Superman is suffering.

[The Bat-Man]

The heroes in comics do inspire and show goodness and charity. None of which changes that there is nothing wrong with the Joker slicing his face off and Batman having sex with Catwoman. Does there need to be a moral lesson in that?

I think you already know my opinion on that by now. I have no interest in endlessly repeating myself.

If a parent doesn't like what they see in Detective Comics #13 (2012), or Detective Comics #327, there's nothing that can be done about it.

They can choose to not support it by not buying it.

Your point has a flaw in it. That's what I'm pointing out. Anyone who feels the need to buy it all, does so because they are a completest. Not because they aren't smart enough to figure it out. And besides, shouldn't we be encouraging people to buy more comics? Like I said earlier, I bought certain comics because of a crossover and thus that title/character gained one more reader.

Those crossovers and year long story arcs are not keeping comic books accessible to the new readers who might want to read an issue of Superman or Batman but find themselves in the middle of a continuity heavy year long arc, without even a last issue recap. And some peoples budgets are limited, so they can't buy many comics a month to keep up with the crossover storyline. Which is why I suggested that they make the comics new reader friendly again with shorter storylines that last about three-issues at the most as it was for decades in the '30s to the '80s so every issue is a jumping on point for new readers. Denny O'Neil was allowed to go back to short storylines as editor on the Batman titles after the long Knightfall/Knightquest crossover was over. Beginning with the Doug Moench and Kelley Jones run in 1995 and expanded to the entire Batman line of comics by editor Denny O'Neil from 1996 to 1998.

Even when they had Batman appear in the Spectre's title and the Spectre appear in Batman's title (obviously to try and boost the Spectre's sales), they kept them two separate stories rather than a crossover storyline.

"Batman: The Animated Series" had a strong following and the comic had strong sales, but DC cancelled the comic.

Actually, because of the strong sales, up until 2004 DC kept publishing comic book series based on Bruce Timm's Batman: The Animated Series/The Batman & Robin Adventures/The New Batman Adventures (1992-1999) long after the TV series was over. As the Bruce Timm animated Batman TV series changed titles, the DC comic books based on Bruce Timm's Batman changed titles as well. The Batman Adventures (1992-1995) spun off into The Batman & Robin Adventures (1995-1998) and spun off again into Batman: Gotham Adventures (1998-2003) and then spun back to Batman Adventures (2003-2004). Beyond the regular ongoing series DC even released The Batman Adventures: Mad Love (1994), The Batman Adventures: The Lost Years mini-series (1998) and the Batman: Harley and Ivy mini-series (2004).

A lot of comics aren't top sellers, but are still on the shelves. If the book were written by Johns and Morrison, it would sell.

Comic books with continued poor sales get cancelled. Of course big name writers with a fan following like Grant Morrison and Geoff Johns and big name artists such as Jim Lee and Alex Ross would give any comic book title a temporary boost in sales, until they leave that title, and many of their fans leave with them.

[refrax5]

Grant Morrison is at least trying to keep Superman alive. He is boiling it down to the essential elements, showing what is essential. Let's face it, we had years of crap Superman writing under Idleson's eye. The New Krypton fiasco. Letting that blow-hard JMS do Grounded. Taking him out of his own books for years at a time and substituting characters no one really cared about.

I think the best new writer we had was Chris Roberson. Keeping in mind that he was stuck using a crap story that was not his own, he showed that he had the chops to become a new and exciting voice with Superman. Roberson loved the character and it showed in the work he did. Sadly he was pushed out for a year of rotating creators and now we have Scott Lobdell, who is hardly going to set the world on fire.

It doesn't help that the current heads of DC consist of a moron, and overrated hack and an artist whose best creative days are behind him. Everyone looks the same. History was destroyed for the sake of being drastic.

Smallville has been more successful than the Superman comics for a long time and has more of a cultural penetration. Learn from what Smallville did right. They did New Krypton in a much better way then the comics ever did. Lois was finally written as someone you could see Superman falling for. New characters were introduced with amazing results (Tess and Chloe).

Morrison had a way of taking classic elements of Superman and reinterpreting it in a modern light. I like the idea of making him a more passionate social crusader, a young cool journalist with high ideals. He comes off as a cool, modern guy without sacrificing his goodness and decency. Johns and Frank just wrote him as a quaint, old fashioned character. He was practically a parody of his wholesome image. I feel like that's not only bad for the character, but actually far away from the original concept of the character. The character should always be a good guy and a moral pillar, but he should reflect the times he lives in, or else he has no impact.

[Fate's Faith]

Those crossovers and year long story arcs are not keeping comic books accessible to the new readers who might want to read an issue of Superman or Batman but find themselves in the middle of a continuity heavy year long arc, without even a last issue recap. And some peoples budgets are limited, so they can't buy many comics a month to keep up with the crossover storyline. Which is why I suggested that they make the comics new friendly again with shorter storylines that last about three-issues at the most as it was for decades in the '30s to the '80s. Denny O'Neil was allowed to go back to short storylines as editor on the Batman titles after the long Knightfall/Knightquest crossover was over. Beginning with the Doug Moench and Kelley Jones run in 1995 and expanded to the entire Batman line of comics by editor Denny O'Neil from 1996 to 1998.

I can't say I'd mind the way they were writing back a little more as Nightwing is currently being written. We have the main storyline current (DotF) but we have the other storyline of Amusement Mile and its complications to his life. Shorten the arcs, limit the events and keep a lower keyed storyline running in the background that can move to the forefront from time to time. That's how I remember Ra's al Ghul's entry to the mythos. Not one big arc then done but someone who popped up from time to time that we had this rich history of the character. But I do love some of the longer stories. I think the format of comics can be some of everything. They don't always have to be just one.

[The Bat-Man]

I can't say I'd mind the way they were writing back a little more as Nightwing is currently being written. We have the main storyline current (DotF) but we have the other storyline of Amusement Mile and its complications to his life. Shorten the arcs, limit the events and keep a lower keyed storyline running in the background that can move to the forefront from time to time. That's how I remember Ra's al Ghul's entry to the mythos. Not one big arc then done but someone who popped up from time to time that we had this rich history of the character. But I do love some of the longer stories. I think the format of comics can be some of everything. They don't always have to be just one.

Yeah, I agree. I like a satisfying full story with some real substance in each issue of a comic book rather than mere pieces of one gimmicky story event that lasts a year. My favorite Batman story is a short one-issue story called "There Is No Hope In Crime Alley" by Denny O'Neil featuring Batman fighting real world street crimes, muggings, robberies, helping elderly people and flashing back to his parents murder. It's a short simple story, and a touching one with emotional impact and a moral. Some series manage to have short satisfying storylines in each issue within a continuing story. Steve Niles/Kelley Jones' Batman: Gotham After Midnight had short storylines with a continuing story subplot within a 12 issue series. Each issue had a singular, encapsulated story—with each featuring a different Batman villain—but there was the structure of an over-arc to the entirety of the book. A different villain—each two to three issues had a slight mini-arc to them with one overriding story over the entire 12 issues.

Steve Niles said about Batman: Gotham After Midnight, "I really want this to be the kind of Batman book that, if by some chance somebody who isn’t that familiar with the character in the comics wants to pick up a Batman comic, these folks could pick up issue #3 and get a story. And then, hopefully, they’ll want to go back and get #1 and 2 and then go back and get #4 when it comes out. Some of the current attitudes for writing comics are a little more geared towards the writing of something like a television show like Lost than actual comic books themselves. Lost, to me, is a soap opera—and in soap operas they stretch things out. I just think the trend of long, slow stories doesn’t interest me. I think shorter stories leads to more enjoyment per comic book—when you look at a story that is part three of twelve—you are getting less of an issue of the comic book. And I’ve had editors call me and say, “Are you sure you want to do this? We could spread this out over a couple of issues…” and I’d much rather just pack this thing and really not stretch the reader out. If I can give readers something that doesn’t stretch a short story out—something with some real substance—in a twelve issue series, I’m going to be really happy."
http://legionsofgotham.proboards.com...nt&thread=2375

[Aquacatlungfish]

I was pointing out how the portrayal of Starfire in Red Hood and the Outlaws is the old degrading stereotype of women as sluts just looking to get laid.

Starfire was not a slut. Batman is pretty eager to get laid. Starfire's much more honest about it.

The portrayal of a man just looking to get laid isn't any better.

Arsenal was trying to get laid. He found Starfire not remembering who Dick was "interesting", why aren't you complaining about that? He was clearly trying to get laid.

There is a difference between the portrayal of any character, male or female, wanting to have sex with someone they actually love and have or at least want a relationship with, and the portrayal of a character having sex with random people they don't love out of boredom.

What's wrong with the boredom option? Sex isn't about love. I see nothing wrong with portraying it that way.

Have you read Snyder's Batman. In that comic Batman gets brutally beaten and caught in an explosion, then taken down to a labyrinth and mentally tortured and then brutally stabbed in the chest. Was that sexist?

[Darth Joker]

What's wrong with the boredom option? Sex isn't about love.

For many people, it is. Many people think that sex ought to be accompanied by romantic love.

Now, I respect that different people have different viewpoints on sex, so it's only natural that superheroes would be the same way. If a single Power Girl wants to sleep around, then that's her choice, because there's nobody in particular she's being unfaithful to in the process.

But in the specific Starfire example, I see two problems...

1) She's supposed to be in a serious relationship with Dick. Even for many of those who take a pretty easygoing approach to sex, they take a dim view to cheating on someone you're going steady with. If Starfire wasn't in a serious relationship with anyone, it would be different. But she is, and so her cheating on Dick just doesn't look good, imo.

2) It creates a disconnect with the most popular Starfire out there - The one from the recent Teen Titans cartoon. DC should be trying to capitalize on the popularity of the TT cartoon, not turning away potential interest there by having the comics Starfire be so radically different from the cartoon Starfire.


As for Batman, there are important factors here:

1) He's very rarely portrayed as going steady with someone. He tends to be a loner, and that includes when it comes to romance.

2) He has the whole "Billionaire Playboy Bruce Wayne" image to uphold. What do billionaire playboys tend to do?

3) If there's anybody out there who needs sex for basic stress relief, it would be Batman, lol.

[Mat001]

They can choose to not support it by not buying it.

That's my point. It doesn't matter if the content is like it is today, or like it was fifty years ago. If a parent doesn't want their kids to read about any violence, glorified or not, then that is their prerogative. Hell, a parent could object to "Batman: The Brave & The Bold" as much as they would "Batman Beyond: Return Of The Joker", even though the former has no blood and was age appropriate, versus a film that had to be pulled twelve years ago and re-edited.

Those crossovers and year long story arcs are not keeping comic books accessible to the new readers who might want to read an issue of Superman or Batman but find themselves in the middle of a continuity heavy year long arc, without even a last issue recap. And some peoples budgets are limited, so they can't buy many comics a month to keep up with the crossover storyline. Which is why I suggested that they make the comics new reader friendly again with shorter storylines that last about three-issues at the most as it was for decades in the '30s to the '80s so every issue is a jumping on point for new readers. Denny O'Neil was allowed to go back to short storylines as editor on the Batman titles after the long Knightfall/Knightquest crossover was over. Beginning with the Doug Moench and Kelley Jones run in 1995 and expanded to the entire Batman line of comics by editor Denny O'Neil from 1996 to 1998.

1. Right and then under O'Neil's watch we had "Cataclysm", "Aftershocks", "The Road To No Man's Land" and "No Man's Land". So much for being reader friendly.

2. Comics today are written for the trade, a method that was starting at the end of O'Neil's tenure. An effort to make the books less talky and more cinematic. Even when the editorial of the companies say that they're going to change it so it doesn't have to be that way, they don't. DiDio and Lee both said that last year and that hasn't even happened. The trade market is too strong to revert to two issue stints. And writers today prefer five to six issues to tell a story.

3. Nothing about the budget stance is something that I myself didn't have to go through and still do. And again, none of it changes that you don't have to read a book that you don't have the money for to get the full story. You don't need Batgirl and Birds Of Prey to get "Death Of The Family". Speaking of the Spectre, I didn't go out to buy the Spectre's book when that crossover occurred. Any book with an actual crossover has the title of said story on the front cover, so that the current reader and a potential new reader knows which book is what.

Actually, because of the strong sales, up until 2004 DC kept publishing comic book series based on Bruce Timm's Batman: The Animated Series/The Batman & Robin Adventures/The New Batman Adventures (1992-1999) long after the TV series was over. As the Bruce Timm animated Batman TV series changed titles, the DC comic books based on Bruce Timm's Batman changed titles as well. The Batman Adventures (1992-1995) spun off into The Batman & Robin Adventures (1995-1998) and spun off again into Batman: Gotham Adventures (1998-2003) and then spun back to Batman Adventures (2003-2004). Beyond the regular ongoing series DC even released The Batman Adventures: Mad Love (1994), The Batman Adventures: The Lost Years mini-series (1998) and the Batman: Harley and Ivy mini-series (2004).

I just said that a few pages ago. The books changed titles to keep up with the style of the show. But even after it ended in 1998, there was still "Batman Beyond" and "Justice League", as well as animated films. All of which had the same Batman. By 2004, as JLU was going, the series began to wind down and was cancelled. Not because of poor sales, but because of "The Batman" and "The Batman Strikes", along with "Teen Titans" and "Teen Titans Go!" and the beginning of the Bat Embargo, the comic had to end before JLU had ended.

2) It creates a disconnect with the most popular Starfire out there - The one from the recent Teen Titans cartoon. DC should be trying to capitalize on the popularity of the TT cartoon, not turning away potential interest there by having the comics Starfire be so radically different from the cartoon Starfire.

Comics, cartoons and live action media have seldomly been on the same page. Mostly because there is very little crossover. The animated Batman from early in the show's run was a far cry from how he was in the comics. In fact, they were going to replace Bruce with a guy who would ultimately brutalize and allow criminals to die. Spider-Man was in the same boat. In his cartoon, it was just like the stories from before the 90's, while the 90's guy had suffered mental breakdowns and identity issues. The classic television series version of the Hulk, which was back with a trio of television movies was different from the Hulk who had a different skin color and attitude in the comics of the time. There's always a disconnect and usually that disconnect can appeal to new readers who come from another medium.

For many people, it is. Many people think that sex ought to be accompanied by romantic love.

What's even more interesting is how many kids are going to have random sex without love, regardless of reading about it in comics. Much less that their siblings and even parents have done it. You can present all the best role model guidelines in the world and people will still go against it, because they can.

[Aquacatlungfish]

For many people, it is. Many people think that sex ought to be accompanied by romantic love.

Sex is about creating new life forms but people enjoy it. That's all sex is about. Just because a character has different moral values than yours doesn't mean they're teaching kids bad things. Roy and Kori were of a consensual age and there's nothing morally wrong about it.

Now, I respect that different people have different viewpoints on sex, so it's only natural that superheroes would be the same way. If a single Power Girl wants to sleep around, then that's her choice, because there's nobody in particular she's being unfaithful to in the process.

But in the specific Starfire example, I see two problems...

1) She's supposed to be in a serious relationship with Dick. Even for many of those who take a pretty easygoing approach to sex, they take a dim view to cheating on someone you're going steady with. If Starfire wasn't in a serious relationship with anyone, it would be different. But she is, and so her cheating on Dick just doesn't look good, imo.

Starfire was single at that time though. She isn't cheating on Dick based on the information we're given. And the information we're given is that she slept with Dick in the past. We're not told that she was in a serious relationship or that they're still together and the reader is meant to assume that the latter isn't true and she's single. Would you propose that if a women has slept with one guy that it's morally wrong to sleep with another. But Batman on the other hands go through relationships and drops them very quickly. One comic he's dating River the next he's dating some Russian piano chick without any explanation of what happened to the White Rabbit.

2) It creates a disconnect with the most popular Starfire out there - The one from the recent Teen Titans cartoon. DC should be trying to capitalize on the popularity of the TT cartoon, not turning away potential interest there by having the comics Starfire be so radically different from the cartoon Starfire.

The most popular Aquaman is the on from Superfriends and there's a clear disconnect between Superfriend Aquaman and current Aquaman. Anything in other media is more popular than the comics version. I like my comics quiet a lot and don't want them to represent the crappy movies and TV shows that DC makes. DC has never made a good movie or TV show that didn't star Batman in it but even then most of the comics interpretations are either a. better or b. the same. The exception to this is Bane's costume. The Teen Titans cartoon wasn't very good and I don't want to see it in my comics. Not the worst thing DC has put out though.

1) He's very rarely portrayed as going steady with someone. He tends to be a loner, and that includes when it comes to romance.

You think the guy that started Batman Inc is a loner? Batman is surrounded by friends and allies and plenty of superheroines to have a healthy relationship with.

2) He has the whole "Billionaire Playboy Bruce Wayne" image to uphold. What do billionaire playboys tend to do?

We only ever see billionaire playboys have sex in sex tapes and I don't think DC are in a rush to publish that story.

3) If there's anybody out there who needs sex for basic stress relief, it would be Batman, lol.

You don't think former slaves have a lot of stress they need to get off?

[Mr. Holmes]

Morrison had a way of taking classic elements of Superman and reinterpreting it in a modern light. I like the idea of making him a more passionate social crusader, a young cool journalist with high ideals. He comes off as a cool, modern guy without sacrificing his goodness and decency. Johns and Frank just wrote him as a quaint, old fashioned character. He was practically a parody of his wholesome image. I feel like that's not only bad for the character, but actually far away from the original concept of the character. The character should always be a good guy and a moral pillar, but he should reflect the times he lives in, or else he has no impact.

Yeah it's like Johns was consciously trying to make Superman outdated and corny. While Johns and Morrison both draw from the past, Morrison actually gets what works and what doesn't in a modern context.

[MFitzH2O]

Morrison had a way of taking classic elements of Superman and reinterpreting it in a modern light. I like the idea of making him a more passionate social crusader, a young cool journalist with high ideals. He comes off as a cool, modern guy without sacrificing his goodness and decency. Johns and Frank just wrote him as a quaint, old fashioned character. He was practically a parody of his wholesome image. I feel like that's not only bad for the character, but actually far away from the original concept of the character. The character should always be a good guy and a moral pillar, but he should reflect the times he lives in, or else he has no impact.

Morrison's doing the same thing in a different light. I'm glad that you like it, but to some of us Morrison's character is a parody in that same light. This Action character no more reflects the times than does any version of the character after its re-imaging in recent memory.

[Mr. Holmes]

Morrison's doing the same thing in a different light. I'm glad that you like it, but to some of us Morrison's character is a parody in that same light. This Action character no more reflects the times than does any version of the character after its re-imaging in recent memory.

You don't think the first issue of Action was a reflection of Occupy?

[Darth Joker]

Comics, cartoons and live action media have seldomly been on the same page.

Which made sense back when comics was a thriving entertainment industry. Let's face it - It isn't any more. Trying to capitalize on popular versions of characters in other mediums could be helpful. Besides, classic comic Starfire (from the 80s) was more like her Teen Titans cartoon self anyway.

There's always a disconnect and usually that disconnect can appeal to new readers who come from another medium.

Yeah, and that's why comics are selling so much better today than they used to. ;)

What's even more interesting is how many kids are going to have random sex without love, regardless of reading about it in comics. Much less that their siblings and even parents have done it. You can present all the best role model guidelines in the world and people will still go against it, because they can.

That sounds awfully defeatist. In any event, I'm not speaking "for the children". For good or for ill, comic books largely gave up on kid readers a long time ago.

I'm speaking about general audiences here, including adults. My point is that portraying Starfire in this fashion is probably not the best way to make her comic book character popular.

Sex is about creating new life forms...

How can that be true when gay couples have sex but can't procreate through sex? I think that sex is more complicated than you're making it out to be. Different people have different viewpoints on it.

Starfire was single at that time though. She isn't cheating on Dick based on the information we're given.

Then why did Dick even come up in the discussion? If her and Dick are no longer in a relationship together, why even bring him up?

[The Bat-Man]

I just said that a few pages ago. The books changed titles to keep up with the style of the show. But even after it ended in 1998, there was still "Batman Beyond" and "Justice League", as well as animated films. All of which had the same Batman. By 2004, as JLU was going, the series began to wind down and was cancelled. Not because of poor sales, but because of "The Batman" and "The Batman Strikes", along with "Teen Titans" and "Teen Titans Go!" and the beginning of the Bat Embargo, the comic had to end before JLU had ended.

You said, "Adaptation comics are only there to promote the show. When the show ends, the comic ends. Sales doesn't matter." Bruce Timm's Batman: The Animated Series/The Batman & Robin Adventures/The New Batman Adventures had ended, yet the Batman Adventures comics had not. The Batman Adventures comics were not comic adaptions of, nor promoting, Justice League/Justice League Unlimited or Batman Beyond, those show had their own Justice League Adventures, Justice League Unlimited and Batman Beyond comics. Also the Justice League Unlimited TV show ended in 2006, yet the Justice League Unlimited comic lasted until 2008.

[Aquacatlungfish]

How can that be true when gay couples have sex but can't procreate through sex? I think that sex is more complicated than you're making it out to be. Different people have different viewpoints on it.

There are different types of sex and heterosexual sex is to create new life forms. People enjoy it and it usually makes people happy. Gay sex is just the last sentence. You can put love into the equation but when you put it into basics, heterosexual sex is just to create new life forms. Quite frankly must moral values people put into life are usually shit and can be ignored.

Then why did Dick even come up in the discussion? If her and Dick are no longer in a relationship together, why even bring him up?

Because Dick and Kori are a very popular couple that deserve some mentioning and if they didn't fans would complain. Mentioning your ex does not mean that you are still together. I would like to know where you get your ideas of couples because acknowledging your past relationships doesn't mean you can't create new ones. I would also like to point out what Dick's been up to. He's been in a relationship with Raya during the New 52 and slept with her and he had a relationship with Batgirl in the past. He's even more of a slut than Starfire.

[Mat001]

Which made sense back when comics was a thriving entertainment industry. Let's face it - It isn't any more. Trying to capitalize on popular versions of characters in other mediums could be helpful. Besides, classic comic Starfire (from the 80s) was more like her Teen Titans cartoon self anyway.

People aren't going to suddenly read comics because they watched the films and cartoons. There has never been a huge bump except for two times in the last forty some years. That's why DC and Marvel only do small alterations such as having characters from the other media appear, but go their own way with their stories. And half of this was back when comics were still in the newsstand market. And people are smart enough to know that one version is different from another, through different media. Like James Bond and Dracula.

Yeah, and that's why comics are selling so much better today than they used to. ;)

Having that similarity didn't help either.

That sounds awfully defeatist. In any event, I'm not speaking "for the children". For good or for ill, comic books largely gave up on kid readers a long time ago.

They gave up because other media became more available and more interesting.

I'm speaking about general audiences here, including adults. My point is that portraying Starfire in this fashion is probably not the best way to make her comic book character popular.

She wasn't that popular to begin with. She was a second rate character on a second rate team.

How can that be true when gay couples have sex but can't procreate through sex? I think that sex is more complicated than you're making it out to be. Different people have different viewpoints on it.

Gay couples can have children, just not with each other. They can use surrogates, in vitro fertalization and adoption.

Then why did Dick even come up in the discussion? If her and Dick are no longer in a relationship together, why even bring him up?

Because they were a couple once.

You said, "Adaptation comics are only there to promote the show. When the show ends, the comic ends. Sales doesn't matter." Bruce Timm's Batman: The Animated Series/The Batman & Robin Adventures/The New Batman Adventures had ended, yet the Batman Adventures comics had not. The Batman Adventures comics were not comic adaptions of, nor promoting, Justice League/Justice League Unlimited or Batman Beyond, those show had their own Justice League Adventures, Justice League Unlimited and Batman Beyond comics. Also the Justice League Unlimited TV show ended in 2006, yet the Justice League Unlimited comic lasted until 2008.

"Batman: Gotham Adventures" didn't start until 1998, well into the end of the first season and then the rest of season two. It continued because of "Return Of The Joker" and it and then later, "The Batman Adventures" volume two was promoting Batman's role in the JL cartoon, by giving him a spin off. Not to mention "Mystery Of The Batwoman", "Vengeance" and "Rise Of Sin Tzu" which were all coming out during this period. When the shows ended and went off the air, they were no longer promoted. "Batman Beyond" and "Superman" both ended in 2001 and 2002, to make way for "The Batman Adventures" and "Justice League Adventures". The 2008 cancellations gave room for "Batman: The Brave & The Bold".