Quote: Let me put it in terms I hope you undertand.
Think of the Batman movies.
One, two and three were dark, showed growth, change, etc.
Three sucked, actually. Not as much as four, but it sucked anyway. That's the one with Two-Face and the Riddler, right? Or should I say Joker and Whackier Joker? What a way to waste Two-Face's potential, too...
Quote: Then fourth came along and was a continuation of the 60's TV show.
Was there a fifth Batman movie or did four kill the franchise?
Think long and hard about that.
It won't be till now that they're doing a fifth movie... and what are they doing? Are they following fourth or "bringing back" one, two and three?
Bringing back doesn't mean make things the same (not in this case), it means to continue what those three movies started and what the fourth one killed.
THAT'S what I want in the comics, for what was started in the 80's and 90's and then interrupted in 99 to be brought back, continued.
First: And what's the difference between that and wanting to bring back the 60's and dismiss the 90's?! Take an objective posture and answer me that. You're attacking writers and posters for wanting to do EXACTLY WHAT YOU WANT TO DO, only with another period of time! On one hand you say "No, the sixties can't be brought back! They're in the past, so leave them there!" and on the other "Yeah, the 90's should be brought back! They're in the past so take them here!" Your whole argument for leaving the 60's behind was that it's in the past... but so are the 90's. You like the 90's and hate the 60's. I get it. Everyone gets it. What I don't get is why you think everyone else should think that and why every "normal" monthly comic should be like you want them to be, and if it's not the writer suddenly becomes an evil conspirational egomaniac. You call my proposal pathetic while I accept yours as an option. I have insulted you, true, but not because of your opinions, I've done it because of your hypocresy and blindness.
Second: My blind love for the Silver Age is in your head. The only reason why you associate me with the Silver Age is because the SA represents everything you don't like. If you thought more carefully you're realize my ideas don't belong to the Silver Age, just like they don't belong to the Golden Age or the "Modern" Age. Or, from another perspective, they belong to all those ages... specially to the "modern" age since the (proportionally) few good comics that come from it are the ones that have influenced me the most.
Quote: Easy... BR supporters want the past brought back, I want the character to continue growing as they were in the 80's and 90's...
I can't believe you said that without realizing the contradiction... A Birthright fan might say "I want the character to continue growing as he was on the 60's and the 70's". You want the past brought back too.
Quote: You think that because I want things to be like in the 80's and 90's (constant growth and constant change) it means I want them to be static and mundane... those couldn't be farther from being complete opposites...
BR is making things so they're static and frozen like in the 60's.
Where do you get that? Suddenly you've read the whole series, and what comes after it? Birthright, from what I've read, is a starting point. Again, you associate it to the 60's because it borrows elements from it... just like it borrows elements from the 80's.
Quote: And there could be more if your idols stopped fucking around with continuity...
Continuity is in your fucking mind. It's only fucked if you let it be fucked. I think maybe you want it to be fucked because you like the thrill of harassing writers...
Quote: No, your definition of a comic is "continuity sucks, don't use it, do stories that contradict each other, I don't fucking care... and if continuity gets in the way just reboot, who cares".
Well, thanks for clearing that up. That proves how much attention you're giving to what I say... When have I said that continuity should never be used? If I recall, I've said several times that I enjoy some comics that use continuity. "Do stories that contradict each other"... only if it's worth it. If the writer has a good reason to do it then he should be allowed to do that. "And if continuity gets in the way, just reboot, who cares..." It's funny how you simplify everything. Maybe the world is too complicated for you so you need to make it simple in order to understand it.
Quote: Considering that "my way" is one of one growth and change over stagnation and repetition YES.
My way over yours and King Krypton's EVERY day, no question.
And you call Mark Waid an egomaniac.
Quote: If you have to ask that then it only proves that you have NO idea of who Superman is or what the concept's all about.
My idea of Superman is as valid as yours. We should both have the oportunity to read new stories of our versions, and not just one of us.
Quote:
Not at all. The comics I like have change and growth. The ones readers like you, Pig Iron and King Krypton like are filled with stagnation and the same old characters doing the same old bs over and over and over again.
Oh yeah? Since you know so well what I like, name an issue of a comic I've read and enjoyed that is filled by "stagnation".
Quote: and current Waid is not the same one that wrote Flash.
That Waid would have shown more respect to the Post Crisis Superman than the SA fanboy working on Birthright.
He suddenly turned evil as soon as he disagreed with you. Convenient, huh?
