DarthShap's forum posts

#1 Posted by DarthShap (875 posts) - - Show Bio

@sethysquare said:

@DarthShap said:

@Perfect 10 said:

@Ravager4: well katana is going to be in the new batman show so her getting her own solo is for that marketing. as for vibe, well he and blue beetle are all dc has for latin characters, blue beetle failed so now its vibe's chance. i would have preferred stargirl in a solo series (with her staff please dc) but my only problem is that they wont get rid of nocenti. is she related to someone at dc or does she has some kind of mind control power? i really dont get why they keep giving her chances. will be so happy when shes off of catwoman

What about Fire, Gangbuster, Renee Montoya or Aztek?

What about Ragdoll, Catman, Kate Spencer, Cod-Piece, Tempest, Dolphin, Plastic Man, Matrix, Christopher Kent, Ice, Azarael, Great Ten, Bizarro, Elongated Man, Red Star, Doom Patrol and all those other characters?

Who cares. They're waiting for the right time to return. Even in the previous continuity not every single character is around at one point of time. Now its Vibe and Katana's turn to shine. Deal with it.

What? I was talking about Latino characters, saying that DC had more than the two.

#2 Posted by DarthShap (875 posts) - - Show Bio

@Perfect 10 said:

@Ravager4: well katana is going to be in the new batman show so her getting her own solo is for that marketing. as for vibe, well he and blue beetle are all dc has for latin characters, blue beetle failed so now its vibe's chance. i would have preferred stargirl in a solo series (with her staff please dc) but my only problem is that they wont get rid of nocenti. is she related to someone at dc or does she has some kind of mind control power? i really dont get why they keep giving her chances. will be so happy when shes off of catwoman

What about Fire, Gangbuster, Renee Montoya or Aztek?

@Zeeguy91 said:

@DarthShap: I'm just saying that Johns took Sinestro and made him much more important and relevant to the DC Universe. Thanks to Johns, Sinestro became a universe-wide threat and not just a threat to Hal. He did the same thing with Black Hand, who was an incredibly obscure villain before Johns got a hold of him.

Also, Darkseid isn't that good of an example, because he still had multiple major achievements under his belt, which were told in many major story-lines: Great Darkness Saga, Rock of Ages, Legends, etc. Sinestro didn't have much of that. In fact, his first major story arc was Emerald Dawn, but that was quickly forgotten.

And you pretty much say it all when you say its editorial decisions. Why would they want to start anew with the Green Lantern concept, unless what they already had wasn't working well enough?

I was mentioning Darkseid as a response to your "If he had been such an important villain, then why would they have gotten rid of him like that?"

As for Sinestro, he just became more important to the DCU because the GL universe became more important. It has little to do with Johns' treatment of the character. He already was a universe-wide threat pre-Emerald Twilight. He was not just a threat to Jordan, he was a threat to the entire Corps. You obviously did not read GL comics from the 80's. Also, you mean Emerald Dawn II, not Emerald Dawn I and it obviously was not forgotten by Johns who RetConed a lot of things about the GLverse (including Emerald Dawn I) but did not change a thing about that story.

And to answer you question "Why would they want to start anew with the Green Lantern concept, unless what they already had wasn't working well enough?" It was the 90's. People had shitty tastes. Even freakin' Superman and Batman got replaced at the time.

#3 Posted by DarthShap (875 posts) - - Show Bio

@Zeeguy91 said:

@DarthShap: Just because Sinestro was the #1 GL villain doesn't mean that he was an A-list villain. That's why during Emerald Twilight, when Hal destroyed the Corps (thank god that was retconned), his neck was broken and he was "dead" until Rebirth, with only a few indirect encounters with the DC heroes. If he had been such an important villain, then why would they have gotten rid of him like that? And on top of that, when people say what Sinestro's greatest accomplishment was, they usually point to Sinestro Corps War.

It has nothing to do with how good the villain is. They are editorial decisions.

He was killed because they really wanted to start anew with the GL concept but the very fact that in that story he was used as Hal Jordan's ultimate challenge says it all.

It is exactly like Reverse Flash I (Prof Zoom). He was the ultimate Barry Allen villain and as such would not have worked as well with Wally, who instead got his own Reverse Flash (Zoom).

And you know who else died/was incapacitated for years several times? Darkseid.

#4 Posted by DarthShap (875 posts) - - Show Bio

Alfred, what did they do to you?

@The_Roman said:

.........Professor Pyg? Mr. Toad? Is it wrong that I do not know these villains?

Thy are from Morrison's A&R run.

#5 Edited by DarthShap (875 posts) - - Show Bio

@Zeeguy91 said:

@mr.obvious said:

@Zeeguy91 said:

@mr.obvious: Well, if anyone's been known to take previously minor and obscure characters and make them important, its Geoff Johns.

...Well, that's KINDA true... :P

Sinestro was a B-list villain before Johns got a hold of him. Same for Black Manta. He may not have made Hawkman important, but I remember his run on Hawkman being pretty good. He turned Green Lantern into DC's second highest selling character, with events that would effect the whole DCU. And most recently, he's taken Aquaman and made him cool (again?). He's kind of garnered a reputation for taking these characters and making them very popular.

I like Geoff Johns but that is just not true.

Sinestro always was the N°1 GL villain. Same thing for Black Manta to Aquaman.

Now Johns did revolutionize the GLverse but it is not like Green Lantern was all but forgotten at the time. Kyle Rayner was a very popular character and his series was doing quite well.

And I am sick and tired of people saying that he made Aquaman cool. He did not change anything. The character was already like that. You just did not know about it because you never read pre-Infinite Crisis Aquaman comics and he had been retired/dead ever since.

#6 Posted by DarthShap (875 posts) - - Show Bio

@mr.obvious said:

@SmashBrawler said:

Justice League of America's Vibe #1

That cover looks stupid. I hope this fails...

What I love about this cover is that you can imagine what the creative team was thinking at the time:

"OK, nobody cares about Vibe but we might sell a few issues if we put Darkseid on the cover8"

#7 Posted by DarthShap (875 posts) - - Show Bio

@Durakken said:

@DarthShap said:

Ok I had forgotten about that that was 1999 quote. My bad.

Having said that, the concept has evolved since then. At the time, nothing had been theorized. Since then however, the expression, the list and its interpretation have changed.

Now you go do your research. We are not in 1999 anymore. Here, I am helping you:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_Refrigerators

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/WomenInRefrigerators

http://www.comicvine.com/women-in-refrigerators/12-43763/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DInYaHVSLr8

You are welcome.

The concept has not evolved. I was going to point this out, but hoped you would... the concept is flawed in principle. That name comes from a non-superheroine and yet the definition is only meant to address superheroines. It is more, in my estimation, blindness to context and males more so than it is that anything that is said about the idea is actually accurate. This is incredibly apparent when you look at some of the list with such an entry as "Carol Ferris" who was never "maimed or depowered" or at least that is not why she was added. Why she was added is because she became empowered, not once, but twice over. The reason she is on the list is because it's not favorable empowerment.

Further, the same type of people that would come up with this type of list are the same type of people that would say the primary victim of war are the women because they have to deal with their men (note the possessive as in the objectification of men) dying and then would argue that Arsenal's daughter's death isn't him being victim contrarily to their first point.

Of course then the whole argument of women who develop some sort of psychosis, are maimed, are raped, are victimized, etc is special to the gender...well i just have to laugh because that then ignores all those other characters such as Norman Osborn, Doc Oc., Harry Osborn, Sandman, many other Spiderman villains, almost all Batman villains, a litany of Superman villains, and not to mention all the heroes who face such things like Spiderman, the X-men, Speedy, Robin, etc. So when it all comes down to it I'm pretty sure I could find more male characters facing these things than female and I'd be more than willing to say, even adjusted so that it's based on percentage of victimized of the whole gender, males would likely come out way way way more victimized.

Oh and just to point out...the carol ferris thing invalidates the whole list in general because the idea is supposed to be depowered, not empowered v.v since again, part of the idea is depowerment without return to pre-depowered levels.

What do you mean it never evolved? I just showed you it did. Someone did not do his research.

The stuff you are saying about war casualties has nothing to to with the topic. "Those damn women do not know what it is like to go to war" Riiiiight...OK.

I do not know why you want to talk about villains either. Villains often get what they deserve. It has little to do with gender.

For heroes and their side characters, it is different and that is where there usually is a big difference in treatment between man and women. Most times, when something bad happens to a man, the story will be about how he overcame it (Batman: Venom or Knightfall) but when something happens to a woman, you do not necessarily get a big fightwhere the woman defends herself and the story will more often than not be about how the man reacts to that situation (Killing Joke, Identity Crisis, Death of the New Gods, Green Lantern in Action Comics Weekly, War Games, Longbow Hunters, Cry for Justice, Blitz...).

Finally, I fail to see how one example can invalidate an entire list and an entire concept. And I would not call being possessed empowering.

#8 Posted by DarthShap (875 posts) - - Show Bio

@Durakken said:

@DarthShap said:

@Durakken said:

Also, I gotta point out that "Women in refrigerators" is actually quite wrong. The point of the WiR is to point out how female heroines are handled "differently" because they are depowered/killed/maimed in some way...AND as a way to ignore that all these things happen to male characters try to argue "never return to their previous status". And to even get to that you have to eliminate characters on the list who are not Heroines, but side characters. You also have to eliminate characters that don't actually fit the "maimed" part like Carol Ferris v.v, and then further eliminate characters that grow from the event and become stronger...like I don't know... Barbara Gordon. Another thing you have to do is eliminate characters that can't come back due to series not existing in any way shape or form and following their adventures isn't important. Of course once we do that we then would have to eliminate, to see if there is an actual problem with "heroines" facing this problem 1 woman character for every male character that is a hero that is dead/depowered/maimed such as Arsenal, Blue Beetle, Cyborg Superman, Lex Luthor, Kurt Conners. (the 3 "villains" i have to remind you did not start as villains and are actually trying to be heroes of some sort or another) and that is off the top my head and would eliminate a good portion of the legitimate list... so that list is more or less bunk.

No.

You are just inventing rules that fon the creators of the list would "have to" follow, for no reason.

It never was about female superheroines (although some characters were superheroines), it was about the suffering of women being used as plot devices to further the character development of the male protagonists (and that is exactly how Moore used Barbara Gordon in the Killing Joke).

If you did not get that, you did not get the point of the list. You do know that it is a reference to Alex Dewitt, Kyle Rayner's first GF, who was not a superheroine.

"These are superheroines..." ~ Gail Simone

Now go do research before you speak

Ok I had forgotten about that that was 1999 quote. My bad.

Having said that, the concept has evolved since then. At the time, nothing had been theorized. Since then however, the expression, the list and its interpretation have changed.

Now you go do your research. We are not in 1999 anymore. Here, I am helping you:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_Refrigerators

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/WomenInRefrigerators

http://www.comicvine.com/women-in-refrigerators/12-43763/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DInYaHVSLr8

You are welcome.

#9 Posted by DarthShap (875 posts) - - Show Bio

@Durakken said:

Also, I gotta point out that "Women in refrigerators" is actually quite wrong. The point of the WiR is to point out how female heroines are handled "differently" because they are depowered/killed/maimed in some way...AND as a way to ignore that all these things happen to male characters try to argue "never return to their previous status". And to even get to that you have to eliminate characters on the list who are not Heroines, but side characters. You also have to eliminate characters that don't actually fit the "maimed" part like Carol Ferris v.v, and then further eliminate characters that grow from the event and become stronger...like I don't know... Barbara Gordon. Another thing you have to do is eliminate characters that can't come back due to series not existing in any way shape or form and following their adventures isn't important. Of course once we do that we then would have to eliminate, to see if there is an actual problem with "heroines" facing this problem 1 woman character for every male character that is a hero that is dead/depowered/maimed such as Arsenal, Blue Beetle, Cyborg Superman, Lex Luthor, Kurt Conners. (the 3 "villains" i have to remind you did not start as villains and are actually trying to be heroes of some sort or another) and that is off the top my head and would eliminate a good portion of the legitimate list... so that list is more or less bunk.

No.

You are just inventing rules that fon the creators of the list would "have to" follow, for no reason.

It never was about female superheroines (although some characters were superheroines), it was about the suffering of women being used as plot devices to further the character development of the male protagonists (and that is exactly how Moore used Barbara Gordon in the Killing Joke).

If you did not get that, you did not get the point of the list. You do know that it is a reference to Alex Dewitt, Kyle Rayner's first GF, who was not a superheroine.

#10 Posted by DarthShap (875 posts) - - Show Bio

This must be a joke. Who would ever buy those series?

It looks like DC is running out of ideas for new series here.