Your DC-Only controversial opinions...

[Lorendiac]

Any so-called Green Arrow fan who actually watches and enjoys Arrow is spurious in my view.

Any so-called Green Arrow fan who basically says "Real Green Arrow fans are not allowed to enjoy a different take on the character unless I give them permission to enjoy it" is spurious in my view.

[Starchild]

Any so-called Green Arrow fan who basically says "Real Green Arrow fans are not allowed to enjoy a different take on the character unless I give them permission to enjoy it" is spurious in my view.

I never liked the real fan argument. It's real snobbish, in my opinion. Been a fan of Green Arrow for a long time and i still enjoy the show, even if it's not the portrayal i wanted.

[Jim Kelly]

The TV shows are much easier to get into than the comics. Spurious is all I want to be.

I miss the days when Batman could get beaten up by a random criminal. There was a time when Bat-creators were trying to emulate what Will Eisner did with the Spirit. Of course, one can argue that Bruce must be superior to Denny because the Batman trained at his job, while the Spirit just seemed to stumble his way through life and death. But it was fun to see Spirit, his suit in tatters, getting a beating--sadistic as that may sound.

[Darkseid Is]

I can't get into the TV shows. The costumes are so bad it's just so distracting to me.

[Timothy Hunter]

I'd be fine if DC only released titles featuring characters from the Batman franchise (Even though I am not a Batman fan myself.), as long as most of them were exceptionally good.

[stephens2177]

2 reasons why the TV shows are hard to stomach sometimes
Feelings, nothing more than feelings
Hidden political messages

[Agent Z]

2 reasons why the TV shows are hard to stomach sometimes
Feelings, nothing more than feelings
Hidden political messages

What political messages?

[stephens2177]

What political messages?

Your funny

[Agent Z]

Your funny

No seriously. What political messages?

[Old Man Ollie 1962]

Any so-called Green Arrow fan who basically says "Real Green Arrow fans are not allowed to enjoy a different take on the character unless I give them permission to enjoy it" is spurious in my view.

A smiley face at the end of a refutation looks passive aggressive and weak.

[phantom1592]

Any so-called Green Arrow fan who actually watches and enjoys Arrow is spurious in my view.

Honestly, that's how I feel about Grell's run and Longbow Hunters.

Well, I enjoy the take on Arrow and think it works for what it's trying to do but I also prefer classic Green Arrow .

Which 'classic' version? Green Arrow is one of those characters that every writer who touches completely changes the character. Personally I met the character when he was teaming up with Green Lantern and consider that the 'true' GA... but even I'll admit he'd had a few solid incarnations before that and it was pretty much a reboot....

That's why I can watch Arrow and take it with a grain of salt. He's kind of a cross between Grell's hunter and the original batman clone... which is legit I guess. Honestly, my biggest problem is that they change his personality every season. Will he kill, won't he, maybe just the Big Bad... maybe if he's in a bad mood... but no he's full of hope now... It's dramatically inconsistent.

You want the truth? Off the top of my head, I can't even remember that episode! But I'm old enough that I started collecting Batman comic books in the early 1980s, and back in those days, it was fairly common to see him get shot or stabbed or knocked down by miscellaneous ruffians, corrupt cops, etc. Not because they were the finest martial artists or the deadliest marksmen in existence, but simply because Batman was a guy in a dangerous line of work and sometimes a writer wanted to show that he could "take a licking and keep on ticking." (In other words, that he could escape his enemies even after he was bleeding out from a bullet hole in his back or something along those lines.)

Heck, the "Untold Legend of the Batman" miniseries had Alfred discovering the secret identities of Dick and Bruce when they staggered home one night with Batman bleeding from a gunshot wound. As I recall, in the flashback sequence that showed this to us, we were never even told the name of the bad guy who had tagged him with a lucky shot. Why not? Because it didn't matter! Nobody at DC in the early 1980s was trying to sell us anything so extravagant as "only someone of the caliber of Deadshot or Deathstroke could possibly manage to injure Batman with a bullet -- he's magically able to dodge the shots of any mediocre gunslingers!"

YES, YES YES!!!!

First off all. I agree completely. My point was that ever since the Bat-god era that started in the 90's... or actually, I think I'd trace it back to Tim Burton's '89 version (more on that). People seem to hate the idea of Batman 'not having planned for that...'. He's super bat god who's the best at every possible field and pre planned everything and it bores me to tears. The same people who praise BTAS tend ot be the first ones that complain when something doesn't immediately get solved by his bat-powers.

Second, I absolutely LOVE 'untold Legends of the Batman' and consider it the one true origin for Batman. Everything about it just flowed so amazingly and felt 'realistic' as opposed to 'wandered Tibet and learned every fighting style ever and somewhere learned to build jet engines and teleportation devices... It was very based on the fact that he STUDIED... and he studied what he would need to know. Criminal psychology, chemistry, criminology... realistic things.

Back to Burton,

I read an article with Bob Kane who talked about how Batman was supposed to be the OPPOSITE of Superman. Superman had all the powers and was alien... Batman was mortal. He was human. If you stab him, he bleeds. if you Shoot him, he could die. Tim Burton's movie is the first time I ever remember seeing Batman take a bullet to the chest and get up and keep fighting. It really pushed the idea of Armor and downplayed the mortality of being Batman. I HATE the armor. My Bruce Wayne didn't need a team of sidekicks to get into his hard rubber costume. He wore it under his tux and/or kept it folded in a briefcase. The skills were in the man not the suit.

I loved that panel of Robin helping a bleeding Bruce up the stairs calling for Alfred to help him.

[Red Wolf]

A smiley face at the end of a refutation looks passive aggressive and weak.

“When you call me that, SMILE!”

[Old Man Ollie 1962]

“When you call me that, SMILE!”

Gary Cooper in The Virginian.

[Crazy Diamond]

I remember a big fandom-led campaign before the first Burton Batman movie to have Michael Keaton removed, because he had a weak chin. The level of fan hatred directed at Adam West was legendary.

I think GL's ring was able to make real things appear. I'm surrprised if that's not the case now. I guess a lot of the great power of the Green Lantern has been taken away, because it used to be he could do everything--he literally had the powers of every other super-hero thanks to his ring--the only thing he was powerless against was yellow (or wood in the old days). It made sense to give him that weakness--also the fact that he'd forget to power up his ring so it would run out of gas when it hit the 24 hour limit--beacuse without such a weakness there was nothing that could stop Green Lantern.

Green Lantern's too weak now. I remember when the ring was one of if not the most powerful weapon in the universe. It could do anything so long as the user had the willpower, knowledge, and imagination to do it. Now it's like all they can do is constructs and if you're not a human or someone like Kilowog you become cannon fodder.

[Crazy Diamond]

The DCAU isn't the be-all and end-all version of the DC universe.

I think it's telling that the comics used to be better than their spinoffs since they had more time to flesh out the characters and their world. That seemed to change for me around the early 2000s.