|
Ahahahahahaha, the epilogue to Superman 
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 13:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 23:39 |
|
|
https://twitter.com/GuillemMarch/status/877438904202399744
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 16:57
|
|
|
Reminder that Wile E. Coyote/Lobo team up book comes out today and it has art by Kelly Jones and and all those things sound awesome.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 17:01
|
|
|
I'd kinda given up on most things DC but I'd be remiss to say that the current arc of Superman was one of the most fun things I'd read in a while. I love who whole family aspect of the book, and man that ending coda was hilarious.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 22:50
|
|
|
good day for a bris posted:I'd kinda given up on most things DC but I'd be remiss to say that the current arc of Superman was one of the most fun things I'd read in a while. I love who whole family aspect of the book, and man that ending coda was hilarious.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 23:08
|
|
|
CapnAndy posted:The entire Superman line has been great since Rebirth. Action Comics, Superman, Supergirl, Superwoman, New Super-Man, and Super Sons are all terrific and they each bring something distinct, it's been really impressive. At the moment I only follow Superman and Action Comics, and I know I need to catch up on Super Sons. The only thing keeping me from the others is money. I still need to feed my
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 23:13
|
|
|
The WW/Taz one shot was great
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 23:22
|
|
Madkal posted:Reminder that Wile E. Coyote/Lobo team up book comes out today and it has art by Kelly Jones and and all those things sound awesome. I came here because I heard a rumor about this and wanted to see if it was true. We live in a ridiculous world.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2017 00:40
|
|
|
I bought RHATO Rebirth book thing whatever, I don't really know poo poo about comics But it was really good??? The art was very pretty and the stories we're good and RH was cool/funny, Artemis ruled, Bizarro was cute as heck ("pup pup way") Why do people hate Red Hood comics
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2017 02:33
|
|
|
Current Red Hood's been a high-water mark for ol' Jason, Lobdell, & co. Pre-Rebirth Red Hood varies from okay to mediocre to slop.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2017 02:53
|
|
|
guts and bolts posted:I bought RHATO Rebirth book thing whatever, I don't really know poo poo about comics Largely because of Red Hood. A lot of people think he should've stayed dead. But if you're new to/don't know much about comics, I'm not gonna try to ruin your enjoyment.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2017 04:02
|
|
|
TwoPair posted:Largely because of Red Hood. A lot of people think he should've stayed dead. But if you're new to/don't know much about comics, I'm not gonna try to ruin your enjoyment. Okay but why? Do people think that I mean
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2017 04:37
|
|
|
guts and bolts posted:Okay but why? Do people think that I mean He's (often) written as a dark, edgy antihero in a family of characters that should have more of a problem with that than they do. It doesn't help that a lot of his previous stories are bad. Also Dark Titsanime is a superfan who tries to turn any discussion around to Red Hood and that makes people understandably a bit antagonistic to discussion of the character.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2017 04:45
|
|
|
guts and bolts posted:Okay but why? Do people think that I mean Red Hood, more often than not, is written very badly. The reason why is that he's the Bad Boy Antihero Robin but because Batman is popular the writers want to keep him as a part of the Bat Family and so you get a lot of twisted convoluted and contradictory characterization to justify why Batman is okay with Murder Gun Robin. On top of that he's prone to fits of extremely bad tryhard edgy rear end in a top hat writing. He can be written well and isn't always bad but is one of those characters who is bad more often than he is good.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2017 04:46
|
|
|
guts and bolts posted:Okay but why? Do people think that I mean
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2017 05:02
|
|
|
So in regards to today's Superman, spoiler warning, so is the cow.....................? Or are the kids possessed? I don't know what to make of it. Also are Tomasi and Gleason staying on the book? Cause they needs to stay on it and keep being amazing on it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2017 05:22
|
|
|
Jiro posted:So in regards to today's Superman, spoiler warning, so is the cow.....................? Or are the kids possessed? I don't know what to make of it. It's the cow, you see it get hit by a blast of energy during the final fight. What confused me about the issue was the resolution to Lois losing a leg.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2017 05:27
|
|
|
howe_sam posted:It's the cow, you see it get hit by a blast of energy during the final fight. Apparently that was just Black messing with perception. Also if it really is the goddamn cow, we better get some Super Sons resolution of Jon and Damian and BatCow vs Cowchester Black. Or at the top of my list some Captain Ginyu Frog body switching shenanigans. I'd also be okay with butchering the cow and the resulting delicious meats makes multiple instances of Manchester Black. Jiro fucked around with this message at 05:44 on Jun 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2017 05:41
|
|
|
Wonder Woman and Tazmanian Devil was pretty fun. I wish they had kept Taz's design much more cartoony for most of the issue, though. It's just weird to look at the guy and see...a neck.  I thought the last two issues of this Black Dawn business lost a lot of the umph from the storyline. Instead of the sort of powerful resonating messages that previous Superman vs Manchester Black confrontations have had, this one just descends into a big chaotic eleven-way fight that we can pretty much blame on mind control and...everyone is aliens? What? At the end of the day Clark doesn't really end up teaching Jon anything, he doesn't really end up countering Black's rhetoric in his son's eyes...no, all we really do here is punch people into submission and that's...kind of missing the entire point of Manchester Black as a character, to me. Well, okay, the whole cow thing was pretty worthwhile, I guess.  Oh, something that did come across interesting to me is that vision of the future Clark and Jon got from that quantum reactor. We see adult Damian, adult Jon, and a blonde woman (girl?) with red face markings and a red-and-yellow costume. Most people seem to think that the girl is Kathy, since she's the only other blonde girl in this whole issue and the connection seems clear. ...But -- and maybe this is wishful thinking on my part 'cuz I've made no secret of wanting this to happen -- consider that Kathy's real skin color is green, her energy pulses are blue, and the outfit she wore before coming to Hamilton was white. Meanwhile, this character's dressed in the same red and yellow color scheme as silver age Lyta Trevor, aka Fury, aka Wonder Woman's daughter. Oooooh. Aaaaah. Also noteworthy is what Jon says next about this vision, this "night beyond worlds": Truth and lies seems to reference Wonder Woman, justice and injustice evokes Batman, hope and despair would relate to Superman. I might be overthinking it, but to me these hints seem to be saying a lot with very little!
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2017 06:40
|
|
|
BrianWilly posted:Wonder Woman and Tazmanian Devil was pretty fun. I wish they had kept Taz's design much more cartoony for most of the issue, though. It's just weird to look at the guy and see...a neck. Also the idea of them as the new trinity.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2017 06:45
|
|
|
BrianWilly posted:Oh, something that did come across interesting to me is that vision of the future Clark and Jon got from that quantum reactor. We see adult Damian, adult Jon, and a blonde woman (girl?) with red face markings and a red-and-yellow costume. Most people seem to think that the girl is Kathy, since she's the only other blonde girl in this whole issue and the connection seems clear. Kathy has the same markings on her face at the end of the issue when her and Jon are in the tree, I'd never noticed them before that though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2017 07:06
|
|
|
Uh...I do believe those are freckles. She's always had those. I mean, they come and go depending on the panel, but they've always been there. Here they are drawn in varying detail by Gleason.  
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2017 07:22
|
|
|
Moochester Black was trying to use his powers on the kids, but he's a cow now, so he couldn't handle it. He lost control and the kids tipped him over.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2017 12:58
|
|
|
So I just finished my pulls. Superman and Batman were fantastic. Green Lanterns was good too. Baz and Jessica have really grown on me. Justice League though. Holy poo poo it's bad. Like every issue and every storyarc just feel like filler crap. It just feel like I'm reading lovely issues of The Authority. If this is all Rebirth and we're supposed to be bringing in old elements from Silver Age/Pre-New 52...where are the good villains?!?!! Like I think I'm about to drop the title.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2017 15:28
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/TomKingTK/status/877896870986698756
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2017 15:50
|
|
|
Already better than every early 90s comic.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2017 15:52
|
|
|
Hell ive got comics from the 80s that the colors aren't even in the lines!
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2017 15:53
|
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:He's (often) written as a dark, edgy antihero in a family of characters that should have more of a problem with that than they do. It doesn't help that a lot of his previous stories are bad. ImpAtom posted:Red Hood, more often than not, is written very badly. The reason why is that he's the Bad Boy Antihero Robin but because Batman is popular the writers want to keep him as a part of the Bat Family and so you get a lot of twisted convoluted and contradictory characterization to justify why Batman is okay with Murder Gun Robin. On top of that he's prone to fits of extremely bad tryhard edgy rear end in a top hat writing. He can be written well and isn't always bad but is one of those characters who is bad more often than he is good. Nessus posted:While these recent comics seem good, I believe historically he has been like Reaper from Overwatch but without the charm. Thanks for this perspective. Part of my problem with comic books, and why I don't buy many despite being nominally into superheroes and fiction that includes them, owes to a whole shitload of dichotomies you have to juggle constantly, and a shifting idea of what is canon. (Like, what year was <superhero> born in, and why haven't they aged a day since then?) With regards to the Joker, you're caught between a rock and a hard place as the writer, right - either Batman and the justice system are inept or negligent, or the Joker should be dead/imprisoned in a place from which he could never escape, but the Joker has to be in video games/comic books/movies so he has to keep coming back, so Batman never kills him, so the Joker keeps murdering innocent people/family members of Batman, etc. For a casual moron non-comic guy, RH's fundamental conceit - "I forgive you for not saving me in time, but why the gently caress is the Joker still alive" - seems maybe not like high art but at least a question worth addressing, and the answers I've seen are lame. Batman saying that you can't start killing because then where do you draw the line is inane because he already does weirdo poo poo like dress as a bat and beat up the poor, often to the point of absurdity. The real answer to Red Hood's question can't exist in the narrative of the comic, it seems like, only the meta-narrative - Batman won't kill the Joker with any permanence because that could potentially hurt revenue. At least, that's how it seems to an outsider casual like me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2017 16:45
|
|
|
guts and bolts posted:For a casual moron non-comic guy, RH's fundamental conceit - "I forgive you for not saving me in time, but why the gently caress is the Joker still alive" - seems maybe not like high art but at least a question worth addressing, and the answers I've seen are lame. The problem is that it isn't because, as you pointed out, it doesn't have an answer the works in-character. The only reason the Joker is still alive is because he is popular. The only reason the Joker isn't in prison is because he's popular and it's a comic book. There is no reasonable or coherent way to address this in a comic because it's a comic problem that only exists because it's a comic and the actual question is nonsensical if you think about it for long. "Why doesn't Batman kill The Joker?!" assumes: The Joker is a nigh-magical entity who can never be constrained or locked up and this is something characters recognize in-universe and treat as an actual part of their argument. The idea that the Joker, a non-powered regular individual, will escape from any and all prisons and arresting and trying him is meaningless. However at the same time, when you're already accepting a magic escape-man who can do anything, you're also assuming that he never gets shot by the police or his own henchmen or someone else in an act of self-defense (or even pre-meditated murder) and that Batman is the only one capable of and obligated to murder Joker to stop his magical crime spree. And even if you take all that as given you now have to throw in the good ol' "he lives in a comic book world." Batman regularly hangs out with magical demons and literal ghosts. Every single one of his friends has come back from the dead at some point as has his son. Red Hood came back from the dead, it's a central aspect of his history. So we're expected to deal with an argument of "why didn't you murder The Joker?!" coming from, among other people, someone who the Joker murdered and who came back to life. So it's a nonsensical argument because you can't even argue that it would 'stop the Joker for good' unless, again, you conveniently ignore the fact it's a comic book and have people pretend like this is a real argument but only when it comes to death. There's no good reason for the question of "Why doesn't Batman kill The Joker?" because the answer is "Batman should be able to lock up the Joker without any trouble and the only reason he can't is comic books."
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2017 16:57
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:So we're expected to deal with an argument of "why didn't you murder The Joker?!" coming from, among other people, someone who the Joker murdered and who came back to life. I don't see RH taking care of the problem himself, either. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2017 17:00
|
|
|
We would have insanely bad villains if they locked up or offed the old rogues gallery. Also almost every superhero would be geriatric if they just had one cannon birthdate?
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2017 17:02
|
|
|
Norns posted:Hell ive got comics from the 80s that the colors aren't even in the lines! That's usually a printing error, not the fault of the colorist.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2017 17:02
|
|
|
guts and bolts posted:Thanks for this perspective. That is pretty much the answer, yeah. And that is also the reason Red Hood as character meandered for years due editorial not knowing what to do with him, because as you point out, his original premise is at odds with the nature itself of a serialized IP. Another problem is that originally he was meant to be a one and off thing done for nothing than shock value ("What if one of Batman's proteges became evil") but the character turned out to be unexpectedly popular and DC decided to keep him around despite not having a clear idea of where take the character next. This lead to having his debut story repackaged a few times on different settings and to editorial pretty much throwing poo poo to the wall to see what would stick. For a time they tried to turn him into a new Nightwing -Back when Dick was meant to die during Infinite Crisis. Then they tried to turn him into Red Robin and finally, turn him into Dick's archvillain. For many different reasons those ideas didn't panned out and thus, when the reboot came, DC decided to "cleaning house" so to speak and focus their efforts with Jason. Toned down his homicidal tendencies, dropped the stories where Jason was completely deranged while taking the few elements that worked from them to round up his characterization. As the one in charge of Jason, Scott Lobdell decided to put Jason at his lowest when the new series began and build his character from there, a process that ended with the Rebirth stories you enjoyed. That said, it wasn't a smooth process, editorial was finicky and rarely keep Jason's character consistent during the crossovers they had over the year, leading to the contradictions and poor stories other posters have mentioned.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2017 17:08
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:There's no good reason for the question of "Why doesn't Batman kill The Joker?" because the answer is "Batman should be able to lock up the Joker without any trouble and the only reason he can't is comic books." That is basically the conclusion I came to at the end of my last post. Red Hood is interesting because he can only exist in a world where someone like the Joker is a nigh-invulnerable magical unimprisonable trickster God. The fundamental question at the core of RH's narrative conceit can never actually be answered narratively. I think it's either super reckless or kinda meta that they even try it at all, honestly, because at the core of Red Hood's character is "comics are nonsense." His Robin-with-Guns shtick is inoffensive but doesn't interest me that much. The fact that he's basically an unraveling of comic books and how/why they work does interest me. He is both the most comic book character, and the character who works strictly as a comic book character the worst, since he got killed and resurrected (lol) and subsists on much of the same nonsense that Batman does writ large, but the central hook of his entire character is intractable. redbackground posted:I don't see RH taking care of the problem himself, either. Because he literally cannot, both by editorial/author/publisher fiat and because he exists in a setting where death is at times meaningless and often actively trivialized. This is another reason I find RH compelling/interesting - he's an anti-hero in the Byronic sense of the word in addition to the colloquial use of "edgy dickhead," in that he cannot ever actually succeed. Red Hood's thing is not being Edgy Robin or Somehow More Boring Than Batman, The Boringest - his thing is that he must, by the rules of comics and how they function, constantly and endlessly grapple with failure. RHATO so far does a great job as a pulpy adventure series - I'm now caught up! - but I think it'd be interesting if they examined this aspect of his character more closely. Norns posted:We would have insanely bad villains if they locked up or offed the old rogues gallery. Why would we have insanely bad villains if the old rogues were gone? The old rogues were originally new rogues at some point; why assume that new=bad? Also, if superheroes were legacy titles to inherit there'd be no need to canonically keep Bruce Wayne at 35 forever while other characters inexplicably age around him - Dick Grayson should have taken over permanently, and then someone else, and then someone else... -- same thing with heroes like Iron Man or whatever. Comic books often want to pull stories from the headlines or make societal commentary, but then have their characters be ostensibly normal humans who both never age and have stories ranging from the Vietnam War to 9/11 while still being fundamentally the same person. It's weird, and in any other medium would inspire either close analysis or ridicule. Instead it's because it's comic books, where the status quo is literally God.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2017 17:29
|
|
|
I don't want comics to be like every other medium though
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2017 17:32
|
|
|
Norns posted:I don't want comics to be like every other medium though That's fine and dandy, but then if you want your medium to be differentiated meaningfully from other extant narrative vehicles, part of the expression of that medium should include telling stories that only that medium could tell. And Red Hood seems like a perfect example of one of those stories - a character who kills people in a setting where that is often meaningless who will never be allowed to kill the person he'd want to kill the most because comic books. guts and bolts fucked around with this message at 18:08 on Jun 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2017 17:35
|
|
|
guts and bolts posted:I think it's either super reckless or kinda meta that they even try it at all, honestly, because at the core of Red Hood's character is "comics are nonsense." Basically a big thing is that while it isn't the only story to do it or even the first, you can trace almost the entire thing back to The Killing Joke's popularity. The Killing Joke had a meta-point about the inevitable ongoing struggle and was basically stand-alone and made by someone with enough of a meta-grasp of comics to make it work. (Setting aside all the other issues with The Killing Joke.) Unfortunately, as comics are prone to do, it became a Defining Story and thus it must be reiterated over and over and over again despite pretty much nobody since then actually having anything more interesting to say about it. (Maybe Grant Morrison but only as a larger part of his meta-narrative-thing.) Everyone just keeps repeating the same beat over and over and over again because it's an Iconic Story and they want to do their take on. A lot of comic problems can boil down to a Defining Run that ends up getting regurgitated over and over and over again until anything interesting about it has been thoroughly mashed into a tasteless pulp. Batman is luckier than most in that he has a larger variety of stories to draw from but his villains get hit hard by it because they don't. Bane inevitably goes back to the Venom and breaking people's spines, Mr. Freeze is eternally trying to save his wife, and so-on, and at best you get divergences on that ("Bane is kicking the Venom FOR REAL this time/Mr. Freeze's wife wasn't actually his wife!") This isn't exclusive and there are a lot of good writers who can do new stories but yeah, regurgitating old character beats over and over with little interesting to say is a major part of the Big Two.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2017 17:41
|
|
|
I'm having some issues finding comic recaps for the Superman stuff so can someone spoil me the aftermath/status quo for The Manchester Black stuff, and Lois's leg?
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2017 17:45
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:Basically a big thing is that while it isn't the only story to do it or even the first, you can trace almost the entire thing back to The Killing Joke's popularity. The Killing Joke had a meta-point about the inevitable ongoing struggle and was basically stand-alone and made by someone with enough of a meta-grasp of comics to make it work. (Setting aside all the other issues with The Killing Joke.) Unfortunately, as comics are prone to do, it became a Defining Story and thus it must be reiterated over and over and over again despite pretty much nobody since then actually having anything more interesting to say about it. (Maybe Grant Morrison but only as a larger part of his meta-narrative-thing.) Everyone just keeps repeating the same beat over and over and over again because it's an Iconic Story and they want to do their take on. The entire reason Lobdell's work with Jason is so good is because he made his explicit goal to stop retreading UtRH over and over and move Jason into different directions.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2017 17:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 23:39 |
|
|
Sinners Sandwich posted:I'm having some issues finding comic recaps for the Superman stuff so can someone spoil me the aftermath/status quo for The Manchester Black stuff, and Lois's leg? Lois's leg was fine, Black caused them to see it as burned off to demoralize Superman/make Jon angry and distrustful of Superman, allowing Black to take control of Jon. The status quo at the end is that the Kents are leaving Hamilton County in the hands of the weird alien people who lived there (they can't blast off home without essentially destroying the town) and moving to Metropolis. During the final battle Manchester Black has his consciousness torn from his body and it lands in a nearby cow, who has some of Black's powers but only enough to make some local teens bring him a cigarette. He loses his hold on the kids and they tip him over because that's what you do to cows in places like this.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2017 17:52
|
|