Well I don't wan't to say to much because of spoilers but yea "violence" is pretty key here, it's a lot more rough than any of the Marvel films, theres also a few swear words. I'm not sure how it was rated in the US but in the UK it got a 12A, that means a 12yo can only attend with an adult.
@trevel8182: Ah! Batman's Uncle!
Ummm... In Tim Burton's movies, Batman kills TONS of people. I straight-up straps a bomb to the chest of Penguin's goon, and he blows up.
And in the Nolan movies, he definitely atleast killed Two-Face.
The Burton movies were based on the show, not the comics, so to some extent they can't really be said to be an accurate representation of the character. It's like if they wound up making the version of Batman where he was a mechanic. It might be interesting, but you wouldn't really call it "accurate."
@g_man Perhaps what they are planning is to do stories about the characters to try and establish the New 52 Batman world, show what their characters are like without the costumes. Instead of where was Nightwing establish who Dick Grayson is and what lead him to become Nightwing. Establish who Jason Todd is and why he is who he is now. Maybe its sort of a character study the way Zero Y6ear is so far. There are a few things that maybe they might want to re-establish too. Like maybe they want to show that Dick didn't just become Robin then Nightwing because of his parent's death and then Bruce. Maybe they want to show more about who he was and why it was all inevitable. Just giving them the benefit of the doubt (?).
It seems like the will tell stories where Gotham is in focus as a "character" and how the characters is in a different Gotham where there is more violence and a higher crime rate. I could see that working to a degree. Overall it seems like a bad idea that is done by editors.
Thanks for the podcast. Long, andappreciated.
Okay, that was really creepy. Just as you made the comment about listening to another CBSi property based podcast for your E3 News. I said out loud, " Or two, or three.", then half a second later, Sara said the same thing. o_O?!
You aren't alone, Tony. I felt horrible letting Meryl die to get that cloak.
I'm rather confused why people keep calling this Zero Year "how it happened". I disagree. That story was already told in BATMAN: YEAR ONE. This new story is built to explain the New 52 Batman version within the 5 year time line. It's a Batman story, Not 'The' Batman story. I loved YEAR ONE, and I'm completely happy with completely avoiding Zero Year. This would have been much more interesting if Zero Year focused on his time training to become Batman. If people have enjoy Snyder's work, I think it's valid for people to enjoy this, but pretending this is the real story is going a step too far.
The issue of Emma taking control of Iceman's body was closer around the time of Pre-Phalanx Covenant. I remember becasue, he was talking to her after those events. He was shocked to see her doing things with his body that he didn't even know was possible. After that was the whole events with Generation X. She then went from teacher of Gen X to Genosha.
Nocenti leaving CATWOMAN is kind of irrelevant given the origin they're using based on her writing.
You're dead right about why cartoons based on comics are made to target kids based on perceptions. They're trying to get the largest audience possible. Sure, anime are made for various ages, but the US aim for highest market value. That is strange that Disney hasn't done more animated series.
If you think villains couldn't lead a series, check out BLACK LAGOON. There are no real heroes in this series, and it's fascinating.
I've been posting some of my Shonen Jump reviews on my CV blog. I'm often surprised as how people who say they don't like a series are incredibly aware of the current events of things they say they don't like.
I really enjoyed that X-MEN songs. That seemed really clever. I'm going to have to go listen to the whole song.
Lol I actually like the 5 star reviews. 10 stars just gets too convoluted and 5 allows for a more straight forward approach like corey said. But I agree with Tony, the more they people complain the more I want you to keep it regardless XD
I prefer the reviews on this site compared to others for two reasons. 1.) I know the reviewers on this site and can more accurately gauge whether or not to take their opinion under advisement and 2.) The reviews on some other sites can typically be too cynical for my taste.
Thanks for the great podcast. I never miss an episode! I think Sara's new catch phrase is, "Oh my gosh." It seems almost easier to get her flustered when she's not present in the studio. As always you guys never fail to crack me up while informing me about the titles that I don't feel like reading. Music is sometimes good to have, just be weary of legal restrictions, whatever those are. I wonder if it's a coincidence that Iceman was made so powerful after Oda created Aoikiji. The power of dry ice should be respected as it is the bane of all warm blood species including humans. Hell of a mutation to have.
I really have to disagree with Tony about Norman Osborn in Dark Reign. I thought it was a pretty awesome excuse to make one of Spidey's villains into a global menace. Most of his rogues gallery just stuck to terrorizing New York as well as Parker himself. Granted it was a bit lame that he was mostly just in that Iron Patriot armor but at least it was consistent with the theme of Gobby being a tech villain who is good at deceiving people. For goodness sake HE gained control of The Sentry through sheer empathy. I'd like to see them interact at least one more time when Sentry comes back as a Horseman. At least Spider-Man gets a solid punch in near the end of Siege which is pretty hilarious. All I'm saying is, as someone who is into villain stories I'd say there was a lot to like about the portrayal of Osborn during the Dark Reign arc. Agree to disagree. Thanks a keep up the great work.
Fun show as always. Can I make a suggestion? Make policy about spoilers, publicize it to CV readers/listeners so everyone knows what to expect and stick to it. I've been only been listening for a couple months, but several times I've heard hesitant discussions about how to handle them, like you're making a decision each time and doubting it. Unlike most of what you talk about, this indecision does not make good listening.
I don't know exactly what the best answer is and you will probably have to try and revise a few times, but here's a proposal:
For the podcast: Use the 2 weeks from in-store date you were discussing this time. People who are avid enough to follow the weekly podcast should be assumed to be avid enough to read their favorite titles soon after they hit the store. Anything after that should be fair game for discussion. Add a one-liner to the top of the show that states the policy as fair warning.
For articles: Give readers a full period between issues (either two weeks or a month, depending on publication schedule) for spoilers without clear warning. If spoiling anything earlier, the article must have a clear warning between the title and the text saying "This article spoils events from Book x, Issue 12 and Book y, issue 22."
Trade waiting gets no consideration here, not because I don't care about those folks (I do), but because I don't think you can wait months for the story and also access a source of daily updated information and expect that source to withhold information for those months for you. Sara's right, CV staff need a clearly defined space in which to do your jobs. You do them great and deserve that. Thanks!
@g_man My question about the rating system was not out of malice nor was it interpreted correctly on the podcast. I was proposing the idea of having 1/2 stars, not the IGN system. I cited numerous times you and Sara have struggled between a 4 and a 5 and how you could benefit from having a rating in between. I never alluded to each star being an element of the book as Corey misinterpreted on the fly. How can you chastise the readers for not reading the reviews when in the beginning of this very same podcast, you lamented a 4/10 review of Superman Unchained on Newsarama without bothering to read the review. If you don't like people complaining about the 5 star reviews, get out of your comfort zone. Have each reviewer try a new #1 from Image. Have someone else review Scott Snyder books. Wouldn't this give the readers a more objective take on the comics that come out this week?
Somewhere along the way in this podcast, there a question about why nobody ever wondered whether Spiderman was a mutant. As usual, when it seems like obvious questions were overlooked, they weren't. They were usually asked a long time ago, we have all read it and just forgot.
The original X-Men wonder about Spidey's mutant chops in X-Men 35 (1967). The idea re-surfaced in Christos Gage's X-Men/Spider-Man LS in 2009. Only reason I remember is that I recently found a cheap copy of the hardcover that collects both stories.
No podcast this week either?!?!?! :(
2 weeks without the podcast now i am angry
Tony would it kill you to post on your twitter that there's no podcast today geesh!
No podcast again. So disappointed.
Agree with you all :'( This podcast is my LIFE COMIC VINE!!! ;)