I haven’t read comics since the '80s, and don’t read Batwoman. That disclosure made, if I was a fan of the series, I’d be pissed that the editors killed a storyline they’d “promised” by allowing the engagement. Stopping the wedding at this late stage in the game cheats the fans that have been following the story.
I really don’t think so. It’s not just that Lois and Clark have been consistently more interesting since they got married. It’s that Superman/Wonder Woman shippers wanted Lois out of the way.
From what I’ve picked up, it’s been the case for years that a vocal chunk of Superman fandom and of DC creative types have been trying to get Supes and Wondy together “now” as opposed to just “having a love child in an alternate future.” They blipped out Clark and Lois’s marriage to put him with Diana.
It may not last; from what I hear, the Wonder Woman writer is pretty much ignoring the relationship with Supey, preferring to play her off Orion of the New Gods.
But it seems quite clear that that was the plan.
That’s not really a reboot, that’s just continuing where the character left off. A reboot starts the character over from the beginning, which in Oracles’s case, means before she was paralyzed. Of course, it wasn’t until this thread that I learned that Killing Joke was still in continuity, so what’s happening in the comics isn’t exactly a reboot, either.
Those aren’t really mutually exclusive. They’re giving Superman a romantic history before he hooks up with Lois. The idea of Superman and Wonder Woman as a couple has been around for years, so why not take this opportunity to play around with it? There’s no way it lasts, though. Sooner or later, he’s going to fall for Lois.
At the Baltimore Comicon yesterday, Didio explained the rationale a little further. He said the Bat characters aren’t allowed to have happy personal lives. (Which is being falsely spread around the Internet as 'Didio said DC characters aren’t allowed to be happy. Fire Didio).
So I guess they want a ‘tragic family’ angle for the Bat books, which sorta makes sense in theory but sounds bad when said out loud.
No, it does not make sense. It means Didio cares more about the stereotype than he does about the character.
By ‘makes sense’ I meant I could see the argument. I certainly don’t agree with it, but I think a case could be made. What kind of person attaches themselves to a persona like Batman’s? Why would anyone functional join that Bat cult?
Though, with Batwoman, the big thing was that she was somewhat defiant about attaching herself to him. Despite the name, she was kinda refreshingly independent.
Sadly, I can get behind this concept. He seems like a nice enough guy, and he’s not a bad writer at all…but his position as publisher makes him something of a front line for PR and he is TERRIBLE at that.
So, fire Didio, or at least forbid him from publicly talking/tweeting about anything not cleared with a competent PR person, so he doesn’t make the rest of the company look bad when he sticks his damn foot in his mouth while speaking from the pulpit.
You are not making sense.
… do you mean a stereotype about gay people, or a stereotype about Batman?