• 87 results
  • 1
  • 2
#51 Posted by Akindoodle (1021 posts) - - Show Bio

I honestly think that it won't work. One, like an overwhelming majority of comic readers are male. Two, in most popular female marketed fiction like Twilight and the Sookie Sackhouse series the relationship is very similar to the Superman/Lois Lane romance. Three, it creates the illusion like DC thinks that women are only into romance with can be bad publicity.

Amen to that and everything else you said

#52 Posted by SC (13119 posts) - - Show Bio

@rustyroy said:

@sc: First of all I don't like this pairing and I don't want to read the book(look at my first comment), and yes I've read every comment posted before mine but none of those had given any good reasons and the generalizing woman reason is not a good reason. If you think they have given a good reason then name the post numbers and at least explain why they're good reasons. And I believe that ideas and concepts can be criticized but when your criticizing it give good reasons. Daniels is not the writer of the book, Soule is and he said it will have romance, drama, action, humor etc. We got maybe 10% knowledge about the book and all we're doing is complaining.

Okay so here are three important questions. Are you the authority on what is a good or bad reason? Is there a difference between complaining and criticizing? If you think criticism requires reasoning why should that apply to other people? If I look through your post history will I find "good" reasons for every instance you are critical?

To be honest I am not sure what specific point you think requires a reason? So could you clarify what point of contention has no reasoning behind it?

Moderator
#53 Posted by RustyRoy (12763 posts) - - Show Bio

@sc said:

@rustyroy said:

Okay so here are three important questions. Are you the authority on what is a good or bad reason? Is there a difference between complaining and criticizing? If you think criticism requires reasoning why should that apply to other people? If I look through your post history will I find "good" reasons for every instance you are critical?

To be honest I am not sure what specific point you think requires a reason? So could you clarify what point of contention has no reasoning behind it?

Nice, you didn't answer my questions. You're not even defending your own points. If you don't want to answer that's okay.

  • No I'm not an authority of anything but I know the difference between a good reason and a bad reason.
  • So you don't believe that criticism requires reasoning?
  • Probably not but I still try, English is not my native language so I try to keep it short.
  • Why is association with romance a bad thing? That's what I'm not understanding. Why when people say that older females/males like drama and teenagers like action its not taken as generalization? Why Superman/Wonder Woman thing is bad, at least DC is trying make it a serious relationship than making it a one night stand like Tony Stark or Bruce Wayne, not too many complain about that. And why Daniels word is taken so seriously, Soule did say there will be other things too.

The thing is I don't even like this pairing and really care for defending it, I just think whenever any news come up people are always negative about it or try too hard to take everything very seriously.

#54 Posted by SC (13119 posts) - - Show Bio

@rustyroy said:

Uh I didn't see what questions you had sorry, the one that was close to a question was too vague to answer. Hence I tried to clarify. I am not defending my own points because I am not really here to have an argument, that and I can't see where you have accurately identified or addressed any of my points. Most of them seem misrepresented or misunderstood. Hence my questions.

@rustyroy said:

  • No I'm not an authority of anything but I know the difference between a good reason and a bad reason.
  • So you don't believe that criticism requires reasoning?
  • Probably not but I still try, English is not my native language so I try to keep it short.
  • Why is association with romance a bad thing? That's what I'm not understanding. Why when people say that older females/males like drama and teenagers like action its not taken as generalization? Why Superman/Wonder Woman thing is bad, at least DC is trying make it a serious relationship than making it a one night stand like Tony Stark or Bruce Wayne, not too many complain about that. And why Daniels word is taken so seriously, Soule did say there will be other things too.

Sure but your reasoning might be inadequate to other people, no?

Criticism much like anything already has reasoning behind it, whether its elaborated on though is a different matter. Ideally criticism would have good reasoning sure, but I don't think that everyone always has to give their reasoning when they give criticism, especially as far as forum posts. They are just expressing themselves.

Thats cool, English is not my first language either ^_^

I don't think anyone is complaining that romance itself is a bad thing, more so that it comes at a cost and whether that cost is worth paying and whether its a good strategy as far as getting more female readers. Its the same as death issues, deaths in comics experience bump in sales, but it also comes at a cost, issues after death issues number drop back down dramatically. People get skeptical and cynical about death now. Same applies with number #1 in comics. It brings in new readers, it brings in older readers, it gets more readers, but comic book companies shouldn't do it too often, because it has adverse and negative effects after. Naturally doesn't mean deaths can't be good or number one issues can't be good, but there can be valid criticism for it. I sincerely don't think anyone who has posted is adverse to romance here, more so the how and why of it being implemented with these two characters. Also there ere generalizations but they can be very faulty and come across as pandering. Also sometimes people enjoy criticizing the reasoning behind things as much as what actually happens. Such statements can influence how people anticipate things.

You mean sort of how people are always negative about other peoples critical opinions and negativity too? =p

Sincerely though, if someone lumps all "negativity" and fails to recognize legitimate criticisms from blind complaining they are guilty of the same behavior they seek to criticize dismiss and so on. Its easy to pretend "everyone" else takes things too seriously, how do we know that the people who think that way aren't actually the ones who need to relax a bit?

Moderator
#55 Posted by PowerHerc (84031 posts) - - Show Bio

Let's check it out and see how good it is and how well it sells.

#56 Posted by Mercy_ (92698 posts) - - Show Bio

Facepalm of epic proportions.

Moderator
#57 Posted by SandMan_ (4528 posts) - - Show Bio

Um...Are we gonna have them punch stuff as well?

#58 Edited by toplel (917 posts) - - Show Bio

Ill just leave this here.

http://www.themarysue.com/daniel-superman-wonder-woman/

At least we're gonna get Superman butt shots.

#59 Posted by RustyRoy (12763 posts) - - Show Bio

@sc said:

@rustyroy said:

  • No I'm not an authority of anything but I know the difference between a good reason and a bad reason.
  • So you don't believe that criticism requires reasoning?
  • Probably not but I still try, English is not my native language so I try to keep it short.
  • Why is association with romance a bad thing? That's what I'm not understanding. Why when people say that older females/males like drama and teenagers like action its not taken as generalization? Why Superman/Wonder Woman thing is bad, at least DC is trying make it a serious relationship than making it a one night stand like Tony Stark or Bruce Wayne, not too many complain about that. And why Daniels word is taken so seriously, Soule did say there will be other things too.

Sure but your reasoning might be inadequate to other people, no?

Criticism much like anything already has reasoning behind it, whether its elaborated on though is a different matter. Ideally criticism would have good reasoning sure, but I don't think that everyone always has to give their reasoning when they give criticism, especially as far as forum posts. They are just expressing themselves.

Thats cool, English is not my first language either ^_^

I don't think anyone is complaining that romance itself is a bad thing, more so that it comes at a cost and whether that cost is worth paying and whether its a good strategy as far as getting more female readers. Its the same as death issues, deaths in comics experience bump in sales, but it also comes at a cost, issues after death issues number drop back down dramatically. People get skeptical and cynical about death now. Same applies with number #1 in comics. It brings in new readers, it brings in older readers, it gets more readers, but comic book companies shouldn't do it too often, because it has adverse and negative effects after. Naturally doesn't mean deaths can't be good or number one issues can't be good, but there can be valid criticism for it. I sincerely don't think anyone who has posted is adverse to romance here, more so the how and why of it being implemented with these two characters. Also there ere generalizations but they can be very faulty and come across as pandering. Also sometimes people enjoy criticizing the reasoning behind things as much as what actually happens. Such statements can influence how people anticipate things.

We still don't know if romance stuffs will come at a cost, I have said plenty of times that Soule did say there will be many other elements too, and romance is hardly overdone like death and #1, DC hardly has a book about romance, if it said the book was about friendship and its targeted to female readers I don't think anyone would've had any problem, I know most people don't like this Superman/Wonder Woman thing and I don't like it either, but if we don't like it then we can avoid it.

You mean sort of how people are always negative about other peoples critical opinions and negativity too? =p

Sincerely though, if someone lumps all "negativity" and fails to recognize legitimate criticisms from blind complaining they are guilty of the same behavior they seek to criticize dismiss and so on. Its easy to pretend "everyone" else takes things too seriously, how do we know that the people who think that way aren't actually the ones who need to relax a bit?

At least I'm not ranting about it, I'm just asking what's the problem, I know there are some problems behind this, but people are jumping the gun, what do we exactly know about the book?

Anyways there's no reason to continue this, we'll probably won't agree on the topic so its better to end it.

#60 Posted by turoksonofstone (13199 posts) - - Show Bio

DC is out of touch and needs an Intervention. Marvel, Image, Dark Horse and the others should just catch DC editorial at a convention and offer some help.

DC today is just a pale shadow of It's former glory.

#61 Posted by MartianManhunterIsBetterThanCyborg (2243 posts) - - Show Bio

@shadowx said:

Ugh. Seriously -_- I knoe man woman who would rather has a comic book focusing on a complex female character without a love intrest.

Well, not without one. There's always Steve Trevor.

#62 Posted by MartianManhunterIsBetterThanCyborg (2243 posts) - - Show Bio

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

I want a Batman/Wonder Woman book with this kind of stuff. I really like that pairing in JLU!

#63 Posted by Rahn (26 posts) - - Show Bio

I love it when men try to guess what us women like and fail, don't you?

#64 Posted by TDK_1997 (14896 posts) - - Show Bio

I don't want a romantic book.I want a book that will explore their relationship up to the point where I will start caring for the relationship and will start actually liking it.

#65 Posted by SC (13119 posts) - - Show Bio

@rustyroy said:

We still don't know if romance stuffs will come at a cost, I have said plenty of times that Soule did say there will be many other elements too, and romance is hardly overdone like death and #1, DC hardly has a book about romance, if it said the book was about friendship and its targeted to female readers I don't think anyone would've had any problem, I know most people don't like this Superman/Wonder Woman thing and I don't like it either, but if we don't like it then we can avoid it.

At least I'm not ranting about it, I'm just asking what's the problem, I know there are some problems behind this, but people are jumping the gun, what do we exactly know about the book?

Anyways there's no reason to continue this, we'll probably won't agree on the topic so its better to end it.

Everything comes at a cost and a benefit. Every creative decision has positive and negative consequences, if the positive outweighs the negative, most creators or fans or companies are okay with that. Different entities have different standards and perspectives.

You have said plenty of times that Soule did say that there would be other elements too, but you presuppose that there are actually people who believe it will be the only thing in the book, you have made faulty assumptions of me, so statements like that do not address my points at least. It would be as if I told you that this is a DC book and that Iron Man will not appear in it. Have you mentioned Iron Man? Well in one post you did, have you said that Iron Man will appear in this Soule Wonder Woman and Superman book? Not in this thread as far as I can tell, but why would you need me to tell you this isn't a book Iron Man will be in when you probably have never said that at all?

I mean I give an example of how different things can be both attractive and detrimental but you address the things as points of comparison, which doesn't actually address the point made.

How do you know others are ranting about it and that your behavior doesn't look the same? Most studies conclude that people who overestimate negative reactions in other people, underestimate their own negative behavior and actions. Again its easy for a person to just think everyone else is jumping the gun, much harder to actually understand what other people are trying to say, I mean you were the one that took my post and made incorrect assumptions of me remember? Not productive as far as being sincere. Here's another you keep making this about the book, as if you can not distinguish between concepts, reasoning and the book. Again examples have been given for how this is faulty. Again you have returned to the book defense. You either are sincerely trying to figure out what problems people have with these topics or everyone else is just a negative nancy who kicks puppies into puddles heh heh.

Well sure, if you wish to stop replying feel free to, you quoted and seemed to misunderstand my post, of course I am going to reply back trying to get you to understand my points and others. I still don't know if you actually understand other peoples arguments well enough to disagree with them, you keep defending or making points that no one else is actually addressing. Its an error in communication in which the only way to overcome is to try and cut down on assumptions and seek clarification. If you do not reply back, take care, was interesting conversation. Cheers.

Moderator
#66 Edited by Kratesis (4266 posts) - - Show Bio

I don't want more romance.

I want female characters that are bad ass.

#67 Posted by Bruxae (13885 posts) - - Show Bio

Ugh, so obviously cause im a female I want to read a graphic romance novel, no thanks.

Id rather read about strong and independant women.

#68 Edited by TheAcidSkull (18032 posts) - - Show Bio

lol, this is funny.

everyone, INCLUDING MYSELF( and i'm a Guy), likes a romance book IF it's actually well written and the romance works, WW and superman are like Brother and Sister, and it's just F*cking weird.

#69 Edited by BumpyBoo (9292 posts) - - Show Bio

@lykopis said:

Not impressed.

I don't want romance, I want quality writing about quality heroes.

Moderator
#70 Posted by lolzstastic (214 posts) - - Show Bio

@theacidskull said:

everyone, INCLUDING MYSELF( and i'm a Guy), likes a romance book IF it's actually well written and the romance works

What if this book has better romance than all of Johns' awful romance combined (which isn't hard at all). I can understand disliking the pairing but it seems that people are hating on this book just for the sake of it.

#71 Edited by TheAcidSkull (18032 posts) - - Show Bio

@theacidskull said:

everyone, INCLUDING MYSELF( and i'm a Guy), likes a romance book IF it's actually well written and the romance works

What if this book has better romance than all of Johns' awful romance combined (which isn't hard at all). I can understand disliking the pairing but it seems that people are hating on this book just for the sake of it.

Dude it's just that it DOESN'T work, WW and SUperman are seriously like siblings and it becomes weird >_>

#72 Posted by Outside_85 (9031 posts) - - Show Bio

Sounds like a very simplistic way to view the audience.

#73 Edited by Wolfrazer (6737 posts) - - Show Bio

@theacidskull: Would it work for Hercules and WW? XP They are siblings but...you know.

#74 Posted by lifeofvibe (3489 posts) - - Show Bio
#75 Edited by TheAcidSkull (18032 posts) - - Show Bio

@theacidskull: Would it work for Hercules and WW? XP They are siblings but...you know.

truth be told....that'd be so much better XD

#76 Posted by Wolfrazer (6737 posts) - - Show Bio

@theacidskull: Hehe, 1st thing is 1st though...DC needs to get Herc back in and in proper character.

#77 Posted by lolzstastic (214 posts) - - Show Bio

@lolzstastic said:

@theacidskull said:

everyone, INCLUDING MYSELF( and i'm a Guy), likes a romance book IF it's actually well written and the romance works

What if this book has better romance than all of Johns' awful romance combined (which isn't hard at all). I can understand disliking the pairing but it seems that people are hating on this book just for the sake of it.

Dude it's just that it DOESN'T work, WW and SUperman are seriously like siblings and it becomes weird >_>

How are Superman and Wonder Woman like siblings? That makes no sense. Superman is your classic boy scout, he doesn't kill (often anyway), he's here to protect not fight, he's comprehensive, a little blunt sometimes. Wonder Woman is more aggressive, she does kill, she can be caring and comprehensive as well but she generally acts more like a warrior, and she has more finesse than Superman does.

#78 Posted by TheAcidSkull (18032 posts) - - Show Bio

@lolzstastic: it's not their personalities that have them as siblings it's how they have been written up until this point

#79 Posted by lolzstastic (214 posts) - - Show Bio

@lolzstastic: it's not their personalities that have them as siblings it's how they have been written up until this point

Yes, how they've been written... by like 3 writers, two of them are hacks (Johns, Lobdell) and of them only wrote a short story in a pointless one-shot (Diggle). So how do you know they won't be better written this time around?

#80 Posted by TheAcidSkull (18032 posts) - - Show Bio

@theacidskull said:

@lolzstastic: it's not their personalities that have them as siblings it's how they have been written up until this point

Yes, how they've been written... by like 3 writers, two of them are hacks (Johns, Lobdell) and of them only wrote a short story in a pointless one-shot (Diggle). So how do you know they won't be better written this time around?

Maybe the would, but what about everything BEFORE the new 52? clark was always perfect with Lois, why change that? if anything WW and Batman would have made more sense.

#81 Posted by lolzstastic (214 posts) - - Show Bio

@lolzstastic said:

@theacidskull said:

@lolzstastic: it's not their personalities that have them as siblings it's how they have been written up until this point

Yes, how they've been written... by like 3 writers, two of them are hacks (Johns, Lobdell) and of them only wrote a short story in a pointless one-shot (Diggle). So how do you know they won't be better written this time around?

Maybe the would, but what about everything BEFORE the new 52? clark was always perfect with Lois, why change that? if anything WW and Batman would have made more sense.

Maybe because it's supposed to be the NEW 52? Clark is now a twenty-something freelance writer, he's allowed to see other people. It would've been really, really boring if he was with Lois right away. What about character development? Sure, let's have them fall in love immediately, that sounds super compelling.

#82 Posted by TheAcidSkull (18032 posts) - - Show Bio

@theacidskull said:

@lolzstastic said:

@theacidskull said:

@lolzstastic: it's not their personalities that have them as siblings it's how they have been written up until this point

Yes, how they've been written... by like 3 writers, two of them are hacks (Johns, Lobdell) and of them only wrote a short story in a pointless one-shot (Diggle). So how do you know they won't be better written this time around?

Maybe the would, but what about everything BEFORE the new 52? clark was always perfect with Lois, why change that? if anything WW and Batman would have made more sense.

Maybe because it's supposed to be the NEW 52? Clark is now a twenty-something freelance writer, he's allowed to see other people. It would've been really, really boring if he was with Lois right away. What about character development? Sure, let's have them fall in love immediately, that sounds super compelling.

no, it would have been completely Normal for clark to have been with Lois. DC is doing the marvel thing where for some reason they set heroes up with random chicks just because they want to be more Human or something like that. They SHOULD have kept the marriage, it would have changed nothing, that's why the new 52 sucks, it retcons things that don't need to be retconed.

#83 Posted by lolzstastic (214 posts) - - Show Bio

@lolzstastic said:

@theacidskull said:

@lolzstastic said:

@theacidskull said:

@lolzstastic: it's not their personalities that have them as siblings it's how they have been written up until this point

Yes, how they've been written... by like 3 writers, two of them are hacks (Johns, Lobdell) and of them only wrote a short story in a pointless one-shot (Diggle). So how do you know they won't be better written this time around?

Maybe the would, but what about everything BEFORE the new 52? clark was always perfect with Lois, why change that? if anything WW and Batman would have made more sense.

Maybe because it's supposed to be the NEW 52? Clark is now a twenty-something freelance writer, he's allowed to see other people. It would've been really, really boring if he was with Lois right away. What about character development? Sure, let's have them fall in love immediately, that sounds super compelling.

no, it would have been completely Normal for clark to have been with Lois. DC is doing the marvel thing where for some reason they set heroes up with random chicks just because they want to be more Human or something like that. They SHOULD have kept the marriage, it would have changed nothing, that's why the new 52 sucks, it retcons things that don't need to be retconed.

Not really. What about Lana Lang? Or Lori Lemaris? There's more women in Clark's life than just Lois, you know. It's the same with, say, Batman or Spider-Man, you may prefer them to stick with a certain love interest but other people may prefer another one. Part of the appeal of the Clark/Lois relationship is that it didn't show up out of nowhere, it had some, you know, CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT (which this relationship is severely lacking, by the way).

Also, it's been two years since the reboot, a little late to complain about that. It happened and it blows but you have to suck it up. Clark is single again and they're taking advantage of it.

#84 Posted by TheAcidSkull (18032 posts) - - Show Bio

@lolzstastic: that's why i don't like it. it may be late to complain but it changes nothing. Part of why people Hate One More Day for example is because it retconned YEARS of characters development, and now dan slott is shoving Carlie Cooper down out throats.

#85 Posted by lolzstastic (214 posts) - - Show Bio

@theacidskull: Yes, but the difference is Spidey and Carlie have no future together because Carlie is a shitty Mary Sue that should've never existed. Superman and Wonder Woman may not be the couple of the century, but there's a chance of getting an actually good relationship between them even if it doesn't last. The reboot may suck but there's still the possibility of getting good, new stories, all you need is a good writer. Or are you gonna tell me ALL New 52 titles are equally horrible? Most of them blow but there are hidden gems here and there.

#86 Posted by TheAcidSkull (18032 posts) - - Show Bio

@theacidskull: Yes, but the difference is Spidey and Carlie have no future together because Carlie is a shitty Mary Sue that should've never existed. Superman and Wonder Woman may not be the couple of the century, but there's a chance of getting an actually good relationship between them even if it doesn't last. The reboot may suck but there's still the possibility of getting good, new stories, all you need is a good writer. Or are you gonna tell me ALL New 52 titles are equally horrible? Most of them blow but there are hidden gems here and there.

Most titles DO suck donkey balls at DC:/

same with Marvel.

But yeah, some are Decent/good. But they are destroying and Rebooting a lot of stuff, and when you've had clark/Lois for so long it just seems terrible to pair him up with someone else, even if it is WONDER WOMAN,

and yes, Carlie Cooper should be killed, like right now.

#87 Posted by Guardian_of_Gravity (2979 posts) - - Show Bio

Man sometimes comic book writers so flagrantly don't get women you wonder if they've ever met one.

#88 Posted by lykopis (10746 posts) - - Show Bio

@toplel said:

Ill just leave this here.

http://www.themarysue.com/daniel-superman-wonder-woman/

At least we're gonna get Superman butt shots.

You.

Yes, you. You are a gem. I hope people check out the link you provided but allow me to just throw this tiny bit from "Liz" -- my new online best friend (whether she knows it yet or not) who was at FanExpo this weekend:

"Now that I’ve had some more time to think about it, what really made me upset was Daniel’s “Superman’s butt” comment. Just what I wanted! Male crotch shots. Maybe they’ll break his spine as they contort him so we can see pecs and butt at the same time. That’s not what I want. I don’t want them to treat Superman like how they treat Catwoman. Or Starfire.

I know I don’t speak for every woman, but I think I can with this statement: All we want are good, well written characters and stories.

With the Twilight comment, as I understand it they want some of that sweet, sweet female teenager disposable income. I get it; there’s gold in them thar hills. I just don’t trust them not to go to cheap pandering.

I can’t help but think that if this series fails, it’s an excuse for DC to say “Look! We tried! The ladies just don’t like it! See? Women don’t read comics!” If it’s successful, which it might be, they’ll completely move over to making only romantic titles, because they now have something that works. The regular comics will become even more entrenched as “for the guys” and any progress made in the past will be wiped out. There will be nothing but Boobs and Butt poses and smaller and more ridiculous costumes."

Thank you, Liz. (Seriously, everyone should read @toplel's link.)