BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


"Countdown to Infinite Crisis" spoiler

 
  

Page: 1 ... 45678(9)10

 
 
I'm Rick Jones, bitch
20:10 / 15.04.05
Suggested for mature readers. It was part of the line that would later become Vertigo, although none of Grant's issues were released under that imprint.
 
 
I'm Rick Jones, bitch
20:42 / 15.04.05


THIS ISSUE: BOOSTER FRIES!
 
 
Haus of Mystery
20:45 / 15.04.05
That comic would be awesome if it had a bit more grit.
 
 
I'm Rick Jones, bitch
21:31 / 15.04.05
BOOSTER FRIES!

That's absolute sadistic genius. Well done, DC!
 
 
Mr Tricks
21:36 / 15.04.05
point?
 
 
I'm Rick Jones, bitch
23:02 / 15.04.05
I was just reading the DC previews on milehigh, and I thought that needed flagging up. I can't decide it's magnificently bad timing or sick humour that they put Booster Fries! on the front of a another comic the same month his 60% of his chest gets burnt to a crisp, but I'm kind of hoping for the latter.

Anyway, that would be the point.
 
 
Benny the Ball
05:19 / 16.04.05
If Giffen had anything to do with it, it's deliberate.
 
 
Rawk'n'Roll
08:13 / 16.04.05
The story was written ages ago but the timing is probably down to the editorial.
On one hand you get Countdown and on the other you get JLA: Classified - I can't believe it's not the Justice League.
So in theory, everyone should be happy.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
10:22 / 16.04.05
Did I say only rude words were personal insults?

Nope. That would have been some sort of coherent statement. You made a series of contradictory actions and statements, which I was left trying to make some kind of sense of, because it is not apparently within your abilities to do.

Now, you demanded that I addressed your positions, not noticing that your contradictory and badly-written posts make it very hard to work out what your position is. Here is my attempt to clarify what my position is again, since you don't seem to have read it the first time:

So, here's the thing. You say that the 80s were a pessimistic period, and that's why comics went grim and gritty. However, at the same time as they were grim and gritty, other comics were not grim and gritty. Now, we are in a pessimistic period (presumably) and you're asssuming that Infinte Crisis will respond to that by making the DC Universe grim and gritty. So far so good, although if we're speculating I'm not sure that war between Thanagar and Rann is necessarily going to be a rich source of grimness, they being two of the campest planets going. Except, again, there are comics which are not grim and gritty and will probably continue to be so - most obviously, the continuity-defying ICBINTJL. So, the conclusion? That at times of pessimism, however one gauges that, some comics are grim and gritty, and others are not. It's unassailable, but again not very productive as psephology or criticism.

I didn't say anything about Checkmate or JLI and I never said a comic HAS to reflect the age it was published it to be good or valid

No. You said:

I said that I thought it isn't unreasonable that comics should reflect (conciously or not) the era they're made in.

Is that "should" as in "may" or "should" as in "ought to"? It seems as in "may". In which case again, we're back to "comics may reflect the era they are made in. Or they may not". Unassailable but not very informative.

So, I'm happy to address the points you've made, but I don't really see what can be said. You think that Countdown and Infinite Crisis, inasmuch as one can speculate about something that has not been released yet, reflect a pessimistic tone you see in the world more generally. This may happen in comics, and may be a good thing when it does. People who did not like Countdown - it is harder to comment on Infinite Crisis because it has not yet been released - are either contributing to or being pulled along by a wave of comic book guy fanboy sniping, or might be so conditioned to acclaiming whatever Grant Morrison does that anything not similar to what Grant Morrison does will not be liked by them. The whole 80s thing seems oddly like your confident contention that the Strokes sounded just like the Stooges, despite not having heard the Stooges. If you've never read any comics from the 80s, how exactly can you be so sure about, say:

And that Blue Beetle and Booster weren't intended as "funny" characters, they just happened to be the only characters available to a writer who wanted to write a funny book?

and write any viewpoint not yours, say from people who have read comics from the last period Blue Beetle and Booster Gold were around much as snide fanboy dipshittery?

Keen intuition? With the utmost respect, given that some people here have read not just about comics from the 80s but also comics from the 80s, is it possible you might not have a complete picture?

Given this, what exactly would you like to discuss? As I understand it, you enjoyed Countdown (fair enough) and think Infinite Crisis is interesting (fair enough). You think that what DC are doing with Infinite/Identity Crisis is exactly equivalent to what Grant Morrison did with New X-Men (not true: most obviously, Morrison is a writer, not an editorial committee; the similarity appears to be that some fans of both the X-Men and the DCU are not happy with the direction being taken). You believe further that all instances of rape or sexual assault in comics are precisely equivalent - therefore, if you were not happy with the treatment of Sue Dibney's rape, you must ipso facto also not be happy with its treatment in Doom Patrol and Zatanna (and also by extension any other comic or piece of media ever? Not sure how far this has been thought through). You believe further that people who want to read Identity Crisis should be "left alone" to do it (I wasn't aware of the existence of brute squads tearing copies from their cherubic fingers, but YMMV), although how that tallies with the existence and concept of discussion boards I know not.

That, as I understand it, is your postion, inasmuch as one can pick a position out of your contradictory and confused posts. What exactly would you like to do with it?
 
 
Rawk'n'Roll
10:40 / 16.04.05
You two really need to get a room.
 
 
Triplets
11:28 / 16.04.05
Nah, just seperate single rooms with lots of mirrors. So that they can hi-five themselves as they jack off for being so awesomely great. Maybe fit a two-speaker soundsystem so they can still volley insults at each other as they reach climax.
 
 
Benny the Ball
11:32 / 16.04.05
Hey everyone, apparently they kill Blue Beetle! Bastards hey, where's the fun in comics etc and on...

Not that I think that this thread is off course or anything.

Just been re-reading New Beginning - Maxwell Lord is based on Sam Neil in Omen III, I'm certain of it. Just have to read ahead and find out when he became likable, when Batman started liking BB, etc. It happens - it's all there Johns Mr Continuity is great, so how about a little of it thrown the way of some 'second-string' characters, hey!?
 
 
FinderWolf
00:50 / 17.04.05
Booster Fries after he gets burned half to death...ouch.

What strikes me as particularly odd is that they chose Maxell Lord to be the villain, and even though yes, he was often villainous and did all this crazy shit, most of his villainous crazy stuff happened in comics that most comic fans (even fans of the Giffen-DeMatteis-Maguire JL when it was in its prime, heck, even when it was Giffen-DeMatteis-Adam Hughes after Maguire left) have never even read, stuff like JUSTICE LEAGUE QUARTERLY, for crying out loud, and even lots of JUSTICE LEAGUE EUROPE.

If we all need a dense multi-paragraph primer on the obscure issues in which he did villainous stuff in comics most people have never read, as opposed to all the issues which most of us have read where he was not an eeevil villain but just a humorously smug self-centered jerk, it might be different.

I'd like it more if it wasn't Maxwell Lord as the Black King (that Greg Rucka talks trash about "If you mess with the Black King you best bring your own body bag," which really made me laugh) but some entirely new bad guy character they just made up for this story arc.
 
 
Benny the Ball
07:25 / 17.04.05
Okay, as I mention a lot, I'm not too up on continuity of late, and the last time I saw the Psycho Pirate he was nuts in Suicide Squad or something post crisis, the only one who remembered what had happened - so is he back for this? Do I even have the right character? That was him in the villians assembled or what ever bit right?
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
07:44 / 17.04.05
Well Crisis most of the 'fun' out of the DCU by taking the Superhorse and Bruce Wayne's daughter out of continuity, so in that sense it makes a certain brutal sense for 'Infinity Crisis' to do the same, and then we'll have exactly the same as happened after the first Crisis, all the writers will ignore Crisis and just do what they want to bring back pre-Crisis elements, see: Superboy and Krypto the Wonderdog.

Haus: I'm not sure that war between Thanagar and Rann is necessarily going to be a rich source of grimness, they being two of the campest planets going.

Genius.
 
 
Aertho
12:54 / 17.04.05
two of the campest

I can see the whole leather-daddy/Klingon-mansex aspect to Thangar, but what's so camp about Rann? Are they drag queens? Because holyshitthatwouldrock. But then, doesn't Chi Chi direct for Colt sometimes?
 
 
Triplets
14:02 / 17.04.05
I can see the whole leather-daddy/Klingon-mansex aspect to Thangar, but what's so camp about Rann? Are they drag queens? Because holyshitthatwouldrock.

That would rock a 7.5 on the 10.0 scale of rockness. And it'd get Ganesh posting here a lot more to be sure.
 
 
Aertho
14:17 / 17.04.05
7.5? Puh-lease...

It's be the EiCs unconsciously selling out to the subtext! Semiotic buffs and Sex studies classes twenty years from now would be schooling on it.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
14:58 / 17.04.05
Alas, Drag Rann has not happened to my knowledge, but it's a planet modelled on the Buster Crabbe/Buck Rogers style: _everyone_ wears spandex, science has left the population smooth-chested effete and unable to propagate through heterosexual intercourse...

I'm just sayin'.

Also, fins on head.
 
 
Aertho
15:06 / 17.04.05
So it's really Neocons versus the Dems again, isn't it?
 
 
Triplets
19:00 / 17.04.05
SEVEN. POINT. FIVE


I stand by it. I measured it with SCIENCE.
 
 
Aertho
19:14 / 17.04.05
Mine was better.
 
 
matsya
23:14 / 17.04.05
Fins on head. Booyah.

Are they FLEXIBLE fins?

m.
 
 
chucklehound
04:51 / 18.04.05
all right, i know the above neocons vs. dems was in jest, but i've sort of been formulating a theory about the last year or so of dc comics lately. despite all the complaints here about millar's run on the authority, the issues brought up there seem to be reflecting in dc continuity pretty heavily. the azzarello run of superman, in particular, seems to focus strongly on the implications of superman interfering in politics (something also touched on in rucka's adventures of superman run) given that azzarello is getting pretty blatant with references to the authority (what with seth becoming a main character, superman overthrowing dictators, shuttling people into his cross-dimensional portal, etc), it's not too much of a stretch to compare this reaction to the millar authority with other hinted-at events in the other key pre-countdown series.

john's teen titans "dark future" storyline pretty clearly spells out that batman's going to drop his no killing policy (which ties in nicely with the various conversations in places like superman/batman where wonder woman tries to convince him that killing is a-ok), which makes batman that much closer to become the midnighter.

jumping back to the earlier posts about comics reflecting real-world trends, i think the millar authority model, while trying to represent more of a liberal interventionist mindset, applies equally well to the neo-con worldview. superman's role as maintainer of the status quo becomes increasingly less defensible as governments are increasingly less able to resolve the world's problems.

i continue to hold out hope (though i am endlessly optimistic about comic writers' abilities to pull off a decent ending) that the next year or so will be an opportunity for the characters to confront what things will be like if they follow through on their authority-like impulses (already hinted at in azzarello's run and the recent titans arc), allowing them to refute that as a valid definition of "superhero" and get back to retro-silver age adventure goodness.

of course, i will agree that countdown was horrifically written, so i should really have much lower expectations. though, i'll completely forgive them if they go for an all out wacky ted kord spectre series. with sue as dead(wo)man. and an undead skeets. all would be forgiven.
 
 
diz
08:25 / 18.04.05
Likewise DC needed a very bad thing to split the JLA for this comming arc, and like it or lump it, it is a more mature and realistic story telling conceit to have a harrowing sexual assault split the Leauge than the plans of Starro or Darkseid or whoever.

i'd like to make the following objections to what you've said here:

1) i'm not sure that we're in dire need of a "realistic" storytelling conceit here when we're talking about superheroes. i'm not saying that we can't have some elements of quote-unquote "realism" in comics, just that we're not necessarily burdened by the lack of it.

2) i'm not so much against the rape and murder of Sue Dibny, as i am against the rape and murder of Sue Dibny. we're up to here with characters with traumatic pasts, thanks. what we're short on is diversity. Sue and Ralph were not your run-of-the-mill grim anti-heroes, and we could use as many characters like that as we can keep. by going through the Giffen/DeMatteis-era characters like a threshing machine, DC is killing off characters it could have used to do refreshingly different projects like Formerly Known as the Justice League. don't they have any boring grim avenging characters they can torture and rape and kill off instead?

i volunteer Nightwing.

3) i had to laugh at the description of the rape in Identity Crisis as "harrowing." if Meltzer had actually written something "harrowing," i might have been more OK with it, but what he wrote was ham-handed crap. if i had to pick one word for it, that word would not be "harrowing" but "cheesy." it was basically on the level of one of those horrible made-for-cable "women in jeopardy" dramas they run on the Lifetime Network to pad out the hours when no-one's watching. you know the ones i mean: the ones that usually star some washed-up actress who used to be the teenage daughter on some crappy 80s sitcom, desperately trying to show how "adult" she is now, or some soap opera star trying to prove she's ready to corss over into "serious dramatic work."

Well Crisis most of the 'fun' out of the DCU by taking the Superhorse and Bruce Wayne's daughter out of continuity, so in that sense it makes a certain brutal sense for 'Infinity Crisis' to do the same, and then we'll have exactly the same as happened after the first Crisis, all the writers will ignore Crisis and just do what they want to bring back pre-Crisis elements, see: Superboy and Krypto the Wonderdog.

it's worth noting that it was a few years before we had a new Superboy, and nearly two decades before we had the return of Supergirl and Krypto, and the latter was made appropriately snarly and serious. if we are going to use the previous Crisis as an example, we would have to conclude that the attempt to make the DCU more serious is unlikely to last forever, but at the same time, we should probably expect it to have a major, long-lasting impact.

john's teen titans "dark future" storyline pretty clearly spells out that batman's going to drop his no killing policy

did you actually read the arc in question? the batman in that dark future arc did, in fact, kill people. however, it wasn't Bruce Wayne under the mask, but rather Tim Drake, who became convinced that Bruce's "no killing policy" was too wimpy after Bruce died during "the Crisis."

the present-day continuity Tim Drake was horrified by this, and duly whomped on his future self before returning to the present, though his big character arc right now is his struggle to avoid become dark-and-gritty despite the fact that he got the shitty end of the stick in two big crossover events (Identity Crisis and War Games) which, due to DC editorial ineptitude, happened within the same week and a half or so of DCU time*.

however, none of this has anything to do with present Batman Bruce Wayne, but instead concerns present Robin and presumed future Batman Tim Drake.

** meaning that Tim Drake's girlfriend was tortured and shot by one psycho during a gang war a mere few days before the poorly-written machinations of another totally unrelated psycho, led to the comically melodramatic death of his father. oookay.

sorry. i bitch about this topic too often
 
 
Mario
10:51 / 18.04.05
I have a simple question.

Why is it that "realism" always equates with "grim & violent"?

They say that Identity Crisis was "realistic", and yet, I never see a woman dragging around a FLAMETHROWER, just in case. What I do see, fairly often, are married couples who bicker occasionally, but truly love each other. You know, like Ralph & Sue Dibny.

Heroism is realistic. Enjoying life is realistic. Loving your family is realistic. Being killed by someone you've known for years who is secretly psychotic is bad soap opera.
 
 
Benny the Ball
11:00 / 18.04.05
Yeah, exactly. Ted Kord was the most realistic character in comics, not from being grim and gritty, but being well created and rounded and injected with humanity.

Grim and Gritty almost seems a parody now days, it's just so templated by Watchmen that it's by the numbers when anyone else does it.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
11:14 / 18.04.05
Well, yes. And, for that matter, a couple who split up but remain fond of each other and conflicted about whether or not they should be apart is more realistic than a couple who split up, with one of them them going psycho and killing her ex's chums to help them get back together.

More generally, you have the Alex Ross dilemma. The Alex Ross dilemma, broadly, is that the more realistic the portrayal of something unrealistic is, the more glaring the unrealistic bits are. So, the grim, gritty procedural bits of Identity Crisis were, for my money, undermined rather by the fact that a good few people in the cast list would be able to circumvent the gritty procedurals immediately. The Spectre can't reveal the secret of who killed Sue? Why not ask Dr. Fate? Or Zatanna? Or, hey, Sue herself? She's bound to be rhumbaing around one astral plane or the other being unquiet. By the time you count out all the magic, psionic, time-travelling, mental and other options, you have a locked-door mystery surely beyond the wit of the former Mrs. Palmer.

Likewise, if you're going to change Dr. Light's brain to make him a less effective villain, why not do it to make him not a villain at all? That way, he doesn't kill anyone. Not even ineffectually. Why not have a pop at Lex Luthor while you're at it? The lesson from this is that the heroes of the DC Universe are grim, gritty, morally ambiguous and - and this is the important part - utterly inept.
 
 
Spaniel
11:54 / 18.04.05
Around Batman's no killing policy. Can anyone really imagine DC doing away with it? I mean, seriously, Batman needs to stay reasonably kiddy friendly and for that reason alone I can't see it happening.
 
 
Haus of Mystery
12:11 / 18.04.05
But if he killed people he could carry a gun. And maybe have a skull on his chest.
 
 
fluid_state
13:00 / 18.04.05
Being killed by someone you've known for years who is secretly psychotic is bad soap opera.

There's a pretty strong case to be made (see the preceding Haus post, among others. As in, the entire thread.) that flagship superhero comics are bad soap opera, at the moment. And we love it.
 
 
Benny the Ball
13:01 / 18.04.05
DC are being a bit stupid by this Batman as a nasty, tetchy man thing. The new film comes out soon (although, from what I've heard being muttered by some of the WB folk, they are not sure about the film as it is a bit alien to them - I take that as a good thing, seeing as they let Joel Schumacher make two steaming shits just because a bit of car-crash money poured in from the first day glo mess) and they are going to get a slew of people interested in the character. Maybe this is what the All Star Line up is really all about, channel the new fans from films onto these, and then mess about with the DCU making it all grim and crap.
 
 
Rawk'n'Roll
13:25 / 18.04.05
Batman needs to stay reasonably kiddy friendly and for that reason alone I can't see it happening.

I don't remember there being a zero death count in the first two Batman films... I'm pretty sure plenty of the henchmen were offed without a second thought. Could be wrong though, it's been a long time since I saw them and I could just be reflecting the darker tone of Tim Burton than the actual actions of Batman in the movies.
 
 
This Sunday
14:28 / 18.04.05
I think the Batmovies actually make a good map for this angst vs fun, faux adulthood versus faux childhood. I do hate the excuse that 'you have to be [age x] when you come to it, to enjoy later' and all. 'Year One' was one of the first Batman comics I ever read, and I was fairly young (it had just come out, collected, with a horribly brittle spine and a stiffness and baxtery quality long since lost to comics reprints), but it had little sway on how into that comic I got. I didn't get into Kirby's Fourth World books until, well, post-highschool, and that didn't stop me from getting completely enmeshed into them. Milligan's 'Enigma' had a great impact on my writing (and thinking) when I was but a tiny little schoolboy and so forth, but I can't get into the Harry Potter novels now, and I doubt I'd have enjoyed them any more as a kid.
Kids do like dark, moody, unrelenting things, and kids do like fun, fast-moving, pop explosions of silliness. Adults, both, as well.
The point is, do something and try and always do it well. I think, when we look back with rose-tinted glasses, the horror comics, crime comics, torture the fronty girl with the big watery eyes filled with terror comics, all tend to get erased, along with Mad or Playboy's comics or Zap, et cetera, so that there's this, 'I remember when comics were happy and fun and light' ideology, which isn't really honest.
What makes more sense to me is, 'I remember when there was [this good comic] and [that good comic] and there wasn't this overwhelming need to make a whole publishing line into one atmosphere (despite the mini-lines that would - See: Midnight Sons, Marvel Edge, and so on throughout history).'

[theadrotty] I'm having to force myself to type this, and I'll not respect myself by the time it's posted, but I have to say, in some ways 'Batman Forever' was closer to my Bat-mythos perspective than the two Burton films. Mostly this is Jim Carrey's to-the-panel Riddler poses and general demeanor (he's not Frank Gorshin, but then, very few are - I mean, Gorshin can be George Burns, but could Burns be the Riddler?), but there's also, yeah, the dayglo aspect helped a little. Two-Face was a complete disaster (what's the point of a binary characterization with only one half?) and Robin was too old, and if he wasn't too old, I hope the overt leatherboy stuff would have been dropped. Let's not try and prove Wertham right on everything all at once, now.
Bat-nipples and their ilk were bad in a realistic sense, but to me, it's like complaining about the costume and set in Julie Taymore's 'Titus'.
Burton was unrelentingly dark and frustrated, stilted is the word I think. Upping the freakishness of *the Penguin* is just... Why? What have you added to the character, regardless of this new plot draped around said character?
That last movie was just a complete mess. I don't like Arnie was my Overlord and Governor, and I didn't like him as my Batvillain, dammit.
Maybe it's generational or just Bat-era-specific tropes, but I'll take the loopy giant props and UFO-flying Batmonkey over the repressed, frustrated, willed ignorance of splendor O'Neil version. Though O'Neil's Bat-novel still has my favorite Batman, quickly followed by Morrison's (post 'Gothic' and 'Arkham Asylum') scifi Batgod, and Miller's 'Dark Knight Strikes...' giddy schoolgirl with a razorsharp cape.
Burton cops to coming into Batman on the 'Arkham' and 'Dark Knight' Miller/Morrison explosion, whereas Schumacher obviously has his Bats settled firmly into the flesh, tone, and nipples of Adam West.
Aronofsky would probably have had the Miller vibe, but maybe not as faux moody, just because he was working so close with Miller on it and Miller seems to have gotten over that era.
Nolan? Based on the two films of his I've seen, I have no idea. Could go any direction. [threadrotting has come to an end]
 
 
Mario
22:00 / 18.04.05
All I want is a choice. You can have your obsessive, socially-isolated Batman, if you like. But give me my slightly-spooky, but essentially well-balanced Darknight Detective (with occasional forays into the sci-fi closet) too.

By imposing the paranoia and distrust of Countdown (See? It's on topic!) on the entire line, DC is reducing the kinds of stories they can tell... they are taking away my choices.

It's no accident that of the two DC books I buy right now, one takes place in deep space, and the other 1000 years in the future. It's the only way I can escape Identity Countdown....
 
  

Page: 1 ... 45678(9)10

 
  
Add Your Reply