Quite a jumble have we here...
I found another posting on Classic Comics Forum, by somebody who more or less condemned the fictional character instead of the writing and characterization in 2015, here being Cyclops, as seen in X-Factor, and on the other hand, almost acknowledges Barbara Gordon's fictional, but decidedly writes too weak an "argument" to really convince:
Unfortunately, if I notice correctly, the poster is alluding to 2012's Avengers vs. X-Men crossover, written by the awful Jason Aaron, Brian Bendis, Ed Brubaker, Jonathan Hickman and Matt Fraction, and I'm not sure why such a shoddy "event" that served as little more than a means of depicting some characters badly somehow qualifies as the way to improve one's viewpoint of a fictional character. Especially when the star in focus was portrayed killing his mentor. Somehow, I highly doubt the comic alluded to is the 1987 X-Men vs. Avengers miniseries, which was shorter, and better.
As for the part about New 52 and Barbara Gordon, that would almost be more convincing if it hadn't been for the prior lapse in logic with Cyclops, since the poster does acknowlege Simone was the writer (and she's one of the most overrated for 2 decades now). Even then, the writer's veering too much to a lenient position that ignores how it's the writer's fault for how the fictional character is portrayed. And again, that's a real shame.
Next, from the same thread, comes the following:
Anyway, one can only wonder what such posters on a forum would say about Johnny Thunder and his hex-bolt genie to boot, since the guy who posted the above alluded to the code used to summon the genie. After all, even minor Golden Age characters aren't immune to this kind of insultingly illogical approach of condemning fictional characters instead of criticizing the writers. It's tiresome seeing this defiance of logic continue onwards unchallenged, but if we wish to improve a terrible situation, that's why we must keep taking a look at the muddled mistakes still being made.
Ever since I read the first few issues of the 1985 X-Factor I've hated Cyclops. The guy ran out on his wife and newborn child to be with his ex-girlfriend, and he's still depicted as the moral center of the X-Men? It's only been since Avengers vs X-Men that I started to like him because Marvel stopped pretending that he was a righteous boy scout and acknowledged that he's a messed up person.The non-existent Scott Summers is a "messed up person"? There's another example of what would appear to be classic "projection", but in the end, it could be argued that the poster is letting Chris Claremont off for bad characterization, not to mention hastiness. IMO, what could've been a healthier way to clear a path for Cyclops and Jean Grey to reunite would've simply been for Madelyne Pryor to have passed away from ailing tissue, if she were a clone. Instead, they had to go to such lengths to run the gauntlet of shock value, and then later made things worse by turning Pryor into a Goblin Queen and even one of the troublemakers in the Inferno crossover. Of course, there's also the question why Jean couldn't have been portrayed as her own agency, written taking a path of her own, and if she needed to be reunited with Scott, it could've been later.
Barbara Gordon as written by Gail Simone in the Nu52 is 'too stupid to live.' It was a plot point that overexerting herself could undo the miracle surgery that allowed her to walk again, and she decided to go jumping off rooftops and getting into fistfights anyway. If ever there was a character who should have never been a superhero, it's that version of Barbara Gordon.
Unfortunately, if I notice correctly, the poster is alluding to 2012's Avengers vs. X-Men crossover, written by the awful Jason Aaron, Brian Bendis, Ed Brubaker, Jonathan Hickman and Matt Fraction, and I'm not sure why such a shoddy "event" that served as little more than a means of depicting some characters badly somehow qualifies as the way to improve one's viewpoint of a fictional character. Especially when the star in focus was portrayed killing his mentor. Somehow, I highly doubt the comic alluded to is the 1987 X-Men vs. Avengers miniseries, which was shorter, and better.
As for the part about New 52 and Barbara Gordon, that would almost be more convincing if it hadn't been for the prior lapse in logic with Cyclops, since the poster does acknowlege Simone was the writer (and she's one of the most overrated for 2 decades now). Even then, the writer's veering too much to a lenient position that ignores how it's the writer's fault for how the fictional character is portrayed. And again, that's a real shame.
Next, from the same thread, comes the following:
Frank Miller killed the Batman I loved. i haven't been able to stand the character since (in the mainstream DCU, that is, as I love the animated version of the '90s).Well in that case, Cei-U, I summon an argument based on logic, and wish to remind that Batman is not a real person, and it's the writers who must shoulder the blame for turning the Caped Crusader's stories stale. Especially post-2000. And I'm not sure I can appreciate the 90s cartoon, based on how the writers put Harley Quinn in such an embarrassingly bad position as somebody brainwashed by the Joker, though it was since the turn of the century that things really took a turn for the worse. If you find any successive Bat-tales bad, it's the writers and the resulting stories that are to blame, not the characters they're built around. I do wonder if any readers at the time ever tried persuading DC to stop forcing such heavy-handed characterization upon the Masked Manhunter? I'm sure some did, but at the time, the obsessive addiction of collectors to buy out of habit really destroyed the ability to make a point, and it's quite likely that many readers didn't have an issue with turning Batman into a mad control freak at all, sadly.
Cei-U!
I summon the distaste!
Anyway, one can only wonder what such posters on a forum would say about Johnny Thunder and his hex-bolt genie to boot, since the guy who posted the above alluded to the code used to summon the genie. After all, even minor Golden Age characters aren't immune to this kind of insultingly illogical approach of condemning fictional characters instead of criticizing the writers. It's tiresome seeing this defiance of logic continue onwards unchallenged, but if we wish to improve a terrible situation, that's why we must keep taking a look at the muddled mistakes still being made.
Labels: Avengers, Batman, crossoverloading, dc comics, dreadful writers, golden calf of villainy, history, marvel comics, women of dc, women of marvel, X-Men
