HR Boards
October 31, 2020, 03:44:37 AM*

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Loki premieres on Disney+ Spring 2021!
Advanced search  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: New DC Title  (Read 2068 times)
Perry
Just an old man
Administrator
HR Celestial
*****
Posts: 12726



« on: January 10, 2014, 01:56:24 PM »

Wow, Sinestro getting his own title now.

Why doesn't DC just call themselves GLBatSup so Marvel can start going by WolvAvengeX and each company start just producing those 3 lines of comics?
Logged

"I do not have OCD. I know. I've checked. Three or four hundred times and I definitely don't. I stopped myself from catching it by washing my hands an even number of times"
David Mitchell
EmeraldWarrior420
HR Celestial
******
Posts: 2181



WWW
« Reply #1 on: January 10, 2014, 04:59:58 PM »

I'll be buying it.
Logged

Jimmy T
Global Moderator
HR Celestial
*****
Posts: 4953



« Reply #2 on: January 12, 2014, 09:33:53 AM »

Cullen Bunn did some cool stuff with the 'Venom' series, so I could call this a positive thing.

And Sinestro is waaaay more interesting than Hal Jordan, 6 out of 7 days of the week.
Logged

Jimmy T since 2001
Perry
Just an old man
Administrator
HR Celestial
*****
Posts: 12726



« Reply #3 on: January 12, 2014, 09:44:23 AM »

And Sinestro is waaaay more interesting than Hal Jordan, 6 out of 7 days of the week.

Very true. But, do you think villains have that leg up naturally however? By in large, I seem to think that the best villains are more interesting than their hero counterpart, save for the few like ... Bizarro (Not once more hitting on your Superman mythos, just think of all the Superman villains, as funny as he can be, he is one of the least interesting). But other Superman villains are very interesting.

Hell, one of the main reasons some heroes just lack support is the lack of an interesting villain. Moon Knight is a great example of how having a crap rouges gallery can just pull you into virtual nothingness. He has no-one. Same with Aquaman, really (though Black Manta is better than ANYTHING Moon Knight has).

One of the reasons I think Dr. Strange doesn't have the strong following is while his villains are on the surface interesting, they are all very similar in desire or structure, hence basically the same and thus squashing any interest there may be due to the repetitive nature.
 Undecided

(Whoah ... getting way too broad here)
 Cheesy
Logged

"I do not have OCD. I know. I've checked. Three or four hundred times and I definitely don't. I stopped myself from catching it by washing my hands an even number of times"
David Mitchell
Jimmy T
Global Moderator
HR Celestial
*****
Posts: 4953



« Reply #4 on: January 12, 2014, 03:24:28 PM »

Naw, a good broad spectrum of analysis there!!

I think that's why Spider-man succeeded so well; Peter was interesting. A book worm, a guy who just 'felt' like the world was against him, but when pushed, he'd spit back in the face of his bully Flash as well.

Hal...I went back to look at Johns last 25 issues of Green Lantern in the New 52; Hal is on earth for about 20 panels in 2 issues before being whisked away. All he is is Green Lantern, and he's really boring. He just is.

Moon Knight is such a head case, he's fantastic to read about, but yeah, no villains to challenge him (same with Dr. Strange. What would a world conqueror like Mordu do if...he succeeded? Because at that point, there is bureacracy, and I'm sure Mordu is not in the vein of assigning tasks, guiding tariffs and minor law Cheesy

So yeah, if the hero isn't very complex, then his villains seem waaaaay more interesting. That's the opposite of Batman-and to be fair, his villains have grown so much, that both sides of that coin succeed.
Logged

Jimmy T since 2001
Pages: [1]   Go Up
Print
Jump to:  

 B l a c k - R a i n V.2 by C r i p ~ Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines MySQL | PHP | XHTML | CSS