roboadmiral's forum posts

#1 Posted by roboadmiral (564 posts) - - Show Bio

You underestimate how hard writers are willing to try to worm their way around that and how inexplicably willing people are to go along with their circuitous and tortured logic in the name of keeping the official kill count at zero. But yeah, there is literally no chance that at least a few of them have not died. Even if Batman didn't kill them on the spot they still died due to complications from their wounds. Infections, internal bleeding, organ failure, etc. There is no such thing as a harmless knock-out. That's how people get brain damage. But the power of the willing suspension of disbelief says that Batman is so precise that he can consistently beat legions of criminals within an inch of their lives over and over without a single direct or indirect casualty.

#2 Posted by roboadmiral (564 posts) - - Show Bio

I think when/if DC continues to work on video games, I don't think it should be a full DCU game. The Batman Arkham series is pretty much the best received comic book video game franchise ever, both critically and commercially, and they should definitely learn from that. Rather than homogenize the universe and make everyone fit a particular style of gameplay and setting. It loses a lot of what makes each character unique along the way. Everything about Arkham showed contributed to the experience of being Batman. The art direction, the combat, the stealth, the exploration. They should continue that with different characters. Make excellent games that focus on and embody the experience of being a particular character.

#3 Posted by roboadmiral (564 posts) - - Show Bio

Don't have to boycott. Just don't read what you don't want to read. If people don't like the new direction, the sales on the books will tank. They won't keep publishing a book that doesn't sell. Comics are too niche a market to keep pushing a thing the readers aren't going for.

#4 Posted by roboadmiral (564 posts) - - Show Bio

Please let this be Miller's comeback. Please. Old Frank Miller (Dark Knight Returns, Batman: Year One, Daredevil: Born Again, the first four volumes of Sin City) despite the attempts of revisionist history is still one of the best talents the comics industry has ever produced. He just also clearly has an ego problem which is how we got post-2000 Frank Miller. If he's hungry and he has something to prove, he's golden. If he comes in thinking "Hey, I'm Frank Miller. I got this," it's doomed. The big problem with most of his newer work is that it's super rushed. It's all clearly first draft stuff that he just threw out because he didn't think he could make a mistake. Hopefully a decade of backlash taught him to slow down, take it seriously, and produce another awesome Batman story. He's done it before which means he can do it again. The question is just whether or not he will.

#5 Posted by roboadmiral (564 posts) - - Show Bio
Violet

#6 Edited by roboadmiral (564 posts) - - Show Bio

Those sexists at DC would never put Batman in such a helpless, compromising cover. Oh wait. . .

. . . Nevermind.

#7 Posted by roboadmiral (564 posts) - - Show Bio

Not really. The performance of any given character varies so widely between writers, story arcs, etc, that establishing what a character's concrete limitations are is pretty much impossible because there are none. Mostly it's just a thing for people to shout angrily when their favorite character loses a fight or someone they dislike wins a fight without having to come up with a good, logically plot-based reason for the fight to have gone the other way. Also, it belies a lack of understanding that a story is a story first, not a computer simulator of hypothetical battles.

#8 Edited by roboadmiral (564 posts) - - Show Bio

I dig it. I was wondering how they were going to handle the scale pattern of Aquaman's costume and how to make it look not silly. The gladiator-esque gauntlets and the tattoos are a neat way to handle it. He's definitely looking intimidating but that could ultimately be a good thing. We don't have much concrete information on the DC movies to come but I was quite pleased with Man of Steel. Marvel has the comedy-infused saturday morning brand of superheroes locked down. It's probably for the best that DC is carving out their own tone and aesthetic. Packing in jokes and primary colors would just be aping a thing their biggest competitor has down to a science and putting more white noise in an already saturated market. Going a more earnest, dramatic route is probably in their best interest to find their own audience and offer something that Marvel isn't already offering.

#9 Edited by roboadmiral (564 posts) - - Show Bio

Admittedly, the hipster in me wishes my four were a little more eclectic but whatever. They're still all brilliant books and I certainly would not be the comic reader I am today without them. Also they kick off my weird obsession with elderly superheroes.

#10 Posted by roboadmiral (564 posts) - - Show Bio

Oh man. I was wondering what was up when I saw how rough he was looking at San Diego Comic Con. At first I figured that he was just getting on in years, but he's definitely not that old. I certainly hope whatever treatment they have him on works out.