>Heroes need recognition and validation
Surprise. they're actually self-absorbed monsters that'll go on a mass shooting spree if they failed to command someone's attention.
Hyper masculine superheroes are not generic. In fact they're exceedingly rare nowadays. >muh fragile masculinity
Nonsense. Plenty of people prefer characters to be somewhat smart, is it because they have "fragile intellect"?
>Hyper masculine superheroes are not generic. In fact they're exceedingly rare nowadays.
For the same reason that no one wants to make 'generic' while male superheroes anymore in the current state of the industry: its seen as generic even though it isn't the current trend because it WAS the dominant trend for the better part of a century in comics.
Ironically, this might not have been an issue if it wasn't for the fact that comics are so fricking stagnant. If you have a constant rollover of new content and new characters, a trend that has been out of favor for 10 years can be forgotten and the revival of it somewhat refreshing. But in comics, all of that shit from 1940 is not just still around, its still the face of the franchise. The old NEVER moves over to make way for the new in comics, so all of the old tropes remain in place and it stays generic long past its sell-by date. And these IPs, with all of their tropes and cliches, will still be in place and considered generic when you die of old fricking age, unless the cape comics industry actually dies before you do.
That's disingenuous as frick. How many superheroes from the silver age are still alive? Most of them are dead and forgotten to time. Even more recent stuff, like the edginess from the 90s, is seen as outdated and funny.
No, what people have in mind is not a realistic snapshots of superheroes but what they are supposed to be. For instance, "Superman goes evil and nobody can stop him" has got to be the laziest, most generic plot line about Superman. Yet it's rehashed over and over again because there's this pretentious and ridiculous focus on "deconstruction" that leads nowhere and produces deeply uninteresting characters. No wonder people still have the silver age Superman in mind, everything else has failed to understand and develop the character.
"Deconstruction" is never going to work because it's a process to critique stuff. It doesn't produce anything, it can't. As long as pseudointellectuals don't understand this we will be stuck in this loop of shitty works trying too hard to subvert expectations and failing.
2 years ago
Anonymous
I'd argue that you can also break out of the loop by just letting the character retire or die and never come back. You are right, 'what if superman but evil' is the laziest subversion of the character possible. Which is why it keeps happening.
But what happens when the subversion is over? You go back to the status quo. Superman vanilla. And he stays, in place, as Superman vanilla until someone decides to subvert things again. And because the character doesn't change, doesn't advance, and doesn't leave? Whether its 5 years from now or 15 years from now, the easiest and most obvious subversion to do will STILL be "what if Superman, but evil?" Because its the same reaction to the same thing, over and over again. As long as the original remains static, the reaction will stay predictable.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Subversion does not create stories, that's the issue. There's nothing wrong with vanilla Superman and there's no reason for Superman to retire. The character could be developed by giving him an actual story with actual characterization, instead of useless moral dilemmas that lead nowhere and evil arcs.
That's the problem. Characterization is hard so let's just turn the character into a caricature of itself.
Something similar happens in anime. Evangelion was great for many reasons, one of the most important being the characters. However then comes the pseudointellectual 20-something that has never read a book in his life, wants to make "the next Evangelion" and what does he do? He takes the archetypal story structure of a specific genre (mechas, magical girls, romance, etc.) And adds "and then everything goes wrong, half the cast dies and the mc is actually evil!" It's garbage. It's lazy. It's just mental masturbation for pretentious homosexuals.
Comic books could have new characters, there's already plenty of somewhat popular new characters that could become classics, but it's all ruined in the name of woke shit. And by that I mean the absolutely uninteresting and unnecessary focus on race, sexuality, gender, and other complex concepts that the writers have absolutely no idea about and should definetly not be writing about.
Tl;dr, the problem is mediocre writers trying too hard to be intellectual and misplaced focus.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>That's the problem. Characterization is hard so let's just turn the character into a caricature of itself.
I don't think thats the issue. Superman has had character growth and arcs. In the past. They all got reverted either by universal relaunches or just writers changing hands. For a character that has been written by 100 different people across 80 years of continuous stories, it HAS to be become a caricature of itself because only the most basic, flanderized version of the character traits are what survives the game of telephone that is the industry.
If the character is going to stay in circulation and be written by whoever is available this week, without overarching control and consistency, this is inevitable.
More importantly, they should be drawn well
Nah
Booooooobs
read bara porn gaylord
Haha OP like men.
Heroes can be anyone, as long as they're trying to do the right thing. That's the point of the genre
>Heroes need recognition and validation
Surprise. they're actually self-absorbed monsters that'll go on a mass shooting spree if they failed to command someone's attention.
>Heroes need recognition and validation
t. Has never read a comic.
Nope. Anyone can be heroic and strive to be more like a hero, but heroes are exceptional individuals. Not everyone can be a hero.
t. Bob Parr
>superheroes have to be as generic as possible, because my masculinity is fragile as FRICK
ftfy
>Anyone can be heroic
>Not everyone can be a hero.
Post yfw you realised OP didn't understand words
Hyper masculine superheroes are not generic. In fact they're exceedingly rare nowadays.
>muh fragile masculinity
Nonsense. Plenty of people prefer characters to be somewhat smart, is it because they have "fragile intellect"?
>Hyper masculine superheroes are not generic. In fact they're exceedingly rare nowadays.
For the same reason that no one wants to make 'generic' while male superheroes anymore in the current state of the industry: its seen as generic even though it isn't the current trend because it WAS the dominant trend for the better part of a century in comics.
Ironically, this might not have been an issue if it wasn't for the fact that comics are so fricking stagnant. If you have a constant rollover of new content and new characters, a trend that has been out of favor for 10 years can be forgotten and the revival of it somewhat refreshing. But in comics, all of that shit from 1940 is not just still around, its still the face of the franchise. The old NEVER moves over to make way for the new in comics, so all of the old tropes remain in place and it stays generic long past its sell-by date. And these IPs, with all of their tropes and cliches, will still be in place and considered generic when you die of old fricking age, unless the cape comics industry actually dies before you do.
That's disingenuous as frick. How many superheroes from the silver age are still alive? Most of them are dead and forgotten to time. Even more recent stuff, like the edginess from the 90s, is seen as outdated and funny.
No, what people have in mind is not a realistic snapshots of superheroes but what they are supposed to be. For instance, "Superman goes evil and nobody can stop him" has got to be the laziest, most generic plot line about Superman. Yet it's rehashed over and over again because there's this pretentious and ridiculous focus on "deconstruction" that leads nowhere and produces deeply uninteresting characters. No wonder people still have the silver age Superman in mind, everything else has failed to understand and develop the character.
"Deconstruction" is never going to work because it's a process to critique stuff. It doesn't produce anything, it can't. As long as pseudointellectuals don't understand this we will be stuck in this loop of shitty works trying too hard to subvert expectations and failing.
I'd argue that you can also break out of the loop by just letting the character retire or die and never come back. You are right, 'what if superman but evil' is the laziest subversion of the character possible. Which is why it keeps happening.
But what happens when the subversion is over? You go back to the status quo. Superman vanilla. And he stays, in place, as Superman vanilla until someone decides to subvert things again. And because the character doesn't change, doesn't advance, and doesn't leave? Whether its 5 years from now or 15 years from now, the easiest and most obvious subversion to do will STILL be "what if Superman, but evil?" Because its the same reaction to the same thing, over and over again. As long as the original remains static, the reaction will stay predictable.
Subversion does not create stories, that's the issue. There's nothing wrong with vanilla Superman and there's no reason for Superman to retire. The character could be developed by giving him an actual story with actual characterization, instead of useless moral dilemmas that lead nowhere and evil arcs.
That's the problem. Characterization is hard so let's just turn the character into a caricature of itself.
Something similar happens in anime. Evangelion was great for many reasons, one of the most important being the characters. However then comes the pseudointellectual 20-something that has never read a book in his life, wants to make "the next Evangelion" and what does he do? He takes the archetypal story structure of a specific genre (mechas, magical girls, romance, etc.) And adds "and then everything goes wrong, half the cast dies and the mc is actually evil!" It's garbage. It's lazy. It's just mental masturbation for pretentious homosexuals.
Comic books could have new characters, there's already plenty of somewhat popular new characters that could become classics, but it's all ruined in the name of woke shit. And by that I mean the absolutely uninteresting and unnecessary focus on race, sexuality, gender, and other complex concepts that the writers have absolutely no idea about and should definetly not be writing about.
Tl;dr, the problem is mediocre writers trying too hard to be intellectual and misplaced focus.
>That's the problem. Characterization is hard so let's just turn the character into a caricature of itself.
I don't think thats the issue. Superman has had character growth and arcs. In the past. They all got reverted either by universal relaunches or just writers changing hands. For a character that has been written by 100 different people across 80 years of continuous stories, it HAS to be become a caricature of itself because only the most basic, flanderized version of the character traits are what survives the game of telephone that is the industry.
If the character is going to stay in circulation and be written by whoever is available this week, without overarching control and consistency, this is inevitable.
This. No one ain't going to be a hero just sitting down paralyzed from the neck down compared to a fire fighter.
And women should be even bigger and muscularer
Heroes should be big musclemen, with girly twink sidekicks.
art style reminds me of Patrick Fillion
Agreed, they also should have flat coloring (realistic coloring looks bad)
Wayne Boring and Dick Sprang are probably the best comic artists ever
If your muscles determine how hard you hit, you were already too weak to handle the big leagues as a hero.
Is this the beefcake thread?
God i hope so
Thats a tit and i am glad you are enjoying slavery as much as you did
Or at least Cinemaphile. With actual visible well developed muscles. They don't need to look like giant bodybuilders...but it's always welcomed.
>somebody actually published this shit
That's some Tom of Finland shit