Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Comics' started by Gregatron, May 9, 2006.
Donald sure, Star Wars **** no.
Wow, this thread has really run its course and has grown to be about nothing, please let it die.
This thread isn't aging though, which makes it classic. It's the same argument over and over, repeating in an infinite loop. The fact that it does not age is what makes it great. There's no need for evolution, no need for plot development. No, it's perfect just the way it is: TIMELESS!!
Post of the day right there.
Love it. Looks like Gregatron got his wish after all. Plus, its all the same people posting over and over, its just like the Simpsons and their characters! SCORE!
What's the point of the thread again?
I can't even begin to explain.
This is an good point. How interesting is a coming of age story, if the character never does?
Once an adult, the story possiblilties are much expanded, and he doesn't need to keep aging chronologically to explore them.
When spidey appeared in the 60´s robin was already a hero with his own adventures and a partner to batman, not a sidekick.
I'm not trying to demean Robin as a character.
I was trying to make a statement about how the development of teenage characters was handled at the time.
I'm sorry if you don't like the term "sidekick" but we'd just be getting into a semantics argument. I agree that Batman respected Robin and his abilities, and yes DC did publish Robin solo adventures, but Batman was still clearly the boss. AND it wasn't just DC. Captain America's Bucky was introduced specifically to compete with the popularity of Robin. My larger point was in the aproximately 20 years since the character was introduced (1940s-1960s) had Robin, or any of the other teen heros aged? Had their personal lives been explored? Perhaps a little, but not the level that Stan Lee introduced with Spider-Man. You have to admit Stan changed the industry.
tony stark was de-aged a while back due to his death and a past self being brought to the current time-line/ reality. it should all be on wikipedia, i recommend reading up on it. after the reborn universe thing franklin had reaged him into his 30s at least. spidey is a post-college guy.
harry's death was only a year in his past after the clone saga so i think spidey's probs 25-26 at most. all the editors at marvel worry about aging him too much with grown-up children and a marriage. WHEN (cos they will, even if just for a while) they split up the marriage again don't be surprised if he starts acting like he's 22/ 23.
when it comes down to it stark is probs sposed to be old enuff to be an uncle type of figure to peter. he is older and smarter and richer. i think this was a good idea, bringing back the whole genius petey thing while leaving the immature spidey humour.
Plus i'd like to say -- what's wrong with developing a character. i wouldn't read the old ditko/lee creation now. he needed to grow up a bit and he defo needed a power boost - i hate seein him get beat up by people with no powers (just equipment) and as a fanboy i always come up with ways of doing it better (in my head) but it's done now and we'll see where it goes. i'd love to see him go toe to toe proper with rhino now or come up against someone like mysterio and knock him out in like the first 5 seconds! i think it could be a funny sub-story to a bigger tale. anyways, im totally off the point now. if its a well written story and develops the character, then itsa good thing.
Btw gregatron u r quite annoying. but guess ppl shudnt get so worked up.
um... the grown up children turned out to be osborn's children, not his, but u get the point. the chief editor (whatshisface? forgotten his name) is always talking about spidey's age, but i think the first post and this very subject has exaggerated it completely