alone story, but it's going to be hell on the next writer to try to salvage whatever comes next.
They already said they are going to focus on WW interacting with the JLA, so I can say for sure it's not going to get my money.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jayngfet
That's your problem. But don't have the gall to say I don't read specific comics when you'll freely admit to doing the same yourself.
Hey, I'm not complaining about Perez's run, am I?
-
Re: Why so many people complain about comic books they don't read?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Shinken
New 52 is a mess, but I doubt that was the idea. I don't even know who was really rebooted (maybe just the JLA and the Titans) - Batman carries all of his previous baggage and more or less the same happens to Green Lantern, Aquaman and Animal Man.
It's basically a big mess, so I wouldn't blame it on Azzarello.
Hey, I'm not calling out the mess that is the general Nu52. I'm calling out the specific mess that is Wonder Woman.
Quote:
Diana has never been consistent. Every writer makes her something else. She has been the JLA's secretary, she has said that women should be submissive, she has been a non-powered kung-fu spy, she has been someone who never kills, she has been someone who kills when there is no other option, she has been someone who kills just because, she has been incredibly efficient, she has been incredibly inefficient, she has had a mortal identity, the list goes on.
None of which actually involves core character traits. Some of it is job description, some of it is situational, and outside of the neck snapping the whole killing thing has been reasonably consistent. On the neck snapping: Literally every member of the justice league except maybe Aquaman has pulled that stunt at least once. Accounting for the silver age standards that had to be adjusted out of necessity, it's actually also reasonably consistent. Saying that powers or a writer-mandated no kill code changes core characterization that doesn't rely on either is ridiculous.
-
Re: Why so many people complain about comic books they don't read?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jayngfet
Hey, I'm not calling out the mess that is the general Nu52. I'm calling out the specific mess that is Wonder Woman.
You misunderstand. I'm saying you can't say "the point of nu52 is X and Azzarello didn't do it so he's doing it wrong" because there is no point to the new 52. Some lines wanted to present old concepts to new readers, some lines wanted to present the same concepts to the same readers and some lines wanted to present new concepts to new readers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jayngfet
None of which actually involves core character traits. Some of it is job description, some of it is situational, and outside of the neck snapping the whole killing thing has been reasonably consistent. On the neck snapping: Literally every member of the justice league except maybe Aquaman has pulled that stunt at least once. Accounting for the silver age standards that had to be adjusted out of necessity, it's actually also reasonably consistent. Saying that powers or a writer-mandated no kill code changes core characterization that doesn't rely on either is ridiculous.
I think Diana being either a strong woman or a submissive secretary is a core character trait, yes. I think her either literally hating all men or not is a core character trait, as well. Her allegiance to the USA (or lack of it) is also a core character trait. And it has all changed depending on the writer. Which is not to mention how her origin story keeps changing.
I forgot to mention how inconsistent her powers were, but they continue to be wildly inconsistent outside Azzarello's book anyway.