|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 24,593
Timelord. Drunkard. 15000+ posts
|
Timelord. Drunkard. 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 24,593 |
The caption helps emphasize it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896
10000+ posts
|
|
10000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896 |
quote:
Originally posted by Conner Kent:
I made an observation and stated my views, and opinions, and I was greeted with "Fuck You" or somemthing to that effect.
Your very first sentence sarcastically implied that Disco Steve was a "pathetic loser". That was why you received the response you did. It had nothing to do with your opinions or views on the topic. Had you merely said "I liked Birthright" or "I didn't like Birthright" and then explained why, I assure you a different response would have been given.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 14,203
1 Millionth Customer 10000+ posts
|
|
1 Millionth Customer 10000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 14,203 |
My god. This thread is being corrupted by a terrible force. I must heal it with the sacred image......
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 14,203
1 Millionth Customer 10000+ posts
|
|
1 Millionth Customer 10000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 14,203 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 14,203
1 Millionth Customer 10000+ posts
|
|
1 Millionth Customer 10000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 14,203 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 15
1 post
|
|
1 post
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 15 |
quote:
Originally posted by Animalman:
quote:
Originally posted by Conner Kent:
I made an observation and stated my views, and opinions, and I was greeted with "Fuck You" or somemthing to that effect.
Your very first sentence sarcastically implied that Disco Steve was a "pathetic loser". That was why you received the response you did. It had nothing to do with your opinions or views on the topic. Had you merely said "I liked Birthright" or "I didn't like Birthright" and then explained why, I assure you a different response would have been given.
Actually like I stated above I made an observation. I said it, and stand by it. I still think it is pathetic to say that.
And I was judged on the fact that I didn't want "Birthright" to replace "Man of Steel", which is what MoTA thinks also, and goes against what some of the people here think.
If I would have let that little observation of mine out I would still have been met with hostility because I agree with someone who is disliked on this board.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,000
5000+ posts
|
|
5000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,000 |
Um...hi everyone.
I, uh...I posted some thoughts above, on page 7, and...uh...I guess b/c I posted in the middle of a side discussion, nobody cares about what I have to say.
That's cool and all. That's the problem with coming in late to a discussion. By the time it gets to be this long, no one cares about what a new guy has to say.
I...um...I will leave now...with my head held low.
Have a nice day!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 7,587
7500+ posts
|
|
7500+ posts
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 7,587 |
quote:
Originally posted by Conner Kent:
quote:
Originally posted by Animalman:
quote:
Originally posted by Conner Kent:
I made an observation and stated my views, and opinions, and I was greeted with "Fuck You" or somemthing to that effect.
Your very first sentence sarcastically implied that Disco Steve was a "pathetic loser". That was why you received the response you did.
Actually like I stated above I made an observation. I said it, and stand by it. I still think it is pathetic to say that.
Conner Kunt: you, sir, are a shite.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 985
500+ posts
|
|
500+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 985 |
quote:
Originally posted by PenWing:
Um...hi everyone.
I, uh...I posted some thoughts above, on page 7, and...uh...I guess b/c I posted in the middle of a side discussion, nobody cares about what I have to say.
That's cool and all. That's the problem with coming in late to a discussion. By the time it gets to be this long, no one cares about what a new guy has to say.
I...um...I will leave now...with my head held low.
Have a nice day!
I didn't address your comments because it's a given that I agree with them :) (except for the anti-Byrne stuff :) )
Others may have ignored them because they don't.
I think that what you said makes a lot of sense.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,000
5000+ posts
|
|
5000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,000 |
I see what you're saying, but, it's nice when someone at least acknowledges your existance.
Anyway, thanks for the kind words.
We know return you to the current conversation, already in progress.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 33,919
devil-lovin' Bat-Man 15000+ posts
|
|
devil-lovin' Bat-Man 15000+ posts
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 33,919 |
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
Spider-Man, the X-Men, Daredevil, Captain America and many more.
These are characters whose origins, unlike Superman's, date back to the 1960's. They have been modernized but never changed in a radical way, not how Waid is doing with BR right now.
MoS happened because, unlike Marvel, DC had made a mess of its continuity by having too many of them running around at the same time.
If Spider-Man can exist for over 40 years with only one origin which seldomly gets mentioned and when it is is only in passing and to modernize it slightly, why can't Superman have one that's only 17 years old?
Eh, we were talking about characters under DC conditions, Crisis and no aging and all. I don't know how Marvel handles continuity.
All I can think of (not having many Marvel comics in my life) is this:
- The comics weren't tied to each other for as long as Superman's. I know that there are a lot of Spider-Man and X-Men titles, but as far as I know each one has always kept separate storylines (like Bat-Man), only making crossovers once in a while.
- More creative teams have worked in those titles than in Superman. Maybe Marvel has another way of handling the revamps, I don't know, or maybe it's just that when they suck (in this particular book, obviously), they fire them instead of keeping the team around for four years...
The point is, I haven't read any issues of those comics and don't know if they suck. I don't know if their sacred continuity is respected or not, or if it's confusing and convulted or not. I do know that Superman sucks nowadays (I think we all agree on that).
Another thing; you say their origins have been modernized. Has Man of Steel ever been modified in the slightest? Retroactive changes don't count.
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
Not so, they just got burned out, it happens.
Stan Lee did 100 issues of Fantastic Four with Kirby. Where they convulted? Yes, and to this day they are praised for what they did there.
You mean they were convulted in a "the stories are so convulted" way or in a "the continuity barely makes any sense, it's hard to follow and requires a lot of research to be enjoyed" way? From what I've read of Kirby and Lee's Fantastic Four, I'd say it's the first one.
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
Depends on the writer's ego.
Geoff Johns manages to make his stories work WITH continuity, other writers who feel they are above it can't handle it so they make it a mission in life to tell people how bad continuity is...
It's all in the ego...
He doesn't MANAGE to work with continuity, he CHOOSES to do so. It's evident that this guy likes doing it. If he didn't like it he wouldn't do it. So Waid can't handle it? What about his past work? You know that Waid is more than able to work with continuity. If he doesn't do it now it's because he doesn't want to. Who knows, maybe Johns will feel the same way some day.
This "depends on the ego" view of you is incredibly simplistic. I can't believe you really think that.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 33,919
devil-lovin' Bat-Man 15000+ posts
|
|
devil-lovin' Bat-Man 15000+ posts
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 33,919 |
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
What about Spider-Man? Since he didn't experience a Crisis his continuity is longer than Superman's, with more stories that are still considered to be in continuity.
JMS manages to use this continuity perfectly, yet Waid can't do the same with Superman...
Won't do the same with Superman. Y'know, this "Waid sucks cause he can't work with continuity!" argument is infantile. You know he CAN, take his work in Flash as an example.
As for Spider-Man, see my last post.
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
Superman is accesible, the books just suck because they are outdated, they fit better in the 70's than today.
And you'd rather make them fit in the 80's.
So Superman is accesible? And you've heard this from how many new readers? Tell you what, let's tell one of the mods here to make a poll asking how accesible Superman's continuity is.
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
So far it has lasted perfectly for 17 years, until now, until Waid came along and fucked it up, till Berganza fucked up the books. MoS has NOTHING, not ONE thing to do with ANTYHING that's happened in the comics in over five years.
Then it has lasted perfectly for 12 years, not 17. And that's about how much it should last logically. Around a decade.
It had nothing to do with the comics the last five years, but it was still there. They couldn't tell an origin because MoS couldn't be denied.
I'm gonna ask you this directly and I hope you answer it this time: say there's never another Crisis like event again. Do you think Man of Steel should last forever?
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
Death of Clark Kent wasn't that bad. I found Kenny Braverman to be a very interesting character.
The storyline and the villian promised a lot, but it ended up being one boring arc with a lame ending.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 33,919
devil-lovin' Bat-Man 15000+ posts
|
|
devil-lovin' Bat-Man 15000+ posts
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 33,919 |
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
Right, there are Elseworlds too...
Don't really add anything to the character.
No, that doesn't mean I support endless continuities. I support immediate ones. For example: what was "added" to Superman's personality after the Exile Saga was used like five years later in Superman/Aliens. That was cool. Now, should something that happened 20 years ago (in Superman terms, which means 52 comics every year) be expected to come out now? No, that's sick. You gotta be obsessed with a character to write something like that and a damn nitpicker to catch it.
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
There are two choices: either it's in continuity or it's not.
Well, that's limited.
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
If the writer wants to do a story set IN continuity then he has to respect what came before, not whinne about how something that happened 10 years earlier can't let him have it HIS way.
If the writer wants to do a story set IN continuity it's because he wants to respect what came before, not whinne... like you're whining right now.
It happened 10 years earlier and it limits him today. I think that's excessive and unnecessary. What if there isn't a Crisis in 50 years? More and more ideas would become undoable because of old stuff.
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
These whinners have to accept that they came last, that other people came before them and they can't ignore what they did out of ego, that what they want to do first was already done before.
They shouldn't have to accept anything. These are not real people that are being written, you know. They'll never be anywhere near real, not the way DC handles aging. This is for fun, believe it or not. Imposing limitations like "oooh, that happened Who Gives A Damn #23653 so you can't do it... oooh" is just silly.
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
Writers like Morrison think that sibilings want to fuck each other in the ass, should he be allowed to tell that kind of stories too?
Comparing breaking continuity to incest? That's extreme. Where did you get that Morrison thing from, anyway?
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
And if a writer doesn't want his story to be in continuity then it doesn't have to be, he can do whatever the fuck he wants with it, but if the story IS in continuity then he better fucking respect it instead of whine about it...
'He better fucking respect it...' You talk about continuity as if it was more important than the actual stories.
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
Do you or don't you understand the difference between stories that are in continuity and those that aren't?
If a writer wants his story to be IN continuity then he has to accept and respect that stories that are similar to his idea may have already been told before.
If he wants it to be outside it then that's his problem.
But YOU made it clear, these writers DON'T want stories that are out of continuity because then they 'don't matter'...
So don't fucking tell me that this is about 'quality' when you know perfectly well that this is about ego!
You're the one that said it, not me. There are Elseworlds but they don't count because then the story doesn't matter, that's a fact.
These whinners want their stories to BE in continuity so that people will talk about them for years and years but they refuse to respect what came before if it's in their way.
Quality has NOTHING to do with this, it's ALL about continuity. They want in and are willing to do and say WHATEVER they want to do it.
Assumptions. Silly ones, I should I add. When you say "they" you mean Waid and...?
I talked about the Elseworlds above. If you have any other questions about it, feel free to ask.
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
Go back to the Silver Age, when stories didn't have respercutions.
Today they do...
Uh, no they don't. They're fantasy. As in not real.
I can't go back to the Silver Age, I was born during Crisis.
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
I find MoS to be a better story than BR. I would still defend BR if it had come first because there's no reason to create waves now, there's no reason to disrupt the origin when the origin has NOTHING to do with the current problems.
That's just fucked up. Too bad nobody is reading our discussion... everyone should know you just said that.
"There's no reason to disrupt the sacred origin..." Gimme a break...
When did it stop being about how good the stories were? When did continuity become so fucking important? If you had your way, we'd eventually end up having nothing nothing but updates on the fictional character's current situation, with specified time frame and no literary value whatsoever.
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
Facts.
Inside that head, no doubt.
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
I don't tell my story, I swallow my ego.
Then you're not a writer.
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
Of course, I have NEVER found a story that would fit your criteria...
The way things are going...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 985
500+ posts
|
|
500+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 985 |
quote:
Originally posted by I'm Not Mister Mxypltk:
say there's never another Crisis like event again. Do you think Man of Steel should last forever?
Forever and ever because that's the ORIGIN.
People don't read comics to read ORIGINS (plural), they read tyo read ONE origin and then new adventures.
Just because some writers feel limited to telling the characters origins over and over again doesn't mean it should be like that.
The characters only need ONE origin and then they should move on, tell new stories without altering the past.
Marvel does it all the time. They have a shitty continuity, but they don't play around with the characters origins (remember Chapter One? They tried to screw with an origin and it screwed them back).
The origins shouldn't have to be touched every 'decade' or every half decade, they should be left alone and the only thing the writers should worry about is telling NEW stories instead of re writing the past over and over again.
Plenty of comic books do that (Batman does it, Wonder Woman does it, Green Lantern does it), so it can be done, it's just a matter of wanting todo it.
You may read comics to read the characters origin's over and over and over and over and over and over again, but other people don't.
There's no reason to alter MoS, except to please some whinner writers and old readers who don't like the changes Byrne made.
As for your question about MoS being modernized... nope, not really, but it doesn't have to, there's NOTHING on it that needs to be modernized.
I just gave you an entire list of EVERYTHING that happened on that mini series and you weren't able to pick ONE thing that would need to be modernized, not ONE...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 985
500+ posts
|
|
500+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 985 |
quote:
Originally posted by I'm Not Mister Mxypltk:
If the writer wants to do a story set IN continuity it's because he wants to respect what came before, not whinne... like you're whining right now.
It happened 10 years earlier and it limits him today. I think that's excessive and unnecessary. What if there isn't a Crisis in 50 years? More and more ideas would become undoable because of old stuff.
This is just sad.
So you're saying that between having X number of stories that tell one continous story you would rather have 10 stories (an example) told over and over again?
Think about it:
Writer A tells story 1, then 6 years later Writer D wants to retell story 1 HIS way. Should he be allowed to do that or be told 'you can't do it, someone else already did it before you came along, think of something original instead of repeating what someone else did before'.
I rather have an unlimited number of stories than a limited number of ones by writers who can't come up with anything original and instead choose to imitate what others have done before...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896
10000+ posts
|
|
10000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896 |
quote:
Originally posted by Conner Kent:
And I was judged on the fact that I didn't want "Birthright" to replace "Man of Steel", which is what MoTA thinks also, and goes against what some of the people here think.
No. You were "judged" because your very first post(very first sentence) was an insult. That's not going to win many people over.
quote:
If I would have let that little observation of mine out I would still have been met with hostility because I agree with someone who is disliked on this board.
Absolutely not. If you just stated your opinion you wouldn't have been met with hostility, so long as you didn't throw in little insults along the way as MoTA does(i.e "this is just sad" in previous post).
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896
10000+ posts
|
|
10000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896 |
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
quote:
Originally posted by I'm Not Mister Mxypltk:
say there's never another Crisis like event again. Do you think Man of Steel should last forever?
Forever and ever because that's the ORIGIN.
People don't read comics to read ORIGINS (plural), they read tyo read ONE origin and then new adventures.
Just because some writers feel limited to telling the characters origins over and over again doesn't mean it should be like that.
The characters only need ONE origin and then they should move on, tell new stories without altering the past.
Marvel does it all the time. They have a shitty continuity, but they don't play around with the characters origins (remember Chapter One? They tried to screw with an origin and it screwed them back).
The origins shouldn't have to be touched every 'decade' or every half decade, they should be left alone and the only thing the writers should worry about is telling NEW stories instead of re writing the past over and over again.
Plenty of comic books do that (Batman does it, Wonder Woman does it, Green Lantern does it), so it can be done, it's just a matter of wanting todo it.
You may read comics to read the characters origin's over and over and over and over and over and over again, but other people don't.
There's no reason to alter MoS, except to please some whinner writers and old readers who don't like the changes Byrne made.
As for your question about MoS being modernized... nope, not really, but it doesn't have to, there's NOTHING on it that needs to be modernized.
I just gave you an entire list of EVERYTHING that happened on that mini series and you weren't able to pick ONE thing that would need to be modernized, not ONE...
Perhaps I'm missing something, because I didn't bother(and I'm not going to) to read the 6 pages before this, but....didn't Byrne rewrite the character? Didn't he change the character's origin? The version that you seem to hold in such high esteem isn't the original. Does that not make Byrne a "whinner writer", like everyone else?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 985
500+ posts
|
|
500+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 985 |
quote:
Originally posted by Animalman:
Perhaps I'm missing something, because I didn't bother(and I'm not going to) to read the 6 pages before this, but....didn't Byrne rewrite the character? Didn't he change the character's origin? The version that you seem to hold in such high esteem isn't the original. Does that not make Byrne a "whinner writer", like everyone else?
What you seem to be missing is CRISIS.
If DC does another Crisis and decides to hire Waid to retell Superman's origin then he's more than welcome to it, till that happens, MoS is the only origin that counts.
If the people doing the comics in the 60's and 70's hadn't decided to split Superman into two different characters and fill the myth up with 32 flavors of Kryptonite, multiple Kryptonians and all the other crap that watered down the concept, then there wouldn't have been any need for Crisis and MoS to happen.
According to Wolfman, he killed Supergirl to help make Superman the LAST Kryptonian, as it should have always been.
What's Waid doing by giving him God Vision? Turning him into the God he thinks he should have always been?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896
10000+ posts
|
|
10000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896 |
So...what are you saying? What's your point?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 985
500+ posts
|
|
500+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 985 |
quote:
Originally posted by Animalman:
So...what are you saying? What's your point?
The point is that there's no room for BR in continuity yet that doesn't seem to be stopping Mark Waid and Eddie Berganza from wanting it to be.
MoS is the origin that was published after Crisis and the one that makes more sense.
And from what I've seen none of you can come up with even ONE thing about it that needs to be modernized or updated. It does seem that the ONLY thing you guys have against MoS is that Byrne turned Krypton from a futuristic Earth into an alien world and you don't like it... that and the lack of additional Kryptonians...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896
10000+ posts
|
|
10000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896 |
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
The point is that there's no room for BR in continuity yet that doesn't seem to be stopping Mark Waid and Eddie Berganza from wanting it to be.
I guess with what little I've heard about it, I can agree with that.
quote:
MoS is the origin that was published after Crisis and the one that makes more sense.
You'll have to explain to me why it makes sense and why all the others don't.
Despite your references to me as a silver age maniac in the Supreme thread, my readings of Superman prior 1990 have been selective, as that was when I started reading comic books regularly.
quote:
And from what I've seen none of you can come up with even ONE thing about it that needs to be modernized or updated. It does seem that the ONLY thing you guys have against MoS is that Byrne turned Krypton from a futuristic Earth into an alien world and you don't like it... that and the lack of additional Kryptonians...
Well, firstly, don't lump me into any group. I've yet to specifically comment on or suggest anything in relation to the origin of Superman, so, for the time being, you don't know what my views or opinions on the subject are.
Frankly, I don't have many. I like to read good stories. I don't really give a shit about "continuity" aside from it's importance to those good stories. I think that if a story is well done and makes sense, it doesn't need to be set in any kind of timeline. The realm of fiction is far too massive and unexplored to limit it like that.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 33,919
devil-lovin' Bat-Man 15000+ posts
|
|
devil-lovin' Bat-Man 15000+ posts
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 33,919 |
I don't have time to reply to MOTA right now, but I skimmed through his posts and I've seem some brilliant stuff ("forever and ever because it's the origin!" you kill me!), so I'm really looking forward to replying, and you can bet I'll get to it as soon as I have an opportunity.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 985
500+ posts
|
|
500+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 985 |
Tell me this, do you understand the concept of TIME?
Do you understand that the heroes origins happened in the PAST?
I've finally understood what your definition of modernizing is.
You don't want retroactive changes done to the origins (i.e. instead of meeting in World War War Reed and Ben met in Desert Storm), no, you want the origins to take place NOW, ignore everything that took place between the origin and today and start from scratch.
You use the 'that's the way it happened before Crisis' defense, you use the 'the characters origins have been retold a hundred times, why not again?', excuse.
You claim to want fresh takes on the stories yet you use outdated, 40 year old story techniques to justify the changes you claim you want.
Do you see the irony?
The origins are MEANT to stay in the past, be old, be outdated compared to today.
There's absolutely NO need to retell the origins over and over again, all that the comics need is NEW stories, not to retread old ground.
Of course, this is a sin for some readers because they find the idea of growth and change to go AGAINST the concept of comic books. They (you) think that comic books are meant to be repetitive and redo the same things over and over again, which is why you have no problem with projects like Birthright, while the idea of actually telling NEW stories scares you...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 24,593
Timelord. Drunkard. 15000+ posts
|
|
Timelord. Drunkard. 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 24,593 |
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
I've finally understood what your definition of modernizing is.
You don't want retroactive changes done to the origins (i.e. instead of meeting in World War War Reed and Ben met in Desert Storm), no, you want the origins to take place NOW, ignore everything that took place between the origin and today and start from scratch.
You use the 'that's the way it happened before Crisis' defense, you use the 'the characters origins have been retold a hundred times, why not again?', excuse.
You claim to want fresh takes on the stories yet you use outdated, 40 year old story techniques to justify the changes you claim you want.
Do you see the irony?
......
They (you) think that comic books are meant to be repetitive and redo the same things over and over again, which is why you have no problem with projects like Birthright, while the idea of actually telling NEW stories scares you...
"I called it a 'Jump to Conclusions' mat. You roll it out and jump to the answer."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 7,587
7500+ posts
|
|
7500+ posts
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 7,587 |
quote:
Originally posted by Animalman:
So...what are you saying? What's your point?
Since this is directed at MOTA, this may be the funniest thing ever said.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 33,919
devil-lovin' Bat-Man 15000+ posts
|
|
devil-lovin' Bat-Man 15000+ posts
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 33,919 |
Moty: I honestly don't have time to reply to your stuff right now (just finished doing homework and I have class in seven hours so I should get some sleep), but please don't think I've forgotten about you. In fact, more than ever I'm looking forward to replying because I've read some lines in what you've said that are just... well, unique. So hang in there, I'm gonna try to come back tomorrow afternoon.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 486
400+ posts
|
|
400+ posts
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 486 |
Let me get one thing clear. We're talking about Superman, right? A comic book character created way back in 1940, or something like that. 60 plus years of story have been told. Now some dude is retelling his origin, and changing it in the process (I believe the term for this is "reconning" but I'm not entirely sure.)
Now, is this process going to affect the previous stories you love so much? I don't think so, it's not like some DC dude is going to walk up to your place and start replacing your comics you love so much for the new "retconned" versions. You can always reread them, and I'm sure they'll be as good as they always were.
Is this process gonna affect the future stories? Maybe, but who knows? they may set the grounds for interesting new storylines. You're closing the door on future possibilities. That is being narrow-minded.
Now, you have to accept something: Superman is a famous character, but people don't like him that much. Sure, people like him, but it's like Mariah Carey. You know she's hot, you can talk about her and her glorious figure, but no way you're buying one of her CDs. The same happens with Supes. Everyone knows who he is, a lot of people like him, but not a whole lot actually buys the comic. Need proof? Supes best selling book for July was your so hated Birthright at number 30. The closest follower? Superman # 195, at number 51. 51. That isn't an awful lot. DC might be trying to jumpstart the franchise to actually save the friggin' book. And hey, you might not know this, but DC is actually in it for the money. It's not some sort of selfless crusade to bring out quality stories, no matter how much money they lose on it. If they are trying to appeal to the much broader audience that watches "Smallville", is that so bad? Me thinks not.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,000
5000+ posts
|
|
5000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,000 |
Guys, when I went to pick up Batman this morning I skimmed Birthright #3.
How do I put this...what Byrne explained in a few panels, Waid took an entire book.
And, do you know what the wrost part is?
He didn't add anything new. He didn't tell us anything we didn't know. AND he didn't write anything to enhance the characters.
So, what was the point in the comic? All he did was take something that, at most, should have taken him 1 page to tell, and stretched it out into an entire comic.
There is no point in retelling an origin if all you are going to do is stretch out the way the story is told. It's so fuckin' boring b/c it doesn't add a thing to the mythos. And it's pointless!
I was hoping this would be a stroy to get in trade for my collection. I would say that I hope it has been cancelled, but, that really screws the people who have bought the first 3 comics. And these aren't cheap!
How can DC ask us to invest in their product, and we invest a lot more than money, we invest time and emotions, if this is the crap that they release?
Again, this book should never have made it off of the editor's desk.
WTF?!?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 509
500+ posts
|
|
500+ posts
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 509 |
quote:
I like to read good stories. I don't really give a shit about "continuity" aside from it's importance to those good stories. I think that if a story is well done and makes sense, it doesn't need to be set in any kind of timeline. The realm of fiction is far too massive and unexplored to limit it like that.
My thoughts exactly.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 985
500+ posts
|
|
500+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 985 |
quote:
Originally posted by PenWing:
Guys, when I went to pick up Batman this morning I skimmed Birthright #3.
Someone else on the DC boards said that he's dropping BR after issue #3.
Like I said, each new issue makes it clearer that Waid has NO idea of what he's saying.
Mxy says that Superman needs a 'fresh' origin... well Mxy, BR is NOT fresh, it's knee-deep in the 1960's and 70's...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896
10000+ posts
|
|
10000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896 |
A story can have silver age aspects and still be "fresh". It's called revisionism.
Thanks, by the way, for skipping over my post and just going back to name-calling.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 985
500+ posts
|
|
500+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 985 |
quote:
Originally posted by Animalman:
A story can have silver age aspects and still be "fresh". It's called revisionism.
Thanks, by the way, for skipping over my post and just going back to name-calling.
First let me apologize. I didn't see your post, otherwise I would have replied to it.
Overall, the only thing I content on it is that GOOD is STILL subjective.
What's good for you and a million people is not good for the other billion that populate the planet.
Rob Liefeld was good, then he wasn't...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 33,919
devil-lovin' Bat-Man 15000+ posts
|
|
devil-lovin' Bat-Man 15000+ posts
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 33,919 |
Oooookay, here we go... quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
Forever and ever because that's the ORIGIN.
Actually, it's not. It's an origin. The third one, we could say, since Kal-L's origin differed a litle from Kal-El's.
"Forever and ever..." Do you realize how silly that sounds? No, I'm talking about the election of words, I'm talking about what you're trying to say. "Forever and ever..." Thank God you don't run DC.
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
People don't read comics to read ORIGINS (plural), they read tyo read ONE origin and then new adventures.
Possible reply #1: How would you know what people think?
Possible reply #2: People read to comics to read good stories. PERIOD. All the rest is instruments to tell those stories. A writer that values anything above a good story stops being a writer. (anything concerning his stories, obviously...)
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
Just because some writers feel limited to telling the characters origins over and over again doesn't mean it should be like that.
Just because some writers feel limited to telling the characters origins only one time doesn't mean it should be like that.
Think about that for a sec, ok? Seriously. (hey, how about that... the word limited fits in better in my phrase than in yours... heh.)
(by the way, what do you mean by "some writers"? Waid and who else?)
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
The characters only need ONE origin and then they should move on, tell new stories without altering the past.
That'd be cool... but it can't be done.
Why not? Because the characters can't age more than a couple of years. You want them to keep the same continuity "forever and ever..." but that in those... let's say 50 years your continuity would consist in, only two or three years would pass in comic time (cause you gotta keep the character young, DC says). You can't say that wouldn't be a big fucking mess. Even bigger than the one we have now for having three or so comic years in 17 real time years.
The only way to keep the character young (like DC demands) and have good stories all the time is... yep, you guessed it, reboot or modify constantly.
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
Marvel does it all the time. They have a shitty continuity, but they don't play around with the characters origins (remember Chapter One? They tried to screw with an origin and it screwed them back).
They have a shitty continuity, but they don't play around with the character's origins... which is what really matters, right? That's what you're saying? Marvel having a shitty continuity is just an unimportant side effect... right?
They have a shitty continuity? But isn't continuity the most important thing EVER? Shouldn't all the real non-whiner writers be guided by the continuity, as if it was their writer's bible? How can they be guided by it, how can it be the most important thing EVER... if it's shitty?
According to you this decades old "forever and ever" continuity is what makes a character. If it's shitty by now, wouldn't it be even shittier in 20 more years? How can the character be molded after his continuity, if it gets shittier all the time?
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
The origins shouldn't have to be touched every 'decade' or every half decade, they should be left alone and the only thing the writers should worry about is telling NEW stories instead of re writing the past over and over again.
An origin can be a NEW story.
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
Plenty of comic books do that (Batman does it, Wonder Woman does it, Green Lantern does it), so it can be done, it's just a matter of wanting todo it.
I explained the difference between those comics and Superman earlier. Eventually, they're gonna get just as convulted as Superman is now.
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
You may read comics to read the characters origin's over and over and over and over and over and over again, but other people don't.
No, I read comics to get good stories. Which I don't get in my favorite character's titles because of the convulted continuity they force themselves to follow.
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
There's no reason to alter MoS, except to please some whinner writers and old readers who don't like the changes Byrne made.
I like the changes Byrne made. I just don't think they should be left "forever and ever". Just like MoS was necessary at one point, a new origin is necessary now and another one after that and another one after that...
The great irony is that you're defending definite origins over revisited ones... but the Superman origin you prefer is a revisited one!
Yeah, yeah, Crisis happened, yadda yadda yadda... I personally think that a Crisis isn't really necessary to make a reboot (a Crisis, as cool as it is to read, is an excuse, not a reason). BUT let's assume for a second that a Crisis IS necessary to make a reboot. Then, we're gonna have a new Crisis sometime soon. And about 10 or 15 years later we're gonna have another one. And then another one. And then another one.
I'd rather make the reboots without making all the Crisis stories (they'd be basically the same thing... unless they find a clever way of making it different), but that's up to the Editors.
It's just the way things are. Things get crappy and intelligent people can see the reasons behind that and take measures to fix things so good stories can be told again.
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
As for your question about MoS being modernized... nope, not really, but it doesn't have to, there's NOTHING on it that needs to be modernized.
I just gave you an entire list of EVERYTHING that happened on that mini series and you weren't able to pick ONE thing that would need to be modernized, not ONE...
Because I'm not writting a revamp. If DC said to me, "Hey Mxy, write a Superman revamp, willya?" I'd start thinking hardly about what should be changed and what shouldn't.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 33,919
devil-lovin' Bat-Man 15000+ posts
|
|
devil-lovin' Bat-Man 15000+ posts
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 33,919 |
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
What you seem to be missing is CRISIS.
If DC does another Crisis and decides to hire Waid to retell Superman's origin then he's more than welcome to it, till that happens, MoS is the only origin that counts.
I seriously don't think Marv Wolfman would have written Crisis if he knew there was gonna be people that would take it so damn seriously.
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
If the people doing the comics in the 60's and 70's hadn't decided to split Superman into two different characters and fill the myth up with 32 flavors of Kryptonite, multiple Kryptonians and all the other crap that watered down the concept, then there wouldn't have been any need for Crisis and MoS to happen.
If all the shit that's been happening in the Superman titles for the past years hadn't happened then a new reboot wouldn't be needed right now.
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
According to Wolfman, he killed Supergirl to help make Superman the LAST Kryptonian, as it should have always been.
What's Waid doing by giving him God Vision? Turning him into the God he thinks he should have always been?
How is turning Superman into a SUPERman any different than turning him into a superMAN? The only difference I can see is that you like one option and you don't like the other.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 33,919
devil-lovin' Bat-Man 15000+ posts
|
|
devil-lovin' Bat-Man 15000+ posts
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 33,919 |
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
The point is that there's no room for BR in continuity yet that doesn't seem to be stopping Mark Waid and Eddie Berganza from wanting it to be.
MoS is the origin that was published after Crisis and the one that makes more sense.
And from what I've seen none of you can come up with even ONE thing about it that needs to be modernized or updated. It does seem that the ONLY thing you guys have against MoS is that Byrne turned Krypton from a futuristic Earth into an alien world and you don't like it... that and the lack of additional Kryptonians...
You got me. All the stuff I've been saying until now has been only a cover up for my hatred for the futuristic Krypton.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 774
500+ posts
|
|
500+ posts
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 774 |
quote:
Originally posted by I'm Not Mister Mxypltk:
You got me. All the stuff I've been saying until now has been only a cover up for my hatred for the futuristic Krypton.
No shit?!?!
![[nyah hah]](images/icons/tongue.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 33,919
devil-lovin' Bat-Man 15000+ posts
|
|
devil-lovin' Bat-Man 15000+ posts
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 33,919 |
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
Tell me this, do you understand the concept of TIME?
Yep.
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
Do you understand that the heroes origins happened in the PAST?
Depends on the hero you're talking about. Some are just starting.
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
I've finally understood what your definition of modernizing is.
Phew! Good, I was afraid I was gonna have to explain it to you all over again...
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
You don't want retroactive changes done to the origins (i.e. instead of meeting in World War War Reed and Ben met in Desert Storm), no, you want the origins to take place NOW, ignore everything that took place between the origin and today and start from scratch.
I do? I had no idea. I thought I wanted whatever made a good story.
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
You use the 'that's the way it happened before Crisis' defense, you use the 'the characters origins have been retold a hundred times, why not again?', excuse.
It HAS been retold before. It's not a excuse. It'd be a excuse if I said "But... the doggie has a cape!"
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
You claim to want fresh takes on the stories yet you use outdated, 40 year old story techniques to justify the changes you claim you want.
...what? What outdated 40 year old story techniques?
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
Do you see the irony?
Where?
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
The origins are MEANT to stay in the past, be old, be outdated compared to today.
I see no problem with that... it's an option. When a new origin is made, it can be set in the past, sure.
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
There's absolutely NO need to retell the origins over and over again, all that the comics need is NEW stories, not to retread old ground.
Sometimes there is. Like before Crisis. Like right now.
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
Of course, this is a sin for some readers because they find the idea of growth and change to go AGAINST the concept of comic books.
Has any growth or change taken place in Superman since 1994? Anything? I'm all for growth. The first eight years or so after MoS are a fine example of growth. If we had reboots more often, it'd ALWAYS be like that.
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
They (you) think that comic books are meant to be repetitive and redo the same things over and over again, which is why you have no problem with projects like Birthright, while the idea of actually telling NEW stories scares you...
Once again, you got me. You can see right through me.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 16,240
Kisser Of John Byrne Ass 15000+ posts
|
|
Kisser Of John Byrne Ass 15000+ posts
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 16,240 |
Question. Does anyone read Superman by seagle and Mcdaniel? And do you like it?
If so, please explain your rationale...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 33,919
devil-lovin' Bat-Man 15000+ posts
|
|
devil-lovin' Bat-Man 15000+ posts
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 33,919 |
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
Mxy says that Superman needs a 'fresh' origin... well Mxy, BR is NOT fresh, it's knee-deep in the 1960's and 70's...
So maybe Birthright isn't the right way to go (I've admitted that several times). A fresh origin is still needed.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 33,919
devil-lovin' Bat-Man 15000+ posts
|
|
devil-lovin' Bat-Man 15000+ posts
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 33,919 |
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
So you're saying that between having X number of stories that tell one continous story you would rather have 10 stories (an example) told over and over again?
No, not told over again. They'd all be different, obviously. The only thing that resembles old stories would be the origin.
quote:
Originally posted by ManofTheAtom:
Think about it:
Writer A tells story 1, then 6 years later Writer D wants to retell story 1 HIS way. Should he be allowed to do that or be told 'you can't do it, someone else already did it before you came along, think of something original instead of repeating what someone else did before'.
If he wants to retell it it's obviously because there's subtantial changes. It'd be a completely different story.
|
|
|
|
|
