This will be Ellis with no scientific imagination and even thinner characterization cloaked in moral relativism and the critics will suck his dick because somehow only he could tell this story because of his vague experiences in the CIA
>DC announced today a new six-issue DC Black Label comic book miniseries launching in August, Jenny Sparks. The Spirit of the 20th Century returns for the 21st in this action-packed new DC adventure by Eisner Award-winning writer Tom King (Wonder Woman, Supergirl: Woman of Tomorrow,The Penguin) and artist Jeff Spokes (WildC.A.T.s, Batman: The Brave and the Bold)!
>“Jenny Sparks is an epic, thrilling, mind-blowing series in the tradition of Strange Adventures, Mister Miracle, and The Human Target,” said Tom King. “The Spirit of the 20th Century comes to the 21st to try to save five men and women taken hostage by an out-of-control and infinitely powered Captain Atom. Through this lens, we’ll explore the grip of Jenny’s time on our own; how, despite all our desperate prayers, the sins of our past refuse to die away. Featuring astonishing art by Jeff Spokes (seriously, it’s so damn good), Jenny Sparks seeks to set the bar in superhero comics, to show how our heroes can illuminate and define our moment.”
>But who is Jenny Sparks? Readers of DC’s WildStorm comics will know that Jenny has always worked outside of the Justice League establishment to find anomalies in the superhero community, is subtle enough to dig into the lies of the most powerful people on the planet, and is strong enough to fight back when these fallen heroes discover who’s digging. She can, if only for a moment, light up the darkest nights. In DC’s new Jenny Sparks, Jenny is the Spirit of the 20th Century, resurrected for the 21st.
>Kicking off the action in Jenny Sparks #1, what could four strangers have to do with the fate of the world? Find out as Captain Atom goes rogue, threatening to destroy the planet he once swore to protect. It may take the most unconventional hero of them all to stop him…Jenny Sparks, the one woman tasked with keeping all the heroes in line, no matter the cost. With a snap of her fingers, she’s entered the fray and won’t quit until the job is done!
>The Spirit of the 20th Century comes to the 21st to try to save five men and women taken hostage by an out-of-control and infinitely powered Captain Atom.
Why reference Captain Atom:Armageddon for Jenny Sparks when it was Jenny Quantum who fought him there?
Do you really think King reads the comics he references? He wrote a whole-ass page with Steel in Heroes in Crisis where he mixed up the two Steel characters into one as if they were just the same person. Dude just briefly googles stuff and then goes off on his own ideas
So the comic you're referencing the dialog is about Hank, but the image drawn is that of Nate. The editor makes the same mistake in the back of the book, so maybe it was on the artist
So the comic you're referencing the dialog is about Hank, but the image drawn is that of Nate. The editor makes the same mistake in the back of the book, so maybe it was on the artist
Also there's technically 5 characters named Steel:
Henry, Hank, and Nate Heywood (Commander and Citizen)
John Henry and Natasha Irons
Eh... it was kind of necessary. No one gave a frick about Jenny Quantum and the only reason Jenny Sparks stayed dead was due to DC being full of Ellis dick suckers, as Ellis got DC to agree to keep Sparks dead because she was his waifu and outside a single mini written by Mark Millar, didn't want anyone else writing her. And with Ellis now a pariah due to #MeToo, there is no need to humor Ellis and keep her dead.
>girlboss the comic
Ahh, yes, so another Tom King story then, Captain Atom will be the representative for evil white males and patriarchy this time around.
It's so tiresome, but at least western comics demise is accelerating, they will not reverse course and instead double down, the pain will be shorter.
>Jenny Sparks #1, written by King with art and main cover by Spokes and lettering by Clayton Cowles, will have variant covers by Guillem March, Homare, and Saowee (1:25). Jenny Sparks #1 will hit local comic book shop shelves on August 21, 2024. Jenny Sparks is a DC Black Label comic book series and carries an Ages 17+ content descriptor (for mature readers). Each issue of Jenny Sparks will be 40 pages, with 28 story pages per issue.
What did he did to Captain Atom beforehand? Or are you talking about King having Atom be used in this book to shit on him for the way DiDio pretty much made the entire Wildstorm Universe job to Captain Atom, a perennial C-Lister forever stuck in the shadow of his Brand X counterpart Dr Manhattan?
tbf Frank Miller was consulting on that comic and allowed that portrayal of him to go ahead
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
tbf you are pulling that straight out of your ass and regardless it’s hacky look at me bullshit writing
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>tbf you are pulling that straight out of your ass
I'm not I'm going off an interview King did about the book where basically he said that Miller allowed King to own the rights to his name and likeness for the duration of the comic publication and printing d and Tom King was talking to Miller regularly during this period, there really isn't any reason to doubt King on this
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
An interview that you saw floating in your toilet bowl.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
well I guess I shit in the internet then
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Tell me where you start talking about Miller Tom I’m not wading through your toilet bowl. Love to hear Miller saying anything about this too.
>Tom King getting more work with """redefining""" yet another fan-favourite character
I'm starting to think this man is my mortal enemy. I don't even care for Jenny Sparks that much but I just know he's gonna pull some more bullshit here.
You guys are all coping. Tom King is a good writer, and an Authority character is exactly up his alley. "He's gonna shove in moral relativism and make it all serious instead of doing a goofy DC story" have you guys never read The Authority comics?? You know the whole point of it is to rail against traditional superhero comics. The Authority is about as close to a Watchmen as you can get, and given how obsessed King is with that story, it makes perfect sense he'd gravitate towards these characters.
It's amazing that this thread already has 20 responses, and yet nobody can actually describe what they dislike about King's comics. All you can say is that you hate his politics and hate how the mainstream sucks his dick. You can't actually describe why you dislike it (because they're not actually bad). If Alan Moore was doing today what he did in the 80's, you would all shit on him too lmao.
The opposite is true though. Most writers just give character the same personality. Tom King gives each character more independence. The way he writes Superman is very different from how he writes Mister Miracle, or Batman. Also his plots are not insubstantial. Don't know where that's coming from. I'm guessing you feel that way because his stories are definitely more character focused than plot-driven, but that the plots do matter.
If his plot aren't insubstantial then perhaps you can explain the plot of strange adventures for us.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
What did you have difficulty understanding? Mister Terrific investigated him for crimes on Earth that were tied to his actions on Rann. It was mostly a political thriller/detective story. That was the meat of the book.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
You're not using that phrase correctly. Or maybe you just misunderstanding me. I'm not saying King does what nobody else does. I'm saying he does it moreso.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>What did you have difficulty understanding?
Well can you explain why the aliens wanted to invade in the first place?
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Are you talking about the invasion on Rann or on Earth? IIRC, the aliens were warlords or something. They invaded Earth because Strange sold them out to save Rann and his daughter
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>They invaded Earth because Strange sold them out to save Rann and his daughter
Oh I'm sorry but that's wrong. Maybe you should reread strange adventures so you could understand and explain the plot better.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
can't even explain what was wrong with my explanation. fricking brainlet, I understand a book I read 2 years ago better than the words you are reading in front of you right now.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
I can easily explain what you got wrong with the plot anon.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Strange Adventure took WAY WAY WAY too long to get to that point of explaining what the frick the plot was (as most people dropped it after the first couple of super vague decompressed storytelling) and the whole thing was a retred of that god-awful Adam Strange mini from the late 80s that retconned Adam a cheating butthole who had a side piece on Earth he never told his wife about, who was hated by the Rannians, and who was only there because Rann's men were rendered sterile due to a nuclear war and his father in law wanted to see if the still fertile women could frick earth men and have kids with them that weren't cross-species abominations (with the punchline being that Adam got his wife preggers but she died giving birth, allowing him to move in with his side piece with the kid in tow, father-in-law be damned).
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
And at least that 80s story was just 3 issues.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>Mister Terrific investigated him for crimes on Earth that were tied to his actions on Rann.
But Mister Terrific didn't investigate him for his crimes on Earth but for his crimes on Rann, which doesn't make any sense.
He is pretentious with rote, repetitive prose that lacks substance and has the most obnoxious dialogue found in comics. His characters are one note, his plots nonsensical, and he writes the same story ad nauseum. He stands on the shoulders of giants and regularly shits all over them. His head is so far up his own ass people don’t realize his mouth is actually spewing his own farts instead of carbon dioxide. I can keep going if you like.
Okay, his dialogue is pretty annoying sometimes, that's a critique at least I can agree with. I don't agree with the idea that his characters are one note or that he writes the same story over and over again though. He has a pretty diverse set of books actually. Batman, Mister Miracle, Danger Street, and his indie stuff. Obviously, he has themes and tropes he revisits a lot, but generally it's filtered through the lens of each unique story. >He stands on the shoulders of giants and regularly shits all over them.
This is the case with the best writers. Moore, Morrison, Ellis. Building on top of, and breaking down, what came before is how progress is made in comics.
>Mister Terrific investigated him for crimes on Earth that were tied to his actions on Rann.
But Mister Terrific didn't investigate him for his crimes on Earth but for his crimes on Rann, which doesn't make any sense.
Didn't the whole investigation start because someone from Strange's book signing was found murdered, with Strange being the prime suspect?
Batman and Mister Miracle are suicidal messes that slit their wrists, which directly ties into my point that he stands on the shoulders of giants and shits all over them. What’s King’s trademark paneling style? Oh yeah that other guys trademark style with zero innovations. Those authors you mentioned have reverence for what came before them. King doesn’t possess the talent required to build back up characters and if he did he wouldn’t because he hates them. His take on Batman is I Am Suicide. He’s an idiot who thinks he’s smart for deconstructing superheroes and making them swear, and you’re an idiot for defending him.
>Batman and Mister Miracle are suicidal messes that slit their wrists
Your point being? Batman being a mentally ill freak is not a new interpretation of the character, why would something like this bother you? >Those authors you mentioned have reverence for what came before them.
Moore absolutely did not, and if you've read a Morrison book from the past decade you'd know he doesn't either. They speak respectfully of the creators in real life obviously, as does King, but the actual content of the books they write are in many ways attacks on what came before.
You say King is an idiot, but as I mentioned earlier in the thread, I can't think of many modern writers who can do what he does. Things like panel layout is not a simple task, even if you are just apeing it form Moore. Notice how few other writers do any complex panel layout? It's mostly either random or a shmorgus board of nonsense. King has the ability to not only work within complex panel layout, but also write to the strength of his artists, which incidentally, is what the best writers do. Just like Moore and Morrison, King will consciously write his scripts to favor his artists. That's why he does the 9 panel grid while working with Gerads, but will use larger layouts when working with Mikel Janin or Bilquis Evely. He is simply better than most writers.
My point being you cited those two titles as being different when they are exactly the same. I’m not having a green text argument with a cherry picking chat bot have a good day.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
lol this is how it goes with every brain rotted Tom King hater. You just immediately give up as soon as you get pushback. I understand, dealing with different opinions can be difficult when your a special ed student.
it did. You are misremembering the book.
Hello, I'm not the anon you've been talking to but I would like to explain my issues with Tom King. I enjoyed Omega Men and Visions but his Batman series having such repetitive dialogue and I didn't enjoy how suicidal he made Batman, which is where I stopped being a fan. Mister Miracle and Heroes in Crisis are where I went from "not a fan" to "actively disliking" his work. They're also where I pinpointed my biggest problem with his work: he uses obscure characters and completely disregards their established characterization.
Actually, he disregards characterization for bigger names too (A Booster Gold that doesn't understand how time travel works?), but when he "reinvents" Scott Free to be suicidal or Adam Strange to be a war criminal there's a much greater chance of that just being the standard for those characters going forward. So when I hear he's tackling less popular characters I like such as the JLI in Human Target or Warlord in Danger Street, I'm filled with dread instead of the usual joy I get when seeing these characters get attention. Usually these guys only get used if a fan finds an excuse to use them, but Tom King is obviously not a fan, or else he would have these characters actually behave like themselves. Looking back, even those early works I enjoyed had this flaw, like the retcon that Victor Mancha was always a secret drug addict.
Anyways, those are my two cents.
I understand your perspective a bit. Part of our difference is probably just how we read comics. I'm very interested in theme, characterization, and how those are integrated into the plot. I don't really care for continuity errors or inconsistency with past titles. Comics are at their strongest, imo, when a writer takes a basic blueprint for a character and runs it through their own unique perspective to create something new. I enjoyed what King did with the stories you listed. Reinvention is a cornerstone of superhero storytelling. Sorry if that's a bit ramble-y. I can clarify if you need it
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
You like what Tom King did with Adam Strange in Strange Adventures anon? Well let's discuss that then.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
I thought it was a good book. It's not as good as Mister Miracle or Danger Street, but I liked it. Haven't read it since it came out, but from what I remember - the artwork was incredible, I liked the twist with Strange, I thought Mister Terrific was cool, and Alannah Strange (I think that was her name) was more than just a generic wife/mommy
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
I'm sorry but what is your issue with calling women generic?
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
What? I'm saying she wasn't generic.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Wasn't she? Can you actually describe her character without saying she wasn't generic?
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Yes, she initially appears to be generic, but during the Rann war, she shows she's actually capable of being quite ruthless. I believe she was also conspiring against Terrific at the beginning of his investigation. She was very intelligent and had her own motivation throughout the story. Different from Barda in Mister Miracle, for example.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Actually no her and Barda basically took the same role and even personality when written by Tom King.
I honestly think Tom has some unaddressed issues with women or at least with his wife.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Not the case at all. Alannah feels almost like a response to the critique of the way King writes female characters.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Compared to the wall of text in my original message (and this message turned out to be similarly long), I wouldn't call you ramble-y at all. I understand your perspective and I frequently share it when reading elseworlds or reboots. Squadron Supreme, Watchmen, and The Ultimates 1 & 2 are all stories I'm immensely fond of. However, there is clear separation from those stories and the long-running continuity of Marvel and DC.
I think that continuity is what transforms these comics into a modern-day mythology. I was into Greek myths as a kid and thought it was cool the way gods and other figures would reappear in different stories, forming this web of relationships. Similarly, an effort to maintain continuity has changed Marvel & DC from a handful of separate storylines into a single grand epic that allows for stories you couldn't get otherwise. The Hank Pym family tree for example is something you can only get with a multitude of different artists all contributing to a shared continuity over decades of serialized storytelling.
Getting back to the Ancient Greece metaphor, I can still appreciate Percy Jackson of God of War reimagining these characters, but it's not like either franchise presents itself as an actual sequel to those ancient myths. Aside from Strange Adventures (which I fear will be made canon one day just due to the amount of praise it gets), King's stories are usually in-canon or vague about how canon they are. So in my eyes he is taking this framework built by his predecessors, twisting it up, and leaving it for someone else to fix while he goes to bask in the praise of his fans. I'm being dramatic here, but really, I'm so bummed that this guy is about to get his hands on Jenny Sparks.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Luckily anon there's no way for them to make Strange Adventures canon with an already dead adam strange.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>King's stories are usually in-canon
Factually wrong. Most of King’s DC output for a while now has been done through black label which is not in-continuity at all.
>Because the investigation leads him to that.
No it doesn't, in fact that's a plot hole right in the open there.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Don’t bother it’s a bad baiter or a bot, just read back the thread
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Hey dummy I already know but I'm using them as a socratic device so shut the frick up and stay in your own lane.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Oh you’re a bot too huh ok got it
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
What the frick did I just say about staying in your own lane? I'm actually talking about a comic book here junior so maybe get off your high horse.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Have fun debating a bot using disingenuous argumentative tactics to hone your Socratic method you fricking bot
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
See ya in the next thread anon and don't try to act too surprised.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
It’s not surprising to have bots debating bots that “win arguments” by deflecting ad nauseum but it is disheartening.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
frick I meant to message you with >it did. You are misremembering the book.
sorry, I barely use Cinemaphile
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Ruh Roh the robots are on the fritz!
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
I am not misremembering because I got it open right now anon and I can tell you there Mister Terrific drops the murder case immediately to focus on the war crimes on Rann and never presents any proof to why he would do that.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Why are you calling someone you know is a bot “anon”, bot?
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Because I never said you were a bot.
Now back to what my previous point which is how Mister Terrific never provides any proof that muder was linked to Adam's war crimes on Rann is a plot hole.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
You said you were debating a bot and yet you still call him anon, curious
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Because he suspects that Strange really did murder the victim, and believes he can find a motive through his time in the Rann war. The victim was screaming at Strange at the book signing that he knew what Strange did in the war right? So finding out what did happen will help Terrific establish his case.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
But there's no evidence there that Adam did commit war crimes on Rann and had to kill that guy to cover it up in regards to the murder.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Originally you said "Mister Terrific didn't investigate him for his crimes on Earth but for his crimes on Rann" and I responded that was because his investigation led him there, because he was searching for a motive. It's through this investigation of Rann war crimes that he's able to convince Alannah that Strange lied and that her daughter is still alive. I believe it was when she confronted Strange that he admitted to everything. There isn't a plot hole, it all ties together.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
No it's a plot hole because he's investigating the war crimes to prove Adam killed the guy but he's already using the murder victim as proof that Adam committed war crimes.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
I don't remember him using the victim as proof that Adam committed war crimes. Not to put you on the spot, but since you said you have the book in front of you, can you give a screenshot of where he does that? or if you have a physical copy just the issue number and I'll check on my end. Not saying you're wrong, I just legitimately don't remember that.
Compared to the wall of text in my original message (and this message turned out to be similarly long), I wouldn't call you ramble-y at all. I understand your perspective and I frequently share it when reading elseworlds or reboots. Squadron Supreme, Watchmen, and The Ultimates 1 & 2 are all stories I'm immensely fond of. However, there is clear separation from those stories and the long-running continuity of Marvel and DC.
I think that continuity is what transforms these comics into a modern-day mythology. I was into Greek myths as a kid and thought it was cool the way gods and other figures would reappear in different stories, forming this web of relationships. Similarly, an effort to maintain continuity has changed Marvel & DC from a handful of separate storylines into a single grand epic that allows for stories you couldn't get otherwise. The Hank Pym family tree for example is something you can only get with a multitude of different artists all contributing to a shared continuity over decades of serialized storytelling.
Getting back to the Ancient Greece metaphor, I can still appreciate Percy Jackson of God of War reimagining these characters, but it's not like either franchise presents itself as an actual sequel to those ancient myths. Aside from Strange Adventures (which I fear will be made canon one day just due to the amount of praise it gets), King's stories are usually in-canon or vague about how canon they are. So in my eyes he is taking this framework built by his predecessors, twisting it up, and leaving it for someone else to fix while he goes to bask in the praise of his fans. I'm being dramatic here, but really, I'm so bummed that this guy is about to get his hands on Jenny Sparks.
I sort of agree with the analogy that superhero stories are modern day mythologies - however, implicit in that idea is that these stories don't have a single canon. Ancient myths like the Greek gods were passed through generations, evolving and changing. Look at how the Greek myths influenced the Roman myths.
I also love Elseworlds story for this reason, but I don't mind the changes made in canon for this either. Like, Frank Miller's Batman, Grant Morrison's Batman, and Tom King's Batman are all very different from one another. They are also all great in my opinion. It's hard to imagine any of them existing if the writers had to adhere to a stricter canon (even with all of Morrison's continuity inclusion, his run goes to a lot of places that a lot of modern Batman fans wouldn't expect from a traditional Batman book). A time-traveling sci-fi story does not sound like it belongs in a Batman book, but Return of Bruce Wayne is one of my favorite stories. And it was in the mainline continuity! Oftentimes, the skill of the writers is more important than the precedent created by canon.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>I don't remember him using the victim as proof that Adam committed war crimes
I mean why else would he think that he should investigate the possiblity adam committed war crimes on Rann if he doesn't already think Adam was the murderer on Earth. Like you said yourself Mister Terrific is trying to established motive but it comes out as a catch-22. >or if you have a physical copy just the issue number and I'll check on my en
It's the fourth issue when he goes to Rann to closely investigate Adam for war crimes.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>why else would he think that he should investigate the possiblity adam committed war crimes
Because who the victim was. The guy who was murdered in the first issue that confronted Strange at the book signing. That's why Terrific is using that to establish a motive.
Also I just read all the Terrific sections in issue 4 and didn't see where he said he's using the murder on Earth as evidence that Strange committed war crimes. In fact, Terrific barely says anything at all in this issue. The biggest moment in the issue with him is when he confronts Alannah's father about Aleea.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Ok do you not understand how that's a catch-22? He's using the murder as proof of the war crimes to prove the murder but he has no proof that adam killed the guy without the war crimes being proved true. >Also I just read all the Terrific sections in issue 4 and didn't see where he said he's using the murder on Earth as evidence that Strange committed war crimes
Anon, I never said he did.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
He's not using the murder as proof of war crimes. That's backwards. He's investigating the war crimes for proof of the murder. How do you investigate someone for a crime without establishing the capability of doing it? Again, it's all about establishing motive. >Anon, I never said he did.
You did right here
No it's a plot hole because he's investigating the war crimes to prove Adam killed the guy but he's already using the murder victim as proof that Adam committed war crimes.
>he's already using the murder victim as proof that Adam committed war crimes.
At this risk of going in circles for another hour, let me just lay down what I believe about what happened. Dude accuses Strange of war crimes at his book signing -> Strange denies war crimes-> Dude is murdered -> Strange specifically asks to be investigated -> Terrific decides to investigate -> Terrific knows that the dude accused Strange of war crimes on Rann -> Terrific decides to go to Rann to find if this is true, thereby establishing a motive for Strange to kill the dude (because the dude could reveal evidence or to hide his involvement or because he had PTSD or whatever). What part of this chain do you disagree with?
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
See
Adam could have committed war crimes but not killed the dude. There is a missing link
The weakest link in the chain would be what links Adam to the murder, there's just no evidence to make investigating for a motive worthwhile.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>Adam could have committed war crimes but not killed the dude. There is a missing link
Well then there wouldn't be a story? I don't really understand this point. Saying X could have happened instead of Y is not a plot hole. A plot hole would be like Strange says he can control the zeta beams and then the rest of the book he can't control when he's zapped back and forth between Earth and Rann. >just no evidence to make investigating for a motive worthwhile.
Again, you're looking at this backwards. You don't look for evidence for a motive. A motive is a type of evidence.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
The point you're missing is there's no evidence to link Adam murdering the guy to justify Mister Terrific going over 4 lightywars to an alien planet to establish a motive by proving Adam Strange did war crimes so it comes off as Mister Terrific trying to use the murder as proof that Adam Strange did war crimes.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Well we're just repeating ourselves now. I still disagree with the framing here, but even if I did agree with it I wouldn't write off Strange Adventures completely. It still has great art, it still has a lot of intriguing elements - like Alannah's interactions with Terrific and what happened with Strange's daughter - and it still does a lot of interesting things with Strange as a character.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
I would write strange adventures off just because the silver age adam strange are just that much more legit.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>A motive is a type of evidence.
Ok but where's the evidence that Mister Terrific needs to find a motive for Adam?
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
You mean other than the fact that Adam specifically asks to be investigated? lol
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Yeah.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Investigating a motive is one of the primary ways to solve a murder because most murders don’t just happen randomly, there is a reason for it, be it love, money, trying to hide something or preventing something from happening, etc.
If the war crime allegations aren’t true then Adam has zero reason to go out of his way to murder someone accusing him of that. The lack of motive would make the case for Adam’s innocence stronger because there is only circumstantial evidence like the guy accusing Adam and then being killer with a space gun.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>If the war crime allegations aren’t true then Adam has zero reason to go out of his way to murder someone accusing him of that.
But that's exactly where the logic falls apart because it's backwards, Mister terrific is trying to find a motive to make Adam the murderer when he doesn't have any evidence that puts adam at the crime scene.
There's zero reason to investigate motive because he doesn't have any proof Adam kill the guy, motive isn't proof.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Oh for…how can someone be this dense.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
See
See[...]
Mister Terrifc is committing a logical fallacy by using the murder as proof of war crimes to prove Adam is a murderer.
The whole story is about mister terrific investigating adam for war crimes and not the murder, the murder is used as proof that he did war crimes and not the other way around which make the whole plot nonsensical and insubstantial.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
It’s called investigating a motive. If his war crime allegations are true Adam has the motive to murder the guy. If he didn’t do war crimes there is no real motive because the guy was crazy.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
See
Adam could have committed war crimes but not killed the dude. There is a missing link
Mister Terrifc is committing a logical fallacy by using the murder as proof of war crimes to prove Adam is a murderer.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
It’s not a fallacy. If Adam is innocent he has no reason to kill a random nutcase when he’s a galactic hero. If Adam is guilty of war crimes then he has a clear motive to silence the accuser.
When evidence on Earth cannot make a clear case to exonerate Adam or show he’s guilty of the murder it makes absolute sense to investigate the validity of the war crime charge to establish if Adam has a motive or not.
And once it’s clear there’s a cover up about Adam’s activities on Rann it makes Adam’s guilt of murder all the more likely because why would a celebrated saviour need to hide facts about his activities that he himself has publicly told about in his own book unless they’re false and why would other people on Rann do it for him unless they too are complicit in them.
If Adam has the opportunity, means and motive to kill the guy, he likely did it. And he can only have a motive to kill a guy accusing him of something if he did actually do the war crimes. The simplest explanation has to be the answer.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>When evidence on Earth cannot make a clear case to exonerate Adam or show he’s guilty of the murder it makes absolute sense to investigate the validity of the war crime charge to establish if Adam has a motive or not
Not if there's no evidence. You wouldn't be trying to find a motive that Adam killed this guy without evidence linking him to the murder in the first place.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
He’s automatically the suspect because soon after Adam gets accused of something vile in public the accuser ends up dead. He’s the most obvious suspect. Validating whether or not the claim has merit is the most obvious direction to pursue because with no motive Adam has no reason to kill the person.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
He's not the most obvious suspect but the only suspect because Tom King is a bad writer. Mister Terrific is using the murder as proof that Adam did war crimes which is supposed to be proof that adam killed the guy, the whole mystery plot is a catch-22.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>The simplest explanation has to be the answer.
Trying prove Adam killed this guy by proving he did war crimes on an alien planet is the literally furthest thing from simple, especially when Mister Terrific didn't even investigate the murder.
Batman and Mister Miracle are suicidal messes that slit their wrists, which directly ties into my point that he stands on the shoulders of giants and shits all over them. What’s King’s trademark paneling style? Oh yeah that other guys trademark style with zero innovations. Those authors you mentioned have reverence for what came before them. King doesn’t possess the talent required to build back up characters and if he did he wouldn’t because he hates them. His take on Batman is I Am Suicide. He’s an idiot who thinks he’s smart for deconstructing superheroes and making them swear, and you’re an idiot for defending him.
Hello, I'm not the anon you've been talking to but I would like to explain my issues with Tom King. I enjoyed Omega Men and Visions but his Batman series having such repetitive dialogue and I didn't enjoy how suicidal he made Batman, which is where I stopped being a fan. Mister Miracle and Heroes in Crisis are where I went from "not a fan" to "actively disliking" his work. They're also where I pinpointed my biggest problem with his work: he uses obscure characters and completely disregards their established characterization.
Actually, he disregards characterization for bigger names too (A Booster Gold that doesn't understand how time travel works?), but when he "reinvents" Scott Free to be suicidal or Adam Strange to be a war criminal there's a much greater chance of that just being the standard for those characters going forward. So when I hear he's tackling less popular characters I like such as the JLI in Human Target or Warlord in Danger Street, I'm filled with dread instead of the usual joy I get when seeing these characters get attention. Usually these guys only get used if a fan finds an excuse to use them, but Tom King is obviously not a fan, or else he would have these characters actually behave like themselves. Looking back, even those early works I enjoyed had this flaw, like the retcon that Victor Mancha was always a secret drug addict.
>A Booster Gold that doesn't understand how time travel works
Entirely acceptable portrayal of Booster. His most consistent and dominant trait is that he’s a bit of an idiot who doesn’t think things through and doesn’t really grasp how things work because he’s a superficial glory hound.
Moore actually towers over the shoulders he stands on, for the most part. Morrison and Ellis can be pretty good at times, but King somehow stands on shoulders and sinks beneath them. He's a phenomenally bad writer.
Don’t agree. Most King hate just comes from the typical fanboy butthurt because he wrote characters in a way that nerds can’t abide because muh continuity or muh favourite character was ruined.
King has written good comics and he has written bad comics. People here loved King and then got mad when Batman didn’t get married and have refused to like his work since over petty fanboy rage.
>Most King hate just comes from the typical fanboy butthurt because he wrote characters in a way that nerds can’t abide because muh continuity or muh favourite character was ruined.
While that's true, it doesn't mean he was actually a good writer. It just means the criticisms have been largely misdirected. As I'm sure you're aware, people here are used to gobbling up junk and being petty.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
He is a good writer. Maybe you should try reading shit that isn’t capes.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
I've mostly read non-capes. King is a terrible writer.
She's functionally immortal (though it ended up being that she immediately died upon reaching one hundred years old then reincarnated as Jenny Quantum) and stopped aging around age 18.
But her main power is the fact that she can control, absorb, manipulate, and blast electricity from her body. But she can't actually generate electricity on her own and requires a source of electricity nearby to draw it into her body to use it as a weapon.
a little bit wrong. who powers are electric because of electricity being so common in the 1900+
there was once a jenny fire who most likely used fire abilities and she gets reincarnated every century hence the name century babies, like elijah snow controlling cold. (something about global warming idk??)
A stark difference in aesthetics from east and west. You can tell what each side values more. One only cares about politico agendas, and the other selling comics. Japan is always better.
HAHAHAHAHAHAH HOT OFF THE PRESSES “MY WONDER WOMAN IS NOT POLITICAL” HAHAHAHAHAAH TOM KING IS A FRICKING moron AND YOU ARE A moron IF YOU WERE EVER FOOLED BY HIM
Manchester Black is less Jenny Sparks and more Jack Hawksmoor, as written by Millar and Brubaker.
Jenny Sparks is a pro-active anti-hero who is defined by the fact that she's functionally immortal but horribly fricked up by a laundry list of fricked up shit she's seen and witnessed as a hero, which is why she drinks and why she has no time for heroes who are cowards and quislings willing to make moral compromises. Along with being haunted by shit like accidentally getting her best friend Adolf fricking Hitler to get into politics after he failed to get into art school and and the whole thing where she has a horrible habit of hanging out with people who do bad shit behind her back (like kill kids so they can create a patchwork corpse baby for a guy's wife, who went insane after being told her husband was sterile and couldn't get her pregnant or the guy who did PCP at a concert he and Sparks were doing security for, which led to him murdering a couple of dozen people before Jenny had to kill him to stop his rampage).
Manchester Black is post-Ellis Jack Hawksmoor; while Ellis wrote Jack as a weepy emo guy forever complaining about alien abductions he was subjected to as a kid which left him with mutilated genitals and becoming near death if he ever left a city, Millar and Brubaker and the guy who wrote the Authority series that came between Millar and Brubaker's run, wrote Jack basically as Manchester Black was written but with huge plot armor and no one willing to frick his shit up whenever he talked shit.
That said, Joe Kelly DID create a sister character to Manchester Black who was more or less an analogue to Jenny Sparks that debuted in JLA #100 and later led Justice League Elite, but largely disappeared off the face of the Earth after Infinite Crisis came out.
>accidentally getting her best friend Adolf fricking Hitler to get into politics after he failed to get into art school
I like stories likes that as if Vienna wasn't also a hotbed of anti-semitism and politics.
IIRC she was having steampunk battles with alien invaders from a parallel earth where blue aliens conquered the planet and discovered the ability to travel in the multiverse and raped people to make half-human/half-alien hybrids.
isnt that the exact plot of that one authority arc with the inbred british empire from parallel earth
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
That’s the backstory for Jenny’s past dealings with the Blue Albion that decided to invade our reality in 1999, which is what the Ellis era Authority story is about.
>I'm dying for more WildStorm, but not like this.
All their attempts to reboot/adapt WS material has been lackluster at best. I get hooked in every time and every time I'm disappointed.
i never doubted there were paid shills on Cinemaphile for even a second but i did doubt there were chatbots here. frick me this thread, 100% without a doubt now
I don't think King is such a bad writer. I've disliked most of his runs, and hated Mr. Miracle, but I think this has a chance to be good. I'll take it over more moronation from Scott Snyder any day of the week. This is the only DC I'll be pulling since... I don't even remember. Mozz's GL?
That's hilarious, nothing fricking matters.
Well the only postive here is maybe this one will finally force the critics to admit Tom King is not a good writer.
You're funny.
This will be Ellis with no scientific imagination and even thinner characterization cloaked in moral relativism and the critics will suck his dick because somehow only he could tell this story because of his vague experiences in the CIA
THANK HIM FOR HIS SEVEN YEARS AS A GLORIFIED FILE CLERK ANON.
The VA refuse to cover papercut scars ;_;
Did you miss his Adam Strange?
No but my aim is getting better!
>DC announced today a new six-issue DC Black Label comic book miniseries launching in August, Jenny Sparks. The Spirit of the 20th Century returns for the 21st in this action-packed new DC adventure by Eisner Award-winning writer Tom King (Wonder Woman, Supergirl: Woman of Tomorrow,The Penguin) and artist Jeff Spokes (WildC.A.T.s, Batman: The Brave and the Bold)!
>“Jenny Sparks is an epic, thrilling, mind-blowing series in the tradition of Strange Adventures, Mister Miracle, and The Human Target,” said Tom King. “The Spirit of the 20th Century comes to the 21st to try to save five men and women taken hostage by an out-of-control and infinitely powered Captain Atom. Through this lens, we’ll explore the grip of Jenny’s time on our own; how, despite all our desperate prayers, the sins of our past refuse to die away. Featuring astonishing art by Jeff Spokes (seriously, it’s so damn good), Jenny Sparks seeks to set the bar in superhero comics, to show how our heroes can illuminate and define our moment.”
>But who is Jenny Sparks? Readers of DC’s WildStorm comics will know that Jenny has always worked outside of the Justice League establishment to find anomalies in the superhero community, is subtle enough to dig into the lies of the most powerful people on the planet, and is strong enough to fight back when these fallen heroes discover who’s digging. She can, if only for a moment, light up the darkest nights. In DC’s new Jenny Sparks, Jenny is the Spirit of the 20th Century, resurrected for the 21st.
>Kicking off the action in Jenny Sparks #1, what could four strangers have to do with the fate of the world? Find out as Captain Atom goes rogue, threatening to destroy the planet he once swore to protect. It may take the most unconventional hero of them all to stop him…Jenny Sparks, the one woman tasked with keeping all the heroes in line, no matter the cost. With a snap of her fingers, she’s entered the fray and won’t quit until the job is done!
>The Spirit of the 20th Century comes to the 21st to try to save five men and women taken hostage by an out-of-control and infinitely powered Captain Atom.
Why reference Captain Atom:Armageddon for Jenny Sparks when it was Jenny Quantum who fought him there?
Do you really think King reads the comics he references? He wrote a whole-ass page with Steel in Heroes in Crisis where he mixed up the two Steel characters into one as if they were just the same person. Dude just briefly googles stuff and then goes off on his own ideas
Why is this never a bigger issue for anyone else besides us?
they don't read comics either.
Then who are these for?
I picked up on it when he first shat the bed with his Omega Men miniseries, its only gotten worse the deeper he's embedded himself into DC
So the comic you're referencing the dialog is about Hank, but the image drawn is that of Nate. The editor makes the same mistake in the back of the book, so maybe it was on the artist
Also there's technically 5 characters named Steel:
Henry, Hank, and Nate Heywood (Commander and Citizen)
John Henry and Natasha Irons
>In DC’s new Jenny Sparks, Jenny is the Spirit of the 20th Century, resurrected for the 21st.
Come on.
Eh... it was kind of necessary. No one gave a frick about Jenny Quantum and the only reason Jenny Sparks stayed dead was due to DC being full of Ellis dick suckers, as Ellis got DC to agree to keep Sparks dead because she was his waifu and outside a single mini written by Mark Millar, didn't want anyone else writing her. And with Ellis now a pariah due to #MeToo, there is no need to humor Ellis and keep her dead.
thanks anon.
I'm glad he is so humble about his work.
>girlboss the comic
Ahh, yes, so another Tom King story then, Captain Atom will be the representative for evil white males and patriarchy this time around.
It's so tiresome, but at least western comics demise is accelerating, they will not reverse course and instead double down, the pain will be shorter.
>Jenny Sparks #1, written by King with art and main cover by Spokes and lettering by Clayton Cowles, will have variant covers by Guillem March, Homare, and Saowee (1:25). Jenny Sparks #1 will hit local comic book shop shelves on August 21, 2024. Jenny Sparks is a DC Black Label comic book series and carries an Ages 17+ content descriptor (for mature readers). Each issue of Jenny Sparks will be 40 pages, with 28 story pages per issue.
>https://www.dc.com/blog/2024/05/14/dc-launches-a-brand-new-wild-storm-adventure
What kind of abuse and torture is Tom King going to put Captain Atom through this time?
What did he did to Captain Atom beforehand? Or are you talking about King having Atom be used in this book to shit on him for the way DiDio pretty much made the entire Wildstorm Universe job to Captain Atom, a perennial C-Lister forever stuck in the shadow of his Brand X counterpart Dr Manhattan?
He did use Atom as a jobber to Gotham Girl.
>40 pages, with 28 story pages per issue.
i don't get it
12 pages of ads.
How is Captain Atom gonna be humiliated this year? They seemingly do it on an annual basis.
Im guessing his suit will be torn and he will explode
I expect Tom King to shit on Ellis a lot in this
If only in attempt to distract people from his own gender politics.
Why? Ellis has not done a book for DC in years and Tom's picking through his leftovers.
Well you can't expect Tom to sell this book based on the strength of his writing right?
Ellis was cancelled by the Woke mob so Tom King, a SJW, must defend the honor of the MeToo movement and demonize Ellis. Like he did with Ditko.
>Like he did with Ditko.
You're going to have to source me on that. Who the frick is this flavor of the month motherfricker to shit on Ditko?
The same comic he wrote Frank Miller as a character. And people still praise him
tbf Frank Miller was consulting on that comic and allowed that portrayal of him to go ahead
tbf you are pulling that straight out of your ass and regardless it’s hacky look at me bullshit writing
>tbf you are pulling that straight out of your ass
I'm not I'm going off an interview King did about the book where basically he said that Miller allowed King to own the rights to his name and likeness for the duration of the comic publication and printing d and Tom King was talking to Miller regularly during this period, there really isn't any reason to doubt King on this
An interview that you saw floating in your toilet bowl.
well I guess I shit in the internet then
Tell me where you start talking about Miller Tom I’m not wading through your toilet bowl. Love to hear Miller saying anything about this too.
At least with this, Wonder Woman and Penguin great artists aren't wasted on Tom King.
>Tom King getting more work with """redefining""" yet another fan-favourite character
I'm starting to think this man is my mortal enemy. I don't even care for Jenny Sparks that much but I just know he's gonna pull some more bullshit here.
>fan-favourite
she's non-binary and lesbian
Will Captain Atom EVER catch a break?
You guys are all coping. Tom King is a good writer, and an Authority character is exactly up his alley. "He's gonna shove in moral relativism and make it all serious instead of doing a goofy DC story" have you guys never read The Authority comics?? You know the whole point of it is to rail against traditional superhero comics. The Authority is about as close to a Watchmen as you can get, and given how obsessed King is with that story, it makes perfect sense he'd gravitate towards these characters.
It's amazing that this thread already has 20 responses, and yet nobody can actually describe what they dislike about King's comics. All you can say is that you hate his politics and hate how the mainstream sucks his dick. You can't actually describe why you dislike it (because they're not actually bad). If Alan Moore was doing today what he did in the 80's, you would all shit on him too lmao.
Tom King is not a good writer and I can explain to you why even.
I'm waiting.
His plots are insubstantial and his characters lack persoanlity.
There, I just you two solid reasons why Tom King is a bad writer.
The opposite is true though. Most writers just give character the same personality. Tom King gives each character more independence. The way he writes Superman is very different from how he writes Mister Miracle, or Batman. Also his plots are not insubstantial. Don't know where that's coming from. I'm guessing you feel that way because his stories are definitely more character focused than plot-driven, but that the plots do matter.
>Tom King gives each character more independence.
false
I can't think of a modern writer who does more character driven stuff than Tom King.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
If his plot aren't insubstantial then perhaps you can explain the plot of strange adventures for us.
What did you have difficulty understanding? Mister Terrific investigated him for crimes on Earth that were tied to his actions on Rann. It was mostly a political thriller/detective story. That was the meat of the book.
You're not using that phrase correctly. Or maybe you just misunderstanding me. I'm not saying King does what nobody else does. I'm saying he does it moreso.
>What did you have difficulty understanding?
Well can you explain why the aliens wanted to invade in the first place?
Are you talking about the invasion on Rann or on Earth? IIRC, the aliens were warlords or something. They invaded Earth because Strange sold them out to save Rann and his daughter
>They invaded Earth because Strange sold them out to save Rann and his daughter
Oh I'm sorry but that's wrong. Maybe you should reread strange adventures so you could understand and explain the plot better.
can't even explain what was wrong with my explanation. fricking brainlet, I understand a book I read 2 years ago better than the words you are reading in front of you right now.
I can easily explain what you got wrong with the plot anon.
Strange Adventure took WAY WAY WAY too long to get to that point of explaining what the frick the plot was (as most people dropped it after the first couple of super vague decompressed storytelling) and the whole thing was a retred of that god-awful Adam Strange mini from the late 80s that retconned Adam a cheating butthole who had a side piece on Earth he never told his wife about, who was hated by the Rannians, and who was only there because Rann's men were rendered sterile due to a nuclear war and his father in law wanted to see if the still fertile women could frick earth men and have kids with them that weren't cross-species abominations (with the punchline being that Adam got his wife preggers but she died giving birth, allowing him to move in with his side piece with the kid in tow, father-in-law be damned).
And at least that 80s story was just 3 issues.
>Mister Terrific investigated him for crimes on Earth that were tied to his actions on Rann.
But Mister Terrific didn't investigate him for his crimes on Earth but for his crimes on Rann, which doesn't make any sense.
>actually claiming that Tom King gives each of his characters a different personality
Lol
Lmao, even
Mister Miracle and Batman both slit their wrists, so keep trying.
He is pretentious with rote, repetitive prose that lacks substance and has the most obnoxious dialogue found in comics. His characters are one note, his plots nonsensical, and he writes the same story ad nauseum. He stands on the shoulders of giants and regularly shits all over them. His head is so far up his own ass people don’t realize his mouth is actually spewing his own farts instead of carbon dioxide. I can keep going if you like.
Okay, his dialogue is pretty annoying sometimes, that's a critique at least I can agree with. I don't agree with the idea that his characters are one note or that he writes the same story over and over again though. He has a pretty diverse set of books actually. Batman, Mister Miracle, Danger Street, and his indie stuff. Obviously, he has themes and tropes he revisits a lot, but generally it's filtered through the lens of each unique story.
>He stands on the shoulders of giants and regularly shits all over them.
This is the case with the best writers. Moore, Morrison, Ellis. Building on top of, and breaking down, what came before is how progress is made in comics.
Didn't the whole investigation start because someone from Strange's book signing was found murdered, with Strange being the prime suspect?
But Mister Terrific doesn't investigate that crime at all, he focuses on the war crime allegations the murder victim made at the book signing.
Because the investigation leads him to that.
>Batman and Mister Miracle are suicidal messes that slit their wrists
Your point being? Batman being a mentally ill freak is not a new interpretation of the character, why would something like this bother you?
>Those authors you mentioned have reverence for what came before them.
Moore absolutely did not, and if you've read a Morrison book from the past decade you'd know he doesn't either. They speak respectfully of the creators in real life obviously, as does King, but the actual content of the books they write are in many ways attacks on what came before.
You say King is an idiot, but as I mentioned earlier in the thread, I can't think of many modern writers who can do what he does. Things like panel layout is not a simple task, even if you are just apeing it form Moore. Notice how few other writers do any complex panel layout? It's mostly either random or a shmorgus board of nonsense. King has the ability to not only work within complex panel layout, but also write to the strength of his artists, which incidentally, is what the best writers do. Just like Moore and Morrison, King will consciously write his scripts to favor his artists. That's why he does the 9 panel grid while working with Gerads, but will use larger layouts when working with Mikel Janin or Bilquis Evely. He is simply better than most writers.
My point being you cited those two titles as being different when they are exactly the same. I’m not having a green text argument with a cherry picking chat bot have a good day.
lol this is how it goes with every brain rotted Tom King hater. You just immediately give up as soon as you get pushback. I understand, dealing with different opinions can be difficult when your a special ed student.
it did. You are misremembering the book.
I understand your perspective a bit. Part of our difference is probably just how we read comics. I'm very interested in theme, characterization, and how those are integrated into the plot. I don't really care for continuity errors or inconsistency with past titles. Comics are at their strongest, imo, when a writer takes a basic blueprint for a character and runs it through their own unique perspective to create something new. I enjoyed what King did with the stories you listed. Reinvention is a cornerstone of superhero storytelling. Sorry if that's a bit ramble-y. I can clarify if you need it
You like what Tom King did with Adam Strange in Strange Adventures anon? Well let's discuss that then.
I thought it was a good book. It's not as good as Mister Miracle or Danger Street, but I liked it. Haven't read it since it came out, but from what I remember - the artwork was incredible, I liked the twist with Strange, I thought Mister Terrific was cool, and Alannah Strange (I think that was her name) was more than just a generic wife/mommy
I'm sorry but what is your issue with calling women generic?
What? I'm saying she wasn't generic.
Wasn't she? Can you actually describe her character without saying she wasn't generic?
Yes, she initially appears to be generic, but during the Rann war, she shows she's actually capable of being quite ruthless. I believe she was also conspiring against Terrific at the beginning of his investigation. She was very intelligent and had her own motivation throughout the story. Different from Barda in Mister Miracle, for example.
Actually no her and Barda basically took the same role and even personality when written by Tom King.
I honestly think Tom has some unaddressed issues with women or at least with his wife.
Not the case at all. Alannah feels almost like a response to the critique of the way King writes female characters.
Compared to the wall of text in my original message (and this message turned out to be similarly long), I wouldn't call you ramble-y at all. I understand your perspective and I frequently share it when reading elseworlds or reboots. Squadron Supreme, Watchmen, and The Ultimates 1 & 2 are all stories I'm immensely fond of. However, there is clear separation from those stories and the long-running continuity of Marvel and DC.
I think that continuity is what transforms these comics into a modern-day mythology. I was into Greek myths as a kid and thought it was cool the way gods and other figures would reappear in different stories, forming this web of relationships. Similarly, an effort to maintain continuity has changed Marvel & DC from a handful of separate storylines into a single grand epic that allows for stories you couldn't get otherwise. The Hank Pym family tree for example is something you can only get with a multitude of different artists all contributing to a shared continuity over decades of serialized storytelling.
Getting back to the Ancient Greece metaphor, I can still appreciate Percy Jackson of God of War reimagining these characters, but it's not like either franchise presents itself as an actual sequel to those ancient myths. Aside from Strange Adventures (which I fear will be made canon one day just due to the amount of praise it gets), King's stories are usually in-canon or vague about how canon they are. So in my eyes he is taking this framework built by his predecessors, twisting it up, and leaving it for someone else to fix while he goes to bask in the praise of his fans. I'm being dramatic here, but really, I'm so bummed that this guy is about to get his hands on Jenny Sparks.
Luckily anon there's no way for them to make Strange Adventures canon with an already dead adam strange.
>King's stories are usually in-canon
Factually wrong. Most of King’s DC output for a while now has been done through black label which is not in-continuity at all.
>Because the investigation leads him to that.
No it doesn't, in fact that's a plot hole right in the open there.
Don’t bother it’s a bad baiter or a bot, just read back the thread
Hey dummy I already know but I'm using them as a socratic device so shut the frick up and stay in your own lane.
Oh you’re a bot too huh ok got it
What the frick did I just say about staying in your own lane? I'm actually talking about a comic book here junior so maybe get off your high horse.
Have fun debating a bot using disingenuous argumentative tactics to hone your Socratic method you fricking bot
See ya in the next thread anon and don't try to act too surprised.
It’s not surprising to have bots debating bots that “win arguments” by deflecting ad nauseum but it is disheartening.
frick I meant to message you with
>it did. You are misremembering the book.
sorry, I barely use Cinemaphile
Ruh Roh the robots are on the fritz!
I am not misremembering because I got it open right now anon and I can tell you there Mister Terrific drops the murder case immediately to focus on the war crimes on Rann and never presents any proof to why he would do that.
Why are you calling someone you know is a bot “anon”, bot?
Because I never said you were a bot.
Now back to what my previous point which is how Mister Terrific never provides any proof that muder was linked to Adam's war crimes on Rann is a plot hole.
You said you were debating a bot and yet you still call him anon, curious
Because he suspects that Strange really did murder the victim, and believes he can find a motive through his time in the Rann war. The victim was screaming at Strange at the book signing that he knew what Strange did in the war right? So finding out what did happen will help Terrific establish his case.
But there's no evidence there that Adam did commit war crimes on Rann and had to kill that guy to cover it up in regards to the murder.
Originally you said "Mister Terrific didn't investigate him for his crimes on Earth but for his crimes on Rann" and I responded that was because his investigation led him there, because he was searching for a motive. It's through this investigation of Rann war crimes that he's able to convince Alannah that Strange lied and that her daughter is still alive. I believe it was when she confronted Strange that he admitted to everything. There isn't a plot hole, it all ties together.
No it's a plot hole because he's investigating the war crimes to prove Adam killed the guy but he's already using the murder victim as proof that Adam committed war crimes.
I don't remember him using the victim as proof that Adam committed war crimes. Not to put you on the spot, but since you said you have the book in front of you, can you give a screenshot of where he does that? or if you have a physical copy just the issue number and I'll check on my end. Not saying you're wrong, I just legitimately don't remember that.
I sort of agree with the analogy that superhero stories are modern day mythologies - however, implicit in that idea is that these stories don't have a single canon. Ancient myths like the Greek gods were passed through generations, evolving and changing. Look at how the Greek myths influenced the Roman myths.
I also love Elseworlds story for this reason, but I don't mind the changes made in canon for this either. Like, Frank Miller's Batman, Grant Morrison's Batman, and Tom King's Batman are all very different from one another. They are also all great in my opinion. It's hard to imagine any of them existing if the writers had to adhere to a stricter canon (even with all of Morrison's continuity inclusion, his run goes to a lot of places that a lot of modern Batman fans wouldn't expect from a traditional Batman book). A time-traveling sci-fi story does not sound like it belongs in a Batman book, but Return of Bruce Wayne is one of my favorite stories. And it was in the mainline continuity! Oftentimes, the skill of the writers is more important than the precedent created by canon.
>I don't remember him using the victim as proof that Adam committed war crimes
I mean why else would he think that he should investigate the possiblity adam committed war crimes on Rann if he doesn't already think Adam was the murderer on Earth. Like you said yourself Mister Terrific is trying to established motive but it comes out as a catch-22.
>or if you have a physical copy just the issue number and I'll check on my en
It's the fourth issue when he goes to Rann to closely investigate Adam for war crimes.
>why else would he think that he should investigate the possiblity adam committed war crimes
Because who the victim was. The guy who was murdered in the first issue that confronted Strange at the book signing. That's why Terrific is using that to establish a motive.
Also I just read all the Terrific sections in issue 4 and didn't see where he said he's using the murder on Earth as evidence that Strange committed war crimes. In fact, Terrific barely says anything at all in this issue. The biggest moment in the issue with him is when he confronts Alannah's father about Aleea.
Ok do you not understand how that's a catch-22? He's using the murder as proof of the war crimes to prove the murder but he has no proof that adam killed the guy without the war crimes being proved true.
>Also I just read all the Terrific sections in issue 4 and didn't see where he said he's using the murder on Earth as evidence that Strange committed war crimes
Anon, I never said he did.
He's not using the murder as proof of war crimes. That's backwards. He's investigating the war crimes for proof of the murder. How do you investigate someone for a crime without establishing the capability of doing it? Again, it's all about establishing motive.
>Anon, I never said he did.
You did right here
>he's already using the murder victim as proof that Adam committed war crimes.
At this risk of going in circles for another hour, let me just lay down what I believe about what happened. Dude accuses Strange of war crimes at his book signing -> Strange denies war crimes-> Dude is murdered -> Strange specifically asks to be investigated -> Terrific decides to investigate -> Terrific knows that the dude accused Strange of war crimes on Rann -> Terrific decides to go to Rann to find if this is true, thereby establishing a motive for Strange to kill the dude (because the dude could reveal evidence or to hide his involvement or because he had PTSD or whatever). What part of this chain do you disagree with?
See
The weakest link in the chain would be what links Adam to the murder, there's just no evidence to make investigating for a motive worthwhile.
>Adam could have committed war crimes but not killed the dude. There is a missing link
Well then there wouldn't be a story? I don't really understand this point. Saying X could have happened instead of Y is not a plot hole. A plot hole would be like Strange says he can control the zeta beams and then the rest of the book he can't control when he's zapped back and forth between Earth and Rann.
>just no evidence to make investigating for a motive worthwhile.
Again, you're looking at this backwards. You don't look for evidence for a motive. A motive is a type of evidence.
The point you're missing is there's no evidence to link Adam murdering the guy to justify Mister Terrific going over 4 lightywars to an alien planet to establish a motive by proving Adam Strange did war crimes so it comes off as Mister Terrific trying to use the murder as proof that Adam Strange did war crimes.
Well we're just repeating ourselves now. I still disagree with the framing here, but even if I did agree with it I wouldn't write off Strange Adventures completely. It still has great art, it still has a lot of intriguing elements - like Alannah's interactions with Terrific and what happened with Strange's daughter - and it still does a lot of interesting things with Strange as a character.
I would write strange adventures off just because the silver age adam strange are just that much more legit.
>A motive is a type of evidence.
Ok but where's the evidence that Mister Terrific needs to find a motive for Adam?
You mean other than the fact that Adam specifically asks to be investigated? lol
Yeah.
Investigating a motive is one of the primary ways to solve a murder because most murders don’t just happen randomly, there is a reason for it, be it love, money, trying to hide something or preventing something from happening, etc.
If the war crime allegations aren’t true then Adam has zero reason to go out of his way to murder someone accusing him of that. The lack of motive would make the case for Adam’s innocence stronger because there is only circumstantial evidence like the guy accusing Adam and then being killer with a space gun.
>If the war crime allegations aren’t true then Adam has zero reason to go out of his way to murder someone accusing him of that.
But that's exactly where the logic falls apart because it's backwards, Mister terrific is trying to find a motive to make Adam the murderer when he doesn't have any evidence that puts adam at the crime scene.
There's zero reason to investigate motive because he doesn't have any proof Adam kill the guy, motive isn't proof.
Oh for…how can someone be this dense.
See
The whole story is about mister terrific investigating adam for war crimes and not the murder, the murder is used as proof that he did war crimes and not the other way around which make the whole plot nonsensical and insubstantial.
It’s called investigating a motive. If his war crime allegations are true Adam has the motive to murder the guy. If he didn’t do war crimes there is no real motive because the guy was crazy.
See
Mister Terrifc is committing a logical fallacy by using the murder as proof of war crimes to prove Adam is a murderer.
It’s not a fallacy. If Adam is innocent he has no reason to kill a random nutcase when he’s a galactic hero. If Adam is guilty of war crimes then he has a clear motive to silence the accuser.
When evidence on Earth cannot make a clear case to exonerate Adam or show he’s guilty of the murder it makes absolute sense to investigate the validity of the war crime charge to establish if Adam has a motive or not.
And once it’s clear there’s a cover up about Adam’s activities on Rann it makes Adam’s guilt of murder all the more likely because why would a celebrated saviour need to hide facts about his activities that he himself has publicly told about in his own book unless they’re false and why would other people on Rann do it for him unless they too are complicit in them.
If Adam has the opportunity, means and motive to kill the guy, he likely did it. And he can only have a motive to kill a guy accusing him of something if he did actually do the war crimes. The simplest explanation has to be the answer.
>When evidence on Earth cannot make a clear case to exonerate Adam or show he’s guilty of the murder it makes absolute sense to investigate the validity of the war crime charge to establish if Adam has a motive or not
Not if there's no evidence. You wouldn't be trying to find a motive that Adam killed this guy without evidence linking him to the murder in the first place.
He’s automatically the suspect because soon after Adam gets accused of something vile in public the accuser ends up dead. He’s the most obvious suspect. Validating whether or not the claim has merit is the most obvious direction to pursue because with no motive Adam has no reason to kill the person.
He's not the most obvious suspect but the only suspect because Tom King is a bad writer. Mister Terrific is using the murder as proof that Adam did war crimes which is supposed to be proof that adam killed the guy, the whole mystery plot is a catch-22.
>The simplest explanation has to be the answer.
Trying prove Adam killed this guy by proving he did war crimes on an alien planet is the literally furthest thing from simple, especially when Mister Terrific didn't even investigate the murder.
Batman and Mister Miracle are suicidal messes that slit their wrists, which directly ties into my point that he stands on the shoulders of giants and shits all over them. What’s King’s trademark paneling style? Oh yeah that other guys trademark style with zero innovations. Those authors you mentioned have reverence for what came before them. King doesn’t possess the talent required to build back up characters and if he did he wouldn’t because he hates them. His take on Batman is I Am Suicide. He’s an idiot who thinks he’s smart for deconstructing superheroes and making them swear, and you’re an idiot for defending him.
Hello, I'm not the anon you've been talking to but I would like to explain my issues with Tom King. I enjoyed Omega Men and Visions but his Batman series having such repetitive dialogue and I didn't enjoy how suicidal he made Batman, which is where I stopped being a fan. Mister Miracle and Heroes in Crisis are where I went from "not a fan" to "actively disliking" his work. They're also where I pinpointed my biggest problem with his work: he uses obscure characters and completely disregards their established characterization.
Actually, he disregards characterization for bigger names too (A Booster Gold that doesn't understand how time travel works?), but when he "reinvents" Scott Free to be suicidal or Adam Strange to be a war criminal there's a much greater chance of that just being the standard for those characters going forward. So when I hear he's tackling less popular characters I like such as the JLI in Human Target or Warlord in Danger Street, I'm filled with dread instead of the usual joy I get when seeing these characters get attention. Usually these guys only get used if a fan finds an excuse to use them, but Tom King is obviously not a fan, or else he would have these characters actually behave like themselves. Looking back, even those early works I enjoyed had this flaw, like the retcon that Victor Mancha was always a secret drug addict.
Anyways, those are my two cents.
>A Booster Gold that doesn't understand how time travel works
Entirely acceptable portrayal of Booster. His most consistent and dominant trait is that he’s a bit of an idiot who doesn’t think things through and doesn’t really grasp how things work because he’s a superficial glory hound.
Moore actually towers over the shoulders he stands on, for the most part. Morrison and Ellis can be pretty good at times, but King somehow stands on shoulders and sinks beneath them. He's a phenomenally bad writer.
Don’t agree. Most King hate just comes from the typical fanboy butthurt because he wrote characters in a way that nerds can’t abide because muh continuity or muh favourite character was ruined.
King has written good comics and he has written bad comics. People here loved King and then got mad when Batman didn’t get married and have refused to like his work since over petty fanboy rage.
>Most King hate just comes from the typical fanboy butthurt because he wrote characters in a way that nerds can’t abide because muh continuity or muh favourite character was ruined.
While that's true, it doesn't mean he was actually a good writer. It just means the criticisms have been largely misdirected. As I'm sure you're aware, people here are used to gobbling up junk and being petty.
He is a good writer. Maybe you should try reading shit that isn’t capes.
I've mostly read non-capes. King is a terrible writer.
No, King is a fricking dogshit writer.
>The Authority is about as close to a Watchmen as you can get
hahahahahahaha
wait
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
homosexual
frick you I wanted to make that exact post
This is way too fricking close to a Planetary/Elijah Snow revival and by Tom King of all fricking people.
He's leaving me no choice i'll have to murder him november 18 of the current year.
the current outsiders is already doing Planetary but DC
I would have sex with her.
hooray another pseudo feminist crap
thanks tom king
cute
>"Let's get a pint, c**t"
"Throughout heaven and earth, I alone am the honored one, you c**t"
no idea who this is but I know it will be shit and sell like shit, too.
frick tom king frick jim ree and frick DC
Why can no artists involved with this comic draw a union flag? This is the best one and it's still hopeless.
What are her powers exactly? Also it’s too bad every single superhero comic has to be set in America, why not have be in Britain
Kek what the frick.
She's functionally immortal (though it ended up being that she immediately died upon reaching one hundred years old then reincarnated as Jenny Quantum) and stopped aging around age 18.
But her main power is the fact that she can control, absorb, manipulate, and blast electricity from her body. But she can't actually generate electricity on her own and requires a source of electricity nearby to draw it into her body to use it as a weapon.
a little bit wrong. who powers are electric because of electricity being so common in the 1900+
there was once a jenny fire who most likely used fire abilities and she gets reincarnated every century hence the name century babies, like elijah snow controlling cold. (something about global warming idk??)
It's cause he was the "Ghost" of the 20th century and ghost can make things cold.
really? frick ive read planatery like 3 times and never noticed that
Not anime.
>bad guy is captain atom
Goddammit I’m so fricking mad you cia piece of shit
Captain Atom is allowed to be either a villain or a jobber.
either/and you mean
>Captain Atom killed the Wildstorm universe
>Now Jenny is going to kill him
Kino
>Captain Atom killed the Wildstorm universe
Wasn't that almost 20 years ago? I guess revenge is a dish best served cold.
Centuries is not a very long time for a culture, Zealot. Most cultures stretch back longer than that.
Who wrote that crap?
Will Pfeifer
It got better.
A stark difference in aesthetics from east and west. You can tell what each side values more. One only cares about politico agendas, and the other selling comics. Japan is always better.
Eww she's a smoker and should be killed
HAHAHAHAHAHAH HOT OFF THE PRESSES “MY WONDER WOMAN IS NOT POLITICAL” HAHAHAHAHAAH TOM KING IS A FRICKING moron AND YOU ARE A moron IF YOU WERE EVER FOOLED BY HIM
Also, it's obvious this is one of Tom King's many many many backroom scripts that he wants adapted for the DCU.
>Jenny Sparks
Yes
>Tom King
No
Adam could have committed war crimes but not killed the dude. There is a missing link
So... What's special about her and why couldn't we have just gotten Manchester Black?
She's who Manchester Black was modeled after.
Manchester Black is less Jenny Sparks and more Jack Hawksmoor, as written by Millar and Brubaker.
Jenny Sparks is a pro-active anti-hero who is defined by the fact that she's functionally immortal but horribly fricked up by a laundry list of fricked up shit she's seen and witnessed as a hero, which is why she drinks and why she has no time for heroes who are cowards and quislings willing to make moral compromises. Along with being haunted by shit like accidentally getting her best friend Adolf fricking Hitler to get into politics after he failed to get into art school and and the whole thing where she has a horrible habit of hanging out with people who do bad shit behind her back (like kill kids so they can create a patchwork corpse baby for a guy's wife, who went insane after being told her husband was sterile and couldn't get her pregnant or the guy who did PCP at a concert he and Sparks were doing security for, which led to him murdering a couple of dozen people before Jenny had to kill him to stop his rampage).
Manchester Black is post-Ellis Jack Hawksmoor; while Ellis wrote Jack as a weepy emo guy forever complaining about alien abductions he was subjected to as a kid which left him with mutilated genitals and becoming near death if he ever left a city, Millar and Brubaker and the guy who wrote the Authority series that came between Millar and Brubaker's run, wrote Jack basically as Manchester Black was written but with huge plot armor and no one willing to frick his shit up whenever he talked shit.
That said, Joe Kelly DID create a sister character to Manchester Black who was more or less an analogue to Jenny Sparks that debuted in JLA #100 and later led Justice League Elite, but largely disappeared off the face of the Earth after Infinite Crisis came out.
>accidentally getting her best friend Adolf fricking Hitler to get into politics after he failed to get into art school
I like stories likes that as if Vienna wasn't also a hotbed of anti-semitism and politics.
Also like what was she doing in WW1?
IIRC she was having steampunk battles with alien invaders from a parallel earth where blue aliens conquered the planet and discovered the ability to travel in the multiverse and raped people to make half-human/half-alien hybrids.
isnt that the exact plot of that one authority arc with the inbred british empire from parallel earth
That’s the backstory for Jenny’s past dealings with the Blue Albion that decided to invade our reality in 1999, which is what the Ellis era Authority story is about.
I genuinely don't understand how he gets work at all.
Can somebody please just kill Tom King? Frick this garbage.
He's a glowie, he could definitely kill you
Who gives a frick? Who wants to read it?
I'm dying for more WildStorm, but not like this. Real WildStorm Universe, and NO Tom King.
>I'm dying for more WildStorm, but not like this.
All their attempts to reboot/adapt WS material has been lackluster at best. I get hooked in every time and every time I'm disappointed.
If it isn't the real WildStorm Universe returning, I don't bother, and DC shouldn't, either.
>How can we convey that this character is British on every fricking page of the story?
Poppy pins
>Tom King
Oh nice, another book I won't read.
Neat
I can't stop laughing at that face
So what's the Jenny Sparks reading
Had me at Jeff Spokes
>Written by Tom King
Say less, already dropped.
did they ever follow up on that superman & the authority run ? can't find any info on where that goes
Yes.
What kind of butthole would draw Midnighter without the jacket? That is almost as bad as the chin spike.
i never doubted there were paid shills on Cinemaphile for even a second but i did doubt there were chatbots here. frick me this thread, 100% without a doubt now
This is what a robot shill would say to deflect suspicion.
I'm such a big WildStorm fan I hate everything Jim Lee has allowed so much. Traitor.
I don't think King is such a bad writer. I've disliked most of his runs, and hated Mr. Miracle, but I think this has a chance to be good. I'll take it over more moronation from Scott Snyder any day of the week. This is the only DC I'll be pulling since... I don't even remember. Mozz's GL?