The return of the Mighty Mighty New 52 Discussion thread

[thetrellan]

Well, completely ignoring the Smallville part, because I think the show runners of that series made it pretty clear that Lana was not Clark's true love, there's a lot wrong with the rest of what you said here.

Firstly, DC is a business. They are in the business of selling comics, which tends to require them to not alienate their fanbase. So, yes, they should absolutely take fans' opinions and wants into consideration. That's not them "caving" or "giving in" or whatever. That's them actually listening to their fans and actually giving them what they want. That's what a business like DC is supposed to do.

Secondly, again, its not a matter of fans being impatient. Its a matter of them not wanting to rehash developments that already took place long ago. Again, we saw the Clark/Lois relationship unfold and culminate in marriage...twenty years ago. Not wanting to rehash something that we all read is not being "impatient," that's simply a want to move forward as opposed to moving backward in terms of character development. Lois and Clark are married and have been married for a long time. We don't need to rehash the telling of their romance again simply because some weren't around the first time they got married. I was 5 when they got married the first time, and read the story of their courtship and marriage much later on. People are able to catch up, even if they weren't there.

And lastly, did you even read their relationship first time around? Because they already went through all of what you're asking for. The got together, got engaged, he died, she grieved, he came back, they experienced problems, drifted apart, she went away, they got engaged again, and then ultimately got married. So, in short, they've done that dance before of drifting apart and coming back together out of their love for one another. We don't need to rehash it. All we need to do is move forward with their marriage.



Uh, yeah, I did read it, actually. You do know that the memories that Wally has brought back with him aren't the actual Titans continuity that Wolfman, Perez, and Grummet spent many years crafting, right? Instead, its that Frankensteined, Titans Hunt continuity that Abnett and editorial cooked up. He might remember NTT, but the rest of them do not. Now, I hope that when Wally sees Kory, Raven, and Vic again, he'll somehow re-instil in them the memory of them being together on the Titans, but it might require a change of the editorial guard. For now, they do not remember their most famous adventures together (aka the Wolfman New Teen Titans run), which sort of puts their "real Titans" status into question.

Are you telling me that Clark's life with Lois sometimes made you laugh, sometimes cry, and leave an ache in your heart whenever they were separated? Because I read the same stories, and I experienced none of that. If these two love each other, they should make us feel that way. You say they covered it? I say something was missing. In a time when stories are supposed to be better, it's not unreasonable to revisit things like this. But traditionally, comics aren't good at it. If someone dies, they can make it sad enough. But that's as far as it goes. I'm all for restarting all corners of the DCU from scratch, because I view it as a new opportunity to finally get it right.

Don't get me wrong. I love those old Superman stories. They were great. But at heart he's a boring character, and there's always room for improvement.

As for Smallville, they suffered from a serious problem. Past a point it all fell flat.

That's because they did too good a job of making Lex likeable. So good that when he turned evil, it defied suspension of disbelief. Everything tied into that turning point- the point he made a conscious decision to be evil- rang false. Including his seduction of Lana.

But even as far as that goes, timing, as they say, is everything. And Clark had the crappiest timing in the universe on that show. He and Lana belonged together. It was pretty obvious. The reason they didn't end up that way was the effort to keep it consistent with the comics. Starting with Lex going bad. It was those efforts that turned the entire series to rot. As evidenced by Rosenbaum's departure from the show. I'm sure he had his reasons for leaving, but the role had become one dimensional, and left him with no reason not to go.

The Walking Dead wasn't like that. When things seemed to be going in a certain direction, they didn't change gears just to keep it consistent with the original source material. Instead they went with it and let the show take the next logical course. As if they'd been paying attention enough to not repeat the mistakes of previous comic book adaptations. The result was, and still is, a pretty damn good show.

Rehashing is discussing or presenting the same story again, with no substantial improvements or differences. It doesn't apply to most remakes, even if they are comics. This was an attempt to make it new, and for that to work, it needs to be accepted for what it is, not what you think it should be. I tell you comics aren't what they could be and have always had room for improvement. DC thought they could improve the DCU by doing something they have done successfully in the past. I think they could have done it better, but it wasn't bad at all. Or perhaps I should say it wasn't all bad. Forever Evil sucked pretty much. But at least the New 52 wasn't like Marvel's Heroes Reborn. That crap was a train wreck.

But give DC credit for trying, even if a lot of it was half assed and lacked any sense of planning. That is to say, had they planned it better, it would have seemed to be the improvement it was meant to be. Unfortunately, the fact is that they had no such plan. Or if they did, they didn't consider it vital enough to stick to.

Yes, they should listen to fans. No, they shouldn't bend to popular opinion. Not if it means derailing a worthwhile course. But see, they shouldn't even be on a course unless there's a story to tell. If they are just shaking the proverbial tree to see what comes loose, then they would be better served to convene all the writers and have the benefit of their expertise. Of course, all these crossovers say that's not what they do at all.

I have wondered about how much the current Titans remember, because it was confusing to see him get together with a group calling itself Titans that only ever went by Teen Titans. But there is no reason to think the memory upgrade was at all selective. It was hazy, and they only seem to recall Wally himself. Not Linda, whom they should be well aware of. Until I see evidence to the contrary, though, I have to assume all the memories are there, and they just need something to jog them loose. As if the universe being reincarnated were some kind of trauma or something. Who knew?

[thetrellan]

I'm talking about the DCU as it existed before Flashpoint, which incorporated DC continuity going back to the beginning. Just because it took DC 20 years to learn its mistake last time doesn't mean that I should support their repeating that mistake. Also, I wasn't even around for the first Crisis, but even I recognized that it was a huge mistake.

That's 26 years. And CIE was no mistake, as those of is who had to live through decades of DC stories targeting five year olds can attest. Some will tell you the event was unnecessary. Don't you believe that for a second. Only when the advent of the internet made communication anywhere in the world possible did I even become aware such sentiment existed. And that was only a relatively recent revelation.

Now say that last sentence ten times real fast.

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

Are you telling me that Clark's life with Lois sometimes made you laugh, sometimes cry, and leave an ache in your heart whenever they were separated? Because I read the same stories, and I experienced none of that. If these two love each other, they should make us feel that way. You say they covered it? I say something was missing. In a time when stories are supposed to be better, it's not unreasonable to revisit things like this. But traditionally, comics aren't good at it. If someone dies, they can make it sad enough. But that's as far as it goes.

Yes, it did. Just because you had your reaction does not mean it has to be my reaction. The story of Lois and Clark coming together and getting married was, to me, one of the best love stories in comics. Hands down. You say something was missing, but I say it was completely fine as is. And DC apparently agreed since they brought the whole thing back into continuity.

As for Smallville, they suffered from a serious problem. Past a point it all fell flat. That's because they did too good a job of making Lex likeable. So good that when he turned evil, it defied suspension of disbelief. Everything tied into that turning point- the point he made a conscious decision to be evil- rang false. Including his seduction of Lana.

But even as far as that goes, timing, as they say, is everything. And Clark had the crappiest timing in the universe on that show. He and Lana belonged together. It was pretty obvious. The reason they didn't end up that way was the effort to keep it consistent with the comics. Starting with Lex going bad. It was those efforts that turned the entire series to rot. As evidenced by the actor's departure from the show. I'm sure he had his reasons for leaving, but the role had become one dimensional, and left him with no reason not to go.

The Walking Dead wasn't like that. When things seemed to be going in a certain direction, they didn't change gears just to keep it consistent with the original source material. Instead they went with it and let the show take the next logical course. As if they'd been paying attention enough to not repeat the mistakes of previous comic book adaptations. The result was, and still is, a pretty damn good show.

Again, when did we start talking about Smallville? That show ended almost 10 years ago. And, again, its not obvious that Clark belonged with Lana when he didn't end up with Lana in that show. They portrayed him and Lana as the typical first love scenario, which is typically the role Lana plays in the Superman mythos.

And rehashing is discussing or presenting the same story again, with no substantial improvements or differences. It doesn't apply to most remakes, even if they are comics. This was an attempt to make it new, and for that to work, it needs to be accepted for what it is, not what you think it should be.

No, its still rehashing. As long as the point of the story is to repeat certain developments that were already established prior to the current story, its rehashing. And its impossible for it not to be compared to the previous version or "be accepted for what it is" when its being sold as a replacement for the original.

They can always do a flashback story that tells an "untold story" from Clark and Lois's past, but a big "no" to straight up retelling their entire relationship and erasing everything that's ever transpired between them. That goes double for anything like the N52 version of those characters.

Yes, they should listen to fans. No, they shouldn't bend to popular opinion. Not if it means derailing a worthwhile course. But see, they shouldn't even be on a course unless there's a story to tell. If they are just shaking the proverbial tree to see what shakes loose, then they would be better served to convene all the writers and have the benefit of their expertise. Of course, all these crossovers say that's not what they do at all.

That only applies if you consider the New 52 a "worthwhile cause," which I do not.

I have wondered about how much the current Titans remember, because it was confusing to see him get together with a group calling itself Titans that only ever went by Teen Titans. But there is no reason to think the memory upgrade was at all selective. But it was hazy, and they only seem to recall Wally himself. Not Linda, who they should. Until I see evidence to the contrary, I have to assume all the memories are there, and they just need something to jog them loose. As if the universe being reincarnated were some kind of trauma or something. Who knew?

I'm actually hoping you're right and the entire NTT run is somewhere deep in their memories and that something does shake it loose soon, hopefully Doomsday Clock. Unfortunately, though, I don't know if that's the case.

[thetrellan]

Yes, it did. Just because you had your reaction does not mean it has to be my reaction. The story of Lois and Clark coming together and getting married was, to me, one of the best love stories in comics. Hands down. You say something was missing, but I say it was completely fine as is. And DC apparently agreed since they brought the whole thing back into continuity.

I can't imagine why you'd lie about this, so I submit you're just really easy please. Either that, or you were prepubescent at the time. Which would explain your sentimental attachment here. Clark's relationship with Lois had little emotion to it because it wasn't a romance comic. Your insistence that it satisfied on this level frankly has be baffled. Unless you are just arguing because your mind's made up and I'm wasting my breath.

Again, when did we start talking about Smallville? That show ended almost 10 years ago. And, again, its not obvious that Clark belonged with Lana when he didn't end up with Lana in that show. They portrayed him and Lana as the typical first love scenario, which is typically the role Lana plays in the Superman mythos.

10 years seems a long time to you. That explains a few things.

No, its still rehashing. As long as the point of the story is to repeat certain developments that were already established prior to the current story, its rehashing. And its impossible for it not to be compared to the previous version or "be accepted for what it is" when its being sold as a replacement for the original.

1 rehash play
verb re·hash \(ˌ)rē-ˈhash\
Popularity: Bottom 50% of words
Examples: rehash in a Sentence

Definition of rehash

transitive verb

1 : to talk over or discuss again

2 : to present or use again in another form without substantial change or improvement

NEW! Time Traveler

First Known Use: 1820 https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/rehash

I have three other dictionaries I can quote if that's not enough for you. Rehash is a derogatory way of referring to remakes which vary little from the original. FYI. Resorting to misuse of it indicates a weak argument. So you probably shouldn't. Just saying.

They can always do a flashback story that tells an "untold story" from Clark and Lois's past, but a big "no" to straight up retelling their entire relationship and erasing everything that's ever transpired between them. That goes double for anything like the N52 version of those characters.

Personally, I hate 'unknown chapter' retcons like this. Worse than erasing everything you ever knew about a character is saying 'it all happened like you remember, except this was going on the whole time. And you never had a clue".

That only applies if you consider the New 52 a "worthwhile cause," which I do not.

Yeah, leaning toward the tree-shaking scenario myself. It seems to me they really just did it because they could.

I'm actually hoping you're right and the entire NTT run is somewhere deep in their memories and that something does shake it loose soon, hopefully Doomsday Clock. Unfortunately, though, I don't know if that's the case.

Considering DC gave up on getting the band together a long time ago, I would be thrilled if New 52 led up to this. I'd be singing praises and worshiping at the altar of 52. I wouldn't care if it made me a hypocrite (it wouldn't). But I doubt they have this much of a clue. I think the powers that be are stuck on the idea of Teen Titans as they now exist, and aren't keen on the idea of dual membership. I'm also getting pretty sick of Damian and his pet demon.

[Dataweaver]

I can't imagine why you'd lie about this, so I submit you're just really easy please. Either that, or you were prepubescent at the time. Which would explain your sentimental attachment here.

And I submit that some people have different tastes than you, without there being something wrong with them (e.g., low standards or immature). Just accept that it worked for him without questioning why.

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

I can't imagine why you'd lie about this, so I submit you're just really easy please. Either that, or you were prepubescent at the time. Which would explain your sentimental attachment here. Clark's relationship with Lois had little emotion to it because it wasn't a romance comic. Your insistence that it satisfied on this level frankly has be baffled. Unless you are just arguing because your mind's made up and I'm wasting my breath.

I'm really not that easy to please. But, again, this is not fact against fact. This is your opinion against my opinion. You say it had little emotion, I say that it did have that emotion. Clark dying in Lois's arms was one of the saddest scenes I'd ever seen in a comic and, imo, Lois and Clark's marriage was one of the most important marriages in comics. And their romance was, to me, one of the best told in comics history. And, apparently, the majority of the fanbase shared that opinion, since DC did bring the whole thing, lock stock and barrel, back into the timeline.

10 years seems a long time to you. That explains a few things.

10 years in TV is a long time to anyone.

1 rehash play
verb re·hash \(ˌ)rē-ˈhash\
Popularity: Bottom 50% of words
Examples: rehash in a Sentence

Definition of rehash

transitive verb

1 : to talk over or discuss again

2 : to present or use again in another form without substantial change or improvement

NEW! Time Traveler

First Known Use: 1820 https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/rehash

I have three other dictionaries I can quote if that's not enough for you. Rehash is a derogatory way of referring to remakes which vary little from the original. FYI. Resorting to misuse of it indicates a weak argument. So you probably shouldn't. Just saying.

You do realize this is all just a distraction from the main point, right? Completely glossing over the fact that it straight up says that it includes to discuss or tell something again, rehashing is synonymous with any one of the following according to Thesaurus.com: reuse, restate, rephrase, rework, change, rewrite, say again. Point is: rehashing basically means to restate, retell, or say over again even if there are few differences. If the point is to take something that was already at point B, take it back to point A, and retell the story of it getting to point B again (even with changes), then its a rehash.

So in conclusion, the New 52 would have been a rehash of a plot point told about 20 years ago: Lois and Clark getting together. And not only that, it was doing so badly. The Lois/Clark romance had all but been abandoned in the New 52 and replaced with a very hackneyed attempt to pair him up with Wonder Woman. And even when writers were attempting to make it a part of the Superman comics, like in the Perez run in the early part of the N52, it was incredibly boring. That John Carrel (what whatever his name was) guy Lois was dating was as interesting as white bread and the whole thing stunk like a generic love triangle before it was hastily abandoned and Lois became pretty much Clark's platonic gal pal. That is, when she was there at all. So, even judging the stories on their individual merits, the N52 was very much inferior to the original telling of Lois and Clark getting together.

There was no "substantial improvement." Again, it was just a hackneyed and obviously flawed retelling, rehashing, whatever you want to call it.

Personally, I hate 'unknown chapter' retcons like this. Worse than erasing everything you ever knew about a character is saying 'it all happened like you remember, except this was going on the whole time. And you never had a clue".

Okay, that's your opinion, and that's fine. But, don't be surprised if its not universal.

Considering DC gave up on getting the band together a long time ago, I would be thrilled if New 52 led up to this. I'd be singing praises and worshiping at the altar of 52. I wouldn't care if it made me a hypocrite (it wouldn't). But I doubt they have this much of a clue. I think the powers that be are stuck on the idea of Teen Titans as they now exist, and aren't keen on the idea of dual membership. I'm also getting pretty sick of Damian and his pet demon.

Well, the New 52 is over and it didn't lead to that. And I would also be exceedingly happy if, somehow, a magic wand was waved and the whole of the NTT continuity and characters were somehow back as part of the timeline. It truly was basically what made the Titans into an actual fully independent corner of the DCU and not just "the sidekicks club."

[Darkseid Is]

I love Wolfman and Perez Teen Titans but I could care less whether or not it was in continuity. What does it matter? It happened, it was great. It's been over for such a long time. I don't care if Dick and Starfire have a history. We're just different comics readers. I look at the universe as a bonus, not the be all end all.

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

I love Wolfman and Perez Teen Titans but I could care less whether or not it was in continuity. What does it matter? It happened, it was great. It's been over for such a long time. I don't care if Dick and Starfire have a history. We're just different comics readers. I look at the universe as a bonus, not the be all end all.

Because people become attached to certain developments and character dynamics as part of the larger universe. This is hardly new and is part and parcel of comic book fandom. Why do people care if Dick and Starfire have a romantic history? Because its their classic dynamic as characters. And, FYI, they apparently still do have a romantic history. That was true even during the height of the New 52, even though we now have no idea how or when they got together, how long they were together, how it ended, etc. And its really hard to actually connect with characters when you don't know the details of their lives. That's something we had before Flashpoint, that we don't have now. Fans are also hostile to replacing all of that with what they view as inferior retellings, as was obvious during the New 52.

It also goes to the very fact that the Titans and the DCU at large are now lacking without that history, largely because it introduced characters and concepts that became important parts of the franchise. Who is Pantha? Or Wildebeest? Or Brother Blood? Or Jericho? Or Kole? Who is this Terra appearing in the Deathstroke series and how does she even know Slade if the Judas Contract never went down? We don't know. Without the NTT, we don't even know really how any of them fit into the Titans franchise. We know Joey was a member of the Titans, but we don't know how or when or why. We don't even know if Brother Blood can even be considered a Titans villain anymore. The list goes on and on and on with examples of how, without the NTT in canon, it really doesn't even feel like the Titans can stand on their own as a franchise anymore.

[thetrellan]

And I submit that some people have different tastes than you, without there being something wrong with them (e.g., low standards or immature). Just accept that it worked for him without questioning why.

There's nothing wrong with being young, and I would never imply that. You just incorrectly inferred it.

I'm really not that easy to please. But, again, this is not fact against fact. This is your opinion against my opinion. You say it had little emotion, I say that it did have that emotion. Clark dying in Lois's arms was one of the saddest scenes I'd ever seen in a comic and, imo, Lois and Clark's marriage was one of the most important marriages in comics. And their romance was, to me, one of the best told in comics history. And, apparently, the majority of the fanbase shared that opinion, since DC did bring the whole thing, lock stock and barrel, back into the timeline.



10 years in TV is a long time to anyone.



You do realize this is all just a distraction from the main point, right? Completely glossing over the fact that it straight up says that it includes to discuss or tell something again, rehashing is synonymous with any one of the following according to Thesaurus.com: reuse, restate, rephrase, rework, change, rewrite, say again. Point is: rehashing basically means to restate, retell, or say over again even if there are few differences. If the point is to take something that was already at point B, take it back to point A, and retell the story of it getting to point B again (even with changes), then its a rehash.

So in conclusion, the New 52 would have been a rehash of a plot point told about 20 years ago: Lois and Clark getting together. And not only that, it was doing so badly. The Lois/Clark romance had all but been abandoned in the New 52 and replaced with a very hackneyed attempt to pair him up with Wonder Woman. And even when writers were attempting to make it a part of the Superman comics, like in the Perez run in the early part of the N52, it was incredibly boring. That John Carrel (what whatever his name was) guy Lois was dating was as interesting as white bread and the whole thing stunk like a generic love triangle before it was hastily abandoned and Lois became pretty much Clark's platonic gal pal. That is, when she was there at all. So, even judging the stories on their individual merits, the N52 was very much inferior to the original telling of Lois and Clark getting together.

There was no "substantial improvement." Again, it was just a hackneyed and obviously flawed retelling, rehashing, whatever you want to call it.



Okay, that's your opinion, and that's fine. But, don't be surprised if its not universal.



Well, the New 52 is over and it didn't lead to that. And I would also be exceedingly happy if, somehow, a magic wand was waved and the whole of the NTT continuity and characters were somehow back as part of the timeline. It truly was basically what made the Titans into an actual fully independent corner of the DCU and not just "the sidekicks club."

Look, you have a right to your opinion, but seriously. Everyone knew Superman wasn't going to stay dead. Lois crying just served the story, which, by the way, is all the romance the books ever had. Barely enough to serve the story. I love those old stories. They were some of the best. But they had limitations, and denying that just because I pointed it out seems kind of silly. If the scene made you cry? It was because you were young and impressionable. Nothing wrong with that. It's what makes old songs stir the heart. But that don't make it high romance.

10 years is like last week to me. Besides, Smallville was 6 years ago. It's relevant because of the romantic element. In the comics, Superman's love life was incidental, an element to serve the story. In Smallville, the romance was the story. They probably never expected it to get so far that she would be expected to drop out of the picture, so they did it up right and made it seem real.

Look up several words in your Thesaurus. You'll find many of the synonyms aren't perfect fits. That's because they can be used as synonyms, but only if the context is right. For instance, you can't substitute the word 'rehash' for each and every instance of the word 'change'. Which is why a thesaurus is no substitute for a dictionary.

So even though New 52 didn't represent real, or any, improvement, that still doesn't make it a rehash. Besides, most of it wasn't actually retellings of old stories, but new ones with much of the past missing. Any way you slice it, it's misuse.

You're right about that. It is just a preference. But right about now, I wouldn't mind if Marvel did a complete reboot. DC's didn't seem necessary this time, or any time other than CIE. But you'd understand if you knew what an awful mess the Superman franchise was in the silver age. The comic was written for five year olds, and because of it I still have trouble drawing the guy. The first clue that he had any real value was the first Superman movie in 1978. So now any time a Superman reboot comes along, I say more power to it. The guy can always use some reinvention.

Ah yes, but the resurrection of the Titans of old is yet but a wistful dream.

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

There's nothing wrong with being young, and I would never imply that. You just incorrectly inferred it.

Look, you have a right to your opinion, but seriously. Everyone knew Superman wasn't going to stay dead. Lois crying just served the story, which, by the way, is all the romance the books ever had. Barely enough to serve the story. I love those old stories. They were some of the best. But they had limitations, and denying that just because I pointed it out seems kind of silly. If the scene made you cry? It was because you were young and impressionable. Nothing wrong with that. It's what makes old songs stir the heart. But that don't make it high romance.

Uh, I knew he wasn't going to stay dead. In fact, he was resurrected several years before I even read DoS. That's because when that story was originally published, I was only a year old. I didn't end up reading it until the early 2000s. So, it wasn't the "suspense" of whether Superman would stay dead. I knew he wouldn't. But I still empathized with Lois's pain and not just her's but his parents' and all of Metropolis's. As characters, they didn't know he would be resurrected, and their pain was palpable.

But, again, you seem to be chalking up my feelings about Lois and Clark's original romance to me being young and impressionable and unable to recognize a good romance. That is ridiculous. I have my opinion, you have yours. That's all there is to it. My opinion is just as valid as yours, so please stop trying to pretend as if it isn't. Again, there are many people who feel the same way about those comics as I do, evidenced by the fact that DC had to bring all of that back.

10 years is like last week to me. Besides, Smallville was 6 years ago. It's relevant because of the romantic element. In the comics, Superman's love life was incidental, an element to serve the story. In Smallville, the romance was the story. They probably never expected it to get so far that she would be expected to drop out of the picture, so they did it up right and made it seem real.

Well, for starters, I said "almost 10 years ago" not that it ended exactly 10 years ago. But, again, the point stands that Smallville has been off the air for the better part of this decade. Either way, its been off the air quite a while now.

But, no, its really not relevant anyway because your assuming that simply because super heroics is the main focus, that Clark couldn't have developed palpable and meaningful relationships. That's like saying that Friends focused so much on comedy that nobody really gave a hoot about Ross and Rachel. Smallville even focused very much on Clark being a superhero (even if not Superman yet), and yet still was able to develop the romantic aspect of Clark's life.

Look up several words in your Thesaurus. You'll find many of the synonyms aren't perfect fits. That's because they can be used as synonyms, but only if the context is right. For instance, you can't substitute the word 'rehash' for each and every instance of the word 'change'. Which is why a thesaurus is no substitute for a dictionary.

So even though New 52 didn't represent real, or any, improvement, that still doesn't make it a rehash. Besides, most of it wasn't actually retellings of old stories, but new ones with much of the past missing. Any way you slice it, it's misuse.

Again, this doesn't matter, but there is something called colloquial use. Those words are considered synonyms because the use of the word "rehash" doesn't have to be limited to scenarios where there's no change. It can be used in scenarios where there is significant change, but at least a few elements are being repeated or reused. But, either way, this is a distraction and it has no actual bearing on the point. The point is: fans don't usually want to strip development away from or regress a character only to spend several years trying to get back to the place where they were.

You're right about that. It is just a preference. But right about now, I wouldn't mind if Marvel did a complete reboot. DC's didn't seem necessary this time, or any time other than CIE. But you'd understand if you knew what an awful mess the Superman franchise was in the silver age. The comic was written for five year olds, and because of it I still have trouble drawing the guy. The first clue that he had any real value was the first Superman movie in 1978. So now any time a Superman reboot comes along, I say more power to it. The guy can always use some reinvention.

Well, most Marvel fans would mind it, which is why Marvel doesn't reboot. And things like Superman Reborn, which rewrote the timeline to incorporate Superman's Pre-FP history pretty much evidence that people want a classic Superman. Not some hackneyed reinvention like they got in the New 52. Batman and the Fantastic Four in the 60s were also written for children, and yet, most fans like it when those elements come back. Hence, the reincorporation of many Silver Age elements during Post-Crisis and the proof we saw during Reborn that Superman remembers his Silver Age adventures.

In fact, its probably DC's belief that Superman does need reinventing, instead of embracing who he is, that's held the franchise back. Superman is not Batman. He doesn't need to be made edgier, or meaner, or more "kick ass" to appeal to the general audience. He was both a man of the people and a sci-fi icon for almost 70 years before the N52 and he will continue to be so now that's its over.

[thetrellan]

Uh, I knew he wasn't going to stay dead. In fact, he was resurrected several years before I even read DoS. That's because when that story was originally published, I was only a year old. I didn't end up reading it until the early 2000s. So, it wasn't the "suspense" of whether Superman would stay dead. I knew he wouldn't. But I still empathized with Lois's pain and not just her's but his parents' and all of Metropolis's. As characters, they didn't know he would be resurrected, and their pain was palpable.

But, again, you seem to be chalking up my feelings about Lois and Clark's original romance to me being young and impressionable and unable to recognize a good romance. That is ridiculous. I have my opinion, you have yours. That's all there is to it. My opinion is just as valid as yours, so please stop trying to pretend as if it isn't. Again, there are many people who feel the same way about those comics as I do, evidenced by the fact that DC had to bring all of that back.



Well, for starters, I said "almost 10 years ago" not that it ended exactly 10 years ago. But, again, the point stands that Smallville has been off the air for the better part of this decade. Either way, its been off the air quite a while now.

But, no, its really not relevant anyway because your assuming that simply because super heroics is the main focus, that Clark couldn't have developed palpable and meaningful relationships. That's like saying that Friends focused so much on comedy that nobody really gave a hoot about Ross and Rachel. Smallville even focused very much on Clark being a superhero (even if not Superman yet), and yet still was able to develop the romantic aspect of Clark's life.



Again, this doesn't matter, but there is something called colloquial use. Those words are considered synonyms because the use of the word "rehash" doesn't have to be limited to scenarios where there's no change. It can be used in scenarios where there is significant change, but at least a few elements are being repeated or reused. But, either way, this is a distraction and it has no actual bearing on the point. The point is: fans don't usually want to strip development away from or regress a character only to spend several years trying to get back to the place where they were.



Well, most Marvel fans would mind it, which is why Marvel doesn't reboot. And things like Superman Reborn, which rewrote the timeline to incorporate Superman's Pre-FP history pretty much evidence that people want a classic Superman. Not some hackneyed reinvention like they got in the New 52. Batman and the Fantastic Four in the 60s were also written for children, and yet, most fans like it when those elements come back. Hence, the reincorporation of many Silver Age elements during Post-Crisis and the proof we saw during Reborn that Superman remembers his Silver Age adventures.

Yeah, but all these years of continuity have reshaped the characters of their greatest heroes almost beyond recognition as surely as any reboot. Yeah, Marvel tried it and it didn't take, but that was before Civil War and all the crap since. But that's not an issue I care to get into, as it's pretty irrelevant.

An assumption is an uninformed opinion. I read all of those stories when they first came out, and although they could occasionally be inspiring, I have also read enough romance comics to know that this wasn't it. That's not an assumption, it's an informed opinion. Peter Parker and Gwen Stacy, that was a great romance. Conan and Belit, that too, in the end.

Lois and Clark? That was just canon. A big part of romance lies in the testing of the relationship, and other than Superman's death, I don't see much, if any, of that here. Romance in fiction isn't the same as in real life. Irl everything about a relationship is the romance. In fiction it must be more demonstrable. Dating isn't romantic, and neither is sex. Romance is the magnetism that draws two people together, the uncertainty when they are apart. A sense of vulnerability that comes from wearing your heart on your sleeve.

None of that ever happened to the Kents. Lois and Clark just dated until marriage seemed the next logical step. Irl that is romance. Of course it is. But in fiction not so much.

And colloquial use is often wrong. It's true that if a particular word is misused enough, the definition will find its way into the dictionary. Again, you need a dictionary to know the difference. Basically, if enough people have the same ignorant conception of how a word should be used, the language evolves because of it. It's not something to be proud of. People stupid changes in meaning. And yes, I did just use stupid as a verb. It seemed appropriate.

Making an error of this sort is nothing to be ashamed of. Defending it can be embarrassing. But continuing such misuse after you've been corrected? I'm sure I don't have to tell you what that is. But the fact that you continue to defend it is telling.

It says we've been arguing over this for way too long. Hell, I'm not even sure what my original point was supposed to be. But you know, other than those two examples I mentioned, I would be hard pressed to find an example of real romance in comics. It's like science fiction. Comics includes something like it everywhere, but the real deal is hard to find. You look at Green Lantern, and it seems pretty SF, but look close and and science is lacking. Like when 2 GLs found themselves ten billion years in the past.

Hello, DC? Why did you add ten billion years to the age of the universe?

Or in Forever Evil, when Ultraman's makeshift eclipse was turned into a worldwide eclipse by tie-in writers who misunderstood, and didn't understand how shadows work.

These observations have nothing to do with the quality of the comics. They are just observations. Nothing to get worked up over.

[Green Goblin of Sector 2814]

Yeah, but all these years of continuity have reshaped the characters of their greatest heroes almost beyond recognition as surely as any reboot. But that's not an issue I care to get into, as it's pretty irrelevant.

Not IMO, but I digress.

An assumption is an uninformed opinion. I read all of those stories when they first came out, and although they could occasionally be inspiring, I have also read enough romance comics to know that this wasn't it. That's not an assumption, it's an informed opinion. Peter Parker and Gwen Stacy, that was a great romance. Conan and Belit, that too, in the end.

What?? Peter and Gwen was a great romance, even though ASM was primarily a superhero comic???? How could that be?

In all seriousness, though. This isn't a case where you have a right opinion and I have a wrong one. Comics are an art form. Art is inherently subjective. You have an opinion. I have an opinion. I liked the romance as it was originally told. You didnt. That's all there is to it. But, again, this discussion is largely moot because DC brought it all back.

And, completely unrelated, but imo. Peter and MJ was a much better romance than Gwen and Peter.

Lois and Clark? That was just canon. A big part of romance lies in the testing of the relationship, and other than Superman's death, I don't see much, if any, of that here. Romance in fiction isn't the same as in real life. Irl everything about a relationship is the romance. In fiction it must be more demonstrable. Dating isn't romantic, and neither is sex. Romance is the magnetism that draws two people together, the uncertainty when they are apart. A sense of vulnerability that comes from wearing your heart on your sleeve.

None of that ever happened to the Kents. Lois and Clark just dated until marriage seemed the next logical step. Irl that is romance. Of course it is. But in fiction not so much.

Well, firstly, their relationship was tested, and not just by the death. There were several other obstacles that came between them, including Lori Lemaris coming back into Clark's life and Lois leaving for an overseas assignment for a time. And then, in the end, they still came together. So, yes, it did feel earned.

However, what makes a good romance aren't scenes where the two characters long for each other or portraying two people as incomplete without one another. A romance works best when the characters are independent people who arent together because they feel like they are incomplete without one another, but are together because they simply want to be with each other. And that's actually how it works out in real life. Most people don't WANT to be with someone who is incomplete without them, because that's just the makings of a dysfunctional relationship (and one of the reasons I feel Gwen/Peter was not meant to be because she'd devolved to a clingy girlfriend by the time she died). So, that's just another example of how art should imitate life. And Lois and Clark imitated that. They were two independent people who were together because they chose to be together and still are.

And colloquial use is often wrong. It's true that if a particular word is misused enough, the definition will find its way into the dictionary. Again, you need a dictionary to know the difference. Basically, if enough people have the same ignorant conception of how a word should be used, the language evolves because of it. It's not something to be proud of. People stupid changes in meaning. And yes, I did just use stupid as a verb. It seemed appropriate.

Again, this point is irrelevant. Colloquial use, or whatever you want to call it, "rehash" applies to what the N52 was supposed to be.

[thetrellan]

Not IMO, but I digress.



What?? Peter and Gwen was a great romance, even though ASM was primarily a superhero comic???? How could that be?

In all seriousness, though. This isn't a case where you have a right opinion and I have a wrong one. Comics are an art form. Art is inherently subjective. You have an opinion. I have an opinion. I liked the romance as it was originally told. You didnt. That's all there is to it. But, again, this discussion is largely moot because DC brought it all back.

And, completely unrelated, but imo. Peter and MJ was a much better romance than Gwen and Peter.



Well, firstly, their relationship was tested, and not just by the death. There were several other obstacles that came between them, including Lori Lemaris coming back into Clark's life and Lois leaving for an overseas assignment for a time. And then, in the end, they still came together. So, yes, it did feel earned.

However, what makes a good romance aren't scenes where the two characters long for each other or portraying two people as incomplete without one another. A romance works best when the characters are independent people who arent together because they feel like they are incomplete without one another, but are together because they simply want to be with each other. And that's actually how it works out in real life. Most people don't WANT to be with someone who is incomplete without them, because that's just the makings of a dysfunctional relationship (and one of the reasons I feel Gwen/Peter was not meant to be because she'd devolved to a clingy girlfriend by the time she died). So, that's just another example of how art should imitate life. And Lois and Clark imitated that. They were two independent people who were together because they chose to be together and still are.



Again, this point is irrelevant. Colloquial use, or whatever you want to call it, "rehash" applies to what the N52 was supposed to be.

I think I've said enough about this. All anyone can do is trust their own judgment, after all.

But you're not the only one who feels that way about MJ. Older Spider-Man readers seem to prefer Gwen, as near as I can tell. It's kind of like one's taste in music. Just five years can make a world of difference. Personally, I think Gerry Conway just threw MJ Peter's way to mess with him. And Mysterio. And the Jackal. And that wall Spidey broke his hands against in frustration. Man, those were the days.

Btw, although I didn't realize it at the time, the reason Lee and Romita's ASM had such a stong romantic bent was that they had worked together on actual Romance comic books. But that also turned out to be a great way to mess with Peter.

[The Darknight Detective]

I think I've said enough about this. All anyone can do is trust their own judgment, after all.

But you're not the only one who feels that way about MJ. Older Spider-Man readers seem to prefer Gwen, as near as I can tell. It's kind of like one's taste in music. Just five years can make a world of difference. Personally, I think Gerry Conway just threw MJ Peter's way to mess with him. And Mysterio. And the Jackal. And that wall Spidey broke his hands against in frustration. Man, those were the days.

Btw, although I didn't realize it at the time, the reason Lee and Romita's ASM had such a stong romantic bent was that they had worked together on actual Romance comic books. But that also turned out to be a great way to mess with Peter.

Without trying to derail this thread regarding Marvel, I got my first Spidey comic at the same time the Gwen clone was around. I have to say, at the time, Gwen-clone appealed to me much more than MJ did. In fact, she was the first female in the comics that I thought was dreamy.

[thetrellan]

Without trying to derail this thread regarding Marvel, I got my first Spidey comic at the same time the Gwen clone was around. I have to say, at the time, Gwen-clone appealed to me much more than MJ did. In fact, she was the first female in the comics that I thought was dreamy.

Same here. I was a couple years into collecting before I got around to Spidey, and didn't understand Marvel's practice of reprinting. My first ASM was 131, and I began to catch on when MJ was in the hospital, and Peter was being haunted by memories of Gwen. I don't remember the issue number, but in Marvel Tales his girlfriend was this blond girl. I was confused until I noticed the fine print caption which read "Originally presented in Amazing Spider-Man #67". So I referred back to that hospital bed with the superimposed face of Gwen over MJ, and realized I was seeing a doomed romance playing out. That was chilling.

Because of that, every moment of Marvel Tales was a precious clock ticking down. There was no way MJ could live up to that. Especially not after seeing the mind games she put Peter through. Staying with Flash, making him think she had broken up with Pete, and letting Peter think the two had slept together. Sorry, but I kind of despise the woman. Peter took it in stride, but he didn't deserve that crap. That's why I believe she was just a way for Conway to mess with Peter.