[Comics] Are We in the New 90s?

[Kalmarvho]

Garth Ennis writes the most genuine, human Superman I've seen, which is a way better take than Morrison's new one.

But yeah, I don't really understand all the resistance to change, whether good change or bad. This wouldn't be a problem at all if continuity weren't fetishized to such a ridiculous degree in the reading of comics, but there we have it.

[Fan]

I love Grant Morrison's new Superman, I loved it when he did Allstar Superman which was one of the most compelling and beautiful Superman stories ever written. He writes great heroes, but his villains are.. well to be entirely honest crappy. Though I still maintain that there's not enough continuity in New 52 AT ALL for it to be considered it's own universe in. It needs to make it past the second year, especially with all the negative press it's getting.

Back on topic though, Grant handles the good side of morality well, but he doesn't make a compelling villain at all his run of The Joker was simply embarrassingly bad.

[The Troubadour]

Garth Ennis writes the most genuine, human Superman I've seen, which is a way better take than Morrison's new one.

Garth Ennis can write any character at all as a human being? I'm genuinely surprised. :-)

But yeah, I don't really understand all the resistance to change, whether good change or bad. This wouldn't be a problem at all if continuity weren't fetishized to such a ridiculous degree in the reading of comics, but there we have it.

The problem, I think, isn't with change or with continuity, but with the way these things are handled. I like continuity, and I also like seeing a character grow up because of it. I would dearly love it if super-heroes were allowed to truly evolve, by growing old, having children and passing on their legacies, or by dying, or simply retiring from the good fight. Instead, what I get is a rehash of old plotlines, meaningless changes to conform to the newest trend, cheap death-and-resurrection plots...

[Kalmarvho]

But... All-Star isn't quite new. I was more referring to Grant's Action Comics run. It has some pretty neat stuff, granted.

[Fan]

But... All-Star isn't quite new. I was more referring to Grant's Action Comics run. It has some pretty neat stuff, granted.

I like the Action Comics run.. somewhat.

It could be better, that much is for sure, and it needs direction in the form of a compelling villain which is just something he can't write.

[Kalmarvho]

Well, Lobdell's Superman seems to be pushing Kryptonians closer and closer to, well, Viltrumites, complete with what is effectively a pre-reform Nolan/Omniman.

It's an interesting direction, certainly.

[Zrak]

You can assume it was an "in case we make it out of here" thing, but the fact of the matter is that going by context, wording, facial expression, and general body language that wasn't the case.

You are aware that the conversation in question begins with the phrase "If we get back to Earth," right? The fact of the matter is that, going by wording, the scene in question literally begins with a paraphrasing of "if we make it out of here."

[tbok1992]

The problem, I think, isn't with change or with continuity, but with the way these things are handled. I like continuity, and I also like seeing a character grow up because of it. I would dearly love it if super-heroes were allowed to truly evolve, by growing old, having children and passing on their legacies, or by dying, or simply retiring from the good fight. Instead, what I get is a rehash of old plotlines, meaningless changes to conform to the newest trend, cheap death-and-resurrection plots...

It's my belief that change works for a character when it keeps a character faithful to their core and feels like it was always there rather than being a jarring change or an unnecessary tack-on to the Mythos.

The multi-colored Lantern corps and Kingpin becoming a Daredevil rather than a Spiderman villain are good examples, they feel like an addition to the mythology that works well and feels faithful to the concept's core. Superman Red/Superman Blue and "No more mutants." on the other hand are changes that detract from the series core.

This also applies, IMO, to characters becoming darker. Captain Marvel becoming a darker character by making Billy Batson a jerk= Terrible idea.
Introducing a darker, good-hearted but far more bitter and cynical Captain Marvel from a future where Dr. Siviana took over the world and started ruling it as a dictatorship= Great Idea!

[turkishproverb]

This also applies, IMO, to characters becoming darker. Captain Marvel becoming a darker character by making Billy Batson a jerk= Terrible idea.
Introducing a darker, good-hearted but far more bitter and cynical Captain Marvel from a future where Dr. Siviana took over the world and started ruling it as a dictatorship= Great Idea!

The crappy version of Captain Marvel is due almost entirely to Geoff Johns being in power at DC and having already made clear he hates children and doesn't think one can be good or likable.

[Wolf_Haley]

Geoff johns sucks eggs, he's a prime example of why people shouldn't go hog wild when they get to write their favorite characters. Still mad because of him Wally got put on a bus and Hal is back to being the great white hope. Oh well at least Flash and New Guardian's before they broke up the orignal team are good.

[tbok1992]

The crappy version of Captain Marvel is due almost entirely to Geoff Johns being in power at DC and having already made clear he hates children and doesn't think one can be good or likable.

Well that's dumb. If I were at DC I'd not only make Captain Marvel the saint of the entire damnable DCU, but I'd try and get the rights to Beck and Binder's obscure character Fatman and put him in there because, darnit, I actually read that comic and liked it, and he'd fit in perfectly tone-wise. I like goofy comics is what I'm sayin'

[Jayngfet]

But yeah, I don't really understand all the resistance to change, whether good change or bad. This wouldn't be a problem at all if continuity weren't fetishized to such a ridiculous degree in the reading of comics, but there we have it.

The problem is that the general changes of the New 52 overall have been badly planned and kinda blatantly made up either on the spot or so soon beforehand it may as well be the same thing. In the first couple of months Tim was a robin as identified in comics, then he was suddenly never a robin, then he was suddenly never even Tim Drake. Even though flashbacks show early on he wore the exact same suit he did as robin instead of his current weird jetpack one.

A lot of Green Lantern is canon. Except a lot of characters that weren't GL's that were heavily involved have been retconned out, but the stuff they did still has physical effects like place names and appearances, so it leaves gaping questions about how it came to be. Not to mention that a lot of comics just retread old ground. The entirety of Kyle's current training seems dumb, simply because Kyle already channeled rage and fear through his green ring enough to cause planet scale terror attacks and fight off whole armies and multiple JL-tier heroes at once.

The old Teen Titans team got referenced in Outlaws, but the Teen Titans just came together right then. In fact, she couldn't possibly have known at least half the people she apparently did, because Vic went straight into the Justice League and Garth couldn't have been around as beast boy in any real sense in a fashion they could have interacted in.

Geoff johns sucks eggs, he's a prime example of why people shouldn't go hog wild when they get to write their favorite characters. Still mad because of him Wally got put on a bus and Hal is back to being the great white hope. Oh well at least Flash and New Guardian's before they broke up the orignal team are good.

This, a hundred thousand million billion quintillion times over. Green Lantern is treated as his personal playground where old concepts either get mangled and revamped in crazy ways or unceremoniously dropped so he can introduce a cast of OC's so bloated the last six or seven years matches about 50 years worth of GL characters introduced all combined. The way Green Lantern power works has been retconned from it's basic level(I mean beyond just the whole yellow thing), the way the Guardians of the universe do things ignores literally every single thing done with them since their introduction, and if you liked say, Fatality or Boodikka, you're SOL since now they got their personalities rewired entirely by MAGIC SPACE ROCKS. God help you if you like Percival or Torquemada since they're both characters that by all rights should have at least a minor part in what's currently going on but Johns really doesn't like the idea of Lanterns he doesn't like being that powerful or important.

Just... screw that guy. He's an immature manchild who, judging by his twitter, has the attention span of a gnat, the sugar intake of an entire second grade class, and pisses off everyone around him so bad he must have the social graces of Ryan Sohmer.

What's wrong with the new Captain Marvel (sorry "Shazam")? His backups were the best thing about an otherwise awful book.

The problem is up until the last few issues Shazam was a slow paced, groan inducing mess of a story. The current thing they're doing with Black Adam coming off as a hero who can't adapt and doesn't understand the modern world, Billy and co. being broke kids who try to profit while doing this stuff, and the idea that Shazam the wizard wasn't always right, is intriguing. Before that though it was just Billy acting like a total jerk and not endearing himself to the audience in any possible way.

You are aware that the conversation in question begins with the phrase "If we get back to Earth," right? The fact of the matter is that, going by wording, the scene in question literally begins with a paraphrasing of "if we make it out of here."

I kinda admitted I flubbed that scene when reading it. The first panel didn't really click all the way in my brain, I'm gonna just come out and apologise for the error.

Though the problem is that again, the body language and context kinda kill the scene. It could have been handled a bit better none the less.

[Zrak]

I mean, you were the first one to mention that the context is them in Hell, trying to escape from Hell. Really, no better for an "if we make it out" speech than that. I'm not really sure what you're looking for, in terms of body language.

[Avilan the Grey]

So someone wanna explain how Shining KNight possibly being trans is a total betrayal of the character and somehow ruins everything involving the character that happened before and was nothing but a publicity stunt when in no way shape or form has it been played up for plubicity.

But this is not the point! The point is unwanted and unnecesary changes for A) the heck of it or B) for publicity that companies do way too often. It is not the gender issue as such, as I said it would have been just as bad if the character woke up one day and was asian, or white, or black, or martian. I am still pissed that they made Barbara Batgirl again, for example.

Either kill the character off and replace him or her with a successor that has these traits OR as suggested below for once do a proper retirement of the character.

[Scowling Dragon]

For example:

Lets make Superman Black and Wonder Woman a South Korean.

Why? Well why not? You racist or something?

[Kalmarvho]

Lets make Superman Black and Wonder Woman a South Korean

The first one already happened, and as for the second one, no one really pays attention to Wonder Woman (which is a shame, her new book is pretty good) I doubt anyone would really notice if that happened.

[Zrak]

But this is not the point! The point is unwanted and unnecesary changes for A) the heck of it or B) for publicity that companies do way too often. It is not the gender issue as such, as I said it would have been just as bad if the character woke up one day and was asian, or white, or black, or martian. I am still pissed that they made Barbara Batgirl again, for example.

Well, it's been hinted at for Cornell's entire run on the character, so it's not exactly the willy-nilly change that "woke up one day" would imply. While Grant Morrison's run never mentioned the subject, it's not as though it was explicitly stated not to be the case. So, not only was it not the sudden jump that the comparison implies, but it also wasn't really contrary to any established canon as, again, the comparison would imply it to be. That aside, since it's a revelation that's been foreshadowed for the entire run, it doesn't really seem like a change "for the heck of it," and since there wasn't much publicity or any discernible attempt to use it to grab publicity, I don't really see much evidence for it being a publicity stunt, either.
I understand the criticism of that kind of narrative move, and I don't think anyone's arguing that it isn't a common problem in comics. I just also don't really see any evidence, whatsoever, that those criticisms apply here.

Either kill the character off and replace him or her with a successor that has these traits OR as suggested below for once do a proper retirement of the character.

You are aware that this Shining Knight is, in fact, an explicitly separate character from the golden age Sir Justin, right? They took on the same role in different incarnations of the recurring Camelot.

[Fan]

For example:

Lets make Superman Black and Wonder Woman a South Korean.

Why? Well why not? You racist or something?

No, it has nothing to do with race, rather with unjustified changes to the character under the pretense of us rejecting it making us racist.

No, we are allowed to not like a character being changed in an unjustified way regardless of what that change is, because it isn't the fact that it was changed, or what it was changed into, but rather how it was executed, and lacking any meaningful execution, pre explanation, or reason for that change makes it a BAD CHANGE regardless of the change.

[Jayngfet]

I mean, you were the first one to mention that the context is them in Hell, trying to escape from Hell. Really, no better for an "if we make it out" speech than that. I'm not really sure what you're looking for, in terms of body language.

A greater sense of urgency. Again, they kinda just stop moving. Their actions are kind of muted during the scene and there's no real sense from facial expression that they're actually worried or contemplating their surroundings on a subconscious level. They're just completely engrossed in the current conversation.

If they were still moving, and looked more worried about what was going on, and had a more anxious set of facial expressions, it'd actually sell the idea of "if we make it out of here", simply because it would actually look like they were concerned about not being able to.

You can't just say the words, comics are a visual medium, you need to sell it on every level.

[Avilan the Grey]

The first one already happened, and as for the second one, no one really pays attention to Wonder Woman (which is a shame, her new book is pretty good) I doubt anyone would really notice if that happened.

So the whole fanrage about the 1990ies pants and jacket a year ago missed you completely?

[Jayngfet]

So the whole fanrage about the 1990ies pants and jacket a year ago missed you completely?

As far as fanrages go, that was rather understated as I recall it though. I mean it was nothing compared to what I remember over Alan Scott being gay, and a speck compared to the whole H.E.A.T. thing.

[Zrak]

A greater sense of urgency. Again, they kinda just stop moving. Their actions are kind of muted during the scene and there's no real sense from facial expression that they're actually worried or contemplating their surroundings on a subconscious level. They're just completely engrossed in the current conversation.

If they were still moving, and looked more worried about what was going on, and had a more anxious set of facial expressions, it'd actually sell the idea of "if we make it out of here", simply because it would actually look like they were concerned about not being able to.

You can't just say the words, comics are a visual medium, you need to sell it on every level.

I still just really don't see it. For one, I don't really think it's fair to criticize a writing decision because of the artist's failure and, to begin with, you were claiming that the decision was a "lazy retcon" to cash in on "fake controversy," indictments that apply largely to the narrative decision. Secondly, while I'll grant that comics are a visual medium and the visual delivery is important, I'm not sure that I would say something was "terrible" just because I could nitpick the art.

Moreover, I don't really get the complaints you have with the art, for the most part. They "just stop moving" because they hang back from the main group to have a private conversation. Honestly, this seems perfectly reasonable to me and I feel it's generally keeping in tone with that sort of scene. As for facial expressions, I don't even know what sort of expression would indicate subconscious contemplation of one's surroundings and I'm not sure what expression of worry you'd want to see; they don't exactly seem like the type to bite their nails under pressure, you know?

Even granting you that they ought to look more worried, I'd say that the characters having insufficiently furrowed brows is hardly grounds to write off the whole thing as "terrible" and dismiss it as a "lazy" attempt to generate "fake controversy." It fits with the character, has been foreshadowed for the entire run, arose at a reasonable time in the narrative, and hasn't been used as part of any discernible attempt to grab publicity. On the other hand, neither character is making the face from the cover of Home Alone and, apparently, that makes the entire thing absolutely terrible and proves that, despite all evidence to the contrary, it was entirely engineered to generate controversy. I'm sorry, but I just don't see it.

[Jayngfet]

The artists failure isn't just on him though. The writer would have written the script and had the major hand in choosing layout and how things actually go down on paper. They don't just do separate things and then come together in the end to paste it all together so much as they ideally have to work together to make something good. A failure on one is a failure on both.

[Kalmarvho]

So the whole fanrage about the 1990ies pants and jacket a year ago missed you completely?

That was an even split. Some people were like PANTS, NAHT MAH WAHNDER WAHMAN and the others were all like I AM NOW GLAD THAT HER ASS IS NOT BARE

[Zrak]

Well, I mean, how much will a storyboard or layout really determine the exact expression on the face that ends up in the panel? The fact that they hung back from the group, sure, but as I said, that makes perfect sense to me. They're going to have a private conversation and they're perfectly capable of taking care of themselves for the minute-or-less that conversation would take. Even with a writer's notes, how the expressions actually turn out is largely up to the artist.

That said, no word on how the fact that they don't look as worried as you'd like ruins every other part of a long-developed and generally sensible storyline and proves that it was just a publicity stunt? I was hoping you'd at least tell me what sort of face a person made to show that they are contemplating their surroundings on a subconscious level.

[turkishproverb]

That was an even split. Some people were like PANTS, NAHT MAH WAHNDER WAHMAN and the others were all like I AM NOW GLAD THAT HER ASS IS NOT BARE

I didn't like the jacket, but enjoyed the rest of the costume, personally.

[Kalmarvho]

The jacket was maybe a little too Superboy, yeah, but the rest was pretty okay. It'd have been funny if they just went with the Nextwave approach and just threw dusters over their original costumes.

[Jayngfet]

Well, I mean, how much will a storyboard or layout really determine the exact expression on the face that ends up in the panel?

A whole lot. Storyboards for comics and animation tend to go into way more detail than film and live action TV. The fine detailing may change and there might be some editing but at the end of the day the script and storyboard are things that have to get followed. It's just how the process works.

The fact that they hung back from the group, sure, but as I said, that makes perfect sense to me. They're going to have a private conversation and they're perfectly capable of taking care of themselves for the minute-or-less that conversation would take. Even with a writer's notes, how the expressions actually turn out is largely up to the artist.

Yeah, but again, it kind of kills the sense of danger for them to just kinda stop for even a minute or less. This is supposed to be hell after all.

Though at this point even though I think you're completely and totally wrong I'm not budging on my stance it's not worth the effort since you clearly won't change your opinion.

That said, no word on how the fact that they don't look as worried as you'd like ruins every other part of a long-developed and generally sensible storyline and proves that it was just a publicity stunt? I was hoping you'd at least tell me what sort of face a person made to show that they are contemplating their surroundings on a subconscious level.

It's not a thing that ruins the whole story, but it brings the whole thing down.

It's not the art that makes it a publicity stunt, it's the fact that it was done at all at this specific time in relation to a whole bunch of stuff done by DC in general spread throughout so many other writers. A scene can fail for multiple reasons, and this did.

In terms of expression, direction of the eyes, tenseness of the brow, and how the mouth acts tends to deal with most of this. There's no checking their surroundings, no real idea they're stressed or anxious about what's going on around them, and no consideration for context. It's a complete failing on the artist and editor, and it causes a failing in the comic as a whole.

[Tiki Snakes]

Speaking as someone who doesn't know either the former incarnations of Shining Knight or the new character of the same codename and hasn't read the comic, I'm going to way in with my 2cents again at this point.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, especially on subjective issues such as whether they felt a scene worked or whether they enjoyed a storyline. In that sense, there is no real right or wrong here.

But on the other hand, Jayngfet, I can't say I'm convinced by your logic or your arguments on the subject. On balance, I find I suspect that I fall more on the side that holds that the whole thing was not a major issue, was not handled spectacularly badly and was not played for controversy.

I must say, if nothing else this discussion does make me curious enough to at least consider looking into it further. Of course, that would require hunting down the appropriate comic to start the plot chain off on and so on so it's not very likely to actually happen.

[Man on Fire]

Well, it's not like it's a changed character. It's an entirely different person from an entirely different time period. Just using the same, I don't know, Legacy/Codename/General Identity that some other guy used at some point.

I thought that happened like, all the time in DC?

In that case Fan's argument is completely invaild, because we're talking here about two different people.

I don't think you understand how niche comics are, Superman and Batman being outsold by ARCHIE DIGEST regularly. Nor do you understand how marketing is done. They market things to age demographics, and interests with occasional nods to nationality due to a modern global approach focused in the areas of highest purchase, but again, irrelevant.

Again - yoo have no evidence they were ripping Fate/Stay Night, as far as I'm concered you made that up. Until you show me somebody admitting F/SN was inspiration, I'm not going to treatyour claims seriously.

My example wasn't given to make me an authority, it was to prove I don't have prejudice, which I don't, against anything with the exception of Prejudice, and unabashed hatred.

Except that having dated transsexuals does not prove anything, just like Tony Harris being married doesn't prove he's not mysgonist, only that he has double standards for women from his einvorment (family and friends) and all other women.

I'm fine with changes being made so long as they construct a decent character.. which it hasn't, which while debatable is something I am allowed to say however "stuck in the past" I am. I am allowed to dislike new things, new things are not always better,

you are. You lose that right when you're ignoring the fact that new SK is a decent character, just because it's not your's SK. Which I belive you're doing.

the "Aryan ideal" character that Shining Knight was represented a struggle of a displaced man throughout time, and someone who had difficulty adjusting to modern ideas and culture. It was a solid character design

Nothing from that couldn't be done with 7S Shining Knight.

The new one creates a different character entirely, literally destroying everything it was before, to replace it with this publicity stunt.

Considering that, as we already estabilished, apparently your Shinning Knight and Demon Knights Shinnign Knight are two different people I have to say that people were saying the same about John Stewart, Guy Gardner, Kyle Rayner, Wally West, Cassandra Cain and Stephanie Bronw and each of them has grew on those fans. It's kinda har to take these

There is no reason to say that this is a dislike for new things, no, the old does not need to move over for the new, and sometimes what came before was better.

By your logic, Twilight is empirically written better than The Lord of the Rings, and "The Last Airbender" is an infinitely more deep, and psychologically compelling story than The Lord of the Flies.

You said yourself that you don't see anything wrong with disliking all change. My post and what I wrote was reaction to that. Now you are changing your tune and attributting to me something I did not said to you.

I will always firlmy belive that people who dislike all change are delusional. That however does not mean I support all change.I myself support only change that I think was done well and I do nto automatically assume superiority of new things over the old. You try to slap on me a label, just because I like some changes you are insisting I like all change, which is illogical.

Also, these comparisions are ridiculous, it's impossible to compare things so different than those you provided in your examples. They aren't even the same genres.

Also, how it is that when somebody does comparisions like that he always takes only the crap from side he doesn't like and only the best things from the side he likes. How would you feel if I'd do the opposite. Why not compare Child's Play with A Cabin in the Woods? Or Armageddon with Sinister? All those crappy Conan books with America's Gods? You are accusing me of thinking all new things are good, but so far you have only showed me arguments that suggest you thing that all old things are good and all new ones are crap.

i tell you something - I'm a big Nostalgia Critic fan. And if that show had taught me something it's that "good old days" produced as much manure as the present. It just stinked in different way.

Just because they're "newer", and they present different characters than white men. There's nothing wrong with a character being any ethnicity, gender, or identity so long as it's presented well.. which it isn't in this case at all.

It makes no sense, and has no place applied to modern media.

For me it has a lot of sense and it indeed has a place. As far as I'm concerned you come to me as confusing "presented well" with "not done to the characters I like".

And I tell you something - show me one good story with old Shinning Knight. because I had never see any, except that one episode of JLU showcasting superheroes without powers. And even there he was overshadowed by everybody else. meanwhile I'm enjoying every issue of Demon Knights.

Lets make Superman Black and Wonder Woman a South Korean.

Hey, let's throw in some demand out of nowhere and try to present it as a logical consequence of issue we're talking about.