Comics are Awesome III

A general discussion forum, plus hauls and silly games.
User avatar
andersonh1
Moderator
Posts: 5566
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 3:22 pm
Location: South Carolina

Comics are Awesome III

Post by andersonh1 »

Seems like it's way past time to restart the very lengthy Comics are Awesome II thread. Old thread found here: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=908

User avatar
andersonh1
Moderator
Posts: 5566
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 3:22 pm
Location: South Carolina

Re: Comics are Awesome III

Post by andersonh1 »

So, it's not just Batwoman. Apparently marriage is a bad thing for ANY DC character at this point. Even Animal Man/Buddy Baker is on the road to divorce.

http://www.bleedingcool.com/2013/09/08/ ... n-aquaman/

http://www.bleedingcool.com/2013/09/07/ ... he-new-52/

User avatar
BWprowl
Supreme-Class
Posts: 4145
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 2:15 pm
Location: Shelfwarming, because of Shellforming
Contact:

Re: Comics are Awesome III

Post by BWprowl »

andersonh1 wrote:Even Animal Man/Buddy Baker is on the road to divorce.
That is the whole REASON people read Animal Man! That's his whole thing! You take away the married/family man schtick, and you're left with generic superhero adventures and nothing to set him apart from the crowd! Jesus Christ!
Image

User avatar
Sparky Prime
Supreme-Class
Posts: 4845
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 3:12 am

Re: Comics are Awesome III

Post by Sparky Prime »

andersonh1 wrote:So, it's not just Batwoman. Apparently marriage is a bad thing for ANY DC character at this point. Even Animal Man/Buddy Baker is on the road to divorce.
I don't think that's a fair assessment. One of their kids was killed in a storyline not long ago and Buddy's wife blamed him for it because it was related to his role as a super hero. It's not like this is something DC mandated or anything, this has been building in Animal Man for several months now as a result of the direction writer Jeff Lemire has been taking it.

User avatar
andersonh1
Moderator
Posts: 5566
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 3:22 pm
Location: South Carolina

Re: Comics are Awesome III

Post by andersonh1 »

How do we know DC editorial didn't mandate it? They certainly exert control over storylines in every other book. Whether Lemire came up with the storyline or whether editorial mandated it, it's a bad idea and a pretty basic betrayal of what makes Animal Man different from just about everyone else.

I find this whole "heroes can't be married" trend just absurd. Married people exist in the real world right along with single people. So do divorced people. So do middle-aged and old people for that matter. They ought to exist among the super hero population of comics as well, if we're genuinely aiming for diversity and verisimilitude. It makes sense for certain characters, like Batman, to not have a happy personal life because it doesn't fit the character. Other more well-adjusted characters could probably make things work, particularly if they're both in the same game. I've always thought Dick Grayson and Barbara Gordon would make a good couple, just to pick one example.

It seems to me that instead of this blanket "no one can be married" policy that each character's individual circumstances ought to dictate their marital state.

User avatar
Sparky Prime
Supreme-Class
Posts: 4845
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 3:12 am

Re: Comics are Awesome III

Post by Sparky Prime »

andersonh1 wrote:How do we know DC editorial didn't mandate it? They certainly exert control over storylines in every other book. Whether Lemire came up with the storyline or whether editorial mandated it, it's a bad idea and a pretty basic betrayal of what makes Animal Man different from just about everyone else.
Why would they? I mean, it's not like Animal Man is one of their more prominent characters so he's not exactly in a spotlight like, say Spider-Man or Superman is. And I don't see how the character getting a divorce would be a betrayal of the character. Have you even been reading any of Animal Man to know what's been going on in the title? Considering what's been happening, it's a reasonable direction for the story to go in. It's not like they're erasing the marriage or anything like they've done with other characters. How many divorced characters have there even been in comics? So he'll still be different from just about everyone else.
I find this whole "heroes can't be married" trend just absurd.
Now that I'd agree with.
It seems to me that instead of this blanket "no one can be married" policy that each character's individual circumstances ought to dictate their marital state.
I seriously doubt there is any such "policy". Some is just coincidence at best and I really believe you're overreacting to it.

User avatar
andersonh1
Moderator
Posts: 5566
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 3:22 pm
Location: South Carolina

Re: Comics are Awesome III

Post by andersonh1 »

Sparky Prime wrote: And I don't see how the character getting a divorce would be a betrayal of the character. Have you even been reading any of Animal Man to know what's been going on in the title? Considering what's been happening, it's a reasonable direction for the story to go in. It's not like they're erasing the marriage or anything like they've done with other characters. How many divorced characters have there even been in comics? So he'll still be different from just about everyone else.
How many superheroes have a wife and two children either? Yeah, DC can move Buddy Baker forward and make him a divorced single dad if they want, and that's legitimate, but it also takes away a lot of what makes him unique, or has for a long time.

I used to read Animal Man, until it turned into a horror comic. This was many years ago, pre-Vertigo. I wanted to try out the New 52 series, but Buddy's eyes bleeding in the first issue and Maxine playing with dead animals showed me it was still a horror comic, or close enough anyway. So no, I haven't been reading the current series and I'm commenting on the character in general, not specific current storylines.
I seriously doubt there is any such "policy". Some is just coincidence at best and I really believe you're overreacting to it.
Check out Didio's comments about Batwoman. There is very much a policy in place for all the Batman characters, and considering that all the former married characters are now single again, I don't see how you can look at DC's actions as anything else but a company-wide policy.

I don't think I'm overreacting, I'm just looking at the facts and comments by Didio and drawing conclusions. Am I saying this can never change, and that characters will never end up married again? Not at all. But someone at DC has clearly decided that for the time being superheroes must be single. And so they are.

User avatar
Shockwave
Supreme-Class
Posts: 5994
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 4:10 pm
Location: Sacramento, CA

Re: Comics are Awesome III

Post by Shockwave »

This will probably seem like a weird question, but I'm wondering why we started the new thread after part II got to 186 pages rather than just waiting for it to go to an even 200. The first one was ended at 100. This could have set the standard for resetting threads: first 100, II 200, III after 300, etc...

User avatar
andersonh1
Moderator
Posts: 5566
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 3:22 pm
Location: South Carolina

Re: Comics are Awesome III

Post by andersonh1 »

Shockwave wrote:This will probably seem like a weird question, but I'm wondering why we started the new thread after part II got to 186 pages rather than just waiting for it to go to an even 200. The first one was ended at 100. This could have set the standard for resetting threads: first 100, II 200, III after 300, etc...
I meant to start thread III after we got through 100 pages in thread II and just never got around to it. Slack moderator. :oops:

User avatar
Sparky Prime
Supreme-Class
Posts: 4845
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 3:12 am

Re: Comics are Awesome III

Post by Sparky Prime »

andersonh1 wrote:How many superheroes have a wife and two children either? Yeah, DC can move Buddy Baker forward and make him a divorced single dad if they want, and that's legitimate, but it also takes away a lot of what makes him unique, or has for a long time.
I can think of a few... Reed and Susan Richards. Hulk has Skaar and Hiro-Kala, although his wife was killed when his shuttle's warp core exploded. MC2 universe Spider-Man. Wally West, even though he apparently doesn't exist in the New 52. There are more... And I'd still say Buddy's unique here. It's not like they're just undoing his marriage like they've done to other characters.
Check out Didio's comments about Batwoman. There is very much a policy in place for all the Batman characters, and considering that all the former married characters are now single again, I don't see how you can look at DC's actions as anything else but a company-wide policy.

I don't think I'm overreacting, I'm just looking at the facts and comments by Didio and drawing conclusions. Am I saying this can never change, and that characters will never end up married again? Not at all. But someone at DC has clearly decided that for the time being superheroes must be single. And so they are.
We're talking about Animal Man here though, and he is very different from the Bat-family. That's a storyline that has been developing for quite some time at this point. It just seems to me with the recent news of Batwoman, people are jumping to conclusions and drawing conclusions from any coincidences they can find. I'm aware of what Didio's comments but that doesn't make it a policy at DC, or true of all characters. He's entitled to his own opinions. And Didio is sort of right about the Bat-characters at any rate. Those titles are filled with tragedy in the characters personal lives. That's why most of them are crime fighters in the first place. They'd know the personal costs having that kind of life could bring better than most characters.

Post Reply