Page 105 of 112 FirstFirst ... 55595101102103104105106107108109 ... LastLast
Results 1,561 to 1,575 of 1679
  1. #1561
    Extraordinary Member SiegePerilous02's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    8,011

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheCape View Post
    Nyssa killed and revived Talia several times near a Lazarus Pit until she broke her mentally, the whole thing ends being to much for Talia and she surrender toward her brainwashing to stop that torture cycle and Nyssa craddle her in her arms (Talia was also naked the whole time, just to add to the creepyness).
    With Morrison's tendency to try to "make it all count," I wouldn't be surprised if these events were meant to play a part in Talia sliding into full villainy in his run.

  2. #1562
    Extraordinary Member TheCape's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    Venezuela
    Posts
    6,673

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SiegePerilous02 View Post
    With Morrison's tendency to try to "make it all count," I wouldn't be surprised if these events were meant to play a part in Talia sliding into full villainy in his run.
    Eh, Morrison pick and choose when is convenient too, you can look his X-Men run to get an idea of that. The difference with other writers is that his ideas are so creative and interesting that most people don't notice, besides i always got the sensation that he considered Talia firmly a villain, although he did a backtrack in the New 52 when changed Damian's conception as something consensual, probably realizing that he comited some mistakes regarding her.
    "Wow. You made Spider-Man sad, congratulations. I stabbed The Hulk last week"
    Wolverine, Venom Annual # 1 (2018)
    Nobody does it better by Jeff Loveness

    "I am Thou, Thou Art I"
    Persona

  3. #1563
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    5,541

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheCape View Post
    Eh, Morrison pick and choose when is convenient too, you can look his X-Men run to get an idea of that.
    He also changed the stuff he choose and ignored way more current canon when it was convenient.

  4. #1564
    Extraordinary Member SiegePerilous02's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    8,011

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheCape View Post
    Eh, Morrison pick and choose when is convenient too, you can look his X-Men run to get an idea of that. The difference with other writers is that his ideas are so creative and interesting that most people don't notice, besides i always got the sensation that he considered Talia firmly a villain, although he did a backtrack in the New 52 when changed Damian's conception as something consensual, probably realizing that he comited some mistakes regarding her.
    I think in addition to that, his runs are more accessible and new reader friendly despite being packed with older references. If his stuff contradicts some older comics that a new reader may not care to even track down anyway, does it really matter? Chances are said comics were already contradicted or contradicted something else already. I feel this way about his X-Men run, as the X-Men have the most convoluted nonsense continuity ever. I'm sure he gets some things wrong, but his run is easier to pick up and is better written than the glut of 90s excess that occurred between Claremont's first departure and his arrival, so whatever.

  5. #1565
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    19,886

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SiegePerilous02 View Post

    The fact that the non-white woman is chosen for this arc is a wider issue, but the creation of the Al Ghuls to begin with has unfortunate implications.
    And DC has only added to that problem since their creation.




    If Batman went the extra step, Gordon and the cops would be all over him like flies on dog crap. It would be incredibly OOC of Jim not to take that action, the alliance with Batman is inherently shaky as it is and his not killing the criminals is the main reason the partnership is allowed to work. What else is Batman supposed to do with the criminals besides turn them over to the police. He and his allies within the system like Gordon have tried to fight the system, Bruce has even donated money to hire and equip better cops and make Arkham more progressive and secure. There is only so much he can do.
    I find this excuse difficult to accept. Firstly, if Gordon is going to come after Bruce for killing (not even murder, just killing in general) why is he allowing Bruce to run rampant across Gotham? Bruce regularly commits torture, assault, breaking and entering, tampering with crime scenes, child endangerment and so on. Just one of these crimes should put him at odds with a truly ethical Gordon. Hell, not too long ago, Bruce broke Selina out of prison when she was arrested for mass murder. That she turned out to be innocent is moot as neither Bruce not Gordon had any proof she was innocent at the time.

    No way is he responsible for the crime related deaths. He and his allies are responsible for cutting those statistics down, and I refuse to not give the villains agency for their own damn actions that lead to those deaths. If Bruce is responsible, he is far from being responsible alone. But again, Status Quo is God is the true reason.
    Itís less that the villains donít have any agency in these deaths itís that Bruceís own responsibility is often ignored. That the system in Gotham is corrupt is acknowledged by fans, itís pretty much the premise upon which Batman is built. Which makes his seeming half assed solutions all the more glaring, especially when they have so many stories pointing out how his methods arenít getting results yet not doing anything about it.

  6. #1566
    Astonishing Member Restingvoice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    3,002

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Z View Post
    And DC has only added to that problem since their creation.
    I find this excuse difficult to accept. Firstly, if Gordon is going to come after Bruce for killing (not even murder, just killing in general) why is he allowing Bruce to run rampant across Gotham? Bruce regularly commits torture, assault, breaking and entering, tampering with crime scenes, child endangerment and so on.
    Because the GCPD are incapable to rein in some of the more dangerous criminals, so they compromise. The Bat fam gets results, so he... they, allow them some leeway, but only to a certain point. If he goes as bad as the criminal they're trying to catch, then they're done. I think that's reasonable.
    Last edited by Restingvoice; 08-17-2019 at 07:26 AM.

  7. #1567
    Extraordinary Member SiegePerilous02's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    8,011

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Z View Post
    And DC has only added to that problem since their creation.
    So it may be best to get rid of them entirely. I wouldn't lose any sleep over it.
    But if they're around, treating them like the horrible people they are is in-character. Talia's upbringing resulted in her being the way she was, and she never had a chance. But as it stands now, despite how tragic she is, she's still a mass murdering and selfish asshole who was always on the edge anyway.


    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Z View Post
    I find this excuse difficult to accept. Firstly, if Gordon is going to come after Bruce for killing (not even murder, just killing in general) why is he allowing Bruce to run rampant across Gotham? Bruce regularly commits torture, assault, breaking and entering, tampering with crime scenes, child endangerment and so on. Just one of these crimes should put him at odds with a truly ethical Gordon. Hell, not too long ago, Bruce broke Selina out of prison when she was arrested for mass murder. That she turned out to be innocent is moot as neither Bruce not Gordon had any proof she was innocent at the time.
    I don't really see your logic here. Gordon drew a line Batman cannot cross, which is killing. It's already shaky for all the other things you mentioned (though those are a case by case basis depending on who is writing, though if he's getting results that help the GCPD clearly he is not tampering with crime scenes to their detriment), so they don't want to cross the line and go too far. Why then do you think they should just go "fuck it, let chaos run in the streets and just dig ourselves in further and let the dude kill people"? That would defeat the whole premise of the uneasy partnership and potential tension.

    As for the child endangerment, the whole superhero community is guilty of this. That's just the weird fantasy world they live in. If we apply realism and bring this to the logical conclusion, the Teen Titans and Young Justice should never have existed, and I'm sure fans of those characters would not be happy with excising them for the sake of realism. I personally don't think Bruce needs another sidekick after Dick and would happily jettison Jason and his brutal death from canon (or put a hard stop to it after that, no Tim, Steph or Cass), but I know I'm in the minority on these boards as far as that is concerned.

    It's fantasy. Nobody cares about hard realism and consequences in Batman comics or else they wouldn't read them. Realistically Batman would die within a week or get locked up, and then we'd have no stories.


    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Z View Post
    It’s less that the villains don’t have any agency in these deaths it’s that Bruce’s own responsibility is often ignored. That the system in Gotham is corrupt is acknowledged by fans, it’s pretty much the premise upon which Batman is built. Which makes his seeming half assed solutions all the more glaring, especially when they have so many stories pointing out how his methods aren’t getting results yet not doing anything about it.
    Again, it fluctuates depending on the writer. The GCPD had been shown to become less corrupt with Gordon in charge after Batman's arrival, and street crime and social reform can be shown to improve. The super crime gets weirder, but the entire DCU is weird and nobody in the DCU, not just Batman, is capable of stopping it. Even Diana, who is willing to kill when necessary, doesn't exactly after a shrinking rogues gallery, does she? And hers are lethal than Batman's.

    We know DC won't let him (OR his allies, most of whom have the same strict code) kill criminals for the same reason they constantly break out no matter how hard Batman and Gordon work to put them away: the bad guys are needed for stories, and DC needs to sell comics. Even death is not a permanent solution to keep villains down, especially the popular ones. What is the point in complaining about Batman being ineffective when the entire publishing model is against him? If Red Hood killed the Joker and was declared a more effective hero, it's not a matter of if the Joker would come back, but when.

  8. #1568
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    19,886

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SiegePerilous02 View Post
    So it may be best to get rid of them entirely. I wouldn't lose any sleep over it.
    But if they're around, treating them like the horrible people they are is in-character. Talia's upbringing resulted in her being the way she was, and she never had a chance. But as it stands now, despite how tragic she is, she's still a mass murdering and selfish asshole who was always on the edge anyway.
    Why are these the only two options? It isn't like Talia is without her sympathetic traits and DC has made semi-heroic characters out of people just as bad or worse. Making the one of the few prominent woc in the Batman mythos into a eugenics obesessed terrorist is hardly ideal but believe it or not, there are ways to write her that aren't something out of a right-wing, anti-Arab novel. DC is constantly finding more complex ways to depict their white villains so why shouldn't the same be done with Talia, especially when she's only recently been at her worse?

    I mean, saying Talia never had a chance is weird given Damien's arc.

    Quote Originally Posted by SiegePerilous02 View Post
    I don't really see your logic here. Gordon drew a line Batman cannot cross, which is killing. It's already shaky for all the other things you mentioned (though those are a case by case basis depending on who is writing, though if he's getting results that help the GCPD clearly he is not tampering with crime scenes to their detriment), so they don't want to cross the line and go too far. Why then do you think they should just go "fuck it, let chaos run in the streets and just dig ourselves in further and let the dude kill people"? That would defeat the whole premise of the uneasy partnership and potential tension.
    My point is it’s an arbitrary line that makes no sense with a supposedly ethical Gordon and supposedly less corrupt GCPD.

    As for the child endangerment, the whole superhero community is guilty of this.
    Most superhero stories are smart enough to not really bring attention to it. Batman comics, on the other hand, have been pushing the dark and edgy thing since the 80s if not further back.
    But you know what? Fair enough. The child endangerment isn’t the best example. It isn’t like the Batman books don’t give me more than enough ammo anyway.



    Even Diana, who is willing to kill when necessary, doesn't exactly after a shrinking rogues gallery, does she? And hers are lethal than Batman's.
    I’d dispute that. There is a lot more diversity in methodology and motivation among Diana’s rogues and hell it’s even been pointed out they aren’t all that threatening much of the time. By contrast, you can’t throw a rock at Bruce’s rogues without hitting someone who isn't a serial killer, terrorist (and I don't just mean the al Ghuls), hitman or some combination of all three.
    Last edited by Agent Z; 08-17-2019 at 11:10 AM.

  9. #1569
    Uncanny King-Kamalu lemonpeace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    the internet
    Posts
    1,656

    Default

    Ric Grayson has been the best jumping on point for Nightwing for me.
    SIGNAL/Duke Thomas is the Midnight Sun of Gotham (respect thread)
    John Stewart is my Lantern.
    Naomi was great, pass it on...
    DC: Batman and the Outsiders, Justice League, Teen Titans, Deathstroke, The Flash, Justice League Odyssey, Doomsday Clock
    Marvel: Immortal Hulk, Miles Morales: Spiderman, Black Panther, Ironheart, Cosmic Ghost Rider etc., Venom, Moon Girl, Avengers
    Anticipated titles: Far Sector, Love Army*, The Other History of DC*

  10. #1570
    Astonishing Member Restingvoice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    3,002

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lemonpeace View Post
    Ric Grayson has been the best jumping on point for Nightwing for me.
    Well, it is a jumping-on point. Not gonna argue with that.

  11. #1571
    Extraordinary Member Celgress's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,889

    Talking

    Quote Originally Posted by Restingvoice View Post
    Well, it is a jumping-on point. Not gonna argue with that.
    You mean a jumping-off point. Sorry, I couldn't resist.
    "So you've come to the end now alive but dead inside."

  12. #1572
    Extraordinary Member SiegePerilous02's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    8,011

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Z View Post
    Why are these the only two options? It isn't like Talia is without her sympathetic traits and DC has made semi-heroic characters out of people just as bad or worse. Making the one of the few prominent woc in the Batman mythos into a eugenics obesessed terrorist is hardly ideal but believe it or not, there are ways to write her that aren't something out of a right-wing, anti-Arab novel. DC is constantly finding more complex ways to depict their white villains so why shouldn't the same be done with Talia, especially when she's only recently been at her worse?

    I mean, saying Talia never had a chance is weird given Damien's arc.
    Damian isn't Talia. His arc is about a child leaving a toxic environment with an abusive and manipulative parent to a new support system. It being superhero comics, it's just heightened to be a family of crime fighting superhero vigilantes. Talia unfortunately did not have a Dick Grayson to rescue her, so she was stuck being raised by THAT man in THAT environment. So no, she never had much of a chance to turn out to be better than she is. If Damian had been left with his mother, or worse his grandfather without the interference of the Bat-Family he'd end up the same.

    I think making sympathetic anti-heroes out of these people is an obnoxious trend in fiction. Think the "Draco in Leather Pants" trope, or women marrying serial killers in prison. Making them semi-heroic with a carefully done redemption arc and some punishment/penance might be worth it in some cases, but it doesn't always work. It makes them "cool" in a way when they may not deserve it. And fanatical cultists, terrorists and assassins should never be made cool in a way to make you want to root for them. Screw them. I don't really buy DC's attempts to absolve Harley either, and she's white. It does mean DC needs to put more effort into Gotham's WOCs though, but don't absolve Talia unless the arc is going to be well written. And on the downside, we'd lose a good a villain. One of the major complaints about the X-Men franchise in recent years is they have nobody to fight anymore because all their enemies end up on their team.


    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Z View Post
    My point is it’s an arbitrary line that makes no sense with a supposedly ethical Gordon and supposedly less corrupt GCPD.
    So the solution to Gordon's loose morals is to make them looser?
    If he's uneasy about the alliance already and the no-kill thing is in-character as a limit, why do you think it'd be in character for him to be like "lol fuck it, yolo, let him do whatever."


    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Z View Post
    Most superhero stories are smart enough to not really bring attention to it. Batman comics, on the other hand, have been pushing the dark and edgy thing since the 80s if not further back.
    But you know what? Fair enough. The child endangerment isn’t the best example. It isn’t like the Batman books don’t give me more than enough ammo anyway.
    It's not particularly difficult to find the ammo you're looking for. Point is, everybody already knows the Batman franchise is not realistic and doesn't hold up to real world scrutiny and his every action wouldn't be feasible or legal irl. It's a comic about a crime fighting dracula who battles evil clowns, madmen with freeze rays and a shape shifting pile of mud who drives a rocket car, is best friends with an invincible flying alien and has a limitless amount of money that he can somehow use both on his personal crusade, aiding other crime fighters and spreading it around to various charities and reform causes.

    Even children know he's just make believe and don't scrutinize this stuff too closely. Nothing in this genre, in terms of what is feasible in the real world, was designed to be.

    Considering all the dead teen heroes we've had throughout the DCU, even if most of them have come back from the dead, I'm not sure the rest of it is much better at not addressing things. Kon and Bart have both been killed, and we've recently had Wallace West hospitalized by Thawne.


    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Z View Post
    I’d dispute that. There is a lot more diversity in methodology and motivation among Diana’s rogues and hell it’s even been pointed out they aren’t all that threatening much of the time. By contrast, you can’t throw a rock at Bruce’s rogues without hitting someone who isn't a serial killer, terrorist (and I don't just mean the al Ghuls), hitman or some combination of all three.
    Cheetah and Psycho alone escape as often as any Gotham rogue and probably have comparable body counts and trauma victims in their wake. Why isn't Diana killing them or putting them into a more secure prison? Because DC would just break them out for the next story when they need them. If DC finally gives a crap about her villains to develop them the same way as the rest of the rogues galleries, their threat level would be upped considerably because everything needs to be edgy now I guess. None of them would be permanently imprisoned or killed if they become popular, body counts be damned.

    Now I personally would love all the Bat-villains to be toned down from being slasher villains, especially the Joker. But we all know about the main behind the curtain, we all know that the edginess sells and we all know why Batman won't be allowed to successfully reform or imprison any of his villains no matter how lethal they become. DC wants to use them. Nothing they come up with in-universe will change anything because of out of universe demands.

  13. #1573
    Amazing Member
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Posts
    87

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SiegePerilous02 View Post
    So it may be best to get rid of them entirely. I wouldn't lose any sleep over it.


    It's fantasy. Nobody cares about hard realism and consequences in Batman comics or else they wouldn't read them. Realistically Batman would die within a week or get locked up, and then we'd have no stories.
    This is a pretty arbitrary line. Either all aspects of a story are open for interrogation or none are. Not that I'm saying that every aspect has to be interrogated in every story or that 'don't worry about how a man can fly' isn't a valid option most of the time. But saying, "well these bits are problematic so lets take them off the table but chill out about these bits because, hey, it's just a story" is inconsistent.

    Part of Batman's appeal is his flexibility when it comes to genre and tone. He can fit into "POW, THWAP" Golden age adventures, and into melodrama and into horror. And there is definitely room in there for asking the question, "Is Batman just repeating the same action over and over with the Rogues and expecting a different result? Does that make him morally culpable? Does that just just make him look stupid?"

    Removing the ability to ask those questions, and removing most of his supporting cast, and rendering his villains back down to a defined set of 'morally black and white but not too evil' cast of Gotham rogues, drastically reduces the scope of the character and the stories you can tell with him.

  14. #1574
    Astonishing Member Restingvoice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    3,002

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Celgress View Post
    You mean a jumping-off point. Sorry, I couldn't resist.
    Oh. Don't apologize. Same.

  15. #1575
    Fantastic Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    353

    Default

    Maybe each writer should tell their own arc and just reboot the universe again and again it is limitless and then. Since choices are infinite just make any story with the character but with the same starting point but with different casts friends and ending each writer writes his universe and then the next one shows us or writes a new one.

Posting Permissions

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