The_Runaway's forum posts

#1 Posted by The_Runaway (100 posts) - - Show Bio

wut happenzd 2 gud grammers;

#2 Posted by The_Runaway (100 posts) - - Show Bio

@Jonny_Anonymous said:

@The_Runaway said:

@Jonny_Anonymous: I don't want to spoil anything but have you ever seen Return to the Jedi?

the end ten minutes of goodness in Return of the Jedi does not a good guy make

But they actually do, if you wanted to prove he was evil, Anakin would have been a better example. You don't get internal monologues from Darth Vader but seeing how things ended, clearly he had good guy in him all along. Which is exactly my point. The thing I think you aren't understanding is the idea of an ongoing monthly series. You can do a profile of villain very easily and its been done many times and no good has to be shown but for any story to have any value there needs to be a struggle between good and evil which is why comics started becoming morally grey in the 80's and have remained so ever since (before this, comics were about the art and nobody cared about the writing which is why plenty of older comics nobody even knows who wrote them just who drew them, the stories were crap if held up to any actual reading material, the worlds unrealistic and marketed to children).

A stand-alone story can feature a character of any sort and it can work, if you want an example of a comic about someone with no redeeming factors look no further then that one issue of Alan Moore's Swamp Thing through the eyes of the serial killer. But, if a story is to feature a character and their most inner sanctum (that is their internal monologues), the only way it will be work as a monthly is if the character can have some sort of struggle.

Now the real world is quite obviously morally grey, always has been, always will be. Therefore, most characters are as well whether they be heroes or villains (from Sinestro to Batman to John Constantine to Spawn to anyone who has ever been in an X-Men comic to The Shade to Han Solo to Darth Vader to Thanos to whoever else). The only difference between heroes and villains is one has the tendency to take one path while the other has the tendency to take the second but they consider them both. Therefore, the most popular heroes have done the wrong thing and the most popular villains have actually done good things.

That said, the reason you can have an ongoing featuring a character like Superman who is treated like a true good guy most of the time but not a series where someone is a pure villain all the time is because it takes strength to resist the blurring lines between god and evil whereas it takes being weak of character and primal in nature to give in completely to the bad. Therefore the former can be interesting if done right. The latter can only work if it is a period in the character's life (Anakin/Vader) as opposed to all of it you see unless they are a secondary character.

If you think a 100-issue series wherein every issue all Darth Vader does is kill some Jedi and feel no remorse is interesting, I think you'd be alone in that. A nice four-issue series, sure, but an ongoing would just get stale. A character that doesn't have to struggle is not one whose head is worth being in for more than a moment.

#3 Posted by The_Runaway (100 posts) - - Show Bio

@Jonny_Anonymous: I don't want to spoil anything but have you ever seen Return to the Jedi?

#4 Posted by The_Runaway (100 posts) - - Show Bio

@Jonny_Anonymous said:

@The_Runaway said:

@Jonny_Anonymous said:

Yea, I think that idea that a villain can only hold an ongoing if he becomes a good guy is false

They have to be in the morally grey, otherwise the book would have to be non-canon or set in its own universe (as other publishers where there is no established universe it is much more common to get a villain ongoing)

The simple fact of the matter being that you think these villains are cool but if you were to actually read a comic featuring the stories from their perspective, it would get pretty boring seeing them get locked up and defeated all the time, there's no character development. The key to any good ongoing comic is character development, true, many comics get by without it but they aren't good either. So if a villain is just pure evil, there's no development. You could have a book that ends in someone becoming evil, or have a villain as the secondary protagonist but otherwise you have to go with a villain who is kind of good (which most of the popular villains are). Even Joker shows an indication he's good in the stories of his that are considered essential like The Killing Joke for example.

Lucifer was a series featuring for all intents and purposes a villain, but it worked because there was character development and he wasn't always a villain. Having set the ongoing back when he was just busy being Lord of Hell and not changing his style for millions of years would be so boring and never have lasted.

I don't agree with this, I don't believe in absolute evil or absolute good ether. You don't have to show the bad guy getting beat all the time because you don't have to have them fight good guys or at least popular good guys. A Darth Vader ongoing is perfectly feasible with him going about killing Jedi.

But Darth Vader was good, that's why it would work. Why didn't you at least say Darth Sidious?

#5 Posted by The_Runaway (100 posts) - - Show Bio

@Jonny_Anonymous said:

Yea, I think that idea that a villain can only hold an ongoing if he becomes a good guy is false

They have to be in the morally grey, otherwise the book would have to be non-canon or set in its own universe (as other publishers where there is no established universe it is much more common to get a villain ongoing)

The simple fact of the matter being that you think these villains are cool but if you were to actually read a comic featuring the stories from their perspective, it would get pretty boring seeing them get locked up and defeated all the time, there's no character development. The key to any good ongoing comic is character development, true, many comics get by without it but they aren't good either. So if a villain is just pure evil, there's no development. You could have a book that ends in someone becoming evil, or have a villain as the secondary protagonist but otherwise you have to go with a villain who is kind of good (which most of the popular villains are). Even Joker shows an indication he's good in the stories of his that are considered essential like The Killing Joke for example.

Lucifer was a series featuring for all intents and purposes a villain, but it worked because there was character development and he wasn't always a villain. Having set the ongoing back when he was just busy being Lord of Hell and not changing his style for millions of years would be so boring and never have lasted.

#6 Posted by The_Runaway (100 posts) - - Show Bio
#7 Posted by The_Runaway (100 posts) - - Show Bio

this blog looks so amazing...if only I had an interest in Batman D:

#8 Posted by The_Runaway (100 posts) - - Show Bio
Jason Blood said:
"wow, looks like our team failed already...you guys are pathetic, great team spirit -_-"
hey man, no one asked for your insults, if we wanted your opinion we'd have asked for it
#9 Posted by The_Runaway (100 posts) - - Show Bio
T.J. Magnum said:
"well he is the saint of killers =]"
but still, I mean, there are 72 Basanos...how could he kill them all before they do something?? but to make it fair maybe it should only be one of the Basanos...*thinks to himself*
#10 Posted by The_Runaway (100 posts) - - Show Bio

Breaking Benjamin - Breath