Page 31 of 33 FirstFirst ... 2127282930313233 LastLast
Results 451 to 465 of 487
  1. #451
    Mighty Member Gaius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    1,496

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Poison View Post
    Thanks! That's odd considering how much development they gave Egg Fu in their Harley Quinn run. Maybe he's the only Wonder-rogue that they like. I thought with their love of obscure characters, they'd be mining Diana's rogues for characters we haven't seen in decades.
    Reading the Connor/Palmiotti issues I just get the sense they wish they were still writing Harley Quinn.

  2. #452
    Amazing Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Posts
    63

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Z View Post
    The majority of the audience disagrees on that.

    Like who? The villains whose goals are changed are generally the ones whose goals weren't considered very interesting to begin with.
    I'd say its the opposite. It shows character development. It shows that the villains are reacting to what is happening to them. Goals changing (wealth accumulation to taking down heroes to taking over a city to saving the ones that the character cares about by all means necessary) allows much greater variety of storytelling. With Mr.Freeze, you have the same repeated story line of him trying to save his loved one from a disease by all means necessary. Every other character that has a wife/husband/loved ones can do that in just one story line. Having to save his wife as his goal all the times makes him boring. The thing about villains is that they are written as villains - meaning evil antagonists to heroes. You don't simply know everything about the villains as much as the heroes in terms of morals, psychological trauma, relationships, personal desires etc... I'd argue that villains are not allowed to be too fleshed out because that would mean they would not be useful as plot devices and make them less intriguing.
    Last edited by prepmaster; 07-29-2020 at 09:31 PM.

  3. #453
    Astonishing Member marhawkman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    3,299

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by prepmaster View Post
    I'd say its the opposite. It shows character development. It shows that the villains are reacting to what is happening to them. Goals changing (wealth accumulation to taking down heroes to taking over a city to saving the ones that the character cares about by all means necessary) allows much greater variety of storytelling. With Mr.Freeze, you have the same repeated story line of him trying to save his loved one from a disease by all means necessary. Every other character that has a wife/husband/loved ones can do that in just one story line. Having to save his wife as his goal all the times makes him boring. The thing about villains is that they are written as villains - meaning evil antagonists to heroes. You don't simply know everything about the villains as much as the heroes in terms of morals, psychological trauma, relationships, personal desires etc... I'd argue that villains are not allowed to be too fleshed out because that would mean they would not be useful as plot devices and make them less intriguing.
    If they become too interesting they end up like Harley and Ivy where people don't want to see them as villains.

  4. #454
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    23,834

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by prepmaster View Post
    I'd say its the opposite. It shows character development. It shows that the villains are reacting to what is happening to them. Goals changing (wealth accumulation to taking down heroes to taking over a city to saving the ones that the character cares about by all means necessary) allows much greater variety of storytelling. With Mr.Freeze, you have the same repeated story line of him trying to save his loved one from a disease by all means necessary. Every other character that has a wife/husband/loved ones can do that in just one story line. Having to save his wife as his goal all the times makes him boring. The thing about villains is that they are written as villains - meaning evil antagonists to heroes. You don't simply know everything about the villains as much as the heroes in terms of morals, psychological trauma, relationships, personal desires etc... I'd argue that villains are not allowed to be too fleshed out because that would mean they would not be useful as plot devices and make them less intriguing.
    Decades of writing proves otherwise. Villains became more interesting because they were written less and less as plot devices with no personality. You even sited this as a reason for why Batman's villains were popular.

  5. #455
    Astonishing Member kjn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    4,580

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marhawkman View Post
    If they become too interesting they end up like Harley and Ivy where people don't want to see them as villains.
    Not necessarily. It's a combination of shifting mores and values in society together with attempts to make the villains more interesting that makes people not wanting to see them as villains.

    Villains like Penguin, Two-Face, or Doctor Psycho has all received good treatments that explore their values and personality, while their villanous status was preserved. The same is true for the way Rucka handled Veronica Cale and Barbara Ann Minerva/Cheetah.
    «Speaking generally, it is because of the desire of the tragic poets for the marvellous that so varied and inconsistent an account of Medea has been given out» (Diodorus Siculus, The Library of History [4.56.1])

  6. #456
    Amazing Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Posts
    63

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marhawkman View Post
    If they become too interesting they end up like Harley and Ivy where people don't want to see them as villains.
    Harley becomes popular so DC turns her into an anti heroine for profits. Ivy got tagged along to be a support cast for Harley but i don't think Ivy gets good character development from being coupled with Harley. As a concept, Ivy is firmly a Batman's rouge and basically a twisted version of the guy. But does Ivy have good stories as a villain against Batman? She is often used as more "change of the pace" villain in Batman comics. I find Ivy to be more utilized in non Batman comics than in Batman comics. With Ivy, you could write her as a villain in a story and its just part of her character, not the whole of it.

    Also I find it problematic that people used to characterize her plant obsession as mental illness when a plant is small part of nature itself and we unintentionally mock someone who could have such great love for nature. This kind of characterization must be from the age where hyper environmentalists were seen as crazy plant obsessed people.
    Last edited by prepmaster; 07-30-2020 at 07:19 AM.

  7. #457
    Ultimate Member SiegePerilous02's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    10,479

    Default

    There is a need for a pro-environmentalism voice in DC comics canon. But putting the effort into building up a new hero is hard and next to impossible, especially in this day and age, and Ivy is the most high profile character they have with that agenda. So it somewhat makes sense to go the anti-hero if not full blown hero route with her, even if characterization wise it doesn't make complete sense.

    Take her edge away, there is no reason for her to be a Batman villain. He opposes her because she poisons people and feeds them to plants, not because of her basic cause.

  8. #458
    Incredible Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    561

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by prepmaster View Post
    It makes Mr.Freeze a more sympathetic character but at the same time boring because his goal is to save his wife. Other villains can have goals that can be changed.
    I wouldn't say Freeze becomes boring, but his background does have a shelf life for how long you can feel sorry for the guy. It's gotten to the point that recently he keeps getting called out for his deeds (He blamed his company/boss for his wife's predicament, but now it's pointed out that he was EMBEZZLING from the company for his personal reasons). It's like the opposite of Harley where instead of wanting you to forget that she was trying to take advantage of the Joker in her origin, they are really pointing out Victor's problematic behavior before he donned the suit.

    It is a little disheartening that all we have to look forward to with Wonder Woman's rogues is being jobbed by a Batman character...If the jobbings were equal it'd be more forgiven (i.e. the Triumvirate of Terror episode of Batman the Brave and the Bold...Sure Wonder Woman was jobbed by Joker, but Superman was jobbed by Cheetah and Batman couldn't beat Lex...so it evened out)

  9. #459
    Astonishing Member marhawkman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    3,299

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SiegePerilous02 View Post
    There is a need for a pro-environmentalism voice in DC comics canon. But putting the effort into building up a new hero is hard and next to impossible, especially in this day and age, and Ivy is the most high profile character they have with that agenda. So it somewhat makes sense to go the anti-hero if not full blown hero route with her, even if characterization wise it doesn't make complete sense.

    Take her edge away, there is no reason for her to be a Batman villain. He opposes her because she poisons people and feeds them to plants, not because of her basic cause.
    It's an odd personality trait when a VILLAIN is the pro-environmentalism one Take Batman and Captain Planet, swap the villains from Batman to Captain Planet, and vice versa. The Planeteers wouldn't even bat an eye unless Ivy actually kills someone.

  10. #460
    Spectacular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    213

    Default



    In the above video, Grail is shown as one of the Wonder Woman enemies in this dedicated episode. The rest are Greek Gods and generic beasts; however, at least one Wonder rogue got added.

  11. #461
    Amazing Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Posts
    63

    Wink

    Quote Originally Posted by marhawkman View Post
    It's an odd personality trait when a VILLAIN is the pro-environmentalism one Take Batman and Captain Planet, swap the villains from Batman to Captain Planet, and vice versa. The Planeteers wouldn't even bat an eye unless Ivy actually kills someone.
    You can kill innocents for sadistic pleasure and still recycle.

  12. #462
    Amazing Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Posts
    63

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SiegePerilous02 View Post
    Take her edge away, there is no reason for her to be a Batman villain. He opposes her because she poisons people and feeds them to plants, not because of her basic cause.
    Even if you don't make her evil and kill people for sadistic pleasures, she would still be an antagonist to Batman because he is a law enforcer and a protector human lives and no matter what kind of schemes she enacts or what kind of humans she targets, she is ultimately a law breaker and a killer. The conflict between her and Batman isn't just good vs evil but also ideological.
    Last edited by prepmaster; 07-31-2020 at 08:43 AM.

  13. #463
    Ultimate Member SiegePerilous02's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    10,479

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by prepmaster View Post
    Even if you don't make her evil and kill people for sadistic pleasures, she would still be an antagonist to Batman because he is a law enforcer and a protector human lives and no matter what kind of schemes she enacts or what kind of humans she targets, she is ultimately a law breaker and a killer. The conflict between her and Batman isn't just good vs evil but also ideological.
    The protector of human lives thing is pretty much what I said.

    There isn't too much of an ideological difference. Batman isn't against environmentalism, and aside from Gordon and a few others he doesn't bow down to the law. I don't think he'd prioritize taking down Ivy if she wasn't feeding people to giant venus flytraps. Wonder Woman would be OOC if she put up with Ivy's more extreme methods as well.

  14. #464
    Mighty Member Gaius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    1,496

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PopQuezy View Post


    In the above video, Grail is shown as one of the Wonder Woman enemies in this dedicated episode. The rest are Greek Gods and generic beasts; however, at least one Wonder rogue got added.
    Odd that Flashpoint Wonder Woman is among the other WWs but I guess there's only so many alternate Wonder Woman that looks distinct from one another.

  15. #465
    Amazing Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Posts
    63

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SiegePerilous02 View Post
    The protector of human lives thing is pretty much what I said.

    There isn't too much of an ideological difference. Batman isn't against environmentalism, and aside from Gordon and a few others he doesn't bow down to the law. I don't think he'd prioritize taking down Ivy if she wasn't feeding people to giant venus flytraps. Wonder Woman would be OOC if she put up with Ivy's more extreme methods as well.
    The guy himself is corporatism. He is among the wealthiest people.

    Edit: Batman is the perfect hero but that should not make Bruce the perfect rich guy. That's the interesting part of his character - the duality of Batman & Bruce Wayne. He is among the wealthiest people, which means he is realistically among the top polluters.
    Last edited by prepmaster; 07-31-2020 at 10:30 PM.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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