No Happy Marriages for DC Heroes

[elvor0]

"We want surprises! That's why we're sticking with the cliches of angst and failed relationships."

I never read the old comic books, but I didn't hate what little I read of New 52 (Mostly just Catwoman and Batgirl, tbh, a little Batman). I was kind of hoping that the N52 would be closer to the "Ultimates" line Marvel had, where it was basically a continuity reboot. What's the point of relaunching the brand if you're still clinging to the 70 years of baggage from before? I don't know who Damien Wayne is (I do now, thanks to wikipedia, but you get my point), and I don't want to have to read a bajillion comics just to know.

That's what I like about the Marvel Cinematic Universe. They take the best parts of the heroes hugnormous history, and strip out the need to read material from decades ago.

The continuity reboot is such a mess. For most of the characters the continuity is said to have been wiped. However, Batman and the Green Lantern Corps continuity haven't been touched.

Everything that happened in them since Infinite Crisis has still happened to them but within the space of 10 years. However, that comes with a ton of problems. If those things still happened to Bats,(ESPECIALLY Infinite/Final Crisis and Blackest Night/Brightest Day having still happened to Bats and GL) then other stuff that happened in there must've happened to the other characters involved in those stories, by extension of that, (For example Supes MUST have saved the universe in Final Crisis because Bats has still travelled in time in the new continuity) it means there has been no reboot. Only in the comic title numbers and a few details.

And by fuck that's difficult for me to read clearly, let alone if you've only just started getting into them ><

Overall I haven't been reading many of the titles. I'm waiting on a Question series, (though his new backstory is fucking naff), and waiting for my copies of the Trinity War to arrive, but otherwise Batman seems to be the only one with really good writing (Though I've heard Batgirl, Batwoman and Animal Man have been good).

Though I think it's unfair to complain about Damian being present, he's been quite important to Batman for a number of years now, so he's earned his place to stick around for the new continuity. Not to sound like a douche, but if you want to know who a character is, just look it up. You did for Damien and it took like what, five minutes? Dick Greyson hasn't been Robin since the late 70s, that's just how it is now, not in this unique case, them clinging to the continuity. Core fans would be pretty annoyed if Dick went back to being Robin I think.

 

[Paradoxrifts]

1- Vocal internet commentators always want their favourite characters to exist unchanging in some sort of perpetually unchanging pop-culture safety zone, so that they can continue to talk about them with other like-minded people without going to the actual effort of purchasing and reading the comics.

2- DC Editorial actually wants to sell some comics.

Yeah, these are pretty much mutually incompatible goals.

I just don't see that. The vocal internet commentors are the people crying most for the characters to change and grow. It's DC Editorial who wants them to stay in some unchanging bubble.

We want marriage we want growth. We want change.

But here's the pinch. The fans will never again agree with one another that any of the changes introduced are any good or worth keeping. The more popular the series or characters, the more fans that have and the more true this is. Eventually it becomes a great big schizophrenic mess where the fanbase simultaneously wants change to occur but also hates it whenever it occurs.

Talk has never been cheaper than it is on the internet. And this is why I don't blame companies for listening to how people vote with their wallets, instead of whoever can project their voice loudest and most obnoxious over the general rabble.

 

[Winnosh]

1- Vocal internet commentators always want their favourite characters to exist unchanging in some sort of perpetually unchanging pop-culture safety zone, so that they can continue to talk about them with other like-minded people without going to the actual effort of purchasing and reading the comics.

2- DC Editorial actually wants to sell some comics.

Yeah, these are pretty much mutually incompatible goals.

I just don't see that. The vocal internet commentors are the people crying most for the characters to change and grow. It's DC Editorial who wants them to stay in some unchanging bubble.

We want marriage we want growth. We want change.

But here's the pinch. The fans will never again agree with one another that any of the changes introduced are any good or worth keeping. The more popular the series or characters, the more fans that have and the more true this is. Eventually it becomes a great big schizophrenic mess where the fanbase simultaneously wants change to occur but also hates it whenever it occurs.

Talk has never been cheaper than it is on the internet. And this is why I don't blame companies for listening to how people vote with their wallets, instead of whoever can project their voice loudest and most obnoxious over the general rabble.

You can't predict what the fans will want so just focus on telling good stories and not trying to cherry pick things. Move forward and things will develop organically. Captcha rocket science as in this isn't it.

 

[Silverbeard]

There are no happy marriages anywhere. The belief that marriage is an automatic end to all of ones problems and a universal remedy for ones issues is a myth held by the unmarried amongst us. There is not a single relationship wherein one can put up ones feet and say' It's going to be clear sailing from here!' Life is simply not like that.

This says nothing about marriages amongst 'heroes', who likely have their own sets of unique problems that go well beyond the typical concerns of the less superior folk. Why should happy marriages be more likely for them than they are for us?

 

[Paradoxrifts]

You can't predict what the fans will want so just focus on telling good stories and not trying to cherry pick things. Move forward and things will develop organically. Captcha rocket science as in this isn't it.

And the internet doesn't agree anymore on what makes for a good story either.

 

[Winnosh]

Dammit Dammit Dammit. Ok apparently at a con someone from Bleeding Cool asked why Aquaman was allowed to stay married in the reboot but no one else can. Didio responded that Aquaman wasn't married in the new continuity... Despite Aquaman and his wife Mera still acting as a couple and everyone referring to her as his queen in every single damn issue and everyone treating them like they are married.

But Nooo apparently they're not.

 

[FalloutJack]

What, is this Game of Thrones, now? You gonna have everybody die? Gimme a break...

 

[McMarbles]

Surely these people are going to be fired, right? I mean... is the reboot really doing that well compared to before?

 

[faefrost]

There are no happy marriages anywhere. The belief that marriage is an automatic end to all of ones problems and a universal remedy for ones issues is a myth held by the unmarried amongst us. There is not a single relationship wherein one can put up ones feet and say' It's going to be clear sailing from here!' Life is simply not like that.

This says nothing about marriages amongst 'heroes', who likely have their own sets of unique problems that go well beyond the typical concerns of the less superior folk. Why should happy marriages be more likely for them than they are for us?

Then why not explore those stories? DC used to be very very good at it. Look at some of the old Justice Society characters, and the long marriages among some of them, that were both very character defining, and could provide some of the best drama and most stunning humanization of the characters. I fail to see how insisting that their characters remain sexual Peter Pan's will bring in a broader audience. At best it is a convenience move for the rotating pool of writers, so they don't have to deal with the debris left behind by the previous scribe. It's lazy. It's offensive. And once word creeps out its going to stir up the Fox News crowd even more than Batwoman's Lesbian wedding. (Honestly few on the right side of the political spectrum really care if Batwoman gets married as a Lesbian. It's legal in some states. It happens. But banning any depictions of normal married life because of drama? Yeah that's gonna tick ALL of them off.)

I walked away from giving DC any more money last year. I'm now very very glad for that decision.

 

[Silverbeard]

Then why not explore those stories? DC used to be very very good at it. Look at some of the old Justice Society characters, and the long marriages among some of them, that were both very character defining, and could provide some of the best drama and most stunning humanization of the characters. I fail to see how insisting that their characters remain sexual Peter Pan's will bring in a broader audience. At best it is a convenience move for the rotating pool of writers, so they don't have to deal with the debris left behind by the previous scribe. It's lazy. It's offensive. And once word creeps out its going to stir up the Fox News crowd even more than Batwoman's Lesbian wedding. (Honestly few on the right side of the political spectrum really care if Batwoman gets married as a Lesbian. It's legal in some states. It happens. But banning any depictions of normal married life because of drama? Yeah that's gonna tick ALL of them off.)

I walked away from giving DC any more money last year. I'm now very very glad for that decision.

I can certainly tell you why I would never write a story about marital problems, if I wrote stories for a living: because it's mundane and run-of-the-mill. We all know what marital arguments are like. Even the unmarried amongst us have observed blazing rows between our parents. Do we really need to see more of that in our comics? I cannot see the appeal in Batman and Catwoman arguing abut car payments or finances or any of the other little things that routinely spark brawls- verbal and physical- between couples worldwide. Unless this was used an excuse to get two heroes to have a rowdy punch-up without needing to make either one a clear villain, but there are easier ways to do that than marital strife, surely.

 

[Pyramid Head]

DC's editors have been fucking things over long before the New 52. Things are just coming to a head because with all the continuity largely lost, the editors fuck-ups are even more noticeable.

 

[RolandOfGilead]

Bob Harras, what an idiot.