Dominic wrote:It has been pointed out that Superman and Quintum seem to have a cancellation effect on each other, almost as if they are "fated" to be adversaries. Q's experiments go wrong when Superman is around, and some of Q's experiments have negtive effects on Superman, that sort of thing.
In that sense, regardless of if Quintum and Luthor are the same guy, Superman is (if only thematically) a hinderance.
That is a spurious comparison, the reason Quintum's main experiment fails is because of Lex Luthor's involvement to create a trap for Superman; the reason Quintum's experiment is negative to Superman is for the same reason. The stuff with Jimmy wasn't Quintum's fault but Jimmy's. The only other experiment gone wrong that I can think of is the Bizarros, and in fact that's both Superman and Quintum's work, I believe - which is rectified at the end of the series when Superman writes down and gives Quintum his full DNA code finally. This is what I don't like about literary criticism, looking for themes and then expanding to the Nth degree instead of just letting them exist as they are.
anderson wrote:I've never quite understood that attitude from DC. From a real world standpoint, the Flash's red body suit looks stupid whether it has seams or not. Superman's costume looks nothing like any clothing that a real person would wear, red trunks or not. Wonder Woman is going to have quite a few Janet Jackson wardrobe malfunctions in that outfit of hers. And so on. If a reader can suspend their disbelief and accept super powered individuals in brightly colored costumes, does a seam or two here and there really make the difference between "modern and cool" and "old fashioned and hokey"? I don't think it does.
It's the thinking of executives in a corporation who bought a comic book company but doesn't understand it well or like it at all, I think that attitude seeps down into DC itself. So if "techy" is what they think people are after, that's going to be the edict, pointless techy lines on everything. It worked for the Arkham Asylum video game costume, so they took it to the page without any real thought. The funny thing is that the change from golden age Flash and Green Lantern is what made a lot of modern DC comics so iconic. The Superman costume looked not as cool until then too, the logo wasn't as good; Wondy's outfit was kind of lumpy and confused - first a skirt and then big shorts - until then as well. Or maybe it's not corporate, maybe it's just comics guys trying not to be DC anymore, pulling a New Coke where it just wants to be Pepsi so badly.
Dom wrote:They might just be trying to get away form control art derived from work done in the 1930s and 40s.
The results have been mixed. But, I can understand what DC might be trying for. But, yes, panel lines look stupid.
From a design standpoint, they undermine the "real" logic that DC is probably trying for. Superman wearing armour is redundant. But, if he is effectively on an alien world, then it almost makes sense. But, it does not look like armour. Why would armoured plating conform that much to his body and still need panels. (Remember, the seams between the panels would effectively be points of failure in the armour. The only reason to include them would be to allow for movement. But, if the armour can mould to his body, it would be flexible enough to not need additional seams as weak points.) Batman's seams would make the costume more difficult to produce and maintain. (Yes, Bruce Wayne is rich, but why would he spend more money and time on the costume than needed?)
DC basically sees how Marvel has more modern costumes and feels outdated, I think, not realizing that the iconography of the DC comics is what separates them from all the rest in the public's eye.
Love it or hate it, or simply being indifferent, DC wants to position "Flash Point" as their most defining since "Crisis on Infinite Earths". They problably want it to have a presence in all of their media, including the movies that are (for some people) the most accessible media. So, it makes sense to pitch "Flash Point" to a wider audience.
That failed if it was the intention, COIE was on the public consciousness for a long time, while Flashpoint made no impact on the greater public whatsoever. They're trying to rebrand but missing the point of rebranding, and a cartoon movie isn't going to fix that.
O6 wrote:I seem to remember the Nolan movies at least implying that most of Batman's gear was currently/previously existing tech. Which doesn't say much for the comics, I guess, but whatever.
The suits weren't production tech, it was prototype tech for them. They sourced some stuff from production in the first movie like the cowl.
Think of Superman as the antithesis of Dr. Manhattan, though. Dr. Manhattan chooses not to wear clothes because he gives zero fucks about what humanity thinks of him. Superman *does* care about humanity--probably more than most actual humans do. Supes is the kind of dude who would design his armour specifically to resemble other superhero's outfits, even if it makes no actual sense for his own well-being.
Superman shouldn't be thinking about armoring himself, he should be thinking about inspiring people to do good things with a big, flashy brand that also says "Krypton" to him. Superman doesn't have a mask, he's not hiding from criminals, he's standing in their faces and saying "don't try it, I'm here and others will follow" with his costume. Only now he's a punk bitch who needs armor apparently.
As far as DC doing a "Flashpoint" flick...am I the only one who keeps forgetting that there was an entire Flash storyline in that thing, and then there was this weird reboot shit tacked onto the end of it? The animated Flashpoint may well excise the entire "universe rebooting" aspect and only adapt the Flash-specific elements.
Does anybody ever care about Flash storylines in cartoons though? They're always the same thing.
