Comics For Tomorrow???

[charl_huntress]

I just read Kingdom Come, wow they really over did it with the heroic overtones. Can people just get over that aspect of Superman, quit thinking of him as a hero or a savior and just let him be Superman. I'm tired of him saving people. He's just a guy who flies around. Jeez. Talk about over-doing a theme.

There is a difference between a hero being portrayed in the modern context as KC tried to show.

LOL...I don't particularly like that story either, so I'm not objective. However, Leaguer...you have to be smokin' the good stuff to think that FT and KC are in the same realm when it comes to religious overtones.

FT was full of that, and it dragged the arc downward by focusing too much on the priest and not on Superman and Lois. KC might have been gritty, and very Marvel....for Superman...but it's not the Catholic quest instrumented by Azz....You have to admit that?

You know what, Leaguer? I see that you like FT...so why don't you defend it...instead of trying to drag other people's opinions in the mud. You are well verse on this arc, and seem to know a lot. Why not try to argue it's good point...I'm sure you have a lot of practice?????

Soooooo...lets hear it.

 

[The Leaguer]

I didn't say Kingdom Come had religious overtones.

 

[charl_huntress]

I didn't say Kingdom Come had religious overtones.

Yeah, but you touted KC as comparable to FT by comparing them...like we who don't like FT were missing something because we didn't see the aspects that KC had????

Or...were you saying something else?

 

[The Leaguer]

I was saying something else. I was mocking the idea that the religious thing was over-done by saying that the heroic thing is over-done, using a similar technique.

 

[charl_huntress]

I was saying something else. I was mocking the idea that the religious thing was over-done by saying that the heroic thing is over-done, using a similar technique.

They are both prominent aspects of storytelling for the past and the present. Yet, I know you know that FT is a bit over the top with the religious overtones.

You saying KC pushes the level of Superherodom is over the top is equivalent to you saying that every animal does a priest-like dance for it's lost brethren.

C'mon dude.....I mean c'mon....

 

[The Leaguer]

I was prepared to mention that For Tomorrow didn't go over the top with it's overtones, that the overtones were the entire point of the story, that Superman losing touch with humanity and becoming more comfortable with his "god-hood" than ever before, which was a foreign role to him, was the basis of the entire story, and that I wasn't saying Kingdom Come was over the top, I was using it as a way of saying complaining about For Tomorrow was stupid, until I read this:

C'mon dude.....I mean c'mon....

Wow. That was a brilliant move. I did not see that coming. In chess, I believe that is called "checkmate." You are a master of argument. You could debate your way out of terminal cancer. That line was the single most effective piece of argumentative rhetoric this world has ever seen. Well played.

 

[charl_huntress]

I was prepared to mention that For Tomorrow didn't go over the top with it's overtones, that the overtones were the entire point of the story, that Superman losing touch with humanity and becoming more comfortable with his "god-hood" than ever before, which was a foreign role to him, was the basis of the entire story, and that I wasn't saying Kingdom Come was over the top, I was using it as a way of saying complaining about For Tomorrow was stupid, until I read this

How HAVE you have you been preparing to mention that Leaguer?

Seriously....you've been tagging along with my thoughts, or restlessly trying to refute them for so long...well...I forgot how long it is now....or are you just following me????

edit:

Or were you just looking for my brilliant chess moves, so you could try to make your presence known. I mean...WTF are you doing...YOU'VE JUST BEEN A HANGER ON...IN THE COMIC SECTION...YET YOU HAVEN'T OFFERED ANYTHING VALID.

DO YOU ACTUALLY READ COMICS, LEAGUER!!!!!!!!

 

[The Leaguer]

No, I just like to make things up.

 

[charl_huntress]

I figured that...

Tell me why you like FT, Leaguer....

Why do you like it...you just seem to quote what others mention.

 

[Garzo]

I never finished the story so I can't really comment on the religious symbolism too much.

However, I don't really understand all the criticism of the film for what people call "religious" imagery. I think they miss the point.

Personally, I think Singer was simply presenting Superman in a "mythic" way, and some of those images were as beautiful as classic paintings. But I never thought he was making a direct comparison between Superman and Christ. Sure, Superman flies and floats in the sky, godlike, but that's what he does. And when he fell, his arms were open. . . it was dramatic. It's a classic pose. Obviously, one could argue there was a much more direct comparison to the mythic Atlas when Superman caught the Daily Planet globe and brought it down upon his shoulders. All in all, it was playing up Superman's role as a rightful member of our pantheon of heroes, that include the many gods and heroes of myth.

 

[The Leaguer]

I figured that...

Tell me why you like FT, Leaguer....

Why do you like it...you just seem to quote what others mention.

What would make you happy, then.

 

[charl_huntress]

What would make you happy, then.

lol...I don't know. Why don't you tell me what really got you while you were reading SR.

See, for me, it was dragging and as a Lois Lane fan I wanted to know more about her. However, the artwork is remarkable and some of the dialogue is moving, but this doesn't negate the negatives.

I just want to hear why you liked it...without the negative responses to why others don't like it???

Is that too mucht:

 

[charl_huntress]

I never finished the story so I can't really comment on the religious symbolism too much.

However, I don't really understand all the criticism of the film for what people call "religious" imagery. I think they miss the point.

Personally, I think Singer was simply presenting Superman in a "mythic" way, and some of those images were as beautiful as classic paintings. But I never thought he was making a direct comparison between Superman and Christ. Sure, Superman flies and floats in the sky, godlike, but that's what he does. And when he fell, his arms were open. . . it was dramatic. It's a classic pose. Obviously, one could argue there was a much more direct comparison to the mythic Atlas when Superman caught the Daily Planet globe and brought it down upon his shoulders. All in all, it was playing up Superman's role as a rightful member of our pantheon of heroes, that include the many gods and heroes of myth.

Okay...that's what people say about FT. Read that and then come back here and talk about that. I'm all worn out when it comes to talking about SR. My therapist says I have to leave that topic alone

 

[charl_huntress]

bump....because damn...lol