Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 05-26-2016, 04:45 PM
The Other Waldo Pepper The Other Waldo Pepper is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 14,077
...incidentally, does anyone want to hazard a guess as to who planted the Comedian's smiley-face badge in the Batcave? I mean, yes, we can bicker all day over whether Doctor Manhattan left WATCHMEN on a hopeful note with the desire to preserve and create life, and whether his character here fits with that; but what I'm asking is, why would Doc at the end of WATCHMEN, or Doc here, or anyone else put that there?
Advertisements  
  #52  
Old 05-26-2016, 05:16 PM
cmkeller cmkeller is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: New York, NY, USA
Posts: 12,570
The Other Waldo Pepper:

Quote:
why would Doc at the end of WATCHMEN, or Doc here, or anyone else put that there?
Maybe Rorschach did? Leaving a clue for the World's Greatest Detective to unravel in case something happened to him sounds like something he might do. Nite Owl might have also, he doesn't seem too have 100% accepted the morality of Ozymandias's actions.
  #53  
Old 05-26-2016, 05:37 PM
The Other Waldo Pepper The Other Waldo Pepper is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 14,077
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmkeller View Post
The Other Waldo Pepper:



Maybe Rorschach did? Leaving a clue for the World's Greatest Detective to unravel in case something happened to him sounds like something he might do. Nite Owl might have also, he doesn't seem too have 100% accepted the morality of Ozymandias's actions.
So the idea is, Dan knows the location of the Batcave, and slips in and out without being noticed, and instead of leaving a note leaves a clue that's evidence of -- wait, what the heck is that evidence of? You recognize it as the bloodstained smiley-face badge from WATCHMEN, but would Bruce?

You say he doesn't seem to have 100% accepted the morality of Veidt's actions; for the sake of argument, okay, let's go with that; how does this help? I mean, yeah, world's greatest detective -- but, what, you think Dan put that in the Batcave so Bruce would somehow get the hint to start looking into a murder he's never heard of in a solar system he doesn't know exists?

(And where did he even get it? Last we saw, wasn't Dan dropping it into a coffin's freshly-dug hole at a graveyard?)
  #54  
Old 05-26-2016, 10:49 PM
foolsguinea foolsguinea is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Tornado Alley
Posts: 14,610
Quote:
Originally Posted by CandidGamera View Post
I'm thrilled with Rebirth, it's the best fix for the New 52 I could have realistically hoped for. Putting the blame on Dr. Manhattan as a proxy for the 'grim and gritty' trend that Watchmen started works fine for me.
If you think that Geoff Johns isn't going to keep doing the same stuff he's been doing, or that all this stuff fans are reading as the return of optimism isn't just Geoff bringing in more bodies to kill, you are setting yourself up for disappointment.
  #55  
Old 05-27-2016, 12:24 AM
cmkeller cmkeller is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: New York, NY, USA
Posts: 12,570
The Other Waldo Pepper:

Quote:
So the idea is, Dan knows the location of the Batcave, and slips in and out without being noticed, and instead of leaving a note leaves a clue that's evidence of -- wait, what the heck is that evidence of? You recognize it as the bloodstained smiley-face badge from WATCHMEN, but would Bruce?

You say he doesn't seem to have 100% accepted the morality of Veidt's actions; for the sake of argument, okay, let's go with that; how does this help? I mean, yeah, world's greatest detective -- but, what, you think Dan put that in the Batcave so Bruce would somehow get the hint to start looking into a murder he's never heard of in a solar system he doesn't know exists?

(And where did he even get it? Last we saw, wasn't Dan dropping it into a coffin's freshly-dug hole at a graveyard?)
All fair points. I'm just speculating that it's someone in the Watchmen universe who is not on board with the Ozymandias/Doctor Manhattan "cynical" world view. How the specifics would play out, I haven't the foggiest idea, but I imagine that with enough imagination, a professional comics writer can work those details out.
  #56  
Old 05-27-2016, 04:43 AM
Grumman Grumman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 8,508
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Other Waldo Pepper View Post
Well, doesn't that depend entirely on whether he is right?

If he's right, and they really do have a choice between preserving life or dooming it; if he in fact was looking at the otherwise-inevitable extinction of humanity, and found a way to instead save the lives of billions; in that case, what's the optimistic thing to do? What's the pessimistic thing to do? What's the cynical thing to do?
The optimistic thing to do is to not assume that the only way to stop the elected government of the United States from doing something they absolutely do not want to do (i.e. get themselves nuked) is to murder millions of innocent people.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cmkeller View Post
Maybe Rorschach did? Leaving a clue for the World's Greatest Detective to unravel in case something happened to him sounds like something he might do.
Sure, but Rorschach is not the Riddler. When he wanted the world to know what he knew, he literally mailed a book which explained everything to the press.
  #57  
Old 05-27-2016, 05:54 AM
The Other Waldo Pepper The Other Waldo Pepper is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 14,077
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grumman View Post
The optimistic thing to do is to not assume that the only way to stop the elected government of the United States from doing something they absolutely do not want to do (i.e. get themselves nuked) is to murder millions of innocent people.
I'm not sure whether you're disregarding my point or embracing it.

I'm asking: assuming Veidt was correct, what's the optimistic thing to do? And what's the pessimistic thing to do? And what's the cynical thing to do?

You're replying that the optimistic thing to do would be -- to assume Veidt was incorrect. Are you saying the optimistic thing to do is to assume he's wrong even if he's right? Because if you're defining optimism as "being incorrect", and cynicism as "being correct", then you can maybe win the argument over whether Doc represents cynicism; but at what price?

THE TRUTH: "Do this, or billions of people die as life on our planet goes extinct."
PESSIMIST: "Okay, let billions of people die as life on our planet goes extinct."
THE CYNIC: "What? No, I'm on the side of love and life! Let's save billions!"
OPTIMIST: "Let's do something else!"
THE TRUTH: "That won't work."
PESSIMIST: "But my plan will leave everyone dead?"
THE TRUTH: "Yes."
THE CYNIC: "And mine will save the lives of billions?"
THE TRUTH: "Yes."
OPTIMIST: "And mine?"
THE TRUTH: "...will also leave everyone dead, yes."

If that's how you define optimism and cynicism, then you're welcome to it.
  #58  
Old 05-27-2016, 08:12 AM
CandidGamera CandidGamera is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Morgantown, WV
Posts: 10,804
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Other Waldo Pepper View Post
Is "cynical" the right word for Dan, deciding what's important is keeping billions of people from dying? Is "cynical" the right word for Laurie, deciding what's important is saving the Earth? Is "cynical" the right word for Adrian, deciding what's important is working against the end of the world? Is "cynical" the right word for Jon, deciding what's important is preserving life and perhaps creating some?
Is "cynical" the right word for Alan Moore, who decided to only give his characters completely fucked choices? Yes, yes it is.
  #59  
Old 05-27-2016, 08:14 AM
CandidGamera CandidGamera is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Morgantown, WV
Posts: 10,804
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Other Waldo Pepper View Post
...incidentally, does anyone want to hazard a guess as to who planted the Comedian's smiley-face badge in the Batcave? I mean, yes, we can bicker all day over whether Doctor Manhattan left WATCHMEN on a hopeful note with the desire to preserve and create life, and whether his character here fits with that; but what I'm asking is, why would Doc at the end of WATCHMEN, or Doc here, or anyone else put that there?
Jesus, did nobody else get this? I've been seeing crap all over the internet wondering if the Comedian as the Joker left it there. The smiley face materialized out of Wally's lightning field and embedded itself in the walls of the Batcave with an audible noise.
  #60  
Old 05-27-2016, 08:39 AM
The Other Waldo Pepper The Other Waldo Pepper is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 14,077
Quote:
Originally Posted by CandidGamera View Post
Is "cynical" the right word for Alan Moore, who decided to only give his characters completely fucked choices? Yes, yes it is.
Well, see, I can get behind that. But I figure that still makes Jon -- and Adrian, and Dan, and Laurie -- characters who strive to make the best choice available, working to preserve life where they can and save as many lives as possible.

And if I want to start railing against Alan Moore, I'm going to soon stop and scratch my head and say sure, he put those characters in a bad situation, but he chose to have them pick the least bad option, with smiles and hugs and peace and love and the survival of humanity and a new surge of social optimism.
  #61  
Old 05-27-2016, 10:54 AM
Miller Miller is offline
Sith Mod
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Bear Flag Republic
Posts: 42,313
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Other Waldo Pepper View Post

I'm asking: assuming Veidt was correct, what's the optimistic thing to do? And what's the pessimistic thing to do? And what's the cynical thing to do?
I don't think the definitions of pessimism, optimism, or cynicism are dependent on being correct. Veidt's plan is profoundly cynical and pessimistic. Even if he's completely right, that doesn't make him an optimist. It makes him someone who has eliminated optimism as a viable philosophy in this situation.
  #62  
Old 05-27-2016, 11:44 AM
The Other Waldo Pepper The Other Waldo Pepper is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 14,077
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller View Post
I don't think the definitions of pessimism, optimism, or cynicism are dependent on being correct. Veidt's plan is profoundly cynical and pessimistic. Even if he's completely right, that doesn't make him an optimist. It makes him someone who has eliminated optimism as a viable philosophy in this situation.
See, I was thinking in best-of-all-possible-outcomes terms.

Like, imagine our buddy is about to hit on women at the local bar; I figure an optimist would say, I bet he goes home with the hottest one, and a pessimist would say I bet none of 'em give him the time of day, and a cynic would say, I dunno, I bet he winds up with a plain-looking one, like he did last time.

Now, you could argue that an optimist is instead someone who says I bet one of them turns out to be a wish-granting genie who gives him everything he desires for the rest of his life, or something, by leaning harder on the "best" part than on the "possible" part. But in a case where the outcomes really *are* limited, I kinda figured someone who goes with the best possible one counts as an optimist.

(And if there's only one possible outcome, then I figure the optimist and the pessimist and the cynic all say the same thing; and if there are only two possible outcomes, then I guess the cynic doubles up with the optimist or the pessimist.)
  #63  
Old 05-27-2016, 01:04 PM
Miller Miller is offline
Sith Mod
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Bear Flag Republic
Posts: 42,313
I think the problem there is, nobody ever actually knows what all the possible outcomes of a given situation are. We don't have the Word of God telling us that humanity was going to wipe itself out in Watchmen - we have the word of Adrien Veidt. And while he's objectively a very brilliant and accomplished person, he's still human. The optimistic response to Veidt's scenario would be to hope that he's wrong. I'd apply that to Veidt himself - the moment when he ruled out the possibility that he could be wrong, that there could be some other way to save the world that didn't rely on murdering New York City, was the moment that any optimism died in him.
  #64  
Old 05-27-2016, 01:13 PM
Amateur Barbarian Amateur Barbarian is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: F.O.S.O.N.E.
Posts: 19,905
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller View Post
Seriously, how long until they find Geoff Johns' head in Alan Moore's freezer?
Never. There's no room, since Moore stores every turd as examples of his untouchable artistic perfection.

(I like most of Moore's work. I feel strongly for artistic integrity. But Moore's just a hypocrite who keeps on selling his work, then throwing fits because DC et al. don't carefully put it in a cello sleeve and store it in a quiet, dark place.)
  #65  
Old 05-27-2016, 01:33 PM
The Other Waldo Pepper The Other Waldo Pepper is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 14,077
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller View Post
I think the problem there is, nobody ever actually knows what all the possible outcomes of a given situation are. We don't have the Word of God telling us that humanity was going to wipe itself out in Watchmen - we have the word of Adrien Veidt. And while he's objectively a very brilliant and accomplished person, he's still human. The optimistic response to Veidt's scenario would be to hope that he's wrong. I'd apply that to Veidt himself - the moment when he ruled out the possibility that he could be wrong, that there could be some other way to save the world that didn't rely on murdering New York City, was the moment that any optimism died in him.
Well, leaving aside for a moment whether we could get Word of God on this -- would Alan Moore count? Has he weighed in on whether Veidt was factually correct? -- my question was, if we assume for the sake of argument that Veidt was factually correct, then how would Jon or Dan or Laurie have reacted if they'd been optimists?

And I guess you're saying that whether he was correct was irrelevant, because an optimist is someone who -- looks not for the best possible outcome, but something better than what's possible? And someone who looks for the best possible outcome is a cynic? Have I got that right?
  #66  
Old 05-27-2016, 04:21 PM
Miller Miller is offline
Sith Mod
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Bear Flag Republic
Posts: 42,313
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Other Waldo Pepper View Post
Well, leaving aside for a moment whether we could get Word of God on this -- would Alan Moore count? Has he weighed in on whether Veidt was factually correct? -- my question was, if we assume for the sake of argument that Veidt was factually correct, then how would Jon or Dan or Laurie have reacted if they'd been optimists?
Nah, Alan Moore doesn't count. He's just the writer. What does he know about anything? . What I mean is, from the perspective of a character in the story, there's no "word of God" that makes Veidt absolutely correct. If Moore said, "Speaking as the author, Veidt was totally right, and he saved mankind from extinction," that information would not be available to Dan or Laurie. They'd still have to take Veidt's word for it that there was no other option.

Quote:
And I guess you're saying that whether he was correct was irrelevant, because an optimist is someone who -- looks not for the best possible outcome, but something better than what's possible? And someone who looks for the best possible outcome is a cynic? Have I got that right?
Not really. What I'm saying is, if a character in the story assumed that Veidt was right, they wouldn't be an optimist. An optimist would assume that Veidt overlooked something. If Veidt was able to convince an optimist that he is right, that person would cease to be an optimist. If Veidt is right, there is no optimistic outcome to the scenario. Just varying degrees of pessimism.
  #67  
Old 05-27-2016, 04:43 PM
The Other Waldo Pepper The Other Waldo Pepper is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 14,077
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller View Post
An optimist would assume that Veidt overlooked something. If Veidt was able to convince an optimist that he is right, that person would cease to be an optimist.
Heh. Okay, fair enough -- but let me ask you this: imagine a character who isn't an optimist; he's so far from it, he actually believes a nuclear exchange resulting in the extinction of mankind is (a) inevitable; and (b) coming soon. And instead of trying to "convince an optimist that he is right," Veidt convinces this guy that, no, it's not inevitable; we can save billions of people.

So -- what just happened?

You said that, if Veidt could convince an optimist, that person would cease to be an optimist; no matter that said person might then go the hugs and smiles and sunshine and forgiveness and let's-go-put-on-costumes-and-save-lives route, they've ceased to be an optimist. Granting that for the sake of argument: if Veidt convinces a guy that, no, there is hope; humanity can be saved -- did he just cease to be a pessimist?
  #68  
Old 05-27-2016, 05:25 PM
Miller Miller is offline
Sith Mod
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Bear Flag Republic
Posts: 42,313
Heh. Good point. I suppose I'd argue that they guy had gotten more optimistic, compared to where he started from, but I don't know that I'd necessarily call him an optimist just because he moved in that direction.
  #69  
Old 02-04-2017, 08:10 PM
The Other Waldo Pepper The Other Waldo Pepper is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 14,077
Bumping this because I stumbled across something that I thought may be of interest. Or may be nothing. Or may be short-lived, either way.

So they've been developing the story with a mysterious "Mr Oz" who makes a habit of viewing multiple TV screens and apparently has access to teleportation technology and prides himself on being a brainy guy who thinks long-term. Is he Ozymandias? We're probably supposed to wonder if he's supposed to be Ozymandias.

If you click on DC's link to an issue he's been in -- like this one, say -- you can see a whole lot of characters with names you can click on to learn more about each of 'em: Lois Lane, Green Lantern, Captain Boomerang, Alfred Pennyworth, you name it. And the link for Mr Oz doesn't go anywhere, because, well, they presumably don't feel like saying much right now; they maybe have a big The Rest Of The Story entry cued up and ready to go, but if so they're understandably playing it close to the vest.

Anyhow, that works in reverse, too; you can type in "Alfred Pennyworth" on that site, and links to issues he's been in -- including that one -- of course pop up.

Guess what happens if you type in "Adrian Veidt". Or, y'know, "Ozymandias".
  #70  
Old 02-05-2017, 09:21 AM
Acsenray Acsenray is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 32,685
Starfire as Little Annie Fanny? I can't imagine what that is like. Any links?
  #71  
Old 02-05-2017, 08:03 PM
TYphoonSignal8 TYphoonSignal8 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 304
It is as if someone gave DC's continuity to my three year old son. And then he decided to use it to clean up after my dog.

I find it fascinating that Johns' promotion of the comics line consists apparently of using characters and concepts familiar to long standing readers in ways which trigger the contempt of long-standing readers.

No one over the age of 15 is interested in whether Dr Manhattan could beat Superman or whether Deathstroke or Batman can beat the Comedian. They're facile questions.

And when Johns isn't smashing up DC's heirlooms with a baseball bat, he still does stupid things. Johns recently killed off the Crime Syndicate in JL #50. This involved using a baby as a lightning gun: http://www.worldcomicbookreview.com/...n-springboard/

As for Cap as a Hydra agent, the fan backlash was so abrupt and strong that Marvel quickly blamed a Cosmic Cube over-writing reality. (Which of course can easily be undone by the same Cosmic Cube. So for the time being we have Steve Rogers as a villain, but give it three years and a Marvel Studios movie or two and he will be back to normal.)

Why the same backlash over the "Watchmen" integration has not caused Johns to blink, I attribute only to his ego.

For those of you who think this is means comics have fallen into a creative sewer, I urge you to consider Image, which has come a long way from its T&A origins. "Deadly Class", "East of West", and "The Wicked and the Divine" are all from Image and they're the three best titles being published in comics.

(Poor Vertigo Comics has been reduced to poorly reviving Lucifer and Fables in an effort to suck up some sales, and doesn't have much to offer otherwise ,save for aside from Gail Simone's eerie "Clean Room".)
  #72  
Old 02-06-2017, 09:27 PM
Miller Miller is offline
Sith Mod
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Bear Flag Republic
Posts: 42,313
Quote:
Originally Posted by TYphoonSignal8 View Post
As for Cap as a Hydra agent, the fan backlash was so abrupt and strong that Marvel quickly blamed a Cosmic Cube over-writing reality. (Which of course can easily be undone by the same Cosmic Cube. So for the time being we have Steve Rogers as a villain, but give it three years and a Marvel Studios movie or two and he will be back to normal.)
For an "abrupt" change to a storyline because of "fan backlash," there sure is a hell of a lot of foreshadowing of it in the months leading up to the reveal.

Quote:
Why the same backlash over the "Watchmen" integration has not caused Johns to blink, I attribute only to his ego.
Probably more to do with book sales than anything else. AIUI, DC's been doing pretty well since the latest reset. It helps that they've been putting out some really, really good books. And they haven't actually done anything with the Watchmen stuff yet. There's some mysterious hooded figure who stands around in a hood being mysterious, who's probably Dr. Manhattan or Ozymandius. And Batman found a smiley face button in the Batcave. That's been about it. It still sounds like a bad idea, but so far, it's not actually a thing yet.

Anyway, no matter how bad it turns out, if it gets me more Superdad comics, I'm okay with it.
  #73  
Old 02-06-2017, 09:40 PM
G0sp3l G0sp3l is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: 479′S 12643′
Posts: 2,404
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Other Waldo Pepper View Post

Guess what happens if you type in "Adrian Veidt". Or, y'know, "Ozymandias".
It's especially funny coming from a company that has several ultra powerful beings that can be defeated by forcing them to say their names, or better saying their name backwards.
  #74  
Old 02-06-2017, 10:22 PM
TYphoonSignal8 TYphoonSignal8 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller View Post
For an "abrupt" change to a storyline because of "fan backlash," there sure is a hell of a lot of foreshadowing of it in the months leading up to the reveal.
It was indeed abrupt. It took one issue: https://www.pastemagazine.com/articl...lation-af.html


Quote:
It helps that they've been putting out some really, really good books. .
I'm obviously missing them. Which books?

1. Aside from giving Superman a son (which is a great character advancement), the writers of Superman are dumpster diving" in Alan Moore's body of work (a recidivist problem for DC, according to Moore himself), this time taking Moore's "Supreme" concept and adopting it for Superman - http://www.worldcomicbookreview.com/...man-15-review/

2. Batman is same-old, same-old, said in a hundred different ways in, what, five or six different titles featuring the same character.

3. Green Lantern is horribly complicated. I loved GL as a kid, and wonder if the inherent problem is that there are just too many of them. There is no real novelty to the character http://www.worldcomicbookreview.com/...ns-1-2-review/

4. Harley Quinn / Suicide Squad are blatant efforts to milk the movie http://www.worldcomicbookreview.com/...uad-21-review/

5. Justice League #1 was awful and kind of on the same intellectual level as Angry Birds #1 - http://www.worldcomicbookreview.com/...directors-cut/

I don't think I've read any other titles recently. So Flash might be great, or Wonder Woman might have picked up again post-Azzarello. Quite seriously, I'd be happy if someone pointed me in the direction of a good DC book.
  #75  
Old 02-07-2017, 08:14 AM
CandidGamera CandidGamera is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Morgantown, WV
Posts: 10,804
Typhoon, as much as the Hydra Cap thing is dumb, it was always going to be explained by a Cosmic Cube. It was hinted at in the very issue that introduced the plot point. Marvel didn't scramble and rewrite.


As for DC's output, Superman is solid for the first time in seven or eight years, and the Batman titles are amazing - Tom King in particular is just an incredible writer who came out of nowhere. Justice League isn't great, but it's been bad since the New 52 started. Wonder Woman may be the best it's ever been in my lifetime. And New Super-Man may be the best wholly new title that DC has introduced since before the New 52, as well.
  #76  
Old 02-07-2017, 08:16 AM
CandidGamera CandidGamera is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Morgantown, WV
Posts: 10,804
Quote:
Originally Posted by TYphoonSignal8 View Post
It was indeed abrupt. It took one issue: https://www.pastemagazine.com/articl...lation-af.html
"A previous version of this article made insinuations that Marvel changed its editorial direction on its second issue to accommodate fans. Paste would like to clarify that a cosmic cube would be necessary to pull off a publication feat of that magnitude and it was an inaccurate implication. More on that here."

Hoist by your own cite.
  #77  
Old 02-07-2017, 09:18 AM
tim314 tim314 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 4,395
Quote:
Originally Posted by TYphoonSignal8 View Post
As for Cap as a Hydra agent, the fan backlash was so abrupt and strong that Marvel quickly blamed a Cosmic Cube over-writing reality.
You think Marvel had decided to just say Cap was a Hydra Agent for real? And it was only because of fan backlash that they changed their minds?

Thank god there was so much fan backlash that DC went back on their plans in the '90s. Otherwise Superman would surely still be dead, and Batman still paralyzed, just as they planned it. I mean, Superman had a funeral and everything - it doesn't get much more final than that.

That was also around the time when Marvel announced that they were "canceling" all the X-Men books. Sure, they were some of their best sellers, but Prof. X's time traveling son had gone back and killed him in the past, so what are you gonna do? Just undo time travel somehow, after it happened?

The fan backlash to that one was so intense that the writers of all the various X-books spontaneously cranked out four months of alternate universe stories before restoring the status quo -- and coincidentally all those stories seemed to fit into the same new timeline, almost as if they had been planned out in advance. But of course that's impossible -- how could they have anticipated the fan reaction?

Actually, comic book creators have a long history of being extremely responsive to fan complaints. Back in the '60s, there were a number of famous incidents where they wrote Superman as being a complete dick to his friends, but when the fans complained they rewrote the endings of those stories so instead of them ending with him actually killing Lois Lane or destroying Jimmy Olsen's life, he was just pretending and always had a good reason.

The funny thing is, with all the originals copies -- in which Superman simply indulged his villainous urges -- having been destroyed, modern readers sometimes mistakenly assume that comic book writers are just in the habit of throwing in crazy twists to, I don't know, make the stories interesting or something.
  #78  
Old 02-07-2017, 07:37 PM
TYphoonSignal8 TYphoonSignal8 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by CandidGamera View Post
Typhoon, as much as the Hydra Cap thing is dumb, it was always going to be explained by a Cosmic Cube. It was hinted at in the very issue that introduced the plot point. Marvel didn't scramble and rewrite.
Aha. Seems I was misdirected by the original article.

Quote:
As for DC's output, Superman is solid for the first time in seven or eight years, and the Batman titles are amazing - Tom King in particular is just an incredible writer who came out of nowhere. Justice League isn't great, but it's been bad since the New 52 started. Wonder Woman may be the best it's ever been in my lifetime. And New Super-Man may be the best wholly new title that DC has introduced since before the New 52, as well.
New Super-Man did not ring true to me.

I will have a look at Tom King's work.
  #79  
Old 02-07-2017, 09:29 PM
Fenris Fenris is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 12,834
Quote:
Originally Posted by TYphoonSignal8 View Post
I don't think I've read any other titles recently. So Flash might be great, or Wonder Woman might have picked up again post-Azzarello. Quite seriously, I'd be happy if someone pointed me in the direction of a good DC book.
Aquaman, Flash, Wonder Woman, Detective, Action and Titans (not Teen Titans) are my current favorite comics. Aquaman is better written than any Aquaman, ever (I include Peter David's iteration), Flash is as good as it was during the Waid/Johns era, Wonder Woman has me fascinated and trying to guess what'll happen next (weirdly, he's embraced the Azzarello stuff and at the same time is undoing it without cheating), Detective shows a Batman we haven't seen since the original Crisis in '85--one who's able to play well with others, Action has Superdad, but also has great stories and Titans seems to pretty much be the keystone book to the whole Watchmen thing and is stunningly written (art's a little sketchy for my tastes though).

As much as I griped when this Watchmen thing started, it's been building up momentum very slowly and very unobtrusively (Saturn Girl showed up in Arkham for a panel or two from Suicide Squad. Johnny Quick's speed formula showed up on a blackboard somewhere (Blue Beetle, maybe?)...stuff like that) and next month is a Batman/Flash mini-series where they start to explore the mystery of the Comedian's badge.

Seriously--I'm currently down on Marvel because of the whole Civil War II nonsense ("Let's have every! single! character! act out of character so they have a reason for a senseless fight, undermine Captain Marvel's basic core concepts and....oh yeah, start the series by killing off one of the three best known black guys") and the X-Men vs Inhumans stuff (Which can largely be summed up as "If that gas cloud doesn't evaporate, all mutants everywhere will die horribly. If it does disappear, we won't have any more Inhumans created until we travel to one of the (5?) other planets that ALSO have terrigen mists and borrow some of theirs" so let's just fight), and DC is currently better than it's been since say, around Infinite Crisis.
  #80  
Old 02-08-2017, 08:22 AM
CandidGamera CandidGamera is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Morgantown, WV
Posts: 10,804
Quote:
Originally Posted by TYphoonSignal8 View Post
New Super-Man did not ring true to me.
What the fuck does that even mean?
  #81  
Old 02-08-2017, 08:31 PM
TYphoonSignal8 TYphoonSignal8 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by CandidGamera View Post
What the fuck does that even mean?
Since you so politely asked:

Issue 1. Main character's dad is in an active conspiracy talkfest. In Shanghai??

Recidivist Chinese supervillain. In Shanghai??

I worked in China for a few years. The writer hasn't, I strongly suspect. The story is set in the wrong place. Singapore would perhaps have made more sense. I can't work out whether this is some sort of English-language effort to enter the Chinese market, or, more likely, an effort to "minoritise" a DC character.

Otherwise, there wasn't much to like about the lead character. He is a bully and a creep, who ends up getting super-powers by the end of the first issue. If this was an effort to set the main character apart from the altruistically motivated, then at least give the character some sort of redeeming quality. All we see is that he hates his father, picks on the fat kid, and is trying to sleep with the hot journalist.

Fenris: thanks for the tips. I will check these out.
  #82  
Old 02-09-2017, 07:51 AM
CandidGamera CandidGamera is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Morgantown, WV
Posts: 10,804
Quote:
Originally Posted by TYphoonSignal8 View Post
Since you so politely asked:

Issue 1. Main character's dad is in an active conspiracy talkfest. In Shanghai??

Recidivist Chinese supervillain. In Shanghai??

I worked in China for a few years. The writer hasn't, I strongly suspect. The story is set in the wrong place. Singapore would perhaps have made more sense. I can't work out whether this is some sort of English-language effort to enter the Chinese market, or, more likely, an effort to "minoritise" a DC character.

Otherwise, there wasn't much to like about the lead character. He is a bully and a creep, who ends up getting super-powers by the end of the first issue. If this was an effort to set the main character apart from the altruistically motivated, then at least give the character some sort of redeeming quality. All we see is that he hates his father, picks on the fat kid, and is trying to sleep with the hot journalist.

Fenris: thanks for the tips. I will check these out.
Yeah, I'm sure Gene Luen Yang knows less about China than you do.
  #83  
Old 02-09-2017, 01:48 PM
D_Odds D_Odds is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Queens
Posts: 11,870
Quote:
Originally Posted by CandidGamera View Post
Yeah, I'm sure Gene Luen Yang knows less about China than you do.
My last name is very ethnic too, but I know very little about the region it is from. I do know many American-born Chinese-Americans (I live in NYC) who are almost as clueless about China as I am. His name alone isn't enough. It's entirely plausible that a California-born Chinese writer, whose parents are from Hong Kong and Taiwan, might not know Shanghai as well as someone who spent a few years there.

Last edited by D_Odds; 02-09-2017 at 01:48 PM.
  #84  
Old 02-09-2017, 04:08 PM
Ibn Warraq Ibn Warraq is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 9,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller View Post
I think the problem there is, nobody ever actually knows what all the possible outcomes of a given situation are. We don't have the Word of God telling us that humanity was going to wipe itself out in Watchmen - we have the word of Adrien Veidt. And while he's objectively a very brilliant and accomplished person, he's still human. The optimistic response to Veidt's scenario would be to hope that he's wrong. I'd apply that to Veidt himself - the moment when he ruled out the possibility that he could be wrong, that there could be some other way to save the world that didn't rely on murdering New York City, was the moment that any optimism died in him.
(emphasis added mine)

I'd agree, though I think it's worth noting he admits in the end that he recognizes that he could be wrong.

Remember his final moments in Watchmen, and the comments which were replayed in Rebirth, were him asking Doctor Manhattan if he'd made the right decision and practically begging Manhattan to say that yes, everything worked out "in the end."

However, in one of the great lines from the Graphic Novel, Manhattan says "In the end? Nothing ends, Adrian. Nothing ever ends."

I'd say what characterizes him the most is arrogance and a need for validation from others. After all, it takes a huge degree of narcissism to have the need to be called "The World's Smartest Man".
  #85  
Old 02-09-2017, 04:20 PM
Calatin Calatin is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,259
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Other Waldo Pepper View Post
Guess what happens if you type in "Adrian Veidt". Or, y'know, "Ozymandias".
Thing is, isn't this a fan-based wiki, meaning anyone could go and edit it? It's not like DC has officially confirmed the identity.

(For the record, I think he is Mr. Oz, but I just don't think those links are hard evidence.)
  #86  
Old 02-09-2017, 04:28 PM
Czarcasm Czarcasm is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Beervania
Posts: 52,386
Watch DC cop out and make the Big Bad a grief-stricken Nite Owl, who is trying to manipulate things after Ozzy's plan is revealed to the world, causing him to die by someone's hands(or kill himself), and Silk Spectre to die in a riot.
  #87  
Old 02-09-2017, 05:16 PM
smiling bandit smiling bandit is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 16,789
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller View Post
Nah, Alan Moore doesn't count. He's just the writer. What does he know about anything?
Well, there's also a potential difference between what he would have said then, and what he would say now.

Am I the only one who thought it was rather significant that Veight was named Ozymandias? As in, despite his general supposition of superiority, he's not at all invincible and greatly overestimates his control of the situation. I assumed that the name was itself a sign of incredible arrogance, and yet ultimate failure.

Apologies for response long after it would have been timely.
  #88  
Old 02-09-2017, 06:04 PM
The Other Waldo Pepper The Other Waldo Pepper is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 14,077
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibn Warraq View Post
I'd agree, though I think it's worth noting he admits in the end that he recognizes that he could be wrong.

Remember his final moments in Watchmen, and the comments which were replayed in Rebirth, were him asking Doctor Manhattan if he'd made the right decision and practically begging Manhattan to say that yes, everything worked out "in the end."
I'm . . . not convinced.

After all, what was he doing just before that? Well, saying that he'd hoped that Doc would understand, of course; but then reacting to the sudden announcement that Doc is planning to leave the solar system for good. Veidt then blurts out a quick remark about how he'd regained interest in human life -- only to get that shut down by Doc's out-of-left-field reply about perhaps creating some in another galaxy.

Say that Veidt heads into that conversation hoping that Doc -- fresh from agreeing to keep the secret, and killing Rorschach to keep the secret -- will stick around and continue to help, preserving life hereabouts because he's now firmly in favor of the plan; suddenly everything falls into place. Veidt leads off by saying he'd hoped the big guy would understand, and Doc weirdly changes the subject; Veidt tries to steer the conversation back to Doc's regained interest in human life, and Doc throws him another curveball; Veidt then tries to rope him into talk of whether it all worked out in the end, and Doc once again gives him nothing to work with.

I mean, sure, it works the other way, too:

Quote:
I'd say what characterizes him the most is arrogance and a need for validation from others.
...but it's easy for me to believe he was simply doing then what he did the last time he spoke with Doc: trying to get him, once again, to say Veidt was correct solely as a means to the end of then having him follow up with cooperation.

(Also, I can't help but wonder: what if it had gone according to plan? Blake says he never had to look out that window; if he hadn't -- if there's no murder for Rorschach to investigate, and no murder of Jacobi to frame him for; if Chess is never hired by a go-between to shoot someone, and Dreiberg never researches whether Company A owns Company B which owns Company C -- then wouldn't Veidt have pulled off the whole thing while fully expecting to never ask anyone for validation? Seems a little weird, if his ruling passion is supposed to be, y'know, a need for validation.)

Quote:
After all, it takes a huge degree of narcissism to have the need to be called "The World's Smartest Man".
Does he, though? AFAICT, the first time it comes up, someone else says that to him, and he waves it off by saying (a) he never claimed to be special and (b) other folks were just overenthusiastic; and then other people say it, but never in response to a request by him. (For example, Doc alludes to that sobriquet in the final issue -- but he does it right after noting that nobody else on the planet has the intelligence to work with tachyons. So, what, Veidt doesn't insist on being called that, even though he maybe is that? I can't quite get my hooks into the ramifications.)
  #89  
Old 02-09-2017, 06:17 PM
The Other Waldo Pepper The Other Waldo Pepper is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 14,077
Quote:
Originally Posted by smiling bandit View Post
Well, there's also a potential difference between what he would have said then, and what he would say now.

Am I the only one who thought it was rather significant that Veight was named Ozymandias? As in, despite his general supposition of superiority, he's not at all invincible and greatly overestimates his control of the situation. I assumed that the name was itself a sign of incredible arrogance, and yet ultimate failure.
For what it's worth, what Moore apparently said then -- upon being told that he had to rework the concept, as he could no longer use the 'Thunderbolt' character -- was that "Ozymandias is our replacement for Thunderbolt: a perfectly evolved man who takes human capability to its most extreme limit. I chose the name because it has a certain grandeur and pretension to it that seemed to fit the character somehow, and because it will enable me to use 'Look On My Works Ye Mighty And Despair' as a title for the chapter where a third of New York's population bite the bullet."

The same source has handwritten notes for the rework:

Quote:
THUNDERBOLT (OZYMANDIAS)
10x HUMAN INTELLIGENCE
YOUNG 37 WILL LIVE TO 150
REDFORD, KENNEDY
POPULAR CELEBRITY
RICH
PERFECT
LONER
'PRESCIENT' THRU INTELLIGENCE

SEES WORLD AS ORGANISM WITH HIM AT CENTRE
  #90  
Old 02-10-2017, 12:05 AM
TYphoonSignal8 TYphoonSignal8 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by CandidGamera View Post
Yeah, I'm sure Gene Luen Yang knows less about China than you do.
Bit snippy aren't you?

Gene Luen Yang was born in California and educated at Berkeley - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_Luen_Yang

On the other hand, I spent half a decade engaged in anti-counterfeiting operations in southern China. There isn't a city with a population above 250000 in Guangzhou province I haven't visited.

But still, you might be right. He might know more about China than me. In which case, I bow to your remarkable insight that his name alone automatically gives him more knowledge about Chinese society and culture than me.

In writing this response to Candide (look, a pun!), I realise that just because it didn't ring true to me, that would not apply to the average reader of the title.
  #91  
Old 02-10-2017, 08:04 AM
CandidGamera CandidGamera is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Morgantown, WV
Posts: 10,804
Quote:
Originally Posted by D_Odds View Post
My last name is very ethnic too, but I know very little about the region it is from. I do know many American-born Chinese-Americans (I live in NYC) who are almost as clueless about China as I am. His name alone isn't enough. It's entirely plausible that a California-born Chinese writer, whose parents are from Hong Kong and Taiwan, might not know Shanghai as well as someone who spent a few years there.
He's the author of American Born Chinese. He's actually studied the culture.
  #92  
Old 02-10-2017, 08:18 AM
CandidGamera CandidGamera is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Morgantown, WV
Posts: 10,804
Quote:
Originally Posted by TYphoonSignal8 View Post
Bit snippy aren't you?

Gene Luen Yang was born in California and educated at Berkeley - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_Luen_Yang

On the other hand, I spent half a decade engaged in anti-counterfeiting operations in southern China. There isn't a city with a population above 250000 in Guangzhou province I haven't visited.

But still, you might be right. He might know more about China than me. In which case, I bow to your remarkable insight that his name alone automatically gives him more knowledge about Chinese society and culture than me.

In writing this response to Candide (look, a pun!), I realise that just because it didn't ring true to me, that would not apply to the average reader of the title.
And you're also missing the fact that comic books present exaggerated, fictionalized versions of things. Including places and people that happen to exist in the real world.

But yes, I'm guessing someone of Chinese heritage who wrote American Born Chinese probably knows a bit more than a guy who spent five years as an outsider in China in an enforcement context.

I never said it was his name alone, and I thought people might be more familiar with his work. Your suggestion that I was arguing simply because of his name was very much in the spirit of your assertion that "Marvel backtracked on Nazi Captain America", based as it was solely on the title of an internet article that had a retraction right in its text. I'm sure those keen observational skills served you well on your hunt for counterfeit whatevers.
  #93  
Old 02-10-2017, 09:41 AM
D_Odds D_Odds is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Queens
Posts: 11,870
Quote:
Originally Posted by CandidGamera View Post
He's the author of American Born Chinese. He's actually studied the culture.
They're narratives about Asian life in America and a popular (most popular?) Chinese folklore tale. As the child of Asian parents born and living in America, he certainly did not just study, but lived "Asian Born Chinese". He may, or may not, have spent significant time in China to understand how Chinese living in Shanghai live and think (in general). But, according to the Wiki, his parents are from Hong Kong and Taiwan, which are very different beasts.

I don't know his background. All I'm saying is that having an Chinese name alone does not make him an authority, and that someone who spent significant time in the region might have a better view.

ETA: Seems TYphoonSignal8 said the same thing. Note to self, read all replies before replying oneself.

Last edited by D_Odds; 02-10-2017 at 09:43 AM. Reason: This is what I get for reading from bottom up
  #94  
Old 02-10-2017, 12:39 PM
CandidGamera CandidGamera is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Morgantown, WV
Posts: 10,804
Quote:
Originally Posted by D_Odds View Post
They're narratives about Asian life in America and a popular (most popular?) Chinese folklore tale. As the child of Asian parents born and living in America, he certainly did not just study, but lived "Asian Born Chinese". He may, or may not, have spent significant time in China to understand how Chinese living in Shanghai live and think (in general). But, according to the Wiki, his parents are from Hong Kong and Taiwan, which are very different beasts.

I don't know his background. All I'm saying is that having an Chinese name alone does not make him an authority, and that someone who spent significant time in the region might have a better view.

ETA: Seems TYphoonSignal8 said the same thing. Note to self, read all replies before replying oneself.
I never said his name did make him an authority.
  #95  
Old 02-11-2017, 08:52 PM
smiling bandit smiling bandit is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 16,789
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Other Waldo Pepper View Post
For what it's worth, what Moore apparently said then[snip]
I don't say this often enough, but I appreciate that you took the time to look that up and post it. Thank you.
  #96  
Old 02-11-2017, 10:45 PM
Miller Miller is offline
Sith Mod
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Bear Flag Republic
Posts: 42,313
Quote:
Originally Posted by TYphoonSignal8 View Post
New Super-Man did not ring true to me.
The thing about New Superman is that, despite the name, he's not the Chinese Superman. He's the Chinese Guy Gardner.
  #97  
Old 02-13-2017, 12:41 AM
TYphoonSignal8 TYphoonSignal8 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 304
That seemed to be where they were taking him in that first issue. I guess its an acquired taste.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CandidGamera View Post
And you're also missing the fact that comic books present exaggerated, fictionalized versions of things. Including places and people that happen to exist in the real world.

But yes, I'm guessing someone of Chinese heritage who wrote American Born Chinese probably knows a bit more than a guy who spent five years as an outsider in China in an enforcement context.
Guess we'll never know, hmm?

Quote:

I never said it was his name alone, and I thought people might be more familiar with his work. Your suggestion that I was arguing simply because of his name was very much in the spirit of your assertion that "Marvel backtracked on Nazi Captain America", based as it was solely on the title of an internet article that had a retraction right in its text. I'm sure those keen observational skills served you well on your hunt for counterfeit whatevers.
More evening primrose, sweetheart.

In any event, the context of the story made no sense in respect of the Chinese society I am familiar with. And so I gave up on it after issue 1.

I read Superman #15. It seems as if the writer, Peter Tomasi, is

SPOILER:

collecting or possibly aggregating Supermen from various realities. Most of them look like variants of the Kryptonian. Some don't. The Justice League of Assassins' Superman looked overcooked. or even boiled.


Yuk.
  #98  
Old 02-13-2017, 08:37 AM
CandidGamera CandidGamera is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Morgantown, WV
Posts: 10,804
Reading a random single issue of a comic, in the middle of a storyline that builds on previous continuity, deciding you don't like all this nonsense going on and it's not for you..

.. well, it's certainly a way to read comics, but I'm not sure it's a way to enjoy them.
  #99  
Old 02-14-2017, 07:09 PM
TYphoonSignal8 TYphoonSignal8 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 304
Thank you Geoff Johns. It is pretty old school to get into message board snark over a comic book. I feel like I am back on the DCMBs in 2001. I regret being that publicly ridiculous.

But, to address your observation, most American comic books (at least those form DC and Marvel) are published as monthly periodicals, and then (sometimes) collected as trade paper backs. It is a mark of the skill of the writer to hook a new reader on the back of one issue. Warren Ellis did this very well with Planetary and Global Frequency. Each issue is self-contained (with some irregular exceptions) all fitting into a much broader framework. If I pick up a single issue of any title, essentially to sample it, and decide it isn't up to scratch, then that's not my problem. It is either the writer not being capable of containing a story in one issue, or it is the publisher's problem in not selling the story as a collected work in the first place. I think that is a sound approach - not yours, clearly, but a valid and rational one.

I read Aquaman #12 yesterday on Fenris' recommendation, and indeed, it is good. Setting aside Black Manta's machinations, there is some decades-overdue world-building in the creation of Atlantean culture, an Atlantean high command, and even what seems to be some intra-Atlantean ethnicity issues. The extent of the Atlantean arsenal is revealed. I don't know some aspects of the backstory, but the story gives me enough to follow it easily, and there is enough going on for me to wonder how it ends.

And also on Fenris' recommendation, I have briefly skimmed Greg Rucka's latest issue of Wonder Woman. I generally like Rucka's writing but this didn't grab me. I'll give it another read.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:49 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@chicagoreader.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Publishers - interested in subscribing to the Straight Dope?
Write to: sdsubscriptions@chicagoreader.com.

Copyright 2017 Sun-Times Media, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017