Comics are Awesome III

A general discussion forum, plus hauls and silly games.
User avatar
Onslaught Six
Supreme-Class
Posts: 7023
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 6:49 am
Location: In front of my computer.
Contact:

Re: Comics are Awesome III

Post by Onslaught Six »

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 actually was. I dropped the book when it started to cross-pollinate with eight other fucking DC titles less than a year into it. We didn't even get a whole goddamn arc out of the thing before they were searching for Swamp Thing and getting help from John Constantine. (I don't know why that guy's so popular; he looks nothing like Keanu Reeves!)

Anyway, the current shit with the book (at least until I stopped reading it) was actually focused on how his daughter was more or less the "heir to the throne" (Animal Woman? Animal Girl?) and that his job was basically to protect her against the supernatural threats that were gonna go after her. There also wasn't a whole lot of Animal Manning in the book, which pissed me off a bit--several issues went by and he either didn't do anything with his powers nor were his powers ever really explained or anything. (This is the only Animal Man book I've ever read, besides that one "super important" issue from the Morrison run.)
BWprowl wrote:The internet having this many different words to describe nerdy folks is akin to the whole eskimos/ice situation, I would presume.
People spend so much time worrying about whether a figure is "mint" or not that they never stop to consider other flavours.
Image
User avatar
andersonh1
Moderator
Posts: 6323
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 3:22 pm
Location: South Carolina

Re: Comics are Awesome III

Post by andersonh1 »

Sparky Prime wrote: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.
It's not a coincidence when EVERY married DC couple with the exception of Buddy Baker and his wife are no longer married. It's a pattern.
Onslaught Six wrote:I dropped the book when it started to cross-pollinate with eight other fucking DC titles less than a year into it. We didn't even get a whole goddamn arc out of the thing before they were searching for Swamp Thing and getting help from John Constantine. (I don't know why that guy's so popular; he looks nothing like Keanu Reeves!)
I think the Rotworld crossover hurt the book more than it helped, at least with some readers.
User avatar
Sparky Prime
Supreme-Class
Posts: 5225
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 3:12 am

Re: Comics are Awesome III

Post by Sparky Prime »

andersonh1 wrote:It's not a coincidence when EVERY married DC couple with the exception of Buddy Baker and his wife are no longer married. It's a pattern.
Several, but not all, of the characters were somewhat de-aged (if they even exist in the New 52 timeline), back to a point BEFORE they were married in the first place. That's not a pattern, that's a reboot. And Animal Man soon to be divorced clearly has nothing to do with that.
User avatar
andersonh1
Moderator
Posts: 6323
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 3:22 pm
Location: South Carolina

Re: Comics are Awesome III

Post by andersonh1 »

Sparky Prime wrote:
andersonh1 wrote:It's not a coincidence when EVERY married DC couple with the exception of Buddy Baker and his wife are no longer married. It's a pattern.
Several, but not all, of the characters were somewhat de-aged (if they even exist in the New 52 timeline), back to a point BEFORE they were married in the first place. That's not a pattern, that's a reboot. And Animal Man soon to be divorced clearly has nothing to do with that.
The effect is the same, whatever you want to call it.

http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page ... e&id=47802
The single largest instance of comic book marriages being erased took place just two years ago when DC had their reality-altering event Flashpoint. Through a series of trips through time, first to prevent the murder of his mother in the past by the Reverse Flash and second to make sure that the murder did happen when the Flash saw what happened to the world the first time he tried to "fix" things, the Flash inadvertently and dramatically altered the DC Universe timeline. As a result of these changes, most of DC's heroes were de-aged to their mid-20s when the New 52 began. A side effect of this change is that any marriages that these heroes had were also wiped away. The four most notable "cosmic annulments" were Superman and Lois Lane (married since 1996), Mister Miracle and Big Barda (married since 1974), Apollo and Midnighter (married since 2002) and Barry "The Flash" Allen and Iris West (married since 1966). In addition, with the complete reboot of the Earth 2 concept, all of the married members of the Justice Society of America (most of whom were married for years -- decades in some cases) were also de-aged and therefore never married. So the Earth 2 Flash, Jay Garrick, is single for the first time in over fifty years and the Earth 2 Green Lantern, Alan Scott, is not only no longer married to his wife but was now actually attempting to propose to his boyfriend before a train accident killed his significant other.
User avatar
Sparky Prime
Supreme-Class
Posts: 5225
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 3:12 am

Re: Comics are Awesome III

Post by Sparky Prime »

andersonh1 wrote:The effect is the same, whatever you want to call it.
Not really. It's not that they aren't married anymore, the altered timeline has made it so that they're younger and haven't been married YET, during a single event that altered the universe as a whole. That's a pretty big distinction from a character getting a divorce around 2 years after that reboot took place and editorial deciding they don't want another to be married. That's not a pattern at all. And I'm not seeing why you posted the quote from CBR. I know the New 52 erased several marriages. It erased some characters from existing as well, yet you're not calling that a pattern.
User avatar
andersonh1
Moderator
Posts: 6323
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 3:22 pm
Location: South Carolina

Re: Comics are Awesome III

Post by andersonh1 »

Sparky Prime wrote:It erased some characters from existing as well, yet you're not calling that a pattern.
That's because there is no pattern there. That's one of the areas where DC has tried to have it both ways. In the case of the Flash and Batgirl, DC went back to their most recognizable versions of each character. In other cases, such as Robin or Green Lantern, DC kept all the various legacy versions that have been created over the years. Sales were the determining factor there, obviously.
Sparky Prime wrote:
andersonh1 wrote:The effect is the same, whatever you want to call it.
Not really. It's not that they aren't married anymore, the altered timeline has made it so that they're younger and haven't been married YET, during a single event that altered the universe as a whole. That's a pretty big distinction from a character getting a divorce around 2 years after that reboot took place and editorial deciding they don't want another to be married. That's not a pattern at all.
Yes, in the fictional continuity of the DC universe, time was rolled back and each of those characters was "never" married because we've gone back in time to a point before that happened, and history will unfold differently this time around. In reality, years or decades of character growth and development have been wiped out by this character regression. They may be doing things differently with Buddy Baker, but the end result is the same: he'll end up another unmarried superhero, just like everyone else. All that's different is the route DC took to get him to that point. Was it too much to ask to have just one happily married superhero? Really?
User avatar
Sparky Prime
Supreme-Class
Posts: 5225
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 3:12 am

Re: Comics are Awesome III

Post by Sparky Prime »

andersonh1 wrote:That's because there is no pattern there.
Exactly. There is no pattern. In either place.
They may be doing things differently with Buddy Baker, but the end result is the same: he'll end up another unmarried superhero, just like everyone else. All that's different is the route DC took to get him to that point. Was it too much to ask to have just one happily married superhero? Really?
I'm not seeing how the end result is the same. He's still got kids. He was still married. Unlike the other character's whose marriages never happened at all with the reboot. It's a completely different end result, not just the route they took. And I don't think the idea to not to have a happily married super hero, but to highlight how difficult that can be.
User avatar
andersonh1
Moderator
Posts: 6323
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 3:22 pm
Location: South Carolina

Re: Comics are Awesome III

Post by andersonh1 »

We're not going to agree on this, so all I'll say is that when the single married character left in DC's stable of characters is on his way to divorce, it's not hard to see how 2+2 = 4. Even leaving Buddy Baker aside, DC has made a very clear statement by wiping out every marriage across the board. And it makes no sense. If police and firemen and members of the military can get married and have families, there's no reason superheroes can't do the same thing. It makes sense for some, and it doesn't make sense for others.

Now, as a break from my negativity towards the New 52, a positive review:

The Court of Owls vol. 2
I had actually started out reading Batman with the New 52 reboot, and it was a good book. I was really enjoying the storyline when the price on the book went from $2.99 to $3.99, and that was the excuse I needed to drop it, as I had quite a few other DC books at the time. It was a good story, but not worth another dollar per month, particularly when I wasn't happy with DC anyway. Nevertheless, I was interested in seeing how the Court of Owls storyline ended, and I finally got around to reading the collected issues 7-12 thanks to the local library.

The good: The semi-supernatural nature of the Talon assassins would have fit right into Bob Kane's early vision of Batman villains. Batman can't just outfight them as he can a gang of thugs, since they don't really feel pain and can't die. So they're good adversaries, and the way they talk and taunt Bruce and Alfred as they attack Wayne Manor makes them seem like a bunch of psycho kids. The Court of Owls itself is also a good new set of villains, kept effective largely because they're faceless for the most part. Monsters are scarier the less you see of them. The idea of a secretive group ruling form the shadows for centuries is not an original idea, but it is repurposed to good effect by Snyder.

Batman's stubborness and dogged determination are depicted well, and it's certainly satisfying to see him come back and ultimately win the fight after being taken so low back in issue 5. Despite the long odds against him, he wins the fight and deals a heavy blow against the Court and the Talons.

Bruce's allies also play a major role, albeit off-panel (and presumably in their own books). He couldn't have won the day on his own, so it's a good thing he has accumulated friends and partners over the years to help him fight. Alfred in particular shines and keeps his cool in a bad situation.

The bad: Suspension of disbelief is difficult when it comes to the injuries Bruce Wayne suffers over the course of this story. He's slammed into buildings and through glass and beaten up by Talons, and all this after he was dehydrated and drugged and stabbed in the first half of the story. I had the same problem with the ending of The Dark Knight Rises. The shock alone should disable or kill him, even without the bleeding. And yet Batman's largely his usual unstoppable self, fighting stronger opponents and coming out on top in the end. Snyder overdid it on the punishment Bruce is able to survive.

The bats versus owls theme is overplayed somewhat.

Did this story really need 12 issues (a whole year of publishing time) to tell?

Overall: A good example of a story in which the enemy breaks the hero down and almost defeats him, only for the hero and his allies to come back and win. There's no doubt, it's a satisfying read, let down by a few details here and there, mainly the unbelievable amount of damage Bruce endures. Yes, he's shown to be recovering in the end, but he should have been dead with all the hits he took. A little more restraint in the writing would have served the story well.
User avatar
Sparky Prime
Supreme-Class
Posts: 5225
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 3:12 am

Re: Comics are Awesome III

Post by Sparky Prime »

andersonh1 wrote:We're not going to agree on this, so all I'll say is that when the single married character left in DC's stable of characters is on his way to divorce, it's not hard to see how 2+2 = 4.
And that's the problem, you're seeing it as the same thing when it simply isn't. Apples to oranges. Animal Man's divorce is something that's come about as an organic part of the storyline, not because of anything else.
Even leaving Buddy Baker aside, DC has made a very clear statement by wiping out every marriage across the board. And it makes no sense. If police and firemen and members of the military can get married and have families, there's no reason superheroes can't do the same thing. It makes sense for some, and it doesn't make sense for others.
Again, the reason for which was a big event that de-aged the majority of those characters, taking them back to a point in their lives BEFORE they ever got married. I don't see how that's a "clear statement" about marriage when that very clearly has absolutely nothing to do with it. It was a result of making the DC universe younger again, not a statement about marriage. I really think you're reading too much into it, seeing something that DC isn't actually saying.

Red Lanterns #23
Atrocitus awakens in space to find his loyal cat Dex-Starr had saved him. He's tempted to take the Red ring from him but decides to track down another they'd recently sent out instead. Meanwhile, Guy contacts Hal asking to be pulled out of this assignment, having trouble coping with how easily he found himself killing the pirate Barg in the previous issue. Hal promises he'll send Saint Walker to purge the Red energy from him as soon as he can. On the planet Styge Prime, Atrocitus and Dex-Starr have tracked down what they believe to be a Red Lantern ring, but instead find the embodiment of Hate, the Butcher, being held captive. Like we've seen happening to the others, The Butcher is weakened and dying seeking to join the others, but with little choice, joins with Atrocitus. Guy contacts Hal once again wanting to know what's taking so long, but Hal informs him the Blue Lantern Corps has been destroyed by Relic. His green ring fully looses its charge and Guy finds out Bleez has been listening in...
This issue makes me wish we'd seen what had become of the Emotional Embodiments after Krona's attack on the Green Lantern Corps. How is it some them were roaming around the universe, while others went to live inside the Central Batteries of their respective color? Of all the Entities, I'd have expected Atrocitus to have held onto the Butcher, given his interest in exactly that way back during Blackest Night when he thought the Specter was their Entity. It's nice to see the continuity between the other books here, with the Butcher suffering from the same thing as the others, and Hal telling Guy about Relic. It seems clear Guy is much more effected by the Red ring this time around.

Green Lantern #23.1
This issue deals with the origins of Relic. It's interesting to see a glimpse of his universe. Not only were there Lanterns like in the current universe, but the use of the spectrum had become part of every day life, with entire cities being made of constructs. We find out, similar to what's been happening, one by one the lights went out for the "Lightsmiths". Relic believed this was due to the Spectrum being part of the light of creation, and using it caused creation to run dry and end the universe. And so as the universe was being destroyed, he crossed the Source Wall as it crumbled, and somehow was preserved for the creation of the DC universe.
I have to wonder, Relic had said there were no White Lanterns in his universe when he saw Kyle... Does he know about the Emotional Embodiements? Their condition seems to be connected to what's going on, but there is no mention of such creatures from his universe. I loved seeing the look at the universe he came from, and how they'd used the spectrum. Seeing that not only did the "Lightsmith's" use the light but 'civilians' as well is a cool idea.

I also flipped through 23.2, the Mongul issue, while I was at the store. I'm not sure where continuity fits in here, given this is his first appearance in the New 52, he's in charge of Warworld once again. I gather this is actually the first Mongul rather than his son, which might mean that the whole Yellow Lantern Mongul story doesn't exist anymore. Didn't decide to get it because I didn't see that it really had anything to do with Green Lantern, other than just to reintroduce the character for the New 52, and as a potential future villain.
User avatar
Dominic
Supreme-Class
Posts: 9331
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:55 pm
Location: Boston
Contact:

Re: Comics are Awesome III

Post by Dominic »

I grabbed a few DC books this week, including the Mogul issue that Sparky mentioned. I have yet to do more than flip through any of them. But, it looks like DC is following through on the fresh start. The "Mogul and and his son" angle from pre-"Flashpoint" is likely just gone, not unlike the Henshaw Super-borg. The newstand edition of the Court of Owls book (I forget which comic it displaced) sold through before I got to the shop last night. Ironically, I could have bought the fancy cover edition. But, I refuse to give DC extra money for that kind of stunting.


Uber #0:
I managed to find the enhanced edition of issue #0 on the way back from a job interview (no clear results yet) yesterday. Oh my lord, this book is amazing. It is so good, I am going to break one of my cardinal rules and ignore something that the writer said about their own work. Gillen has specifically said that people should not be cheering about this book or enjoying it too much. Well, too damned bad. I am compelled to cheer for comics this good. My only real complaint is that Gillen is far too charitable in his treatment of Albert Speer and Heinz Guderian (particularly Speer).
Grade: A/B


-Dom
Post Reply