Is the DCU just too light hearted?

[Legato]

But another problem is that at one time, comics struggled so hard to be taken seriously as a medium because the material published at the time was seen as childish and silly.
Now it's going to have a hard time being taken seriously because the material published is seen as grimdark to the point of being a dark satire of comics themselves.

It won't be taken seriously until it (the big2*) strikes a balance in the middle, with offerings that are equal part silly titles and equal part grimdark titles and a lot of stuff in between (what you would expect on network television or newspaper comic strips).

*I say the big 2 because indy comics already found that balance. A long time ago.

It's not comics but I feel that the MCU actually manages to find a perfect balance that the comics are having a hard time to maintain.

[Lee Stone]

It's not comics but I feel that the MCU actually manages to find a perfect balance that the comics are having a hard time to maintain.

I agree with you.
And that has to do with the movies being made with the audience in mind.
They're made to appeal to a wider demographic.

Which means they take care not to do or say certain things, while still filling it with enough action to keep them exciting.

[Legato]

I agree with you.
And that has to do with the movies being made with the audience in mind.
They're made to appeal to a wider demographic.

Which means they take care not to do or say certain things, while still filling it with enough action to keep them exciting.

Which makes one wonder is DC and Marvel Comics these days are being less audience friendly?

[Lee Stone]

Which makes one wonder is DC and Marvel Comics these days are being less audience friendly?

Or perhaps by alienating all but one specific group, they've made it easier to target the audience the still do have. But at the cost of possibly increasing the readership.

[BohemiaDrinker]

The Illuminati are happily destroying lots of planets right now.

Happily? Okay...

[stephens2177]

I'm not saying people don't necessarily have a point, but illustrating it by comparing a cover, which is always overdramatic, with interiors is not necessarily fair.

Crap happens on covers all the time that doesn't necessarily follow through inside.

Jon is more psycho inside

Here's a hint : One's an obnoxious brat that isn't defined by his obnoxiousness, the other's an asshole with no redeeming qualities and who no one wants to read about, and who got his book cancelled because of that.

One was a kid who thought he because he was SUPERboy he could do it all,and he couldn't,and the book was about him learning that,the new one is about a mass murderer who enjoyed killing ppl,but now should be redeemed...NOT,sorry Aaron kuder is a great writer,but his writing of a bad character doesn't mean the character is good.

Thank you for still loving super heroes.

This nerd hobby has drawn in too many gore-feeders trying to live out their weird violent power fantasies. Super heroes are supposed to be mythological protectors that devote their lives to saving and helping people. If you want to read about rapists and murderers, watch the news.

Exactly

[Kyer]

It seems to me that the DCU is just too light and whimsy.

Please give me your description so I can avoid you in dark alleys in any city, rural area, or the afterlife.
Wait...maybe you did a typo and meant some other form of entertainment not DC? That must be it. Either that or copious sprays of arterial blood and fast-growing mold sprouting from body orifices is the new lite comedy.

Makes me want to barricade myself in my room and watch The Muppet Movie on continuous loop until reality goes away.

[Dispenser Of Truth]

It seems to me that the DCU is just too light and whimsy. Most of the superheroes like Superman, Batman, Batgirl, Green Lantern Corps, the Teen Titans, the Ravagers, the Earth 2 heroes and Aquaman are boy scout heroes that refuse to kill under any circumstances. I think this is the reason DC always lags behind Marvel in sales. Marvel has heroes who are darker and kill more frequently like Thor, the Inhumans, Wolverine, Psylocke, Rogue, Scarlet Witch. The Illuminati are happily destroying lots of planets right now and their book is selling very well. Shouldn't the DCU be darker and grittier like the Marvel universe as well? Man of Steel showed that Superman was willing to kill so he should be snapping his enemies necks so they don't bother him again. Batman should either kill or cripple his enemies. The Green Lanterns can easily conjure up weapons to kill their enemies, since they have the Guardians' approval to kill from back in the Sinestro Corps War.

Aside from the regular arguments about the nature of the superhero genre--one clearly not built for what you're suggesting--and the reason for Marvel's success right now--an abundance of talent and editors that trust in said talent--you clearly either have not read or are wildly misrepresenting most of the comics you're talking about.

Apparently, Alan Moore is one of these geniuses. I hear that little gritty story he wrote called Watchmen did quite well.

Watchmen was a parody, however bleak. It wears 'realistic' colors, but it has a superhero created in a nuclear lab accident, flying owl ships and a villain that at one point had a solar death ray.

Are you serious? This is the superboy we have now ^,and this is the one we had in the evil 90's v

My understanding is that he was something of an anomaly in the era.

No not really. The current comics pander to adults who grew up reading superhero comics. Without those people, there is no comic market.

...which is why it needs to expand and diversify, like Lee Stone said, if it wants to survive into the future.

[Shawn Hopkins]

You can't pin this on Alan Moore. It's not his fault that most people are too dumb to understand Watchmen.

Here's a hint : One's an obnoxious brat that isn't defined by his obnoxiousness, the other's an asshole with no redeeming qualities and who no one wants to read about, and who got his book cancelled because of that.

That book ran for eight years. Then Superboy headlined in Teen Titans until they killed him off in Infinite Crisis four years later. The latest version was killed in his own book and replaced with what's essentially an evil twin after 26 issues.

[The MunchKING]

I'm reading stories about people with zero percent body fat who can punch planets out of the sky and break six laws of physics (as well making a mockery of the legal system) before breakfast. What 'genius' thought I wanted these stories to be gritty and 'realistic?' I mean, that doesn't even make sense!

HA! The MunchKING finds your posts most amusing, and wishes to concur with the sentiments expressed therein.

[stephens2177]

My understanding is that he was something of an anomaly in the era.

Lol,I kinda figured you weren't around during the "era" you were being negative about.bad shit happened back then,but there was much much more happy time in between,and more pure heroic stuff then there is now,by a long mile.

[Dark-Flux]

I like variety.

I love the Punisher. A lot.
Superman is one of my all time favourites.

I dont want Superman to become the Punisher.
I dont want Punisher to be censored.

I love Bendis' Daredevil.
I adore Waids Daredevil.

The Dark Knight is one of my favourite movies.
You can bet your ass im buying the Batman 66 DVDs as soon as they hit.

I love big 2 superheroes.
I pull more Image titles than anything else.

Can i still internet?

[thetrellan]

Man of Steel showed that Superman was willing to kill so he should be snapping his enemies necks so they don't bother him again. Batman should either kill or cripple his enemies.

This isn't realistic though. It's immoral, dark ages stuff. In the real world you go to jail for killing your enemies. Because this is only acceptable in primitive societies, and even in the bronze age doing so would probably get you kicked out of Greece for 8 years (a life sentence in the bronze age as most didn't survive it).

And for a great many Man of Steel wasn't great, and having him kill like that was a big part of it. It's not so much that he killed because he wasn't given a choice. It's that it was handled too soon, therefore seeming to happen with little consideration or dramatic impact. This should have been saved until at least the end of the second film, and preferably not until the 3rd.

As for Batman, he is well aware of how obsessive his own mission is and how crazy his enemies are. He couldn't tell the difference between himself and them without his moral code.

Bottom line, it's not heroic to kill like that. That's not how Marvel really handles things for the most part. After all, where's the shock value if you're doing this all the time? Besides, even Wolverine has to be seen looking for every alternative. Otherwise he'd just be a serial killer.

[Pinsir]

This isn't realistic though. It's immoral, dark ages stuff. In the real world you go to jail for killing your enemies. Because this is only acceptable in primitive societies, and even in the bronze age doing so would probably get you kicked out of Greece for 8 years (a life sentence in the bronze age as most didn't survive it).

And for a great many Man of Steel wasn't great, and having him kill like that was a big part of it. It's not so much that he killed because he wasn't given a choice. It's that it was handled too soon, therefore seeming to happen with little consideration or dramatic impact. This should have been saved until at least the end of the second film, and preferably not until the 3rd.

....are you joking? Every society recognizes the right to self-defense and justifiable homicide. If Zod was a human with a gun threatening a family, and Superman was a human with a gun he could shoot to kill Zod and it would be legal.

[Lee Stone]

....are you joking? Every society recognizes the right to self-defense and justifiable homicide. If Zod was a human with a gun threatening a family, and Superman was a human with a gun he could shoot to kill Zod and it would be legal.

That would cause many a film and story to end before the first act was over.
And the only logical sequel would be someone seeing Superman (or whatever hero) as a menace to society. Thereby justifying them, in turn, to kill the "hero" before the first act in the sequel.
And they in turn...
On and on...

The movies would turn into short snuff films where they kill off the "hero" from the last one.