|
Unmature posted:Oh I’m very well acquainted with the characterizations on the show I’d just like to be able to more definitively say things like “this character trait didn’t exist in the comics prior to the show” I can't provide great sources but I know that BTAS basically reinvented Mr. Freeze from a bland one-note villain into a tragic character. But hey easy answer: none of Harley Quinn's traits existed before the show! 
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2019 20:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 02:14 |
|
|
Unmature posted:When did Two-Face first show multiple personalities and not just an obsession with the number two? Morrison's Arkham A Serious House had Two-Face using a tarot deck instead of a coin, as part of his treatment. (Probabky not quite the answer you're looking for.)
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2019 22:03
|
|
|
Unmature posted:When did Two-Face first show multiple personalities and not just an obsession with the number two? Batman Annual #14 is a post-Crisis retelling of Two-Face's origin that is way more explicit about "Two Face" being an evil second voice/personality in Harvey Dent's head that existed before his face got scarred up, that's from summer of 1990. I don't honestly know if it came up before that. quote:I know Joker was always Batman's nemesis, but when does it go from enemies to a straight obsession with each other? Is it pre-Killing Joke? If you read the comic/synopsis in the link, it introduces the idea that Joker doesn't want to just beat/kill Batman, he wants to constantly challenge him until some sort of perfect death. quote:His life is mine... I can crush the breath out of him... effortlessly! I can, at last, triumph! But such a hollow victory--! It was mere luck that caused my attack on him to succeed. I'd always envisioned my winning as a result of cunning... at the end of a bitter struggle between the Batman and Myself-- him using his Detective Skills and me employing the divine gift men call Madness!... No! Without the game that the Batman and I have played for so many years, winning is nothing! He shall live... until I can destroy him properly! I don't think this element existed in any previous Joker portrayal, but I don't know if this rises to the level you're talking about?
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2019 23:04
|
|
|
That's sort of tricky to answer because the groundwork was there thematically from the beginning, even if the two "sides" weren't necessarily written as two completely autonomous personalities. His very first appearance in 1942 opens with a splash panel of Harvey Kent reading Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde and there's a pretty explicit sense of Two-Face doing things and acting on urges that repulse and frighten Kent. I wouldn't go so far as to say each side is portrayed as an autonomous and conflicting personality though. This is kind of the same characterization we get in Denny O'Neil's handful of Two-Face stories in the 70s. That being said the Harvey Kent Golden Age version feels more pointedly like a person torn between an actively awful person who wants to harm and an actively good person who wants to do good and is frightened of his "bad" self, whereas the Bronze Age Harvey Dent, imo, feels more like a good guy who turns bad but occasionally mitigates his badness. The Jekyll/Hyde thing is less sharp and the passivity of the character, the reliance on chance, feels like more of the central schtick. As far as I know Andrew Helfer and Chris Sprouse's wonderful "The Eye of the Beholder" from 1990 is where the two coexisting but agonistic personalities thing becomes really entrenched, and the first time he refers to himself in the first-person plural. Of course there are references to Two-Face as a "split personality" earlier, notably in The Dark Knight Returns, but there, for instance, we're still basically just getting a more nuanced version of the 70s Two-Face, where Harvey Dent, insofar as he's a different person than Two-Face, is never really "there" at the same time. It's likely that I'm missing something-- I'm pretty weak on Bronze Age DC-- but from poking around and double-checking stuff I don't think I'm egregiously far off. Hopefully that was a bit helpful?
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2019 23:09
|
|
|
In fairness to Tony, the landing was perfect, it exploded on the ground.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2019 23:26
|
|
|
Wow that’s super in depth, thanks guys!
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2019 00:57
|
|
|
How many major characters from DC and Marvel (and for this I'm considering any character who has had their own book/book with a partner as a major character) have had amnesia?
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2019 20:37
|
|
|
bessantj posted:How many major characters from DC and Marvel (and for this I'm considering any character who has had their own book/book with a partner as a major character) have had amnesia? I'd bet the number who have not is greater.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2019 20:59
|
|
|
Rhyno posted:I'd bet the number who have not is greater. Wouldn't surprise me if the number who have not is smaller. One of the reasons I was trying to cut the number of characters who qualify down.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2019 21:07
|
|
|
I'm having a hard time thinking of any who haven't, maybe The Thing. I was going to say Iceman, but I remembered all of the O5 X-Men were retroactively given amnesia in Death of X, so technically he's had amnesia from like issue 8 of The X-Men until very recently.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2019 21:18
|
|
|
Rhyno posted:I'd bet the number who have not is greater. It depends on how tightly we're restricting the definition of "amnesia." If, for example, getting your mind wiped by a telepath counts you've got Basically Every X-Man Ever, so...
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2019 21:19
|
|
|
Skwirl posted:I'm having a hard time thinking of any who haven't, maybe The Thing. I was going to say Iceman, but I remembered all of the O5 X-Men were retroactively given amnesia in Death of X, so technically he's had amnesia from like issue 8 of The X-Men until very recently. Didn't the Thing actually believe he was Blackbeard the Pirate for a time?
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2019 21:21
|
|
|
do repressed memories count as amnesia
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2019 21:24
|
|
|
OK, change. Which story has pulled off the amnesia angle the best?
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2019 21:24
|
|
|
Rhyno posted:Didn't the Thing actually believe he was Blackbeard the Pirate for a time? Oh gently caress, yeah, that's one of the earliest F4 stories too. Canonically he is the historical Blackbeard the Pirate in the 616, but he did forget he was Ben Grimm.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2019 21:28
|
|
|
A better question would be what writer has used the trope the most.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2019 21:28
|
|
|
bessantj posted:OK, change. Which story has pulled off the amnesia angle the best? Claremont used it to fix the damage that had been done to Carol Danvers in Avengers #200, the original Weapon X story in Marvel Comics Presents was pretty good, I liked Lemire's Moon Knight. I didn't like Sentry in the New Avengers that much, but I've heard good things about the Paul Jenkins mini.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2019 21:32
|
|
|
Rhyno posted:A better question would be what writer has used the trope the most. I'm guessing Claremont.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2019 21:33
|
|
|
bessantj posted:OK, change. Which story has pulled off the amnesia angle the best? When Norman forgets Peter is Spider-Man, and that he’s the Green Goblin. Peter doesn’t hand him over to the police, and the thought of Norman regaining his memories hangs like a dagger over his head.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2019 21:47
|
|
|
Yeah that poo poo owned.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2019 21:50
|
|
|
Open Marriage Night posted:When Norman forgets Peter is Spider-Man, and that he’s the Green Goblin. Peter doesn’t hand him over to the police, and the thought of Norman regaining his memories hangs like a dagger over his head. I've been going through old comics and I'm coming up on the return of the Green Goblin!
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2019 22:06
|
|
|
bessantj posted:How many major characters from DC and Marvel (and for this I'm considering any character who has had their own book/book with a partner as a major character) have had amnesia? Spide-Man had amnesia at one point, and Doctor Octopus fooled him into thinking they were partners in crime. I forget which one, though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2019 22:15
|
|
|
Open Marriage Night posted:When Norman forgets Peter is Spider-Man, and that he’s the Green Goblin. Peter doesn’t hand him over to the police, and the thought of Norman regaining his memories hangs like a dagger over his head. this is the answer
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2019 22:23
|
|
|
bessantj posted:OK, change. Which story has pulled off the amnesia angle the best? I kind of like Morrison's Batman where he gets amnesia and resorts to a backup Batman persona. Also comics are pretty much soap operas so they resort to the standard cliches ie: death/coming back from the dead, amnesia, and secret family members.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2019 23:02
|
|
|
Morrison’s Batman did all of those.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2019 23:05
|
|
|
The Silver Age Green Goblin stories made good use of the amnesia. The problem with having a supervillain find out a superhero's identity is the question of what they're supposed to do with that knowledge. They can do effectively nothing, like Venom, so it becomes pointless and makes that villain less of a threat. Or they use it to destroy the hero's life, like Kingpin with Daredevil, assuming you want the story going down that dark path. But with Osborn he had amnesia so the threat was always there and the times he did know or remember he attacked Peter or his loved ones the way you'd expect. And then, finally, when he actually succeeded in doing something horrific he died soon after because there was nowhere to go from there.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2019 00:25
|
|
|
Open Marriage Night posted:When Norman forgets Peter is Spider-Man, and that he’s the Green Goblin. Peter doesn’t hand him over to the police, and the thought of Norman regaining his memories hangs like a dagger over his head. You got a lot of mileage of that for Harry, too. Especially in Spectacular Spider-Man.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2019 04:35
|
|
|
That storyline is essential Spider-Man 101 to me. Wolverine’s amnesia was one of his best and worst qualities.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2019 04:42
|
|
|
Just finished the return of Green Goblin storyline and it was really good. Harry popping pills was a great part of the story.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2019 23:15
|
|
|
bessantj posted:Just finished the return of Green Goblin storyline and it was really good. Harry popping pills was a great part of the story. I think that's the story that broke the Comics Code Authority's stranglehold on approving content of comics. The Nixon whitehouse asked Stan Lee and Marvel to do an anti-drug Spider-Man comic, but the code didn't allow any depiction of drug use at all, even in a clearly negative fashion so the wouldn't approve the story so Marvel just said "gently caress it" and printed the comic without the stamp, retailers didn't care and the CCA shortly after loosened a lot of their content guidelines.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2019 00:53
|
|
|
Skwirl posted:I think that's the story that broke the Comics Code Authority's stranglehold on approving content of comics. The Nixon whitehouse asked Stan Lee and Marvel to do an anti-drug Spider-Man comic, but the code didn't allow any depiction of drug use at all, even in a clearly negative fashion so the wouldn't approve the story so Marvel just said "gently caress it" and printed the comic without the stamp, retailers didn't care and the CCA shortly after loosened a lot of their content guidelines. and then it still took until Milligan and the Allred's X-Force for the stamp to die out entirely
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2019 01:23
|
|
|
Skwirl posted:I think that's the story that broke the Comics Code Authority's stranglehold on approving content of comics. The Nixon whitehouse asked Stan Lee and Marvel to do an anti-drug Spider-Man comic, but the code didn't allow any depiction of drug use at all, even in a clearly negative fashion so the wouldn't approve the story so Marvel just said "gently caress it" and printed the comic without the stamp, retailers didn't care and the CCA shortly after loosened a lot of their content guidelines. If someone (cough cough E&C cough cough) could give a rundown on the Comics Code Authority that would be great. Like who were the people actually reading the comics before publishing? Was it just editors with guidelines? Who overlooked the CCA? Was it all done in house?
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2019 01:24
|
|
|
The Association of Comics Magazine Publishers was an industry oversight group formed by a number of publishers, initially, to lobby against public attacks on comics for contributing to delinquency. To support their arguments against comics not being terrible the publishers drafted a short code known as the ACMP Code that 'banned' things like sexy comics, racism, torture, and divorce which, while voluntary, they could point to and say "if we were really that bad why would we voluntarily not publish these obviously bad things". When the public changed to attacking comic content rather than just the medium itself, the ACMP reformed as the Comics Magazine Association of America and expanded the ACMP Code into the Comics Code, founding the Comics Code Authority as an in-organisation 'enforcement' department. It was still technically voluntary at every stage because the whole purpose was to avoid being actually regulated by the government, but because the CMAA was an industry group formed by publishers who were very interested in not being regulated for real it was enforced by them through their publishing and distribution arms, so the expectation was if you didn't have a stamp then you had to find a publisher and distributor who wasn't a CMAA member to get your comic out, which was very hard. To get the stamp you had to submit your comic to the CCA to review, but generally everything was written in-house with the Comics Code in mind anyway, which was fairly black and white in regard to its restrictions, as opposed to like film ratings where you might get bumped up a rating by having too many swears and have to figure out how to edit one out. Marv Wolfman might get into trouble with the anti-werewolf law but otherwise it was quite straight-forward. Marvel, as a member of the CMAA, did just go "gently caress it" and printed their Spider-man story and could do so because they were a big publisher with established distribution. There was never anything stopping anyone from doing that. The result wasn't so much that retailers stopped caring about the code, but that the CMAA itself revised the code to 'update' it to reflect the cultural attitudes of the 1970s as opposed to those of the 1950s when it was created - with the revised Code lasting another decade before the rise of independent publishing meant that more and more comics were appearing without the seal, and without the accompanying public outcry against their content that the Code was created to avoid, leading the major publishers to abandon the seal altogether in order to compete in those content spaces against the smaller publishers.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2019 03:04
|
|
|
You should 100% go read the pre code comics. There was some amazing and sometimes wild stuff being made. Nothing like the independent comics in the 80s, but still pretty goddamn nuts. Like, I love 60s marvel books, but they had nothing on EC.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2019 03:21
|
|
|
I've heard that, towards the end, it was unclear if anyone was actually looking at the comics that were being submitted for CCA approval, and Archie Comics had just started slapping the 'Approved by the Comics Code Authority' seal on their covers without bothering having them reviewed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2019 10:40
|
|
|
Angry Salami posted:I've heard that, towards the end, it was unclear if anyone was actually looking at the comics that were being submitted for CCA approval, and Archie Comics had just started slapping the 'Approved by the Comics Code Authority' seal on their covers without bothering having them reviewed. Supposedly someone went to their offices that had been long abandoned. Complete with an overstuffed mail slot of submission envelopes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2019 10:46
|
|
|
My favorite way people got around the code was that evil supernatural stuff was limited to what you could put in and you had things like Marvel calling zombies 'zuvembies' which were exactly the same thing. Also once the regulations loosened they immediately stopped being wishy-washy about Ghost Rider who then promptly because a demon from Hell.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2019 13:00
|
|
|
Where did Mephisto fall in line re: the comics code? And the whole "he's the leader of hell, but, like, not Hell hell."
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2019 13:18
|
|
|
Dawgstar posted:My favorite way people got around the code was that evil supernatural stuff was limited to what you could put in and you had things like Marvel calling zombies 'zuvembies' which were exactly the same thing. Also once the regulations loosened they immediately stopped being wishy-washy about Ghost Rider who then promptly because a demon from Hell. Don't forget that a "living vampire" doesn't count as a "vampire".  Uthor posted:Where did Mephisto fall in line re: the comics code? And the whole "he's the leader of hell, but, like, not Hell hell." There's a lot of psuedo-Devils (with the capital-D) that appeared in 1950's and 60's code books. So presumably you could rip-off Dr. Faustus as long as you didn't say he was the dude from the bible or came from H-E-double-hockey-sticks. Edit: Aw, the story where Batman sells his soul to the devil is from just after the code revisions. Random Stranger fucked around with this message at 13:53 on Apr 18, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2019 13:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 02:14 |
|
|
Angry Salami posted:I've heard that, towards the end, it was unclear if anyone was actually looking at the comics that were being submitted for CCA approval, and Archie Comics had just started slapping the 'Approved by the Comics Code Authority' seal on their covers without bothering having them reviewed. Of course, that was also because Archie's publisher, John Goldwater, was the main founder of the Comics Magazine Association of America, which created and enforced the Comics Code. Which led to charges that the Red Circle line of horror comics (published by Archie in the '70s) could get away with printing stuff that violated the CC thanks to Goldwater's influence.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2019 14:12
|
|
