Your DC-Only controversial opinions...

[Adekis]

This just reminds me . . . a long time ago, I researched and wrote a rough draft of all the different excuses which DC has used, at one time or another in "canonical" comic books, to address the question of: "Why is Jay Garrick still in good fighting trim when he was already a grown man in the 1940s?" I never got around to polishing it up and posting it, but maybe I ought to dust it off and try again?

Do it!

Okay, here's another one: Superman lost something in the mid 40s that he didn't get back until 2011, and that I never, ever want to see him lose again. As a result, every event where Superman could potentially go back to being more like the pre-Flashpoint Superman scares the **** out of me, because I'm afraid Superman will go back to being, emotionally if not literally, forty years old like "Clark" in the L&C book. And I never need that again; Superman should be young.

[phantom1592]

Okay, here's another one: Superman lost something in the mid 40s that he didn't get back until 2011, and that I never, ever want to see him lose again. As a result, every event where Superman could potentially go back to being more like the pre-Flashpoint Superman scares the **** out of me, because I'm afraid Superman will go back to being, emotionally if not literally, forty years old like "Clark" in the L&C book. And I never need that again; Superman should be young.

Depends on what you consider 'young'? For me, I like Superman in his 30's. I like Superboy in his teens. I do not need to see either aging as time progresses.

I don't really need to see the actual.. honest to goodness superman dealing with young people problems or being hip or learning his powers.. I like him to be an actual adult with a steady job and a grounded sense of responsibility.

I like him as the icon that other heroes look up to... not the one who over sleeps and stays out all night clubbing. That's what Spider-man's for

I don't want him TOO old. I think the Alex Ross books always make him a little too old, but full fledged adult is ideal.

Yeah the grim in the DC Universe gets old. I didn't mind it so much when it was a Batman thing but like now Superman is grim when before he was always the opposite of Batman. In fact I think there was times where Superman basically told Batman to lighten up some and enjoy himself in the 90s. Which usually resulted in a growl and gruff response. I doubt the nu52 Superman would do that but I don't really know much about the nu52 version since the costume just makes me incapable of reading an entire issue. I just hate it. Just like I despised that horrible Superman Red and Superman Blue period. That had to be the dumbest redesign in history...

BUt back to the whole grim thing... what do we get in the Man of Steel film? Basically Batman in a semi-Superman outfit... But then I didn't care for much of anything in the film except Russell Crowe's Jor el and Kevin Costner's JOnathan Kent.

One of the few times I actually enjoyed a replacement character was in the 90s when Dick Grayson became Batman after Knightfall because it was a lighter Batman. One who would joke.

And then they brought Bruce back and he was darker then ever and in a darker costume. I always hoped they'd go back to the blue, gray and yellow oval costume of the 90s pre-knightfall era when Bruce got over the Bane incident but alas...

LOL

I had to double check to see if I had written this... I agree with everything here.

I loved Grayson as Batman with Tim as his Robin in the 90's. I thought that nailed things well. My biggest issue with Batman was this whole 'best at everything' thing he had going on. No real challenges... Nightwing however, was always a BETTER Batman for me. He had the fighting skills... he had the detective skills... he had the training... but bad guys were still a threat. He had to work for his successes. That whole Prodigal storyline while he wore the cowl (Blue/gray/yellow FOREVER!!!) was an awesome story.

I had hoped for something similar when Dick took over for Bruce post-Final Crisis... But the ones I glanced at just didn't seem to hit it. It was like putting on the cowl made him instantly Bat-god... and it just didn't seem that different than Bruce. And I hate Damian with a passion...

[t hedge coke]

The Crisis is the natural state of the DCU. The Golden Age that can be seen and visited, but isn't coming back all the way. The beautiful and troubled present, constantly under threat, always under threat. Statuses quo that are constantly being broken up and reforming in novel variations. Heroes meeting heroes. Worlds colliding.

From Flash of Two Worlds to A Crisis of Conscience, Convergence to The Second Death of Superman, a surviving status quo is only good for one-offs that won't be revisited intact.

[Jim Kelly]

The Crisis is the natural state of the DCU. The Golden Age that can be seen and visited, but isn't coming back all the way. The beautiful and troubled present, constantly under threat, always under threat. Statuses quo that are constantly being broken up and reforming in novel variations. Heroes meeting heroes. Worlds colliding.

From Flash of Two Worlds to A Crisis of Conscience, Convergence to The Second Death of Superman, a surviving status quo is only good for one-offs that won't be revisited intact.

You talk a good game and I'm almost sucked into believing that could work, but when I think about it. Yuck. It's seems like a line of comics made for someone with no attention span.

I think characters each have their own home time period, after which or before which they're not as good. The original Doom Patrol belong in the '60s. The Blackhawks belong in the '40s--as does Wonder Woman and the JSA. Boston Brand died in 1968. John Jones, the Martian Manhunter, came to Earth in the '50s. The Rocket Reds belong in the '80s. Green Lantern and Green Arrow could only have gone on their Hard Travelling Heroes Search for America in the late '60s/early '70s. Cyborg belongs in the '80s. Slam Bradley should be in the '30s. The Marvel Family should be in the '40s and '50s. The Legion of Super-Heroes belong in the 30th century. Jack Knight belongs in the '90s.

[t hedge coke]

You talk a good game and I'm almost sucked into believing that could work, but when I think about it. Yuck. It's seems like a line of comics made for someone with no attention span.

I think characters each have their own home time period, after which or before which they're not as good. The original Doom Patrol belong in the '60s. The Blackhawks belong in the '40s--as does Wonder Woman and the JSA. Boston Brand died in 1968. John Jones, the Martian Manhunter, came to Earth in the '50s. The Rocket Reds belong in the '80s. Green Lantern and Green Arrow could only have gone on their Hard Travelling Heroes Search for America in the late '60s/early '70s. Cyborg belongs in the '80s. Slam Bradley should be in the '30s. The Marvel Family should be in the '40s and '50s. The Legion of Super-Heroes belong in the 30th century. Jack Knight belongs in the '90s.

Your version may work out better, but it's never really been the way the DCU's worked. And, for me, I really am glad nothing it time-locked and everything can be retold or revisited.

Particularly with superheroes, I don't generally want something that requires a great attention span, but something that rewards me with novelty and excitement. I think superhero comics, in general should be something you can breeze through and be satisfied. If you can also take your time and study and interpret and pull more out, that's a bonus, but it should be a bonus. The real energy in most superhero comics should be in the zip bang pow.

[LobsterJohnson]

I don't see test pilots as dated myself and think Hal works just fine in the present...

However I do agree that SOME characters work better in the past. Batman is a major one for me. Back when his detective work consisted of chemistry and deductions and fingerprint lifting and safecracking... all that hands on stuff. As opposed to the modern computer era where all crimes are solved with a push of a button and all security is bypassed by pushing another button.. and with Batman he's not even the one who often PUSHES that button..

Most heroes work better in a world without any kind of facial recognition and I always liked the WWII heroes to be in their mid 60's as opposed to 90+...

I agree about Batman's detective work. I miss that element of the books. I was really excited to see Batman doing actual detective work in The Doom that Came to Gotham. I think that's one reason I like the Elseworlds books set in the past so much.

[Adekis]

Depends on what you consider 'young'? For me, I like Superman in his 30's. I like Superboy in his teens. I do not need to see either aging as time progresses.

I don't really need to see the actual.. honest to goodness superman dealing with young people problems or being hip or learning his powers.. I like him to be an actual adult with a steady job and a grounded sense of responsibility.

I like him as the icon that other heroes look up to... not the one who over sleeps and stays out all night clubbing. That's what Spider-man's for

I don't want him TOO old. I think the Alex Ross books always make him a little too old, but full fledged adult is ideal.

I want the Superman of "now" to be twenty-five to twenty-seven years old, no older. To me, that's the prime of adulthood but without being fully mature, so it allows for him to be a little bit of a hot-head, which I think he should be. He's definitely responsible, grounded, consistently employed and what not, but I don't necessarily have a problem with the idea spending the night at Jimmy's or going out to the dance club with Diana (but she enjoys it a lot more than he does, and he wouldn't go without her influence, even though he has fun). Of course, to me, Spider-Man is always in his very early twenties, say twenty-two at the oldest, because they don't let him move forward and become the Greatest Marvel Hero (who isn't Captain Marvel) in-universe like he should be, but hey, this thread is about DC opinions!

It's an interesting point you make about Superboy- I had trouble with the Superman side of Young Justice because I thought Superman was both emotionally and practically inept, but Superboy both interested and bothered me because both visually and in terms of how he fought, I thought Superboy looked more like how I thought Superman should than Superman did! Of course, he was hot-headed without enough charm or joy to balance him out, so he never acted like Superman, but, uh, otherwise he was pretty on top of things.

I'm with you and on the train about Dick Grayson though. He's way better than Bruce. That "best at everything" shtick you mentioned is why I liked Kirk Langstrom better as Batman in Gods and Monsters than I do Bruce Wayne!

[Trey Strain]

I agree about Batman's detective work. I miss that element of the books. I was really excited to see Batman doing actual detective work in The Doom that Came to Gotham. I think that's one reason I like the Elseworlds books set in the past so much.

It won't be long before software makes test pilots obsolete.

Yet another reason to reboot Green Lantern.

[ed2962]

I agree about Batman's detective work. I miss that element of the books. I was really excited to see Batman doing actual detective work in The Doom that Came to Gotham. I think that's one reason I like the Elseworlds books set in the past so much.

I think those type of old fashioned detective Batman stories can still work. Cops will tell you that most of their leads still come from them just talking to people or criminals not being as smart as they think they are.

[Johnny Thunders!]

It's a fact that Jerry Siegel had horrible relationships with editorial. BUT I think as a young writer making a living, he would have made changes to Superman just to keep pace with the explosion of Superheroes that followed his creation. No teenage creator would freeze their creation or creative process.

[Jim Kelly]

I would guess that Jerry Siegel had a great relationship with Vin Sullivan--who was his early editor. But both Sullivan and Siegel didn't have warm feelings for their new bosses--Donenfeld and Liebowitz. Sullivan left soon after those guys took over from Wheeler-Nicholson--believing he was getting rooked by their shadey business practices. Vin moved around a bit after that until he ended up publishing and editing Magazine Enterprises.

ME published Siegel and Shuster's FUNNYMAN--which was also a syndicated newspaper strip--in comic book form, after Jerry and Joe were forced out of National Comics (DC). Given how much respect Sullivan paid to the writers and artists who came to work for him at ME--and given that many of them had worked for him in the early days--I'm guessing that Sullivan was a decent guy, as far as editors go.

Yet FUNNYMAN was a failure. So even when Siegel was working for a good guy that didn't translate into success. I'm not sure there's a correlation between an editor's personality and the quality of work he gets from those who work for him. In an ideal world, nice guys would finish first. But the world in which we live doesn't appear to be ideal.

[Pharozonk]

Your version may work out better, but it's never really been the way the DCU's worked. And, for me, I really am glad nothing it time-locked and everything can be retold or revisited.

Particularly with superheroes, I don't generally want something that requires a great attention span, but something that rewards me with novelty and excitement. I think superhero comics, in general should be something you can breeze through and be satisfied. If you can also take your time and study and interpret and pull more out, that's a bonus, but it should be a bonus. The real energy in most superhero comics should be in the zip bang pow.

Constant restarts don't give me any reason to be invested in the story. Why should I care if Batman survives this week's issue if the universe he's in will potentially be gone by the end of the year anyway?

[Starchild]

The next Justice League writer should take notes from Claremont's Uncanny X-Men, Warren's Authority & Millar's Ultimates on how to do a proper team book.

[t hedge coke]

Constant restarts don't give me any reason to be invested in the story. Why should I care if Batman survives this week's issue if the universe he's in will potentially be gone by the end of the year anyway?

Who cares about the end of the year? If you even know which parts survive and which don't, which, generally, we don't.

But, you have to know things will, in some ways, be different within, at least, a four year window. Things are going to change (while looking, at least superficially, largely the same).

The comic in your hands should be good.

[Pharozonk]

Who cares about the end of the year? If you even know which parts survive and which don't, which, generally, we don't.

But, you have to know things will, in some ways, be different within, at least, a four year window. Things are going to change (while looking, at least superficially, largely the same).

The comic in your hands should be good.

It should be good while also respecting the comics that came before it. That universe isn't a sandbox you made yourself, but rather one that was created by people a long time ago that you now have the privilege to play in. You owe it to them to at least respect their space.