love or hate new alan scott?

[Johnny P. Sartre]

A reinvention of a character in a new universe (where in that new universe main characters got reinvented) in a new secondary earth (where it's considered a sandbox to do NEW things and expermiement) and the the big dogs aren't the there. Come on! Non-prime earths have always been known to distort and add something new to the agenda.

Also, gimmick and bean counting as this may be, at least they gimmicking and bean countering towards diversity.

[RohanRiderX]

A reinvention of a character in a new universe (where in that new universe main characters got reinvented) in a new secondary earth (where it's considered a sandbox to do NEW things and expermiement) and the the big dogs aren't the there. Come on! Non-prime earths have always been known to distort and add something new to the agenda.

Also, gimmick and bean counting as this may be, at least they gimmicking and bean countering towards diversity.

agree least its trying for something good

[Johnny P. Sartre]

see but.... batwoman also bothers me. i get a lot of people love her arcs and its well written or the art is really cool but i dont like her either. its like they needed to get a lesbain into the mix. and batman was popular. lets put her there.

that only slightly bothers me. what bothers me most about her character is that batman doesnt let ANYONE run in gotham without his blessing and his guidance. and here she comes taking the bat name and doing her own thing getting her own gadgets from her own sources like a "strong independant woman" would. it doesnt make sense. batman would never let her do what she does.

i know that there has been an issue or 2 where they show them getting along but its so unlike batmans character to allow her to do that. it bugs me.

Batman did give her her blessing, added her to inc, and saved her froma mugger. Did you not read Ruckas run? She got the gadgets from her father, a ex-military man.

Also, if Batman can have different Robins and have different Batmans all over the world, he can allow Batwoman.

[MajorHoy]

You are aware of the analogy of children making and destroying their own universes in the proverbial sandbox, yes?

I'm also aware of the little "surprises" that can be buried in the sand as well.

And litter boxes sometimes are referred to as "sand boxes".



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

[RohanRiderX]

Batman did give her her blessing, added her to inc, and saved her froma mugger. Did you not read Ruckas run?

Also, if Batman can have different Robins and have different Batmans all oer the world, he can allow Batwoman.

See this is where we are getting into the "somethings count, some dont" shenanians with the reboot

most people arent gonna remember that because its before the reboot...

[The_Greatest_Username]

Alan Scott being gay does seems kind of gimmicky, but I think he's being written well so I don't really care about that change. What I do think is strange is that Alan Scott being gay essentially makes us lose his son, Obsidian, who was already gay pre-Flashpoint.

[Johnny P. Sartre]

For the bat universe most of it was left untouched, if I'm not mistaken but you're right.

[RohanRiderX]

For the bat universe most of it was left untouched, if I'm not mistaken but you're right.

Yea thats ...a can of worms right now i dont wanna open right now haha everythngs the same ...excepts ts not hahah

[MajorHoy]

For the bat universe most of it was left untouched, if I'm not mistaken but you're right.

Except for Catwoman, all the Batgirls, Dick not being Robin until he was around 16, Tim possibly always being "Red Robin" and never just "Robin", the method by how Jason came back, . . .

[Johnny P. Sartre]

Ah okay. Thank you.

[DCFanboi]

So i have red earth 2 #3 like 15 times lol and i am wondering what everyone thinks of the new alan scott.

Personally i love the fact that that really didint change his personality at all from what it was before there is no difference besides ya know...he likes dudes. Which i think is something i have come to like about alan the way they set it up wasn't anvilicious it was protrayed just like any hetero relationship which i think is great thing and made me actually feel like it wasent forced.

plus the man clearly has gigantic huevos

a talking green flame just drafted him into his war on evil and scotts reply...."bring it"

im glad Scott is recognizable as the same charecter.

I hate him. He is completely unrecognizeable as the same charcater. He is Alan Scott in name only.

QFT. A character's race, sexuality, religion, and gender is part of what makes them them. It's like if they turned Batman into a girl (Brianna Wayne) in the New 52. I actually told my friend that when the New 52 was happening he FREAKED OUT.

QFTA.

About 10% of human beings are gay. About 0.01% were gay in comics before the New 52. This coincided with the situation that existed in modern society in nearly every single moment up to the present one: the situation that homosexuality has been taboo and homosexuals have mainly remained closeted.

So is DC saying characters used to be straight and now they're gay? Or are they saying things have changed and it's no longer necessary for so many characters to remain in the closet? Or are they simply saying we're starting over and while we do so we're going to take the opportunity to make superhero comics just a little less strictly about straight, white males and just a tiny bit more like the actual world they seek to reflect?

To create a ton of new gay characters (or black ones or Asian ones or whatever) to resemble a more accurate reflection of our society would be to ghettoize them; to make their very reason for being one of diversity. Alan Scott isn't only gay; his whole life doesn't have to be about that. Nor is Ryan Choi only Asian.

Is it your suggestion that DC makes up the difference with a bunch of "Bunkers?" Because, if so, I don't think I'd much enjoy that approach, regardless of socio-politics.

I do not agree. To take a character who was not gay (and not just that trait either) and now claim he is, is to destroy the character. If a new gay character is made who only reason to exist is to be gay, that is an issue of the creator, not something inherent in the design process. Or are you claiming that for a character to be relevant, substantial and homosexual he must have original heterosexual roots?

[Robotman4]

He's cool so far but they need to give him his cape back. I really dislike the new design without the cape.

[refrax5]

I hate him. He is completely unrecognizeable as the same charcater. He is Alan Scott in name only.



QFTA.



I do not agree. To take a character who was not gay (and not just that trait either) and now claim he is, is to destroy the character. If a new gay character is made who only reason to exist is to be gay, that is an issue of the creator, not something inherent in the design process. Or are you claiming that for a character to be relevant, substantial and homosexual he must have original heterosexual roots?

He has the exact same personality in amost every single way. I think it's so funny how comics fans are more upset that he's gay---which has little bearing on how he's been portrayed, it's not like he's acting as a stereotype in any way---but he's not a WW2 vet and he's a young modern man, which are way bigger changes.

Again, I'm sorry, details about characters and their personalities change to reflect the society they exist in. They always have. Batman may not have had a gender change, but he is portrayed VERY differently than he was in the Golden Age or the Silver Age. The differences in the Batman or Superman characters of that era and this era are faaaar more vast than making Alan Scott gay. To accept one but not the other is hypocritical.

[Joseph_Kerr]

Batman did give her her blessing, added her to inc, and saved her froma mugger. Did you not read Ruckas run? She got the gadgets from her father, a ex-military man.

Also, if Batman can have different Robins and have different Batmans all over the world, he can allow Batwoman.

the difference is batman trained all the robins. so he knows theyre "worthy" or trusting enough to represent the bat name. theyre skilled enough. they arent newbs. its been done before. any time a vigilante comes to gotham batman destroys them and kicks them out of gotham. it shouldnt be any different with batwoman.

id have no issue with it if batman trained her. but he didnt. shes the strong independant woman that can do it all on her own without any help. its also a gimmic.

[Fate's Faith]

I like everything about the character WAY more except for his connection to "the Green" life force or whatever. I'm getting enough of that over in Swamp Thing and would rather they did something more original / creative with the character's powers.

That I agree with to an extent. I've taken that the Green of Earth 2 is more a combination of the Green and the Red of Prime Earth. Life in total. Especially since Grundy seems to be the destruction of all life. But hopefully they bring this more away from what I've come to think of as the Green.

see but.... batwoman also bothers me. i get a lot of people love her arcs and its well written or the art is really cool but i dont like her either. its like they needed to get a lesbain into the mix. and batman was popular. lets put her there.

that only slightly bothers me. what bothers me most about her character is that batman doesnt let ANYONE run in gotham without his blessing and his guidance. and here she comes taking the bat name and doing her own thing getting her own gadgets from her own sources like a "strong independant woman" would. it doesnt make sense. batman would never let her do what she does.

i know that there has been an issue or 2 where they show them getting along but its so unlike batmans character to allow her to do that. it bugs me.

Then Batgirl is another offender. Unless her beginnings have changed, she didn't ask for permission to work in Gotham. Batman didn't even know her identity for awhile. Besides, isn't she a new character that people say they should create if they want gays and lesbians?