Zechs wrote:Yes, I have my own madness, but I keep it down. I keep it restricted.
Yes. Yes they were Herald. The 90s while good in some regards also wore certain characters down. Iron Man. Thor. Spider-Man. Green Arrow. Guy Gardner.
1. In your opinion.
2. With #1 said, I notice none of them were massacred due to your feeling that they were worn down. Interesting...
I know there are more names, but those instantly pop into my head of top tier heroes. Lower? They were riddled with 90s concepts.
So is the New 52...
Just look at Blue Devil in that cover you posted at DC's attempt to make him more "hip" for the youngsters. What Robinson did was a blessing and even then he did more for the character than probably anyone else could had at that time.
Some would argue the same for Steph's death...
I mean again look at what Waid did to BD in Underworld Unleashed. Dude got a raw deal in that.
And if making a deal with the Devil meant that a character should be killed off, so many fanboys wouldn't be screaming in anguish over Spider-Man -- sorry, "Spider-Pus" -- recently.
Still, I enjoy the story for what it was as is BD and the others getting killed. It served a point.
No, it served NO point. Again, even Jimbo himself pointed this out in that issue in which Mist II died.
Hey Stephanie got killed as well it served a point as well.
The only point that served was to get Batman alone again. And, as the survival of Nightwing, Robin, Cass, etc. demonstrated, getting Batman alone again didn't really require anyone to die.
But there's a difference between Blue Devil's exit being well written and Stephanie's being not.
There are people who would argue that Steph's exit was written well.
Would YOU agree??
Again, it's easy to dismiss the demise of a character YOU don't care about.
Funny how the rules change when it's a character you DO care about being killed...
At the moment I know that the pair of characters are about as dead as can be. A fate truly worse fate than what happened to Blue Devil. A fate that Grant Morrison showed so well in Animal Man. Characters lost in limbo because the writers/editors just have no need for them. I just wish someone at DC whomever it is who has this grudge against legacies is removed.
I'd argue that it's better for a character to be in limbo, where that character can be immediately brought back and put to good use, than dead, which -- as I mentioned -- requires some resurrection excuse just to make the character usable again.
I'd go into this more but I seriously don't want to waste a two hour or more what result in a meaningless debate.
All discussion on this board is ultimately meaningless.
"We're ALL mad here."
Nothing is gonna change your hatred for DC. Nothing. Not if Dan and the gang are all fired. Not if Dr. Light II is restored or given an ongoing by a good creator.
Let them try those, and you'll find out otherwise.
Instead it'll be another and another face that'll you do battle with. Instead of fighting this white whale do what I do. Honor the characters and the memory. Show how stupid the current philosophy is.
I do all that, thank you.
And frankly, many people consider THAT a "white whale".
ESPECIALLY Dan and the Gang themselves.
By attacking you're doing nothing short of what H.E.A.T. did
Maybe, maybe not.
The important part is: Did Hal Jordan come back??
Gee, lemme check...
and in you be held in the same regard as "Didio" himself.
That's utterly impossible.
I'm not running -- and ruining -- DC like he is.
Nobody goes to Newsarama's Facebook wall to denigrate me and my actions.
And unlike Dan, I actually know how to write.
So be better than your enemy is what I'm getting at. Be more than a person who clings to hate. Embrace the good of what made you enjoy comics.
I am. But thanks for your concern.