Rene

Re: Ultimate vs The Authority

Re: Ultimate vs The Authority Divis Mal basically wants to be left alone, and wants his fellow novas to be left alone.

Re: Ultimate vs The Authority

Re: Does Champions encourgage conformity?

Re: Does Champions encourgage conformity?

Re: Does Champions encourgage conformity?

Re: Ultimate vs The Authority The Authority in about six panels. The Ultimates are basically a weaker version of the Avengers, while the Authority is probably as powerful as the JLA. The Ultimates could last longer if they had their full membership (Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch make just occasional appearances and mostly as a running gag).

Re: Ultimate Champions: How would you do it?

Re: Ultimate vs The Authority

Re: Ultimate vs The Authority Gets a bit to me too. It isn't Alan Moore, it isn't even Planetary or Supreme Power. It's basically an action comic book, even though it's a fun one, IMO. The only aspects that I think are more "realistic" than an ordinary book is that the superscience in Ellis issues were less Kirby and more Moorcock/Lovecraft/cyberpunk. I kinda like that. Even though it's perhaps a not really more realistic, just less unrealistic. Of course, Millar later went crazy with it, and would make Kirby proud. I also dig Warren Ellis's cinematographic style.

Re: The Authority:What the heck? I basically agree. The comic book is conveniently written in such a way as to never put the Authority into doubt. At least not in the Ellis/Millar issues. I'm not familiar with the later issues. I don't think this makes the Authority a bad comic. It just keeps them from exploring some interesting moral questions. But basically the Authority's universe is planned in such a way as to allow them to be heroes. So, yes, I think they *are* heroes, in their universe's context.

Re: The Authority:What the heck?

Re: The Authority:What the heck? Yeah, but they didn't screwed up due to overzealousness that time. Just one of their members was irresponsible in his personal life. Nothing that could be used to put into question the team's modus operandi. I've not read Stormwatch, but I understand that they had to follow orders from one of those corrupt, incompetent human organizations (it's the only type of human organization there is in the Wildstorm universe). But as soon as they were on their own, they were basically infallible in their choice of targets. Somehow I doubt the writers would introduce anything to put into question the team's vigilante mentality. I would like to see it, but I doubt it will ever happen. The writers have, traditionally, sided with the Authority too much.

Re: The Authority:What the heck?

Re: Ultimate vs The Authority Drug Use? Check. Free Love? Check. Lefist Philosophy? Check Dress Weird? Check Pacifist Outlook? No way. 4 out of 5

Re: What is a Superhero to you?

Re: The Authority:What the heck?

Re: The Authority:What the heck?

Re: The Authority:What the heck? It gets worse. Wright might be even sympathetic if his confession were motivated by a guilty-ridden conscience, but despite his claims he only confessed because he was about to be exposed by some newspaper. Also, Wright's version of the facts kept changing *daily*, as more people started to disprove his tales. He basically lied when he tried to come clean about lying. Even worse, Wright kept his arrogance until the very end. His non-apology apology about lying wasn't even contrite. He blamed everyone but himself. He kept mouthing off against "big business corporate media" for not exposing him (or not exposing him sooner) in a Jayson "ahaha I'm so smart" Blair kinda way, he kept blaming conservatives for forcing him to lie so people would be more receptive to his positions, he blamed Bush, he blamed oil, he blamed everybody but himself. You know, I don't buy into the notion that all American leftists are paranoid weasely whackos who hate their country, but Micah Wright really seems to fit the stereotype. I find him beyond comtemptible. Chuckg was kind when describing him.

Re: Ultimate vs The Authority

Re: Ultimate vs The Authority Hey guys, I'm not one of those people who think, say, Saddam Hussein should have been just killed without a trial. But what if Saddam had been proven able to escape once a month, had been proven again and again that his madness was so extreme that you couldn't have a prayer in hell to reason with him, had been proven again and again that he is extraordinarily cunning and willing to take hundreds of lives at the top of a hat not for power lust, but for something as unpredictable like, say, yesterday he ate pizza, and he always likes to kill after he ate pizza... The Joker is that extreme. It's a situation so extreme that it's frigging unreal even for superhero comics. The Joker in the 70s was scary, but not that scary, he was more like a extremely evil supervillain who killed dozens a year, probably, not this walking holocaust that post-Alan Moore writers seem to have turned him into. The Bat writers kept upping the Bat-Villain' perversity and body counts, while keeping Batman more or less the same, and the poor guy just looks helpless to me in his own title (in the JLA he is Mr. Unbeatable). I dunno. I buy Chuck's explanations about editiorial fiat, but it irks me to try to argue the letter of the law in such a ridiculously extreme situation, as if the Joker's "civil rights" were more important than the lives of the next hundred people he will surely kill next month (not probably, not likely, we just know he will kill), so we shouldn't even sedate him. Yeah, okay, I can certainly buy that permanently removing the Joker would make the comics less fun for some, and that is a valid explanation. But talking morals when we discuss the Joker... leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Hell, I don't know why people still live in Gotham City, with mass murders occurring daily, not to mention plagues and earthquakes, the place should be deserted by now. The whole situation is ridiculous.

Re: Ultimate vs The Authority

Re: Ultimate vs The Authority I dunno. I can think about some things from the top of my head, besides killing the Joker, or maiming him, or lobotomizing him: 1) Put him into a tougher prison than Arkham. 2) Enlist other heroes' help in toughening Arkham's security. 3) Exile the Joker to another dimension. 4) Keep the Joker heavily sedated into the Batcave. 5) Ask Dr. Fate or Zatanna to magically alter the Joker's personality. 6) Camp on the Arkham's doorstep to catch the Joker whenever he escapes, taking turns with Nightwing, Robin, Huntress, etc. But that is just little me, spending some minutes to think about it. I'm sure that a genius who is able to master every discipline and science know to men could be able to think about a million more possibilities if he worked at it. Also, the assumption that Batman would have to reform society to dispose of the Joker is... chancy. He wouldn't even be arrested. A more realistic outcome would be everyone looking the other way, when a mass murderer who escaped a million times is disposed of.

Re: Ultimate vs The Authority Yeah. Though I don't like the word "goofy", I agree with you that what works for certain characters and genres isn't always necessarily "realistic". Mostly, it's the comic book format that necessitates certain contortions. Batman's story is a never-ending story, and you can't dispose of the best villains permanently. Chuckg, I see your point. But the Batman, seeing that the system does nothing to contain the Joker (not to mention all the other psychos in Arkham) should do *something*. I don't know what, though. I agree with bblackmoor that sometimes you have to just accept the unrealistic parts and move on, but it got too silly for me, and that is probably one of the reasons I'm unable to follow Batman for longer stretches, even though I can enjoy the occasional story. I get sick of seeing mass murderers being led to a resort for a holiday just to escape next month again and again and again, while the "hero" does nothing. I think the whole thing is too immoral, as immoral as "the Authority", probably, even though in Batman's case it isn't a conscious thing on the writer's part, probably. (Even though the occasional story hints at this. I've read an issue recently that speculated that the Batman is "soft" on the Joker, Two-Face, etc. because Batman can easily see how he could become as deranged as them if he hadn't channeled the tragedy that befell him into justice. Interesting rationale, but I wouldn't care to hear it if I were a Gothamite with my family picked piecemeal by Arkham escapees.) There is the occasional villain that deserves death as much as Batman's enemies (I can think of Sabretooth and Bullseye, for instance) but in this case it appears to be less the heroes fault. Wolverine has at least *tried* to deal with Sabretooth.

Re: Ultimate vs The Authority