wcw43921

Re: Cool characters from goofy concepts That is interesting. It was my understanding that there was going to be a live-action movie (or TV movie) with Bo Derek in the role of the Dazzler. I never really had a problem with the Dazzler--I liked the powerset and the costume, although I could have done without the disco-ball pendant and the roller skates. Otherwise, she had potential.

Re: And now, for your daily dose of cute... The Empire found it much easier to deal with the giant chipmunks of the moon of Pavasia than the Ewoks of Endor. This may be due to the general timidity of chipmunks, regardless of their size.

Re: A Thread for Random Videos Escape--A nifty, heartbreaking little film

Re: Who you include in your Magical Harem of Fictional Characters? If you're looking for combat artists to help him fight the PCs, then you'd definitely want Lynda Carter as Wonder Woman--along with Sarah Michelle Gellar as Buffy Summers, Eliza Dushku as Faith Lehane, Summer Glau as River Tam, Lucy Lawless as Xena, Warrior Princess, any character played by Michelle Yeoh (heck, why not all of them) Scarlett Johanssen as the Black Widow--and while we're at it, Aayla Secura and Ahosoka Tano. (Show me the PC who wants to fight a lightsaber wielder. Even if they have a lightsaber themselves.) If you're just looking for pretty women to serve and adore him, I would go with any legendary sex symbol--Jean Harlow and Mae West (perhaps with black-and-white coloring), Marilyn Monroe and Jayne Mansfield, Raquel Welch (as stated earlier) Sophia Loren, Jane Russell, Farrah Fawcett, Pam Grier, Diana Ross, Donna Summer--and that's just off the top of my head. And there are plenty of modern-day sex symbols who I'm sure would fit right in with this guy's idea of a "magical" harem. Hope that helps.

Re: And now, for your daily dose of cute... "My super-instant mesmerizer never fails!"

Re: What Makes An Iconic Superhero Costume? I thought these might be somewhat relevant to the discussion-- Frazz strip for 10/25 Frazz strip for 10/26

Re: Super Transportation By "jet turbine" I meant a car propelled by jet thrust. A gas turbine turns the wheels directly by connecting the turbo shaft to the drive shaft, the way a piston engine's crankshaft isconnected to the transmission, and then to the drive shaft. I hope that explains things better.

Re: Super Transportation Something for your Golden or Silver-Ager characters--the 1954 Fiat Turbina-- While it's powered by a gas turbine, it would not be difficult, I think, to re-imagine it as a jet-turbine car. Heck, all it needs is a pair of pop-out wings and it could double as a hero's flying vehicle.

Re: Supervillain Monologues Just now discovered this thread, so I'm bumping it to the top with what is, to my mind, the most blood-chilling villainous monologue in literature--this passage from George Orwell's 1984, where O'Brien is detailing to Winston Smith the way by which the Party will triumph-- "--Obedience is not enough. Unless he is suffering, how can you be sure that he is obeying your will and not his own? Power is in inflicting pain and humiliation. Power is in tearing human minds to pieces and putting them together again in new shapes of your own choosing. Do you begin to see, then, what kind of world we are creating? It is the exact opposite of the stupid hedonistic Utopias that the old reformers imagined. A world of fear and treachery is torment, a world of trampling and being trampled upon, a world which will grow not less but more merciless as it refines itself. Progress in our world will be progress towards more pain. The old civilizations claimed that they were founded on love or justice. Ours is founded upon hatred. In our world there will be no emotions except fear, rage, triumph, and self-abasement. Everything else we shall destroy everything. Already we are breaking down the habits of thought which have survived from before the Revolution. We have cut the links between child and parent, and between man and man, and between man and woman. No one dares trust a wife or a child or a friend any longer. But in the future there will be no wives and no friends. Children will be taken from their mothers at birth, as one takes eggs from a hen. The sex instinct will be eradicated. Procreation will be an annual formality like the renewal of a ration card. We shall abolish the orgasm. Our neurologists are at work upon it now. There will be no loyalty, except loyalty towards the Party. There will be no love, except the love of Big Brother. There will be no laughter, except the laugh of triumph over a defeated enemy. There will be no art, no literature, no science. When we are omnipotent we shall have no more need of science. There will be no distinction between beauty and ugliness. There will be no curiosity, no enjoyment of the process of life. All competing pleasures will be destroyed. But always -- do not forget this, Winston -- always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face -- for ever." Compared to O'Brien, all the others are lightweights.

Re: What Makes An Iconic Superhero Costume? I've always been partial to chest emblems--the S-emblem worn by Superman and the others in the Superman Family, the Bat-Emblem worn by Batman and the Bat-Family, the Green Lantern Corps emblem, the lightning bolts worn by the Marvel Family and the Flash Family, the heart emblems worn by the Archie gang as superheroes, the Spider-Emblem worn by Spider-Man and--well, Spider-Man. I imagine capes would be considered iconic by many outside of comic fandom, even though cape-wearing heroes and villains are in the minority. I'm parital to them myself, although I will concede that Edna has a point. But the drawbacks of a cape can be compensated for easily--and taken advantage of by a clever hero. ("I use my telekinesis to wrap Dr. Abomidable's cape around his head!") But then, just about any super-costume could be considered iconic, in that they have one thing in common--they define the character in a single image, as much as their deeds. It immediately tells the observer who the wearer is, and what they stand for. A costume does two things--it conceals the original identity, and creates the new one. There's a passage from the book Soon I Will Be Invincible by Austin Grossman where the villain Doctor Impossible is describing his costume (pgs. 89-90) and it concludes with this paragraph-- "In street clothes I'd just be a criminal. Which I am, of course, but in the costume I'm something more. I wear the flag of a country that never existed, and the uniform of its glorious army, spreading forth the dominion of the invincible empire of me. Doctor Impossible." Superman without his costume would likely have never become as popular with--well, anyone--as he is with the red-&-blue tights and the cape, not to mention the big red "S." The same with Batman and his Bat-Mask, Bat-Cape, Bat-Symbol and everything else Bat. Not to mention that in-universe he wouldn't be as terrifying to the superstitious, cowardly lot that makes up the majority of the criminal underworld. And the same for any other superhero character, or the luchadores of Mexico--they and their fans understand this better than anyone, I think. Hope that helps.

Re: And now, for your daily dose of cute... I would hate to encounter something like that in dim light--I would scream like a slumber party full of little girls, then run like a lit string of firecrackers had been tied to the seat of my pants. Sad, but I fear it might be true.

Re: And Now for Something Slightly Different: Mis-Spelled and Reimagined Supers I got yer Bustice right here!

Re: World with superheroes - Only one power set? Sounds interesting--would this be set in the prequel era? Sometime after the fall of the Empire? Earlier? Later? Just before the prequels might be interesting--the player-Jedi could be out there working outside the law to guard peace and justice, and they discover evidence that the Sith are preparing their comeback. They try and warn the Jedi Council, but because they left the Order they are regarded with--well, let's call it skepticism. This leaves the renegades to attempt to destroy the Sith by themselves--Good Luck with that, guys.

Re: And Now for Something Slightly Different: Mis-Spelled and Reimagined Supers Cycleops--The Bicyclist Brave!

Re: New Math suggests that Warp Drive may actually be possible This is a heck of a thing--makes me hope we might have interstellar travel in our lifetime. That would be one of those things like Lindbergh's flight across the Atlantic, or the first moon landing--that would make people say "If we can accomplish this--we can accomplish anything!" When was the last time we said that?

Re: Things That Exist in a Superhero Universe Advanced land, sea, air and space vehicles that operate without any government regulation or oversight whatsoever.

Re: Super Transportation Check out Batman's new ride-- A little on the noisy side, but that lets the bad guys know he's coming--the whole "striking terror into the hearts of the superstitious and the cowardly" thing. I, for one, like it.

Re: Do you consider Batman to be a Gadgeteer or something else? But how far can you take that before it's no longer in the superhero genre? You might as well forget about even wearing a costume--just get yourself some combat fatigues, a kevlar vest. an ALICE belt for your weapons and other gear, and a ski mask to hide your face. And forget all that batarangs and batrope nonsense--just get yourself some guns, man. Crimefighting through superior firepower, and all that. It may be more practical, and more grounded in reality--but it's not superheroes. It's certainly not Batman. Trying to make a superhero story "grounded in reality" is like, as one writer suggested, trying to make a Peter Pan story with real pirates. It's like making an episode of Hogan's Heroes with a scene at a concentration camp--one look at the emaciated prisoners and any humor is killed in a half-second flat. Take away the outlandishly costumed villains with their grandiose schemes, take away the costume that defines the identity and the purpose--and what do you have? You might have a decent crime thriller, you might have a decent terrorist thriller (Nighthawks, with Sylvester Stallone and Rutger Hauer comes to mind)--but you wouldn't have Batman. You may have someone with that name, but not that character. That's how it seems to me, anyway.

Re: Do you consider Batman to be a Gadgeteer or something else? He can be a gadgeteer/inventor if he needs to be. I remember a early Golden Age story where Hugo Strange had a serum that affected the human "growth glands" that he used to turn men into monsters. He injected Batman with the serum and told him it would take effect in twelve hours. Batman escaped the cell Strange was holding him in and made his way to Strange's laboratory, where he tricked the two human monsters standing guard into fighting each other, then used Strange's equipment to concoct an antidote. Another story by Mike W. Barr (done in a Silver Age style) had him facing a Satanic-themed villain called Brimstone. The climax had Batman trapped in some sort of "infernal pit" that had not only brimstone--aka sulphur--but saltpeter and charcoal lying around. Stuffing all three into a convenient lead pipe, he made a crude bomb. ("Crude--but it worked!" as he said to Robin.) My own preference is that Batman should build his own gadgets, or at least have a hand in designing them, then outsourcing the components and performing the final assembly. One of my annoyances about the "Dark Knight" movies is that it seemed like he got all his equipment out of the DARPA surplus catalog, and when he put it all together it just happened to come up with the Batman look. It's like they were trying to make things as unlike the comic book as they could--which is why, I suppose, there was no attempt to bring in Robin, or the Penguin, or the Riddler, or Harley Quinn, or anyone else who might have been perceived as "comic-booky." But to get back on topic, I think that when Batman makes his own gadgets, weapons and vehicles, he's putting a part of his soul, his drive to destroy evil, into every item. They're all a part of the Batman identity, all part of his war against crime--all extensions of his self. That's something you just can't buy with money. Finally, you have to remember that Batman is a scientist, which can encompass a number of fields and disclipines. This was established in the episode of The Simpsons when Springfield got a monorail-- MARGE: "Homer, there's someone here who can help!" HOMER: "Is it Batman?" MARGE: "No, it's a scientist!" HOMER: "Batman's a scientist!" MARGE: "It's not Batman!" Hope that helps.

Re: Women of the Champions Universe (Fanpictorial) I thought Doctor Phantom has a sort of Golden Age look to her. I'm glad she's on the heroes' side. Excellent rendition, as usual.

Re: Super Transportation The 1948 Buick Streamliner Just the thing for your Golden Age Caped Crimebuster to pursue his foes in style! "Gallopin' Golly! That's the niftiest car I've ever seen!" "She's also faster than anything else on the road, Ol' Chum! A car would need jet engines to have a chance to outrace her! Want to go for a ride?" "Oh Boy, DO I!!!" Me too, actually.

Re: Gsvc 2012 Perhaps Istvatha V'han or one of her minions could be the Crimson Claw. Whichever heroes and villains survive/do best in the Challenge are offered favored status in her Empire, provided they help her to conquer Earth. This could be a good way to introduce her to the campaign, if you haven't already.

Re: Popularity of Superhero Groups in a Shared Universe Which is why I suggested that in a single reality the JLA and Avengers would be combined into one team.

Re: Popularity of Superhero Groups in a Shared Universe I'm inclined to think that the Avengers and the Justice League would end up being combined into one group, if not through government influence then by mutual agreement. Both teams have one thing in common--they're solo heroes, each with a solid career or thier own, who have banded together for a common purpose. I don't know as the Avengers would be the government team--remember originally they were funded by Tony Stark, whose "bodyguard" Iron Man was one of its founding members. While they maintain cordial relations with the United Nations and the US Government ("Mr. President, this is Superman. We've noticed that Tropical Storm Bernard has picked up speed and is headed towards the Atalntic Coast. What can we do to help?") they are not acting as its agents. The US Government would likely have its own team of heroes, most likely led by Captain Atom and taking assignments from Nick Fury. I don't see the Doom Patrol on that list, but I figure they've most likely combined with the Defenders. (Would they be called the Defender Patrol? The Doomfenders?) The Fantastic Four would be quite popular, I think--Reed Richards would be big with the science and technology crowd, while Susan Storm Richards would be regarded as one of the most beautiful women in America. Johnny would be a teen idol, and Ben would be popular with older folks. As I said in another thread, I think Spider-Man should have his own team of heroes--to wit, Spider-Man And The Spider Command, a team in the mold of Batman and the Outsiders. I imagine The Prowler and Black Cat as members, along with Steel Spider and Scarlet Spider, who may--or may not--be Spider Man's clone. I don't know how popular they'd be--not very I would imagine, what with J. Jonah Jameson working full-time to undermine his reputation and the Black Cat's own reputation as a criminal. Hope that helps.

Re: And now, for your daily dose of cute... I'm wondering about the parents who made that suit for their baby, myself.