Shazam returns in a new ongoing by Geoff Johns and Dale Eaglesham.

[PyroTwilight]

I wonder how long until we get the reveal of Darla's parentage many have assumed. What with being named Darla DUDLEY and all.

[Ascended]

You think? Freddy starred in his own titles, in CAPT. MARVEL JR., in MASTER COMICS and in THE MARVEL FAMILY for many years at Fawcett. He was a genuine star and somehow the writers were able to work with his verbal impediment and make it a fun element of the character.

Eh, perhaps they could make it work but I don't think modern audiences would want to see that. Not from Billy. Even if Freddy carried his own title for a while that doesn't mean he was the star of the franchise. Robin and Supergirl and plenty of other sidekicks/legacies/junior partners carry books but they're not the heads of their respective franchises.

I'm sure there are writers out there who could make it work. I just don't think it's worthwhile.

It was a fun gag with Freddy though.

[Frontier]

I wonder how long until we get the reveal of Darla's parentage many have assumed. What with being named Darla DUDLEY and all.

I'm hoping Johns uses this book as an opportunity to bring back more classic Captain Marvel stuff.

At the very least we're going to see some follow-up to Sivana meeting Mr. Mind.

[leo619]

Pre-Flashpoint Billy Batson may never have acted that way. But fandom certainly paints him as such when the version of the character who gets angry and depressed sometimes due to his circumstances (but comes around fairly quickly as well) gets painted as some extremely angsty, dark gritty edgelord in comparison.

I never said individuals who are genuinely like that shouldn't exist in real life. But Billy is a fictional character, and he was created as an idealized orphan by adults who wrote the kid a certain way and depicted his behavior a certain way to be an escapist fantasy. If we want him to appeal to modern kids and not just old school fans, the new approach might be necessary.

You're contradicting yourself. You can't say "you're not saying people like that shouldn't exist in real life" and then say Billy was an "idealized" orphan. Because then you're saying that people who are like Billy in real life are somehow idealized orphans, kids, etc. This is the area that is missing. Because we weren't idealized kids, we were the opposite, again cast down from society for being "too nice."

So ultimately, the only thing that changed is who can relate to the character. By changing to reflect those that are "rougher around the edges" due to past experiences, they're only confirming that the only way a person should be when going through such circumstances, is "rough around the edges."
And that's a bad message to send, especially when you don't have any more characters (well specifically from DC) to counterbalance that approach.
At least Marvel has Ms. Marvel and Gabby. Though I would argue it's probably more important to see males in the same light since being "nice" is often considered weak for males.

New 52 Superman is not overly dark though. The guy who was concerned with finding a home for two hamsters? What and edgelord that guy is. The guy who is very close to the original version of the character and the core concepts that went into his creation. And DCEU Superman is nothing like him or New 52 Billy. Even he, as often as he's forced to mope and be put in dark situations, is not that dark.

No one was saying he was Moon Knight/Punisher level dark. Just because I mentioned that they darken the characters doesn't mean they go to the full own opposite end of the spectrum. It just means they decided to remove the "boy scout" aspect of the two characters because again, being "nice" is considered "boring, bland, plain" and everything else under the sun.

It's being a jerk, but Mary immediately called him out for it, he felt shitty for making Darla cry, and stood up for his foster siblings from bullies a few pages later, and made sure to hide Freddy from the bullies and lure them away because he couldn't escape with his leg. And we saw a flashback of him saving a girl from a foster home that was abusing her.

Are any of these things OOC for pre-Flashpoint Billy, and was he immune from making mistakes?

Those were definitely OOC elements for pre-flashpoint billy, because those weren't the type of mistakes he would make. He wouldn't be outright rude or inconsiderate to someone who was genuinely kind and considerate to him. And that's where another issue lies. People assume that mistakes are only involved when someone becomes a full own Jerk. And that's only because it's own the surface and easier for people to grasp. Being taken advantage of, which was a common point for pre-flashpoint billy, is a mistake. Being too trusting into individuals who doesn't deserve it, is a mistake.
Someone doesn't have to be a full on jerk just to make mistakes.

Nobody is denying he behaved like a jerk for a little bit, but it's not like we saw his good points late into the story. As a trade, it's one volume. How little patience do readers have that they cannot even get a quarter of the way in (if that) before they see Billy's facets as a human being?

Um....earlier you said this:

but I'd say a far bigger problem is dismissing them as jerks when they do not behave in a way we deem acceptable, or until they "prove" that they have a heart of gold underneath to be worthy of our attention.

These are two different scenario's. People have stated that new 52 Billy is a jerk, which is true. But that doesn't mean he have soft spots underneath him to counterbalance his jerk like behavior. If he was a complete jerk with no redeeming qualities, I wouldn't be reading the book. But that's clearly not the case, and I'm pretty sure most people would agree with that. I'm specifically saying there's no reason to beat around the bush to excuse his behavior as if it's the "Only" way of being normal. Because that discredit those who were like and related pre-52 billy more as somehow not being real. This was the same excuse given to DCEU for why they should be dark, as if light and positive are somehow not relateable/real.

Let's not even pretend that New 52 Billy is anything like Batman at his worst. C'mon, you can't be serious.

And it doesn't excuse his behavior, but holding said behavior against a 13 year old boy is pretty ridiculous. It should be called out, but I've hear some fans claim the kid was no longer "innocent." That's the kind of comments I find kind of disturbing.

Correlation does not mean the exact same. I would never say Billy has the same darkness as Batman, because very few heroes in comics is as dark as batman. But just like people can be upfront about Batman's behavior, so should they be able to with Billy. Now I definitely disagree with somehow believing he's no longer innocent. He's definitely still innocent, (though innocence isn't really based on age.) But I also believe people have the right to label his behavior as a jerk. When I ran into this kids as a kid, I definitely thought they were a Jerk, that wouldn't change now that I'm older. As stated before, as I can personally attest to, having a rough background doesn't give you a pass to be a jerk.

[Vic Vega]

SHAZAM by GEOFF JOHN & DALE EAGLESHAM in November

- The series will explore different worlds of magic.

- In the first issue, Shazam! and his friends find a subway terminal similar to the one that brought Billy Batson to the Rock of Eternity, but with many different branches leading to other worlds.

Attachment 68447

This looks interesting.

I forgot...is this the Nu52 Marvel Family?

If so where's Junior? Is it the blond dude?

[KurtW95]

This looks interesting.

I forgot...is this the Nu52 Marvel Family?

If so where's Junior? Is it the blond dude?

Yes. Both Freddy and Mary have been put on the same level as Johns' new characters.

[Agent Z]

So ultimately, the only thing that changed is who can relate to the character. By changing to reflect those that are "rougher around the edges" due to past experiences, they're only confirming that the only way a person should be when going through such circumstances, is "rough around the edges."

Not really. That’s like saying that original Billy was a representation of how all people reacted to hardship. Remember, that Billy wasn’t the only orphan in the book and they didn’t act like him.

And that's a bad message to send, especially when you don't have any more characters (well specifically from DC) to counterbalance that approach.

Actually they did. Wonder Woman, Cyborg, Amethyst, Bunker etc.

No one was saying he was Moon Knight/Punisher level dark. Just because I mentioned that they darken the characters doesn't mean they go to the full own opposite end of the spectrum. It just means they decided to remove the "boy scout" aspect of the two characters because again, being "nice" is considered "boring, bland, plain" and everything else under the sun.

There is a huge middle ground between “boy scout” and “punisher”. Billy fell in that middle ground.

Correlation does not mean the exact same. I would never say Billy has the same darkness as Batman, because very few heroes in comics is as dark as batman. But just like people can be upfront about Batman's behavior, so should they be able to with Billy. Now I definitely disagree with somehow believing he's no longer innocent. He's definitely still innocent, (though innocence isn't really based on age.) But I also believe people have the right to label his behavior as a jerk. When I ran into this kids as a kid, I definitely thought they were a Jerk, that wouldn't change now that I'm older. As stated before, as I can personally attest to, having a rough background doesn't give you a pass to be a jerk.

There are people in this thread and numerous others discussing New 52 Billy that go way beyond calling him a jerk. For a lot of people, if Billy isn’t acting like Christ himself, he’s no better than a villain. KurtW95, for instance, flat out calls him unlikable.

[Jim Kelly]

The nice thing about Billy, Mary and Freddy is they could easily be re-imagined as coming from diverse ethnic groups. Freddy always seemed like he could be Jewish (which would have given his 1940s orgin story a lot more importance). I'm just going to assume so for the movie. I guess even with blond hair he still could be Jewish, but I hope the comics go with the look from the movie and from the original Mac Raboy comics.

[Frontier]

This looks interesting.

I forgot...is this the Nu52 Marvel Family?

If so where's Junior? Is it the blond dude?

That is the New 52 Marvel Family.

The blonde kid is also Freddy.

The nice thing about Billy, Mary and Freddy is they could easily be re-imagined as coming from diverse ethnic groups. Freddy always seemed like he could be Jewish (which would have given his 1940s orgin story a lot more importance). I'm just going to assume so for the movie. I guess even with blond hair he still could be Jewish, but I hope the comics go with the look from the movie and from the original Mac Raboy comics.

Especially considering his nemesis is a guy named "Captain Nazi."

[KurtW95]

Especially considering his nemesis is a guy named "Captain Nazi."

I wonder how they'd explain that today.

A) Sliding timeline
B) Captain Nazi has recently broken free from suspended animation
C) Changing it to being a non-powered Neo-Nazi (this would probably work the best for the movie or a more realistic Earth One GN)
D) Fawcett characters are brought into the future (like they did when they relaunched a long time ago)
E) Time spell
F) Dropping the origin altogether, like it seems they did with the New 52.

I think B would be the best option.

[Jim Kelly]

Didn't Ordway establish that some of the old Fawcett super-heroes (Spy-Smasher, Bullet Man, Minute Man) existed in the 1940s and fought Capt. Nazi and the like?

[Frontier]

Didn't Ordway establish that some of the old Fawcett super-heroes (Spy-Smasher, Bullet Man, Minute Man) existed in the 1940s and fought Capt. Nazi and the like?

I remember reading in the Starman crossover with Captain Marvel something to that effect, since Bullet Man (?) was being accused of being a spy and Jack Knight tried to help clear him because Ted had teamed-up with him back in the day.

[Vic Vega]

I wonder how they'd explain that today.

A) Sliding timeline
B) Captain Nazi has recently broken free from suspended animation
C) Changing it to being a non-powered Neo-Nazi (this would probably work the best for the movie or a more realistic Earth One GN)
D) Fawcett characters are brought into the future (like they did when they relaunched a long time ago)
E) Time spell
F) Dropping the origin altogether, like it seems they did with the New 52.

I think B would be the best option.

Captain Nazi could always be a modern era neo-Nazi.

He could also be a relative of the original (if this version of the DCU had superbeings during WW2-I honestly lost track).

Marvel did something similar with Master Man: their modern era version of the WW2 era Invaders baddie was a distant neo Nazi relative of the original super Nazi that got powered up by Red Skull.

[Jekyll]

Please! No more nazis!!! They are sooooooo overused!

[ERON]

There are people in this thread and numerous others discussing New 52 Billy that go way beyond calling him a jerk. For a lot of people, if Billy isn’t acting like Christ himself, he’s no better than a villain. KurtW95, for instance, flat out calls him unlikable.

Literally NO ONE is calling for Billy to act "like Christ himself" or like a "Pollyanna" as someone earlier claimed. There are plenty of people calling for Billy to act like he did before the reboot. Billy never acted like Christ or like a Pollyana before the reboot. Old Billy was no more or less unrealistic than New Billy. I've worked with underprivileged kids for 18 years now, and I've seen kids that acted like Old Billy, kids that acted like New Billy, and kids that acted like neither.

If you prefer New Billy, that's fine. You're entitled to your opinion. But there are plenty of us who like Old Billy, and we have a right to express our opinions, too.