Page 9 of 14 FirstFirst ... 5678910111213 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 135 of 210
  1. #121
    Extraordinary Member hellacre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    5,776

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Last Son of Krypton View Post
    Is Grampa so slow drawing?
    I don't know much other than what I read about him. But looks like he has done some good stuff and does not do much comic work...so that he is willing to do this is promising. Also seems he adores Miller. Calls him "Sensei ".
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rafael_Gramp%C3%A1

  2. #122
    Ultimate Member Sacred Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    16,405

    Default

    Funny how The Golden Child link in his bibliography links to the Eddie Murphy movie right now. LOL
    "They can be a great people Kal-El, they wish to be. They only lack the light to show the way. For this reason above all, their capacity for good, I have sent them you. My only son." - Jor-El

    "Now why don't we step up here and everybody get stepped up, and let's get some stepped up personal space up in this place." - Phillip Jacobs

  3. #123
    Astonishing Member misslane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    2,688

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vakanai View Post
    Well good news then - the writers who use popular AU depictions to inform their storytelling without knowing what made those AUs great are just going to make bad stories which will be forgotten. Your so called "damaging" stories hasn't stopped there being tons of great Superman stories being written since then, even now. I don't think Superman has been damaged by any of these AU stories, I think maybe you're just so focused on the bad stories inspired by these takes and a certain odd segment of the comics/gaming fandom that you're forgetting all the good Superman stuff we also get. If you include all the great stuff in your calculations I really do think it balances out if not outright leans in the favor of good.
    If the good balanced out the bad, then the bad takes wouldn't keep popping up. The problem is: some bad stuff is popular. Frank Miller writes popular trash. Mark Waid wrote an Elseworld story that is beloved by all but regretted by the author himself because of its legacy. I'm not the one focused on the bad stories; it is DC itself that keeps revisiting bad tropes because they sell. If the balance leaned toward the good, we wouldn't be getting another iteration of Miller's garbage but would be getting new stories in the vein of Busiek's Secret Identity or Grant Morrison's All Star Superman. We're not. I can't recall the last time DC put out an AU Superman story with a high profile writer/artist that wasn't some sort of riff on tired dark themes of 80s and 90s.

    I don't think there's anything organic in fundamentally changing a character that should hopefully survive for at least another hundred years. I mean Superman growing old, retiring, dying and being replaced by his son in canon could be considered organic, but I have no interest in the continuity progressing that far and more in canon.
    Your interests are beside the point. The question was whether or not these sort of developments could be supported by storytelling. That was the claim Nelliebly made that you vehemently could not support. She did not say anything about your likes or your preferences. She argued only that these developments did have story to support them. You can disagree about whether the storytelling is your thing, but you can't disagree that the storytelling is there.

    Disagree - a popular AU take can always be nullified by another popular AU take. It is really that simple. But a status quo change that lasts years, maybe even a couple decades in continuity? What nullifies that?
    Your doctrine of nullification simply is not supported by fact. Morrison's All Star Superman did not stop Injustice from happening. Superman: Secret Origin didn't stop Miller's Master Race or Golden Child getting a green light. Where are all the popular AUs that are balancing things out? And I still can't believe you are comparing the damaging dark dystopian nonsense from AU books to status quo changes that may not be your thing but are certainly not on the same level as turning Superman into some sort of government stooge, genocidal dictator, or an indifferent bystander.

    And a broken Superman doesn't interest me, but most stories and most AUs aren't a broken Superman. You can always ignore the stories that tell about a broken Superman. But if DC goes all in on Superdad to the point where even most AUs have him a daddy, how do you avoid that?
    Again, you are arguing a hypothetical that does not exist. What exists now are countless AU evil Superman stories with very few recent AU heroic Superman stories (with or without children) to balance them out. DC has been using AUs to make Superman a daddy since the 1960s. It is not a recent development. Not even close. In fact, as I'm sure the Superman and Wonder Woman shippers in this thread would attest, Superman ended up as a daddy in one of those "broken" AUs: Kingdom Come. I'd argue that it was the prevalence of Superdad in AUs that brought the idea over the official continuity in the first place. In other words, you've got it all backwards.
    Last edited by misslane; 09-15-2019 at 12:08 PM.

  4. #124
    Astonishing Member misslane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    2,688

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Celgress View Post
    Who are you or how am I to define what is a good story or a bad story? People like different things. I don't believe in gatekeeping. I didn't like an issue of Up in the Sky because Clark fantasies about Lois being brutally murdered by Lex but other people like the story and lots of them have bought the books. If DC okays an AU story or any story let the readers decide by voting with their wallets what they like and what they don't. At the end of the day, this is merely entertainment.
    No, I'm sorry, quality is not determined by sales figures. Garbage sells all the time. It's legitimately bad storytelling to use tired tropes like women-in-refrigerators to turn Superman into a dark parody of himself.

  5. #125
    Mighty Member Yoda's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    1,656

    Default

    Half the praise for this is based solely on shipping and nothing else. Otherwise the cognitive dissonance of championing a pairing as some bastion of “equality” and praising Frank “Holy Terror” Miller would make peoples heads explode.

  6. #126
    Ultimate Member Sacred Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    16,405

    Default

    That's a pretty baseless claim. If I said half the praise for mainstream Jon Kent was based purely on shipping I'd have my head torn off, and rightly so, as he has plenty of fans of whom shipping is not necessarily high priority. There's no reason to assume its not the same here. Our community is just one small part of the total readership. Whatever dominates our conversations here do not accurately reflect all of fandom and their reasons for purchasing/liking books.
    "They can be a great people Kal-El, they wish to be. They only lack the light to show the way. For this reason above all, their capacity for good, I have sent them you. My only son." - Jor-El

    "Now why don't we step up here and everybody get stepped up, and let's get some stepped up personal space up in this place." - Phillip Jacobs

  7. #127
    Astonishing Member misslane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    2,688

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sacred Knight View Post
    The easy answer is that it doesn't matter. At all. Feelings of ownership and exclusivity can crop up for many of reasons of which I won't blanket assume any individual here, everyone has their own reasons. But the reality is this: mainstream Jon is only the next in a line of quite a few "Jon Kents" spanning back decades, not all of them being carried by a Lois Lane, because the main feeling behind the name has always had the most to do with Clark and his love and adoration for his father, and that writers similarly have wanted to capture that. And of course in virtually all versions of the character, canon or alternate, Clark loves his Pa very, very much. That's why the mother has been sometimes interchangeable in that regard. Its not sexism at play, just a pragmatic look at the reason the name has cropped up so often in so many different iterations. Its far more a father/son thing than a husband/wife thing. It just is. Mainstream Jon is different from others of course in that this is a canon version, so some claim of ownership might want to be assumed amongst fandom, but the history simply shows it is not. Will that change in the future? Maybe. But still probably doubtful. Like others have said, Damian's popularity in canon hasn't stopped DC from allowing alternate tales to explore other avenues for different incarnations of the boy in regards to origin/parentage.
    It's understandable why Jonathan is a common name for Superman's son, regardless of who the mother is. I do get that even though I'd prefer the mothers get to contribute names more often and to have daughters as well as sons. I think if one takes a long view of comics as a larger mythos, there are several things that happen over and over again in some form or another in one incarnation or another. What tends to have the most impact are the elements that remain consistent over time, traverse mediums, and earn affection from fans not just in the niche comic book audience but the general mainstream audience. I don't know what the future holds for Clark and Diana's Jonathan or Clark and Lois's Jonathan other than this book is coming out and Jon is appearing in CW's Crisis as well as a few kid friendly graphic novels while maintaining his presence in the comics as well as appearing on YOUNG JUSTICE. It's still early days, though, and I guess anything can happen. Still, ultimately there's a little something out there to appeal to a range of preferences.

  8. #128
    Ultimate Member Sacred Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    16,405

    Default

    I fully get and support wanting these characters to have a bigger connection to, and thought put forth in a dynamic with their mothers. I get that 100% and am all for that. Historically, especially with the Superman mythos, father/son dynamics have a vastly skewed focus, and that's continuing even with mainstream Jon. I get wanting to see that subverted to a degree in favor of getting the mothers in there more than they historically have in the past. They make for great stories. As a personal fan of the New 52 Superman one of my fondest memories was the issue which came from the point of view of Clark's two mothers and the display of their love for him. Its a rarirty to see get explored heavily in the mythos, and its welcome when it occurs. Lois deserves more time with the mainstream Jon. And I'd have a strong interest to see this Miller version of Jon get some development with Diana. But I would expect that's not going to be the main focus here either.
    Last edited by Sacred Knight; 09-15-2019 at 11:28 AM.
    "They can be a great people Kal-El, they wish to be. They only lack the light to show the way. For this reason above all, their capacity for good, I have sent them you. My only son." - Jor-El

    "Now why don't we step up here and everybody get stepped up, and let's get some stepped up personal space up in this place." - Phillip Jacobs

  9. #129
    Mighty Member Yoda's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    1,656

    Default

    I
    Quote Originally Posted by Sacred Knight View Post
    That's a pretty baseless claim. If I said half the praise for mainstream Jon Kent was based purely on shipping I'd have my head torn off, and rightly so, as he has plenty of fans of whom shipping is not necessarily high priority. There's no reason to assume its not the same here. Our community is just one small part of the total readership. Whatever dominates our conversations here do not accurately reflect all of fandom and their reasons for purchasing/liking books.
    I meant the praise here and in this thread. I’m not going to waste time proving such an obvious point. Purporting to support any kind of “equality” and championing Miller doesn’t track at all.

  10. #130
    Extraordinary Member hellacre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    5,776

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sacred Knight View Post
    That's a pretty baseless claim. If I said half the praise for mainstream Jon Kent was based purely on shipping I'd have my head torn off, and rightly so, as he has plenty of fans of whom shipping is not necessarily high priority. There's no reason to assume its not the same here. Our community is just one small part of the total readership. Whatever dominates our conversations here do not accurately reflect all of fandom and their reasons for purchasing/liking books.
    Oh you and your common sense observations.

  11. #131
    Extraordinary Member hellacre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    5,776

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sacred Knight View Post
    I fully get and support wanting these characters to have a bigger connection to, and thought put forth in a dynamic with their mothers. I get that 100% and am all for that. Historically, especially with the Superman mythos, father/son dynamics have a vastly skewed focus, and that's continuing even with mainstream Jon. I get wanting to see that subverted to a degree in favor of getting the mothers in there more than they historically have in the past. They make for great stories. As a personal fan of the New 52 Superman one of my fondest memories was the issue which came from the point of view of Clark's two mothers and the display of their love for him. Its a rarirty to see get explored heavily in the mythos, and its welcome when it occurs. Lois deserves more time with the mainstream Jon. And I'd have a strong interest to see this Miller version of Jon get some development with Diana. But I would expect that's not going to be the main focus here either.
    Well DK3 Jonathan was literally strapped to her back. He was there with her at nearly every moment through the series. There were some tender and defining mom/son moments all through the series from her nursing him to taking him into battle. She also had really powerful moments with Lara. I would like to see her in this too...but not sure how much of even Clark, Diana or Bruce we will see. Seems this is Carrie, Lara and Jonathan's gig.

  12. #132

    Default

    So, the title golden child is that meant to jon or does lara have those kinda glowy powers? Is this golden thing connected superman prime one million?
    Somebody here had buddha comparison to jon. Buddha is painted in golden colour.gold is very important in Buddhism and is said to be very auspicious. It is also considered very auspicious in hinduism as well many other dharmic "religions" . Even though considering these traditions as religions is very narrow.

  13. #133
    Ultimate Member Last Son of Krypton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    10,365

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by manwhohaseverything View Post
    So, the title golden child is that meant to jon or does lara have those kinda glowy powers? Is this golden thing connected superman prime one million?
    Somebody here had buddha comparison to jon. Buddha is painted in golden colour.gold is very important in Buddhism and is said to be very auspicious. It is also considered very auspicious in hinduism as well many other dharmic "religions" . Even though considering these traditions as religions is very narrow.
    Yeah, golden child is referred to little Jonathan.

    Noun

    golden child (plural golden children)

    One who is favored or the favorite (in a family, on a team, at work, etc.), often held in high esteem by others, and for whom there are high hopes.

    https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/golden_child

  14. #134
    A Wearied Madness Vakanai's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,208

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by misslane View Post
    If the good balanced out the bad, then the bad takes wouldn't keep popping up.
    Bad takes would have happened with or without AUs. Some writers are just wrong. Blaming AUs for bad writing is a bad argument.

    The problem is: some bad stuff is popular. Frank Miller writes popular trash. Mark Waid wrote an Elseworld story that is beloved by all but regretted by the author himself because of its legacy. I'm not the one focused on the bad stories; it is DC itself that keeps revisiting bad tropes because they sell. If the balance leaned toward the good, we wouldn't be getting another iteration of Miller's garbage but would be getting new stories in the vein of Busiek's Secret Identity or Grant Morrison's All Star Superman. We're not. I can't recall the last time DC put out an AU Superman story with a high profile writer/artist that wasn't some sort of riff on tired dark themes of 80s and 90s.
    Which one did Waid write again?

    And so what? Sometimes thing are popular. That's okay. For all the popular "Superman is a goon/weak/dictator" takes there's a popular "Superman is good" take. Good takes also keep popping up, so why all the focus on just when the bad ones pop back up? As for AU Superman stories that aren't dark 80's/90's riffs? All Star, American Alien, Man and Superman (don't care that it was written to be in canon, it never wound up being so), Birthright (it was meant to be out of continuity so I'm counting it), Earth One (controversial, but not same tropes from 80s/90s), just to name the ones I'm familiar with, more well versed fans could probably name more.

    You're interests are beside the point. The question was whether or not these sort of developments could be supported by storytelling. That was the claim Nelliebly made that you vehemently could not support. She did not say anything about your likes or your preferences. She argued only that these developments did have story to support them. You can disagree about whether the storytelling is your thing, but you can't disagree that the storytelling isn't there.
    For fictional characters the interests of the audience are the only things that are to and of the point. And for a character who has remained relatively the same for decades I think that storytelling supports not drastically upheaving everything. But to each their own. I'm not getting into another Jon debate so listen up - no argument will ever win me on him being a good thing to the Superman Family or Mythos, so lets agree to disagree on that point. The AU debate is much more worthwhile.

    Your doctrine of nullification simply is not supported by fact. Morrison's All Star Superman did not stop Injustice from happening. Superman: Secret Origin didn't stop Miller's Master Race or Golden Child getting a green light. Where are all the popular AUs that are balancing things out? And I still can't believe you are comparing the damaging dark dystopian nonsense from AU books to status quo changes that may not be your thing but are certainly not on the same level as turning Superman into some sort of government stooge, genocidal dictator, or an indifferent bystander.
    I think you misunderstood what I meant my nullification - it isn't that good takes nullifies bad takes from happening or causing influence, but that popular good takes nullifies the so-called "harm" of bad takes because they all balance out. Bad takes will get a green light - so too will good takes. No AU will damage Superman because Superman will always have a plethora of good stories and takes backing him up. And I already mentioned some popular AUs to balance things out, some fans can name even more, and others will come. Personally I'm really looking forward to Superman Smashes the Klan for example.

    As for comparing AU books to status quo changes, it isn't nonsense - AUs are temporary affairs lasting only for one story arc, and are or will be a dime a dozen. Status quo changes can last for years, maybe a decade or better, and will therefore have much longer lasting impact than an AU that is popular with a segment of the fandom for a while before they move on to something else.

    Again, you are arguing a hypothetical that does not exist. What exists now are countless AU evil Superman stories with very few recent AU heroic Superman stories (with or without children) to balance them out. DC has been using AUs to make Superman a daddy since the 1960s. It is not a recent development. Not even close. In fact, as I'm sure the Superman and Wonder Woman shippers in this thread would attest, Superman ended up as a daddy in one of those "broken" AUs: Kingdom Come. I'd argue that it was the prevalence of Superdad in AUs that brought the idea over the official continuity in the first place. In other words, you've got it all backwards.
    Dude, calm down, your posts are coming off kinda angry and energetic. Now admittedly I could be wrong, tone is a hard thing to infer from text, but you might need to take a breath.
    Now - Countless AU evil Superman stories? Dark Knight Returns, which is kind of debatable, Red Son, again debatable, and Injustice, which is legit evil. That's all I'm drawing here (others I wouldn't call "evil" however broken you may view them - Kingdom Come may have been broken, but ended whole again). How many evil Superman stories are really out there and popular right now? Not as many as I think you are arguing. Basically a few, maybe several, more than enough to be balanced out by heroic AUs. Here I'll try it out - Injustice=All Star, Red Son=Earth One (or the upcoming Smashes if you think EO is one of those"broken" Supermen), DKR=American Alien.
    And I don't know what you're arguing, I never said I had anything against Superman being a Superdad in AUs, I just feel it should have stayed an AU concept. I'm not blaming any AUs for bringing it to canon though, that's all of the writer and whoever stupidly okayed it.

  15. #135

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Last Son of Krypton View Post
    Yeah, golden child is referred to little Jonathan.

    Yeah! I took it literally. I mean, that last panel with jon seemed metallic. So, i thought it might be connected to the Golden superman thing. If the buddha comparison is a blunt as Jesus/moses comparison to clark. Then i could see a story coming together.
    Siddhartha's father was a very powerful man like clark is. Birth of the Siddhartha was a little weird to say the least. Suffice to say Siddhartha's father tried to sheild him from all worldly miseries with his might. But, Siddhartha's ventures out comes to know about death and diseases. It torments him and he decides to find an answer for it. He became shakyamuni. He attained enlightenment with slght assist from sujata.
    So, i imagined this to be story like that with clark and jon.
    Last edited by manwhohaseverything; 09-15-2019 at 12:33 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •