Jason Todd:WTF?

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

Originally Posted by Sn4tcH

You're oversimplifying the argument. It would be more akin to her showing up in Hush and saying she was the daughter of Batman and Catwoman. Now if someone wants to come in and say it's because Infinite Crisis re-shuffled the Earth and made it so elements of Huntress' pre-Crisis origin cannon again, that's all fine and dandy.

You're right - reverting a characters hair colour back to what it was is exactly the same as changing a character origin, parents and purpose.
Exactly. The. Same.
I'll never be so flippant about such serious matters again.*



*Even if they have been fully explained in the books.

[SeritoNiN]

I really like Jason Todd.

I really hate that DC can't find consistency for the character.

[Sn4tcH]

Originally Posted by FunkyGreenJerusalem

You're right - reverting a characters hair colour back to what it was is exactly the same as changing a character origin, parents and purpose.
Exactly. The. Same.

That's what happened to Jason Todd though...

Pre-Crisis red-haired Jason was a happy young lad who had acrobat parents who were murdered by Killer Croc. Post-Crisis Jason had black was a "street tough" who's parents were murdered by Two-Face. New Earth Jason Todd is a mixture of these two characters.

My point was the mixing together of two characters is a lot more than someone having inconsistent hair lengths.

[AiyokuSama]

Originally Posted by Teatime Brutality

For the DCU. Over and over again.

That is the conclusion you've drawn for yourself. And you're welcome to it. I don't think there is enough evidence for such a conclusion.

We have been over this before and unless you have some new information, I stand by my conclusion: there is no evidence of what history/continuity changes have happened for the Batfamily. Instead you are offering up your own supposition as fact.

I'm still hopeful that Morrison proves himself as a writer by coming up with a more engaging reason then retcon to justify a cliché.

Originally Posted by Teatime Brutality

Confirmed by comic after comic and interview after interview.

I've seen your "comics after comics" and stand by the above. Which interviews? The one where Morrison is talking about "one man's remarkable life"? I've already shown several times why that statement is particular to Bruce and not all of the DCU. Or are you meaning something else?

Originally Posted by Teatime Brutality

Who's talking about throwing things out? This is about putting stuff back in.

Bruce didn't make Jay dye his hair. That was Jay's choice, and a point of the character's development as he tried to show Batman that he understood what he was doing. But in one page, Morrison threw that out.

Originally Posted by Teatime Brutality

And that is very likely one of the reasons why you continue to misunderstand this.

Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I misunderstand. In reality, I'm unwilling to jump to the conclusion you have. Perhaps something will happen in the future to change my mind, but at present I disagree with you that there is enough evidence to conclude that continuity is no longer relevant.

[AiyokuSama]

Originally Posted by FunkyGreenJerusalem

What do you mean 'If you want to read it that way'???

I mean exactly what I said.

Originally Posted by FunkyGreenJerusalem

That's how the scene reads, and was obviously the authors intent - as reading it that way plays along with themes of the book.

And yet we have Morrison saying that he deliberately leaves his story points open ended for the reader to fill in the blanks. That means the reading is open to interpretation. The point that you and others seem to be missing is that I'm not overlaying my interpretation on it. I have none. Instead I'm waiting for more information.

Originally Posted by FunkyGreenJerusalem

Why mention it all, let alone the way the character complains about it, if it's not a reference to his belief that Batman never accepted him and always wanted him to be someone else?

To undermine the character? To set up for a mental instability situation? Because it's a different character and not the Earth-1 JT? There are many, many options. I'm not willing to say yours, mine or anyone's is the right one. At this point I'm saying, "I don't know what this means and I want more information."

Oddly, this seems to upset some people. I'm not sure why.

[AiyokuSama]

Originally Posted by Captain Jim

That was simply one example. Another might be Morrison's reworking of the Son of the Demon story.

How so? As I recall, that was an Elseworlds story.

Originally Posted by Captain Jim

In any case, you need to get over this. We're not going to derail another thread on hair obsessions.

Jim, I've made multiple posts discussing various points. If people want to talk to me (or anyone else) about the hair issue in any capacity, that's what they will do. I will take responsibly for my own choices, but I will not be held responsible for those of others. And that includes yours, since you posted to me about the hair issue. However, I find it oddly flattering that you claim I have the power to derail a thread.

[carabas]

Originally Posted by AiyokuSama

How so? As I recall, that was an Elseworlds story.

It's a reverse Killing Joke. Written as canon, and some time later it was decided Batman was not going to have a son crawling around somewhere after all.
And then after Final Crisis,it was canon again in a modified form.

[AiyokuSama]

Originally Posted by carabas

It's a reverse Killing Joke. Written as canon, and some time later it was decided Batman was not going to have a son crawling around somewhere after all.
And then after Final Crisis,it was canon again in a modified form.

Interesting. Wasn't it made part of Kingdom Come or am I mixing up my Elseworlds?

[carabas]

You are.
Son of the Demon had Batman Jr. raised anonymously by som random civilian couple. And he got a normal name.

Kingdom Come has Ibn-Al-Xufhi or something like that, raised by Ra's.

[AiyokuSama]

Originally Posted by carabas

You are.
Son of the Demon had Batman Jr. raised anonymously by som random civilian couple. And he got a normal name.

Kingdom Come has Ibn-Al-Xufhi or something like that, raised by Ra's.

Ah. Thanks. I haven't read Kingdom Come but have heard people comparing Damian unfavourably to Ibn-Al-Xufhi.

[carabas]

I think they're similar, except Ibn is in his twenties instead of just a kid, and has learned manners.

Why on earth havent' you read Kingdom come? It's like the only good thing Alex Ross has ever been asociated with.

[AiyokuSama]

Originally Posted by carabas

I think they're similar, except Ibn is in his twenties instead of just a kid, and has learned manners.

So I've been told, though you put it far more...civilly then some I know

Originally Posted by carabas

Why on earth havent' you read Kingdom come? It's like the only good thing Alex Ross has ever been asociated with.

Honestly? All the hype about it is something of a turn off. I haven't watched Titanic for the same reason.

I freely admit that it's not exactly a brilliant reason on my part. But it's one less thing my wallet is complaining about.

[Teatime Brutality]

Originally Posted by AiyokuSama

That is the conclusion you've drawn for yourself. And you're welcome to it. I don't think there is enough evidence for such a conclusion.

For the conclusion that Infinite Crisis created a new DCU continuity?
For the conclusion that the Bat-Mythos Morrison has since been using is a blend of pre- and post-CoiE material?

Bloody Hell! How much more evidence do you need for those two 'conclusions'? (and by 'conclusion' here, I mean 'incontestable facts')

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

Originally Posted by AiyokuSama

I mean exactly what I said.
And yet we have Morrison saying that he deliberately leaves his story points open ended for the reader to fill in the blanks. That means the reading is open to interpretation. The point that you and others seem to be missing is that I'm not overlaying my interpretation on it. I have none. Instead I'm waiting for more information.

Where did he say that?

I'd like a quote thanks to see the context - because I don't think this fits it.

We're not 'overlaying an interpretation' we're reading what's there, and can see the themes developing.
That's how you read something by the way, you're supposed to think about what's actually being said - even saying that we are adding own personal interpretations just shows how far off the mark you are.
You seem to waiting for caption boxes to appear to tell you what to think - they won't appear, the scene and how it ties to the character and continuity was already explained.

To undermine the character? To set up for a mental instability situation? Because it's a different character and not the Earth-1 JT? There are many, many options.

Because he's upset that he felt he was always being forced to be Dick Grayson.

Why else would you have the character mention the hair dye?

I'm not willing to say yours, mine or anyone's is the right one. At this point I'm saying, "I don't know what this means and I want more information."

The information is there in the book.

If you don't know what it means, after having it explained in this thread, then you never will.

Oddly, this seems to upset some people. I'm not sure why.

Because you keep refusing the answers that are right there in the page, and then criticize the writer for not doing his job?

It's both boring and frustrating to read.

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

Originally Posted by carabas

It's a reverse Killing Joke. Written as canon, and some time later it was decided Batman was not going to have a son crawling around somewhere after all.
And then after Final Crisis,it was canon again in a modified form.

Killing Joke was always written to be in continuity.
Read all about it in this book.

Also, the son became part of continuity a year or two before Final Crisis, in 'Batman And Son'.