What the hell happened to suddenly bring it back to the high numbers? Is that move unprecedented in comics?

I stopped reading after Jurgens quit. Was anything that came after his run worth reading?

I think he IS genuinely trying to get you (The Reader)to think it IS 'the best comic ever' so you'll continue to buy into his hype/perpetuation machine.

I work in Marketing and I'm here to tell you that nothing (and I mean NOTHING) is printed on ANY material without the express intent of deliberately influencing the consumer.

I'd think about reading the manga, but most of the time I've been directed towards a manga, I'm told how it's so much deeper than the series, and it turns out to be a pretty hollow experience. A lot of pictures and plot and not a lot of dialogue. I'm not saying I hate all manga (Nausicaa might just be one of the best books I've ever read. And I love Blade of Immortal and Lone Wolf & Cub), I'm just not sure whether I want to invest that much time and money on a hundred volumes of this thing.

But his powers weren't always nebulous. I am sure some of you remember the old Marvel Universe Handbooks where they would list Dr. Strange powers and describe how magic in the marvel universe works: personal, universal or dimensional. Magic in the MU used to have rules and actually make a kind of whacky sense, but it doesn't any more. I don't blame Bendis because the "rules" for Marvel's magic have been disappearing for the last 15 years.

Also, anyone who has ever read the old Ditko Dr. Strange's know that his powers were once well defined and he was far from omnipotent. I sometimes wonder why Marvel doesn't come up with a new character to act as his apprentice and kind of try to redo the magic of the old series with the roles changed: new character acting like Strange, and the good Doctor filling in for the role of the Ancient One. Just a thought.

Looking at a lot of the stuff I write on this site, I probably should it again.

That little sentence changed my entire perspective of Batman. I have long resisted the idea that others have said that Batman must be insane or a lunatic to fight crime like he does, but now I am beginning to think he is a fanatic. Here is a man who allows Joker, the most dangerous psycho killer ever to walk Gotham, or even the world, to continue to kill and maim and torture because to do so would break his “personal” code. The guy is a selfish prick. He is more worried about maintaining his own personal standard than he is about the welfare of the people he is supposedly sworn to protect.

And no matter what you do to him, he never succumbs to breaking this code (Darksied doesn’t count because he is a god, not a human – super-heroes are always willing to turn a blind eye to people who are not human or mortal). Torture him or his love ones, kill people in front of him, kill people close to him, Batman will not break. Batman will never give up, he will always fight, and he will always fight to live by his own rigid dogma.

Batman is a great protagonist, but I don’t see him as a great hero any more.

But just look at the preview they showed of Runaways where Nico says a spell that is misinterpreted (She says "Zombie not" and it is interpreted as "Zombie Knot" creating a giant mass of zombie). It is funny and clever, and would be great for Sabrina the Teenage Witch, but that isn't how Marvel's magic is supposed to work.

The want a very realistic Batman who also operates in the completely unrealistic DC universe and they want him to fight actual super-powered villains.

The want homicidal, psychotic villains like the Joker, but they don't want these villains to die or disappear (and with good reason, because he is a great villain) making Batman seem even more ineffectual and incompetent.

I'm boycotting Ellis until he finishes "Planetary" and gets "Fell" back on a reasonable schedule. I can't imagine why John Cassday, even with his schedule on "AXM," couldn't have finished the big "Planetary" finale by now. He's slow, but he's not that slow. And Ellis giving Templesmith a year off to push the "30 Days of Night" movie is simply inexcusable. Ben can't draw while on the road, for all the gods' sakes?

I'll pick up more Ellis, probably in TP, when he has accomplished the tasks I set him. Until then, I'm not paying for his ciggies.

"Constrainment of Magic" is the exact opposite of using it as Deus Ex Machina and just as bad.

Besides that, you can still have a fantastical magical universe and still follow some sort of rules. Even something as whacked out as Harry Potter has rules for how their magic operates.

But you actually nailed the problem on the head - DC is trying to please everyone, and in the process might not be pleasing anyone.

Now, FELL and DESOLATION JONES and such: what happened is that a year or more ago his computer crashed and it turned out to be a failed hard drive. Completely unrecoverable and he lost a shitload of scripts he had been working on for the above books, NEWUNIVERSAL, etc. So all his research, character notes, storylines, etc. were lost. This left him in the position of being committed to do new work but also having to go back and rebuild several issues of multiple series, which is why those three books all suddenly stopped coming. He's supposedly been working on them in between all his other new stuff, but that hard drive crash really screwed things up.

Seriously, this material's too golden for fanfic! Quesada, email me care of the @$$holes!

Bam!

But I am with Psynapse, I don't think "defining the rules of magic" or whatever is the way to go. I am fine with the powers of Wiccan, etc. I find it amusing that JoeNathan, who regales everyone with references to dorkish Marvel stuff, actually thinks the "old school" Marvel magic was better.

Bjornegar,call me "no one" because I like Winick. Liked him on Teen Titans, LOOOOOVED him on eXiles.

Jurgens run on Thor was the best ever, I liked it probably better than Simonson's run. All the issues of "Godhood" and Thor as a real God being worshipped, and the fallout from that, was really, really well done. Plus....Thor Girl!

OK, so for the couple guys who recommended stuff for me, I will say that the first Alias TP was awesome. Great noir, the best Bendis I've ever read. However, now that I see what a terrific character Jessica Jones can be, her treatment (by the same writer) in New Avengers is even worse.

I read Invisibles Vol. 1 and 2. My travel companion and occasional comics reader (but not superheroes)liked the first volume better because it was more one long story, but he skipped all the "psychedlic" parts. I liked the second volume much more, found the more self-contained stories to be very entertaining. The way Morrison did a whole issue around a character who turns out to be a security guard killed in passing by King Mob was really clever, and the story of the interdimensional creature who's caretaker thinks it likes him was seriously creepy. Overall, Invisibles isn't my favorite Morrison work but it falls in the middle. I will probably pick up another volume or two next time I travel.

Ultimate X-Men World Tour/Hellfire was actually excellent. It was written by Millar, yet lacked the smug self-satisfaction that can plague his writing.

ASBAR, recommended by no one but I got it soo cheap and was curious. That shit was hilarious. I can only believe it was intentionally funny, because I believe every single character in the book used the phrase "goddam Batman." Also, while I love the art, a panel of Vicki Vale's crotch ran a far second in porniness to Frank Miller's alternative cover of Black Canary. Also, it took almost no time to read the entire TP. Worth what I paid for it, but not full price.

I also read a novel by Chuck Pahlaniuk called "Snuff," which I quite enjoyed, but that's a topic for another forum.

I don't think your correct on Batmans stringent rule against killing. There are some basic truths in life that we hold self evident. First and foremost in that is probably that murder is wrong. And make no mistake that is what Batman would be doing. he is NOT the law and he especially isnt God, a pragmatist like Bruce Wayne would understand that. He goes just as far as he can without crossing the line into something that cannot but understood by any mortal man, the concept of death. This is a man whose entire purpose was brought about by an act of murder and he who doesn't learn from the past is doomed to repeat it. Batman works only for the betterment of the city of Gotham, if he starts killing people as an act of enforcement where does the line get drawn from there, what does that mean from those who derive hope from him? Can they kill to? Is murder the way to get what you want? Moreover, he knows he doesn't HAVE to kill, he is resourceful and smart enough to do it the hard way, if he just said "Well you know what fuck it this time I'll just shoot the criminal cause I'm tired tonight." What kind of person does that make him? Bruce Wayne may have lost his life, in a manner of speaking, the night his parents died, but one thing that he has never sacrificed is his soul. And that could be the only thing standing between him and the thing he disdains most. Fanaticism may be what drives him to dedicate his life to fighting crime, but it's common human decency that keeps him from killing.

And yeah, Batman knocked Ted's tea all over him and kicked him out of the Batcave, consigning him to death. So yeah, Batman's a dick.

Pretty simple, folks.

Supposedly the Joker will not kill or cannot kill Batman because he considers him to much fun (as shown in the Emperor Joker storyline). Batman in turn will not kill the Joker because that is the one line he will never cross, no matter what the Joker does. How often have we heard Batman say he is not going to kill the Joker because it would bring him down to his level, or it would let the Joker win? So know we have this never ending dance where the Joker tries to push all of Batman’s buttons to try and bring him down to his level, but Batman doesn’t succumb no matter what the Joker does. Batman’s moral code survives, but the rest of Gotham is laid to waste.

“Hey, congratulations on capturing Joker alive again Batman. As soon as I am done burying my wife and kids that he killed after escaped from Arkham for the billionth time I will come over and shake your hand for not breaking your code against killing. Douche.”

The problem is that Batman has been shown time and time again that he refuses to kill no matter what, and the Joker has been shown time and time again that he will break out of Arkham and kill again. So Batman refusing to kill the Joker isn’t relly a maater of him cherishing life (I mean, one Joker is responsible for 1,000 dead, that is a lot of lives lost that he supposedly cherishes) but the fact that it is a dogma that he will not break.

DC has painted themselves in a corner because on one side we have a moral character like Batman who cannot kill, and which they could never show killing, and on the other side we have the Joker who murders on a whim and does horrible things and always returns. DC could kill the Joker (but obviously not for long) or have him stop killing, but niether option is popular with the fans so that only leaves the option of Batman finally deciding that he must be willing to kill the Joker for the greater good.

I am not saying Batman should always kill, or enjoy killing; I am just saying DC should finally come out with a good explanation why the Joker is alive and why Batman hasn’t at least tried to kill him. Otherwise he comes across as a completel dogmatic nut just as irrational as the Joker.

Discuss.

Batman shouldn’t even view himself as a defender of the law, but as a vehicle of justice. To paraphrase Raymond Chandler “The Law is not Justice. The Law is just a mechanism, and that is all that it is.” Batman doesn’t care if someone’s rights are violated or if he has a search warrant (hell, he doesn’t even have a fucking badge) if it will help him stop a criminal. He operates in ways that law official never could and never can, and he is only answerable to himself and his high moral code.

In fact you can see Batman’s disdain for the law and his belief in his moral superiority by looking at Robin. Here is a vigilante who has an underage kid acting as his sidekick. The law and most people would call that child endangerment (especially after the fact that one once died), but Batman looks at it as a necessity. His moral judgement supersedes society and the law and says despite the dangers, the city will someday need another vigilante guardian such as himself, and that he must find and train this replacement and even place him in harms way to prepare him for the role.

Secondly, where the hell is Gotham's tax dollars going? I mean, the cops there can't solve a damn thing without help from a vigilante, and their prisons and Asylums are the easiest thing to bust out of. I always imagined Gotham is like rated worse than Detroit and East St. Louis for places to live in.

Runner up Bug because I am old enough to admit I was a Micronaut's fan (one of my oldest comic book memories is getting the issue where the Micronauts fright Man-Thing and Bug gets crushed).

Yeah!

Continentalop: I think you mean you were upset because he WAS treated like an embarassing character. Hey, you ever notice that the word embarass mainly consists of 'bare ass'? Coincidence ?

I gotta disagree with Reverend Scarecrow. Yeah, you don't have to research nuclear physics to write a good Bruce Banner or magic to write a good Dr. Strange, but if somebody did, the results could be excellent.

Believe it or not, I'm not a frustrated comic book writer. I've never had the desire to work in comics. Funny that Strange and the Hulk should come up though, because if I was given the opportunity to write any comic I wanted, it would be the Defenders which would occasionally, but far from always, feature these two. Writing fantasy characters, writing about magic, does require some rules (even the FAIRLY ODD PARENTS have Da Rulz) or you get some bad writing (Brand Nude Day, which is a bad concept). I would write Dr. Strange as having very little power over the physical universe, which is why he needs Defenders, occasionally. "Occasionally" being an important word whenever you talk about the Defenders. So, if, say he's ever facing Hand sorcerors who have brought Fox spirits, no problem. But when they send a team of assassins into his townhouse, he might have Daredevil waiting for them and if some sort of giant plant being rages through downtown Manhattan, Doc would need the Hulk to rip it apart (both the aforementioned plant being and Manhattan).

BTW, the Kid is almost right about the Hulk/Defenders/Offenders comics. I am into the concept, like the match ups(although all true Defenders fans -- okay there's three of us-- know that the Defenders is seldom this line up and can be anyone in the Marvel Universe), like the name Offenders. I gotta disagree. There's never too much art in a comic. No rules, of course, but if the writing starts to take too much control, then I always ask, "Is this thing only a comic book because that's the only place the writer could get published?"

A) Despite being incredibly evil and even murderous at times, neither Doom, Luthor nor Magneto have the death total that the Joker has. Every time the Joker appears it seems he has to kill about a dozen people. Doom may kill an incompetent henchman, but I don't think we have ever seen him just butchering civilians. In fact, Doom and Magneto are usually displayed as “noble” foes, making killing them less necessary.

B) Even when they do kill a large number of people, that is an aberration and sometimes it is something out of character. When Magneto because a genocidal madman, many people said Morrison had the character wrong. And often after that it is retconned away or another group of writers try to change his character: Remember when Magneto sunk the Russian sub? Well not long after that he got regressed in age by Omega, and Claremont used that as a rational to explain that Magneto is no longer as ruthless as before and shouldn’t be held responsible for those actions (as the trial in Avengers vs. X-Men showed). C) Doom is the head of a country and Luthor was the CEO of a major conglomerate and former POTUS. It is a little harder to kill those types of figures without suffering consequences compared to killing an already convicted mass-murderer. Killing a dictator like Pol Pots, even if he deserved it, would have consequences (especially if he had set up a Doomsday scenario); killing a billionaire like Bill Gates (even if he was secretly a child molester) would be hard to explain or to escape having to face punishment; but killing a serial killer like Ted Bundy or the Zodiac Killer who seems to escape capture or even escape prison at will and murders another dozen people would be justified.

C) Actually, the FF has shown that the Thing is more than willing to kill Doctor Doom (the Thing was also shown to be more than willing to let Galactus dies). Only Reed Richards stopped him, usually because of his diplomatic immunity. The same with the X-Men versus Magneto sometimes (especially back in the days when Wolverine first joined). D) The Red Skull is shown in the Marvel Universe as being just as evil and psychotic as the Joker (maybe even more so) but I have a feeling that Captain America would kill him if that was his only opportunity to stop him. I don’t think I ever heard Cap say “If I kill him I am just as bad as he is.” Maybe because Captain America knows you have to kill a couple million like the Red Skull and his buddies did before you can be as bad as him. I think Cap would love to take the Skull in alive so he’ll face trial and punishment by the law (he never has been captured), but the I don’t think Cap would refuse to kill him if that was the only option or it looked like the Red Skull might escape.

And actually, my problem isn’t so much with Batman as with the Joker. The writers keep having him kill and kill and kill again, and usually in horrific manners. If the Joker is going to continue to act in such a manner and never face any true consequences, it is naturally going to make Batman look impotent and incompetent, or like someone who must follow his dogmatic code no matter what. I might admire certain pacifist, but if they choose to uphold their code of pacifism over shooting or fighting a man trying to kill someone, I know what is more important to them: their personal code. That is the same corner that DC know has put Batman.

I am reminded of Kill Bill. Part one was so awesome, I still watch it sometimes. Part two was just terrible, watched in theater..sucked. Another chance on cable...yep, sucked.

The first half of the arc, with the Catwoman story arc, was excellent. I figured the harsh review here was unwarranted. But nope, it was just as stupid as the reviewer stated, really infantile and boring. Goodnight, Moon, indeed.

Having said all that, I agree that Batman is the real identity and Bruce is the cover. This opinion in no way excuses the unbelievably awful second half of this story.

Maybe I have more comic aspirations than I thought. I did meet the world's stupidest comic book artist once and we talked about doing a book together. I had the idea of a three or four person superhero team who would face villains one time, until things had been completely resolved. Usually, the villain would die but it would seldom be the team killing him. We'd have to keep things surprising or interesting. The idea was that usually, in Chester Gould's old DICK TRACY strips, the villains didn't survive, even the really popular ones like Flat Top. As an example for the World's Stupidest Comic Book artist, I mentioned that a Dr. Doom-like character might be tried and executed by his people.

"You can't kill Doom," the artist said. "Marvel wouldn't let you."

"Well, it wouldn't be a Marvel book and it wouldn't really be Doo--"

"Doom's a Marvel character. He has to be in a Marvel book."

"Okaaay, yer shittin' me, right?"

"No, man, he really is Marvel."

By the way, the pledge young Bruce Wayne made after his parents died was "And I swear by the spirits of my parents to avenge their deaths by spending the rest of my life warring on all criminals." I imagine in war you have to be willing to take a life now and than.

But why the hell was that used as the rational for him being acquitted in the X-Men/Avengers limited series? Or am I remembering it wrong. Because if that was his defense and it happened after his rejuvenation, the World Court's prosecutors in the Marvel Universe are as bad as the prosecutor in Perry Mason.

And once again, I think the bigger problem is with the Joker. Everybody loves him as a psycho but they don't realize by having him be such a murderous fiend it makes the Batman look ineffective. It was one of the reasons the Golden Age editors demanded that they tone down the Joker - how effective of crime-fighter is Batman if his foes keep reappearing and murdering people again and again.

I'm not saying we go back to the 50s campy Joker, but maybe they should go back to how he was in 1940 and 1941 where Batman would be willing to kill him but the Joker always apparently died before he could get to him. Sure it is a trope and even a cop-out, but at least it is a cop out that accepts the fact that Batman realizes how evil and dangerous the Joker is.

I am trying to figure out how it is I can actual like Dark Avengers when everything else called Avengers sucks right now.

Conti, you don't like New OR Mighty Avengers right now? Man, I am digging all of that right now. When Pym did the 'Avengers Assemble' bit, and Hulk was in the picture, I almost teared up a little. It's been like 30 years since Hulk was part of an A-Team.

And the New Avengers are just screwed, which is a lot of fun to read.

And I always hated Magneto joining the X-Men - he could be a sympathetic villain without having to be required to be a good guy, But that is my problem with the entire X-Men Universe - it is as I said before the WWE of comic books. One moment someone is a kayfabe, the next moment he is a face. Just because the fans like him.

And I agree with you 100% about Emma Frost - hell, her first appearance she killed six of her own men and was about to mind erase storm. How quickly people forget that about a women showing that much skin.

Of course, then why wasn't Galactus and Lizard on the good guy sides. Galactus views himself as a force of nature, beyond good and evil, and the Lizard views himself as the defender of reptile life (same rational as Magneto). Hmmm.

Fuck. The worse thing about Secret Wars was it f'ed up Byrne Doom story where Doom had switched minds with the yahoo in the crowd during the Surfer/Terrax fight. Great set up and then it went down hill because of the continuity errors and the fact the Beyonder had to be involved.

I liked him as EIC, but Shooter fucked up some shit.

I will say this about Secret Wars, while nobody really died (Ultron and Kang don't count) it did have a effect on the actual Marvel Universe afterwards: Colossus cheated on Kitty Pryde, ending their relationship; Thing stayed behind and She-Hulk joined the FF; Spider-Man got the symboite; etc.

But those are two great fuckin' moments in comic book history. In fact, I think Captain America has more great "I can't fucking believe that moments" than any other character - even Spider-Man and Batman.

That cover(#10) with Doom's armor all shredded, but his gauntlets still glowing-giving me goose bumps right now.

Sure, Professor X could appreciate Magneto but while I can by masters of magnetism and super psychics, I can't see why he didn't say "Wolverine/Cyclops/Storm/Bansh ee lead the X-Men in my place." I mean, I realize the Mean Drunk in my neighborhood is struggling to be a better man, but no way am I going to ask him to babysit. After that, Marvel couldn't have a conflicted villain. Maggie had to be a hero.

For a better, more complex version of mutant anti-heroes/decent villains, may I suggest Theodore Sturgeon's MORE THAN HUMAN. His mutants, the homo gestalt, which pre-dated the X-MEN, went back and forth between good and evil like ... real people. It was like the X-Men and the Brotherhood were one little group and you never knew who was who.

Ok, have anyone of you see Roger Corman's the Raven? I swear to God that I think the Brotherhood is based on the cast of the Raven. The movie came out just one or two years before the comic did.

Magneto = Boris Karloff (back when Magneto was an older looking man with big bushy eyebrows).

Mastermind = Vincent Price Toad = Peter Lorre Scarlet Witch = Hazel Court's red hair and Olive Sturgess disposition Quicksilver - Jack frigin' Nicholson

And you can add me to the hate parade for Marvel's turning villains into heroes. I recall even Sabretooth becoming a hero for some time.

Yeah, attempts to make the New Mutants hip teens always came off bad because Claremont was far from being a teen and would probably be the first to admit that he was never hip.

Lila had the Dyson sphere because Claremont had read RINGWORLD. Too many mutants. That was around the time I started thinking, "This would be cooler if these characters were shocking and freaky instead of common place."

They took a paragraph bathed in cynicism and used the first sentence.

http://www.aintitcool.com/node /35852#1