55 Comments
  • 55 results
  • 1
  • 2
Posted by mimschkin

 What exactly would you expect with a name like 'Speedy'?
But really, I think major changes are ok, if they're actually going to go with them. Like if they'd have developed the whole story of Roy and his lack of arm, his struggles, etc. in depth (I don't actually know how much they did of this because I don't read said comic, but yeah). But then having something major happen, only to fix it a couple issues later is a pointless venture, probably just with a marketing motive. 

Posted by Captainess Boricua

The ending was cruel, G-Man! 
 
My poor Roy Harper. Let's hope that this change they forced on him only goes to develop him into a better character. I've always loved Roy because of his faults and what he overcame due to his drug habit. I was shocked and angry when I found out what happened to him in the Cry for Justice mini but as I got used to the idea all I can hope is that the miniseries does him justice.

Posted by Branagin77

Of course  they should go through changes..just not lame changes that make no sense..you know the ones where you can tell the writer's just getting bored with writing, so to meet deadlines they ruin stuff... 
 
Red arrow should have lost his arm then they should of shown how he struggled with depression and the frustrations of having lost his pride and joy of a arm.. then hey should fell of the wagon and starting using heroin again to cope with all the pain, then after time he could of had a really bad ass comeback.. Change definitely takes time...That's keeping it Real! 
 
Word is Born...

Edited by xerox_kitty

Waittaminute... something strange happened there.  Was there a change half-way through that film?!  It was very subtle, but I swear something was different! Hrmm... 
 
In general, comic fans don't like a lot of change.  That's pretty much why characters keep coming back from the dead.   A one-armed archer was sadly unoriginal, since it had been done in Dark Knight.  However, it was more chocking to see how it happened.  Hell, this level of physical abuse for the sake of a cheap plot would put normally have put Roy in the Women In Refrigerators list... if he wasn't a guy :p  

Moderator
Posted by Omega Ray Jay

So long as it's nessasary  ive got nothing against character changes but like you said, change for the sake of it just isnt worth it, Just seems like genuine opportunities for character development is shunned nine times out of ten for plane old shock value.

Posted by sora_thekey
@xerox-kitty said:
"Waittaminute... something strange happened there.  Was there a change half-way through that film?!  It was very subtle, but I swear something was different! Hrmm... "
Yeah I think G-Man must've had a sore throat during that shot or something cause he sounded different.... 
 
Great PSA guys.... only problem is that shouldn't it had been on Speedy rather than the change of characters.... 
Unless there's a part two!
Moderator
Posted by grifter78

LOL!  That was great!  Love Babs' cameo.  :D
Posted by lostlantern13

I think it's too early to tell if it (referring to Roy's arm in the laughably bad Cry for Justice) was done for shock or done to evolve the character. I feel like there should be some wait to see how his mini goes. 
 
Sometimes change works (Dick Grayson growing up to Nightwing as 1 example) and sometimes it doesn't (Red/Blue Superman as another). Just gotta give see how the story goes.     

Posted by FoxxFireArt

I believe the literary term is a character being static. I am pro change, but it has to be plot driven. Not just mindless shock value and the writers need to stick with it. That doesn't seem likely when a single series may have a series of writers throughout a year. In series that lasts decades. How can you have a character remaining the same and still having a character remain interesting to read.
Deaths are the same. Too often I just can't find any emotional involvement when everything that happens to characters is reversed at some point. 

That's something I like about manga series. When you have a single writer. You often get a stronger narrative. Changes happen to a character that are solid and lasting.

Posted by No_Name_

Posted by G-Man
@Babs: Thanks!
Staff
Posted by Zoom

Drugs was pure shock value.  Denny O'Neil wrote some good stories but that one dropped the ball and ignored the fact that Roy had a huuuge support system outside of Ollie.
 
As for the arm...not so bold when he just gets a metal arm right after.

Edited by E.I.S.A.M.

Here's what I think about change in general. Change is good. If we didn't have change, we wouldn't have Oracle, or Tim Drake, or the New Teen Titans, or the great stories we got out of Wally West as the Flash.  
An example of keeping characters in the same place when it's obviously a bad idea is the most recent Titans. They put all the old kids together when they were adults when there was obviously nothing left to do with them but move them forward. These characters have to move forward or they're seen as obsolete by the writers and fan base and are then killed off. Dick Grayson as Batman is a good idea. Wally West as the Flash is a good idea. Tim Drake as Nightwing is a good idea.  Sure, I think we can all agree that Roy loosing an arm was grossly unnecessary, and one of the manny manny reasons I can't stand James Robinson's writing, but him becoming Red Arrow was awesome, and needed.
I believe that right now, DC should embrace the change they've begun. Let's get the next generation graduated, and let's put the old dogs in the JSA. Let's have BatmanII, Donna Troy, Power Girl, John Stuart, Wally West, Arsenal, Cyborg and Starfire on the Justice League, and lets move Hal, Barry, and Dinah to the JSA, and lets retire Jay, Ted, and Allen to a condo in Florida. Just a thought.

Posted by Riezner
@mimschkin said:
"  What exactly would you expect with a name like 'Speedy'?  "
: )
Posted by D-Dude

Hey G-man, i totally think that your special effects went wrong at the end cause I could the effects starting to show your full arm. Or are you a mutant??
O__o

Posted by Archetype

I think some stories such as Roy losing his arm are done to shake things up for a character that has become stale but other stories such as the one's where he was doing heroine were more about addressing social issue through the medium of comic books than it was about any shock value.These comic book publishers are large companies sure they make mistakes but they know what they're doing and they know shock value is only temporary and that what might only be "shock value" to you might actually be heart wrenching and devastating to someone who loved the character because you know people love them some obscure characters.
 
Also since Roy is getting a new arm why didn't he make sure it looked good?
That design disgusts me it's so ugly!
 
Great PSA! It was a wonderful production yall should be proud.

Posted by cjhanz

changes are good but i doesnt make sense for this character i mean he just got prmoted to red arrow and then he imedatley gets his arm ripped off. roy shouldnt have to get his arm ripped off to get a flipin miniseries i mean how many teams has he been in how many contacts does he have they couldnt draw on any of those things and make a fantastical adventure with roy maybe bats and barry or even red robin, red arrow team up hes a cool character who gets a shit deal. roy gets on the league and gets the name red arrow only to be a background character in it his stint with hawkgirl wasnt all the long either then bats dies he is imedatly overshadowed by dick. 
Posted by Grim

i feel like change is sometimes necessary for the development of newer and younger characters. They have to evolve past short shorts and side kicking.  Shock value changes usually suck for some people, but are offten done in ways that will effect/offend the fewest people.
 I feel like this thing with Roy was something well thought out. DC is going to kill, retire, and villainize a fraction of their youthful characters before the surviving few officially become major leaguers. So i look forward to the trials Roy will have to face with this.

Posted by Decept-O
@xerox-kitty: 
Good points.    
 
 LMAO @ mimschkin's Speedy comment.  Always thought it ironic, that one.
Nice job on the video guys, it had me laughing!
Posted by Mbecks14

I'm all for change as long as its natural and it makes sense.
 
drastic twists like this ruin characters. The titans get the brunt of these radical changes because they're just obscure enough to give creators flexibility.  Roy/Arsenal/Red Arrow is the most recent of these changes, but not too long ago, Jericho who basically just came back from the dead as a good guy was once again, again, turned into a bad guy in the Deathtrap arc that spun out of the stupid, failed election arc taht DC did.
 
Now Roy and Jericho are NOT my favorite characters. but it does bother me when this happens. I feel that Roy should never have become Red Arrow at all, i dont think they shouldve put him in the league. so while i approve of him becoming Arsenal again, what they're doing now is just wrong. 
 
Honestly the Justice League is an absolute mess right now. and they just keep making it worse. Get the titans out of there, disassemble the league (again) and then build it back up with the characters that should be there when their own stories stop conflicting

Posted by Emperor Gonzo Noir

This reminds me of a story about a another boy named Speedy

 Poor Speedy, he was so close to getting his wings too
Edited by SUPER-MAN 23

Change is  good 

Posted by robokungfu

Roy Harper is the Harry Goldfarb of comics then!

Posted by Bandito
@G-Man said:
"It took Spider-Man years to get through high school and then college."
 
It takes most people years to get through high school and then college.
Posted by 4Essence

Great video, G-Man. It was funny as hell and raised an important question. My response to that would have to be that I think every change is mostly to keep characters fresh and keep things riveting, which is of course necessary with characters so old and will continue to grow in age.  
 
However, i think that in the business perspective, (I understand that a lot of the executives actually have a great admiration for these characters), it's really is about selling books. And how do you do that? You unmask Spider-Man, then a couple of years later, you take away his wife; you make Tony Stark an alcoholic; you have Wonder Woman kill someone; you "kill" Batman.  
 
I think sometimes this is done needlessly. Sure these things aren't completly bad, and there are some really good ones that actually make you think (Deaths of Jason Todd, Superman, Captian America) but I'd prefer my characters untainted. 
Posted by They Killed Cap!

Minor changes are ok, costumes, tweaks to power, names etc. 
 
Major changes not cool-Superman-Blue Superman, Ferral wolverine, orign changes continuity changes. 
 
Posted by NightFang

Great vid but I think some characters should go thought changes so the don't get old but nothing to major, like "losing you're arm"!!!!

Posted by johnny_spam

Well I know that Roy was on drugs because Dennis O'Neil thought it was an issue that needed to be addressed in the seventies. 
 
As for Roy losing his arm I know this might sound offensive to other DC comic book fans  (DC comics are my favorite superheroes) but if they are not Superman or Batman then there place is not guaranteed. Just because a book is popular at one time doesn't mean it will always be. So I think that some of these characters may need shocking acts just to give them some strength. And let's be honest Roy wasn't doing anything important at the time. Now he's getting a mini series. 
 
I just had a idea for a book at the end of this video. 
 
The Rise of G-Man Written by JT Krul.

Posted by MemnochZERO

Personally I think it's about how best the change suits the character. I mean real Nightcrawler vesus Chuck Austen's warped Nightcrawler = bad change. Pre Crisis Jason Todd versus Post Crisis Jason Todd = good change. As for Speedy and all his changes up until now, when it comes to kid sidekicks I think they can only stay the same for so long before they have to grow and start making mistakes or shed the happy kid persona (lets face it, kids sidekicks staying 100% the same over 50 years is gonna get dated pretty quick). I also don't mind shocking changes as long as it's not shock value, by that I mean something drastic for dramatic effect versus to make a drastic change "just because". Sadly a lot of shakeup ends up shock value, but enough exists out there that has redeeming value. It's a mixed bag, really it just depends on the creative team.
Posted by Secret Identity

"Change is good", "20/20 hindsight", "fear of the unknown" and "If it ain't broke don't fix it" are all phrases that come to mind when talking on this subject. The way I see it is like this: 
 
People(all people) resist change in one way or another. Change takes us out of the realms of certainty which makes us uncomfortable. Some take change better than others but we all feel a little anxiety when big changes happen in our lives. Be that changes in our jobs, our home life, our love lives etc etc. Some will embrace change as they feel no other option and others will resist it. Imagine, if you will, being in a boat traveling on a river with a strong current. Soon enough you lose sight of the bank from which you left. At this point there is an instant feeling of anxiety. What if something happens whilst you are gone? Or if something unexpected happens up ahead? You have two choices; try to paddle back and resist the current (which is near impossible in most situations) or continue to row down the river and hope you enjoy the ride ahead. Paddling back is the resistance of change. Paddling forward is accepting it. (There are in reality a couple of other choices; get to a bank and get out the river or stop paddling and just go with it.) 
 
What people like to do when changes like this happen is either rush into it with a very gung-ho attitude or push against it with a very negative one. In the example given here (Roy's loss) there was already a lot of negativity to latch on to and someone to blame for the change (The book and the author). Whether this is rightly or wrongly done is neither here nor there. What is important is that a character that many enjoy has and will be changed from here on out. That change scares people. And it is a particularly strong fear when it is in a media form. 
 
When a change happens in real life people deal with it. They have no choice but to do so. It is these changes that bring both stress and enjoyment to life. But life is very different to media. People read comics or watch films or read books to escape their own lives and distance themselves from that which causes them stress; Change. So a change of a character that people read about causes speculation and discomfort. 
 
You will notice that in a film or a novel the beginning is usually pretty happy or uneventful and that it will be the changes that cause the excitement in the story. In the lord of the rings for example we see a relatively happy, contented character in Frodo until the change(Gandalf) appears. This change brings about conflict but at the end of the books there is a sense of completion and of the status-quo being restored. This is fine in film and novel form as (mostly) the story has an ending that you know you can reach by reading on and that offers a sense of reassurance. 
 
In comics however we see a character as someone who will continue to be shown beyond this story and there is never any clear end in sight. In the case of Roy Harper we had a change that was drastic and have been left hanging to find out what this change will be with no way to immediately read on to the resolution of this change in the way we have with a book or film. This causes us to dwell, and those of us who have dwelt on our concerns well realise that this only serves to make us more anxious. This is what is happening here. Nobody knows if this change will be well written, what will happen or where it will leave the character when the story is complete. We can speculate but that is all we can do. That causes people to feel uncomfortable and that in turn causes people to fight this change. 
 
It may turn out that this was a very bad move on the part of DC (I do not blame the author of the book in which the even happened because i have no doubt that there was a discussion throughout the higher ups of DC that lead to this change) but until it is tried there is no way to know. "20/20 hindsight" counts for little here. It may also totally revitalise a character that was reaching the point of being very much the same as others that have been before him and falling into a rut. Again, we will never know what could have been. 
 
I have followed the character for a while now and I am a fan of him so whilst nervous of the outcome I am curious as to what will happen with Roy. My standing on the question of "Was this a necessary change?" is probably not but I will follow the story and enjoy it for what it is, hopeful that it will be a positive change in direction.  
 
As for whether change is good on the grander scale of things? I'm all for it. Both shock change and gradual change. The question is not if the change is good but is what comes after the change good. "Change is inevitable" after all.

Posted by Malice Wonderland

the guy going through "changes" looks like he's being naughty...LMFOA
Posted by CATMANEXE

Those who defy change get hit by the bus when 
they miss the stoplight change to green

Posted by speedlgt

I wonder if this was to done to give him some super human aspect.......for example a cyber arm could give him greater power in that arm add that to a guy that has been deemed a great hand to hand fighter in dcu and you now have a powerless hero with a type of power.  I think thats why this was done I mean i look at this guy and when they added him to the league i was like really? but then they made him seem like a real bad ass now you give him this and who knows
Posted by Namor1987

Forge & Cable & Bishop were all amputees kinda so no IT's Not HANDICAPPED IT'S SUPER HANDICAPABLE LOL

Posted by Final Draft85

I dig the character Roy Harper, so I hate that his arm was ripped off & now he went all Luke Skywalker on us... still it's better than a hand made of hard water (Aquaman). He kind of reminds me of Green Arrow from "The Dark Knight Returns" story & if this helps more people take notice of him cool, but like G-Man said "Don't just do it for shock value. Make it matter". Also this is way better than Superman Blue... that change was bad. =)
Posted by Harlekin

I'm all for it if it keeps him from calling himself Red Arrow.

Posted by DoomDoomDoom

Great video!  IMO characters should change, but I do prefer when the change is addressed.
"change is the only constant"

Posted by DoomDoomDoom
@grifter78:  when it cut to Babs in the same jacket I lost it laughing.
Posted by DMC

I was hoping you were going to cover the Punisher in this since people have been giving Rick Remender a hard time lately. Still this was a great video
Posted by Sir Duke

Really funny video, but it didn't make the best case.  Characters should absolutely change, but the changes should be in the character, not just for shock moments to drive sales.  Yes, life is unpredictable, and you have to deal with things that are beyond your control.  I think it's fine that Roy Harper's arm was ripped off in and of itself, the problem was in the execution.  Like the video said, it was barely addressed in the next issue and was just something to drum up sales at the expense of a character's progression.  That said, it'll be interesting to see what they do with the character from here on out.  
 
I think a better example is when the change really comes from the character as he grows, matures, or is just forced to change in some way.  Take Luke Cage for example.  He started out as a petty criminal and gang member, and slowly became not just a hero and a leader, but a loving husband and father.  These changes were gradual and complex.  Marvel didn't up and decide one day that Luke Cage has to be a family man, it was a gradual buildup to make him the man he is over several years.

Edited by TheBug

Change can be great, as long as you don't forget what made the character good in the first place.
Posted by AMP - Seeker of Lost Knowledge

 As everyone here on ComicVine is aware that every comic book starts out with an idea, and writers need to keep things moving or they're forced to spice things up a little as the years go by and styles change. Some of these changes can be good, and/or they can ruin everything we love in comics. Without change we don't have a continuing story and our characters live, 'happily ever after, the end'. As long as their are writers who given our characters new directions, our reactions for their development will continue to surprise/horrify us. It's our demands that make these writers go for their creative talents.

Posted by Illyana Rasputin

I didn't know you had a library in your bomb shelter, G-Man! I have learned that forming emotional ties to characters will only disappoint you when creators are looking to shake things up a bit in their respective universes. I like shocking moments. As long as the character remains true to who they are, I don't see any harm in giving them a cybernetic limb or a secondary mutation, from time to time. I feel that when the subject matter crosses over into real-life issues, it should be handled with care, but I love all the wacky escapades in comics, and I am all for mixing it up. Obviously, there are instances in which dramatic character changes have been disastrous, but when handled well, certain writing devices can enhance an already beloved character , and sell even more titles. ($hhhhh!) Now, about that cybernetic limb, you're getting red all over your copy of Pride And Prejudice With Zombies.

Posted by Illyana Rasputin
@Namor1987 said:

" Forge & Cable & Bishop were all amputees kinda so no IT's Not HANDICAPPED IT'S SUPER HANDICAPABLE LOL "

I like that! 
Posted by THEBlaqueBasterd
@Branagin77:  Spot on with EVERYTHIN u said.......... 
 
But...just ONE thing....didnt you mean... "Word is BOND..." ? >:|
Posted by HaloKing343

Ha ha! AMAZING video. Usually I don't like this campy stuff but this was very entertaining. 
 
G-Man looked really funny in the suit but Babs didn't really seem to have a purpose in the video. I feel like you guys just threw her in there so that she could be there.
Posted by MichaelSimpson


 
This is WHY exactly I'm not reading any new Marvel & DC comics anymore, but unless it's Marvel's What if.  
Edited by hugo123

From the moment they set in place the last major change to this character (Stripping away the characters individuality and making a red version of GA) they set in moment a chain of events whereby the character would either become obsolete and be fazed out, or they would have to kill him, main him or emotionally destroy/change him in order to bring some difference to the character. He was never going to be anything more than filler as GA light.
 
The loss of the arm isn't the catalyst for change for this character, Roy Harper has always had crud dumped on him and been able to dig his way out, so an arm that can be replaced by a prosthetic or robotic limb would not be enough to change his character dramatically. I have little doubt the writers have a far more emotionally challenging shock in store for Roy. The loss of Star City and with it Lian Harper, Roy's young daughter, will be the true dramatic force that promotes major change to this character.
 
I'm not adverse to change. Changing a character works in some cases, I'm not sure it will work in this case but I'll be giving it time to see if it does.

Posted by jakob187

Meh.  Homie lost his arm.  Homie's getting a prosthetic arm.  Problem solved.

Posted by Hawkling
@Branagin77 said:
" Of course  they should go through changes..just not lame changes that make no sense..you know the ones where you can tell the writer's just getting bored with writing, so to meet deadlines they ruin stuff...   Red arrow should have lost his arm then they should of shown how he struggled with depression and the frustrations of having lost his pride and joy of a arm.. then hey should fell of the wagon and starting using heroin again to cope with all the pain, then after time he could of had a really bad ass comeback.. Change definitely takes time...That's keeping it Real!   Word is Born... "
How could he shoot up heroin with one arm?
  • 55 results
  • 1
  • 2