Your DC-Only controversial opinions (part II)...

[byrd156]

This is probably blasphemy...

Frank Millers All-Star-Batman reads like it wants to be taken serious while being unaware that its some kind of grotesque parody; just without the wit and charm or any other of a parodies positive qualities. Its a horrible train-wreck whose only redeeming quality is Jim Lees art.

And now I guess its running for my life time *sighs and sprints*

This isn't controversial, it's an absolutely garbage book that can be fun if you think of it as so bad it's good.

[Dred]

No, you're right. Everybody and their dog at the time it came out kept trying to sell this idea that he was doing it ironically. He wasn't. He just lost his talent. It's meant to be "serious" like DKR or Year One but he just doesn't know how to write good comics anymore. There's a reason they put Azzarello on with him for the third one.

"Miller is too edgy and dark and his comics too absurd. We need to reign him in. Who's a good idea?"

"Azzarello! That guy isn't edgy and sure knows how to show restraint!"

The idea is still hilarious to me. Let's reign in Miller with bargain bin wannabe Miller.

[stargazer01]

Maybe but that is the society people are growing up in, They protected the celebrities, actors, sports star and politicians in my time. They don't that today, How many seeming happy perfect celebrities or popular figure either break up with their wife, have a drug addiction, the reality they are hard to work with, kill themselves, etc. In Superman heyday, it was easier to believe in near perfection because didn't get to see those flaws. It is cynical and it is why Superman is harder to pull off today. You see it in the shows and movies find the popular character who always does the right thing and is living a happy life. Maybe I am wrong and that's why Superman should be inspirational and not flawed because that is so different. But the easiest way to make the archetype today is to give them a "good" character flaw so the alarm doesn't go off.

A person walks up hands you a million dollars in a briefcase and says nothing. Is the first instinct I have a million dollars or is what is wrong? Probably the later we are trained to look for the wrong.

Well, Wonder Woman was just shown to be a very inspirational character with a of virtues and good will toward mankind and the masses loved her movie and her. Maybe that's what audiences want, heroes larger than life who are good and who can save the world from evil even if just in a fictional world. It makes people feel good and gives them hope. It's great escapism.

Audiences weren't very thrilled with a very human Superman full of doubt and angst with the Snyder movies.

[Agent Z]

Well, Wonder Woman was just shown to be a very inspirational character with a of virtues and good will toward mankind and the masses loved her movie and her. Maybe that's what audiences want, heroes larger than life who are good and who can save the world from evil even if just in a fictional world. It makes people feel good and gives them hope. It's great escapism.

Audiences weren't very thrilled with a very human Superman full of doubt and angst with the Snyder movies.

The WW movie also didn't portray Diana as the perfect paragon of virtue who can do no wrong.

And last I checked, both of Snyder's Superman movies had him saving the world and having good will towards mankind.

[SiegePerilous02]

The WW movie also didn't portray Diana as the perfect paragon of virtue who can do no wrong.

And last I checked, both of Snyder's Superman movies had him saving the world and having good will towards mankind.

I think it's more that the WW movie actually executed the whole thing far better than Snyder's Superman did. It presented her as flawed and needing character arc, but still struck the right balance with making her a larger than life superheroine. Arthur is pretty much the same.

In comparison, Snyder's Superman's arc isn't as well realized. He saved the world, but clearly audiences connected with her more than him. If they did, that means the former product worked and the latter didn't. At least for enough people. I still like MOS, but the potential was squandered, and it was shaky to begin with. Fans just simply want that for Superman, when it is clearly not too difficult to do for other characters.

[stargazer01]

Smallville paved the way for modern superhero TV. Not Arrow like some say lately..

He got a show because of his popularity in Smallville.

[Osiris-Rex]

Smallville paved the way for modern superhero TV. Not Arrow like some say lately..

He got a show because of his popularity in Smallville.

Depends on how one defines modern. I would say Adventures of Superman paved the way for Superhero TV. For it's time that would have been modern, with TV being dominated by westerns at the time.
Without Superman on TV would TV executives been as likely to have Batman, The Incredible Hulk, Wonder Woman, Lois and Clark on TV in the years following. I don't think Smallville existed in a vacuum,
Adventures of Superman and Lois and Clark sort of paved the way to making Superman acceptable on TV. Without their legacy I wonder if anyone would have even considered Smallville.

[OpaqueGiraffe17]

Smallville paved the way for modern superhero TV. Not Arrow like some say lately..

He got a show because of his popularity in Smallville.

I’d say Smallville was the “Blade” of tv superheroics. While Arrow was the equivalent of the first X-men movie. Blade might have “paved the way” but it was X-men that really got the ball rolling.

[DrNewGod]

I’d say Smallville was the “Blade” of tv superheroics. While Arrow was the equivalent of the first X-men movie. Blade might have “paved the way” but it was X-men that really got the ball rolling.

I like this analogy.

[stargazer01]

Depends on how one defines modern. I would say Adventures of Superman paved the way for Superhero TV. For it's time that would have been modern, with TV being dominated by westerns at the time.
Without Superman on TV would TV executives been as likely to have Batman, The Incredible Hulk, Wonder Woman, Lois and Clark on TV in the years following. I don't think Smallville existed in a vacuum,
Adventures of Superman and Lois and Clark sort of paved the way to making Superman acceptable on TV. Without their legacy I wonder if anyone would have even considered Smallville.

The 21st century. And we all know superheroes became popular thanks to Superman.

I’d say Smallville was the “Blade” of tv superheroics. While Arrow was the equivalent of the first X-men movie. Blade might have “paved the way” but it was X-men that really got the ball rolling.

Is Blade considered a superhero? Arrow was introduced in Smallville along with other superheroes. Arrow got a pilot due to his popularity there.

[BBally]

I think the outcome of Crisis On Infinite Earths hurt DC in the long run.

Whatever Happened To The Man Of Tomorrow is the most overrated Superman story ever written.

[phantom1592]

The 21st century. And we all know superheroes became popular thanks to Superman.




Is Blade considered a superhero? Arrow was introduced in Smallville along with other superheroes. Arrow got a pilot due to his popularity there.

Yeah... I'm a huge Fan of Blade, but I think that movie gets too much credit for 'starting the comic boom'. It was a vampire movie. It was advertised as a vampire movie. It was horror. People who had no idea whatsoever about Blade... including actual comic book fans went to see it because it was a kick-butt vampire action movie.

Blade may as well have been an independent character for all the reputation he had. It stood on it's own merits... like the Crow or The Mask or the Losers as one of those cool fun concepts that audiences were surprised was originally a comic.

Even in the trailer no mention whatsoever of comics, marvel or anything... Just a mention of Stan Lee as an executive producer in tiny blurry letters in the credits.



X-Men on the other hands.. were superheroes. They were the #1 best selling Comic, the most popular Saturday morning cartoon... Non-fans may still find them a bit unknown... but they were OUT there. Blade? Not so much.

[DrNewGod]

I think the outcome of Crisis On Infinite Earths hurt DC in the long run.

I agree with you there...

Whatever Happened To The Man Of Tomorrow is the most overrated Superman story ever written.

...and now we must quarrel. I won't declare it the best Superman tale, but I don't agree that it's overrated, and certainly not the most overrated.

[SiegePerilous02]

I think the outcome of Crisis On Infinite Earths hurt DC in the long run.

Whatever Happened To The Man Of Tomorrow is the most overrated Superman story ever written.

I agree with you there...

...and now we must quarrel. I won't declare it the best Superman tale, but I don't agree that it's overrated, and certainly not the most overrated.

Gotta side with DrNewGod here. COIE hurt DC in the long run.

But a part of me might have been ok with that being the last Superman story. It was the tail end of his reign as the mightiest and most popular superhero. it may have been better to have him bow out with a good story and a happy ending with Lois and let the genre and DCU move forward. Yeah the reboot kept him around, but the various attempts to "fix" him afterwards have only done further damage. It's like they parade out his corpse to keep the brand going and continue to make money without much regard for the character himself and he's never reached that height of popularity again. Making everything a more level playing field for their brands is good in theory, but 1. They had to scale and gut his history and lore to do it and 2. it just shifted to Batman.

[Electricmastro]

I'm not against Batman killing on principle.