What would be awesome is a 'universe' that had DC ORIGINAL characterization

[BlackOpsTengu]

A universe where Superman kills small time mooks and wife beaters by throwing them a mile into the air.

Where Batman machine guns people occasionally with his bi-plane.

Where Wonder Woman looses her powers when she gets tied up (RWAR).

Etc etc.

Basically, a universe that brings back the pulp fiction roots of Superhero-dom. Instead of hiding behind the endless angst of, "I CAN'T KILL" or "I CAN'T SAVE EVERYONE", you just have a whole universe that operates on pulp logic and no one sees anything bad with it at all. And 'good' superheroes would be more like Doc Savage than 'our' version of Superman. It wouldn't be Millerized/gritty because Superman was absolutely HAPPY when chucking criminals in the air, and Batman was very polite to old ladies crossing the street before knocking criminals off of buildings.

I just think it's funny the original creators made their characters very specifically, and now, we take the reinterpretations as gospel, and discard the original stories as too 'immoral' (Superman Batman killing etc). Given what's happened to the DC universe recently, I can't say that approach has worked, because it causes all kinds of other angst to pop through.

No body tells Lobster Johnson for example he has a funny name:

CAUSE HE'LL KILL YA!

It'd be awesome, funny and awesome.

 

[Anubis]

The reason DC sucks now is because of bad editorial decisions, and bad writing. It was awesome 3 years ago. Now? Bleh. Suddenly making them killers again wont do anything except drive more people away.

 

[yenaled]

I don't understand what's so cool about killing.

 

[Andy C.]

The problem with just hitting the re-set button and putting everyone's characterization to where they were back in the 30s is that the 30s aren't relevant anymore. The Superman who chucked crooked politicians off of buildings and threw mobsters into the paths of their own bullets came from one of the darkest times in our country's history, and people needed that kind of emotional release. Unless you plan on having Supes take out Osama Bin Laden or George W. Bush every issue, I doubt you'd get the same feeling again.

There's also the problem that the original creators actually didn't keep their characters constant as you claim. In fact, both Superman and Batman had completely given up on killing by the end of 1940--while the original writers were still on board. It partly had to do with them coming under flak for encouraging childhood violence, but it also added to their characters. Batman in particular was nothing but a blatant ripoff of the Shadow before they added tweaks to his psyche, chief among them his aversion to guns and killing in general.

The great thing about long-lived heroes like Superman and Batman is that they're constantly evolving, and you can track the evolution from one era to the next. The times change, a new writer comes on board, the character becomes a little different, while still keeping the core elements of who he was (Superman was popular because he was an optimistic symbol in troubled times, not just because he killed people) A good writer is able to keep all of those additions and revisions in mind, while still telling a story that's relevant to the audiences of today. Setting back the clock seventy years just to have a body-count again would be a slap in the face to everyone who's worked on those comics since then.

 

[BrianWilly]

 

[Anubis]

Yeah man, can't really go back to that. It'd be okay for an alternate universe, but I can tell you this, it wont sell well.

 

[BrianWilly]

The Goddamn Batman is doing okay, it has to be said.

 

[Anubis]

That's because Frank Miller causes fanboys to lose all sense of good or bad.

 

[November Rain]

To be fair heroes have always been used as a simple of empowerment

back in the day, it was all about taking the laws into your own hands and saying to peeps if you dont get up your ass to stop people, no one will.

now it's pretty much, be good and fair and always give people a chance and let the authorities deal with things and no matter how many people they allow to die because we did not act appropriately, we won't stop them


these heroes come from a government which happily kills people and sends people to their death bed and has large costly wars with many casualties with other countries. Why should a domestic terrorist threat (which is a supervillain) have a better chance of escaping alive than the soldiers and innocent victims of warfare?


Again there is a culture where killing means they have to invent better villains and better heroes. I would love a universe where any hero or villain could get killed off at anytime and a threat was real and its stories were finite and unchangeable, where the universe was seen as the selling point rather than the characters. plot driven characters rather than the other way around.

of all the real points comics try to portray, the act of death, bereavement, moving on and growth is amongst the worst and that's because writers and editors want to milk everything at least four times.

 

[Spike_x1]

The Goddamn Batman is doing okay, it has to be said.

Yeah, I was about to mention ASB&R. At least as far as sales go, it's good. The quality of writing and characterizations, however, are hilariously awful.

 

[Andy C.]

I always figured All-Star Batman (whether Miller meant for it or not) is popular just for the MST3K effect.

 

[BlackOpsTengu]

Not as main continuity, as one of those new fangled alternate universes.

It'd actually be an interesting one.

Heroes killing isn't totally indicative of the kind of universe I'm referring to, it's just the most obvious example. Another big one would be the big moral lessons at the end of an issue... and everyone takes it seriously.

"Yes, and with the hospitalization of Scissor-man, I think we can all agree that we shouldn't run... from the law... with scissors!"

*everyone laughs and nods in agreement.*

*WINK*

 

[TheCorpulent1]

I don't understand what's so cool about killing.

 

[yenaled]

Yes!

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

 

[TheCorpulent1]

That last page gets me tingly even now.

 

[Spike_x1]

I liked the sequel to that story a lot too; Final Battle, or whatever it was called. There was some stupid stuff, like the Atomic Skull abandoning his pseudo-good guy status and attempting to kill the Kents without remorse, but there were still some awesome factor, such as Neutron and the Master Jailer's updates. The last issue was the best, however, as [blackout]Black had convinced Superman that he had tortured and killed Lois. Superman and he then had a wicked fight, capping off with Superman blasting Manchester Black down to his skeleton with heat vision. Course, then we find out that that whole scene was all in Clark's head, and that he'd never kill because it's not worth it and not what Lois would want. He will, however, make sure that Black won't be able to eat solid food ever again. And then Lois' death turned out to be a trick by Black, meant to goad Superman into killing him. Failing that, he kills himself by the end of the issue after realizing that Superman was "the real deal," and he was just "a f**king supervillain."[/blackout]

Now the important question: Did any of that even still happen after that wacky reality punch?

 

[TheCorpulent1]

I will continue to believe it did until something directly contradicts it, at which point I will b**** with a fury the likes of which has never been seen before. Kelly's Superman stories need to still count. They're a perfect encapsulation of what Superman's all about.

 

[Spike_x1]

Indeed. Nevertheless, I try not to get my hopes up anymore about the good pre-IC Superman stories still being in continuity.

Lena Luthor = Gone
Brainiac 13 = Gone
Character development in any of Superman's rogues = Gone
Character development for Jimmy = Gone
Etc, etc...

I've been conditioned not to expect much from the continuity of Superman stories anymore.

 

[TheCorpulent1]

Yeah, Superman's kind of the posterboy for the idea that ongoing comic casts never really change. It'll all come back around to the same old status quo over time.

 

[fifthfiend]

A universe where Superman kills small time mooks and wife beaters by throwing them a mile into the air.

Where Batman machine guns people occasionally with his bi-plane.

Where Wonder Woman looses her powers when she gets tied up (RWAR).

Etc etc.

Basically, a universe that brings back the pulp fiction roots of Superhero-dom. Instead of hiding behind the endless angst of, "I CAN'T KILL" or "I CAN'T SAVE EVERYONE", you just have a whole universe that operates on pulp logic and no one sees anything bad with it at all. And 'good' superheroes would be more like Doc Savage than 'our' version of Superman. It wouldn't be Millerized/gritty because Superman was absolutely HAPPY when chucking criminals in the air, and Batman was very polite to old ladies crossing the street before knocking criminals off of buildings.

I just think it's funny the original creators made their characters very specifically, and now, we take the reinterpretations as gospel, and discard the original stories as too 'immoral' (Superman Batman killing etc). Given what's happened to the DC universe recently, I can't say that approach has worked, because it causes all kinds of other angst to pop through.

No body tells Lobster Johnson for example he has a funny name:

CAUSE HE'LL KILL YA!

It'd be awesome, funny and awesome.

I still say I want Supes to go back to beating the **** out of crooked landlords and mine owners.

 

[Aristotle]

A universe where Superman kills small time mooks and wife beaters by throwing them a mile into the air.

Where Batman machine guns people occasionally with his bi-plane.

Where Wonder Woman looses her powers when she gets tied up (RWAR).

Etc etc.

Basically, a universe that brings back the pulp fiction roots of Superhero-dom. Instead of hiding behind the endless angst of, "I CAN'T KILL" or "I CAN'T SAVE EVERYONE", you just have a whole universe that operates on pulp logic and no one sees anything bad with it at all. And 'good' superheroes would be more like Doc Savage than 'our' version of Superman. It wouldn't be Millerized/gritty because Superman was absolutely HAPPY when chucking criminals in the air, and Batman was very polite to old ladies crossing the street before knocking criminals off of buildings.

I just think it's funny the original creators made their characters very specifically, and now, we take the reinterpretations as gospel, and discard the original stories as too 'immoral' (Superman Batman killing etc). Given what's happened to the DC universe recently, I can't say that approach has worked, because it causes all kinds of other angst to pop through.

No body tells Lobster Johnson for example he has a funny name:

CAUSE HE'LL KILL YA!

It'd be awesome, funny and awesome.

You are SO late with the whole "I like uberviolent deconstruction!" We're well into the reconstruction period.

 

[cerealkiller182]

Didnt Batman say "papa spank" in those days to criminals before throwing them a beating. Not even Uwe Boll would allow that kind of lame dialogue to pass.

 

[TheCorpulent1]

Yeah, he would. You know he would.

 

[Aristotle]

Didnt Batman say "papa spank" in those days to criminals before throwing them a beating. Not even Uwe Boll would allow that kind of lame dialogue to pass.

Well that's what Tengu wants to see in his Batman comics. So be quiet! Or Tengu spank!

 

[elswick1979]

Does this mean that Superman will call Black Lighting, Negro Lighting or beat Lois when she dosn't have dinner ready, oh oh oh I know a madcap Lex Luthor story where he is going to poison the city's water, now that might be cool, and Batman's gun and purple gloves.