| Author |
|
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 132341
|
| Posted: 03 February 2007 at 10:15am | IP Logged | 1
|
|
|
What I understand is that you created the first native american in comics with any true potential and let it fall into the "Revelations of previously unknown siblings (99.99%)" category by virute of a daughter that was inherently more powerful and full of enough teenage angst to overshadow her father's potential.*** Aside from the rather HUGE fact that a daughter is not a "sibling" -- you seem to be equating power level with characterization. Shaman isn't as powerful as Talisman, so he is automatically a less developed character. I certainly don't recall Michael slipping into a subordinate role after Elizabeth gained her powers.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Thomas Moudry
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 5060
|
| Posted: 03 February 2007 at 10:15am | IP Logged | 2
|
|
|
Stories that shouldn't have been done:
The death of Aunt May
The marriage of Superman and Lois Lane
The marriage of Spider-Man and Mary Jane Watson
The recasting of Catwoman as a prostitute early in Batman's career
The second origin of Jason Todd
The death of Jason Todd
Heck, maybe the first origin of Jason Todd
Maybe Jason Todd entirely
Maybe Dick Grayson should still be Robin (even though I think Nightwing
is pretty cool)
The origin of Wolverine
The origin of the Joker
The origin of the Phantom Stranger
Edited by Thomas Moudry on 03 February 2007 at 10:16am
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 132341
|
| Posted: 03 February 2007 at 10:24am | IP Logged | 3
|
|
|
Could I ask when you think that particular storyline jumped the shark (if indeed, you think it did)?*** At two points. First, there was the set-up, in what became known around the Office as the "lesbian incest moment", when the adult Kate, rather than simply vanishing out of Kitty's mind, "pauses" to "impulsively" give her younger self a kiss. That moment, not in the story as plotted or as drawn, opened the door for later excavations. If one wanted to, one could interpret that scene as meaning Kate somehow survived the altering of the X-Men's future, and so, therefore, in some way, did that future. Not a big deal, had it been left alone -- but unfortunately Chris has a habit of resurrecting storylines by effectively saying "You thought the heroes won, but really they failed." So the actual "shark-jumping" occured when that future was revisited, as an "alternate timeline". (Remember, "Days of Future Past" was my story. Chris didn't want to do the Sentinels again, because he said they were "whimpy". I said he just wrote them "whimpy", and plotted the story that became "Days" to show him how to do it right. The whole point of the story -- a point on which I was even able to convince Mark Everything-We-Do-Creates-Alternate-Realities Gruenwald -- was that the X-Men successfully changed the future. They WON. Shunting that future off into an alternate timeline means they LOST.)
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Greg Kirkman
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 12 May 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 15775
|
| Posted: 03 February 2007 at 10:38am | IP Logged | 4
|
|
|
The resulting sprawl of a story is more or less the poster child for Comics Gone Awry - but 10 years later Spider-Man is still swinging around.
++++++++++++
No, he isn't. Just a stranger with the same name.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Roger Jackson
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 12 October 2005
Posts: 260
|
| Posted: 03 February 2007 at 11:33am | IP Logged | 5
|
|
|
Watchmen was popular mostly because of the smiley? That's a new one!
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Brian Tait
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 18 April 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 1817
|
| Posted: 03 February 2007 at 12:26pm | IP Logged | 6
|
|
|
But when the fringe has become a large part of the
main fabric, when it seems sometimes that the rational, sane fans who
read strictly for pleasure have become the fringe --- then we're in
trouble.
************************************************************ *************************************
Well then, we're in soooo much trouble now, it's not funny.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Andrew Kneath
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Posts: 2275
|
| Posted: 03 February 2007 at 12:34pm | IP Logged | 7
|
|
|
"Revelations of previously unknown siblings (99.99%)" (Or Daughters)
It is not as if Shaman had been regularly appearing in comics for 20 or 30 years before his daughter turned up in Alpha Flight. In terms of issue appearances, he was essentially quite a new character himself.
I do hate the long lost siblings cliché though.
Having said that it seem that nearly every notable hero or villain is an only child, the only exceptions being characters whose siblings are also notable hero's or villains.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Greg Kirkman
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 12 May 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 15775
|
| Posted: 03 February 2007 at 12:42pm | IP Logged | 8
|
|
|
Long-lost relatives and characters added as stunts seem like good signs of shark-jumpage to me.
Here's a question--when long-running characters like Superman or Spider-Man get way, way off-track, and the industry itself becomes increasingly unhealthy and self-destructive, is there a point where the characters should be retired?
Does a time arrive when a character has been forced to jump through too many absurd hoops, and becomes creatively non-viable? Should it ever be decided that a character has had a good, long run, and now needs to bow out with some shreds of dignity intact? Should a given character be allowed to become a corporate mascot who will never be in danger of cancellation/retirement, no matter how wrecked their mythos becomes? Or, should we always hold out hope that a good writer will come along to breathe new life into a series?
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Randy Sterger
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 04 January 2007
Posts: 223
|
| Posted: 03 February 2007 at 12:51pm | IP Logged | 9
|
|
|
I don't think so Greg - it's only the most nal of people who can't get past this stuff.
If I remember right, Peter actually hit Mary Jane during the clone saga, didn't he? Nobody talks about it now, but something like that is just about as off-character as you can get. Time washes the stuff away.
If some storyline were somehow able to get Peter back where he should be, a couple years later people would be talking about the current stories, and not the stuff in the past. (At least the maajority of the people - it's a small % who mke this stuff the center of their lives>)
You can always retcon and/or reboot and start over any time you want. People forget the little things over time.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Joe Zhang
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 12857
|
| Posted: 03 February 2007 at 12:55pm | IP Logged | 10
|
|
|
"People forget the little things over time."
What would be truly good for comics is if the fans of pros of today just disappeared.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Sam Parker
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 01 September 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 562
|
| Posted: 03 February 2007 at 1:00pm | IP Logged | 11
|
|
|
Were Hal Jordan's father and brothers part of his back story in the Silver Age, or are those relatives/relationships more recent additions to the Green Lantern mythos?
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Greg Kirkman
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 12 May 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 15775
|
| Posted: 03 February 2007 at 1:08pm | IP Logged | 12
|
|
|
Hal's brothers appeared in the early Silver Age stories.
I don't believe his father was introduced (in a flashback to his death) until Emerald Dawn in 1989.
Edited by Greg Kirkman on 03 February 2007 at 1:10pm
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Topic Closed)
