|
Post by Paste Pot Paul on May 1, 2017 19:46:59 GMT -5
All the parts I love in the character, all make him the loveable rogue he is, hell even the thievery is part of that. It's the difference between someone happy to slaughter while pillaging a boat, and the person who is a master of the blade killing in defense or as part of a job (guard, army, king). Is a cold blooded killer really a fine example for what we want in a friend.
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on May 1, 2017 19:58:34 GMT -5
All the parts I love in the character, all make him the loveable rogue he is, hell even the thievery is part of that. It's the difference between someone happy to slaughter while pillaging a boat, and the person who is a master of the blade killing in defense or as part of a job (guard, army, king). Is a cold blooded killer really a fine example for what we want in a friend. I don't think I could be friend with someone like Conan, because he does steal from others and treats women in all too cavalier a way... but he's no cold-blooded killer. He's a warm-blooded killer! I very much doubt he could stab someone in the back of strangle them in their sleep. He has no compunction about getting anyone out of his way with lethal force if necessary, but he usually gives people a chance to get out of the way first (especially under Roy Thomas's pen, as Roy was trying to make the man a little less of a pure barbarian). He and Tarzan are much alike in that way: they do not share our civilized aversion for death, but they don't go out of their way to inflict it on others. (Tarzan is, naturally more noble than Conan... impeccable breeding and all that. All I remember him stealing when he wasn't momentarily deranged is Opar's treasure). Both men should also be judged by their world's standards; Conan, like Harald Hardrada, was just doing what was natural for his time. He just did it better!
|
|
|
Post by Cei-U! on May 1, 2017 20:16:03 GMT -5
For a forum which in general dislikes Wolverine and the Punisher for their less than stellar methods, I find it somewhat confusing that Conan especially is revered. Wish fulfillment in capes I get, but if our wish fulfillment is a murderous thief... ...the odd thing is Ive loved Conan since I was 14, and wished I could beat up anyone like he could. Still have the same concerns tho. It's about context. Conan lives in a fantasy world that never was. Wolverine and Punisher live in what is supposed to be the real world. Different worlds, different rules, different reaction. Cei-U! At least that's how I see it!
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on May 1, 2017 21:06:40 GMT -5
I always preferred Fafhrd and Gray Mouser. They were rogues and thieves; but, tended to target those who earned it and avoided trouble unless it either sought them or was for a good cause. They also had more realistic personalities. It was nice to see a blend of con artist with swordsman. Why Hollywood hasn't jumped on these guys is beyond me. All you gotta do is pitch it as "Lethal Weapon, With Swords" and those guys will be drooling, even though that's not really true.
|
|
|
Post by lobsterjohnson on May 1, 2017 22:18:45 GMT -5
Not really relevant, but this discussion made me think of it: I think Daredevil breaks his non-lethal code at least 5 times in Frank Miller's run.
|
|
|
Post by berkley on May 1, 2017 23:08:24 GMT -5
Not really relevant, but this discussion made me think of it: I think Daredevil breaks his non-lethal code at least 5 times in Frank Miller's run. One of the reasons I think Miller's DD doesn't always work is that the combination of the hard-boiled crime with the superhero genre is a bit of a mismatch at times. Too much realism doesn't always go well with superhero fantasy, for one thing because one of the primary tenets of that fantasy is that the super-powered beings don't abuse their power (except for the super-villains, of course). So unless you're going to take it all the way like Ennis did in The Boys - and then you have something else altogether - I think you have to be very careful how you go about introducing realism into superhero stories. OTOH, you don't want everything too sparkly and squeaky clean, or things will soon be very dull. So it's a bit of a balancing act, and every reader will have their own feeling as to where exactly the point of equilibrium is located.
|
|
|
Post by Paste Pot Paul on May 2, 2017 8:47:17 GMT -5
For a forum which in general dislikes Wolverine and the Punisher for their less than stellar methods, I find it somewhat confusing that Conan especially is revered. Wish fulfillment in capes I get, but if our wish fulfillment is a murderous thief... ...the odd thing is Ive loved Conan since I was 14, and wished I could beat up anyone like he could. Still have the same concerns tho. It's about context. Conan lives in a fantasy world that never was. Wolverine and Punisher live in what is supposed to be the real world. Different worlds, different rules, different reaction. Cei-U! At least that's how I see it! Hey Kurt, yeah I get the different settings part but its not what I was alluding (poorly) to. My dilemma is more moralistic, in that Ive been struggling for a while with "idolizing", for want of a more concise term, immoral characters. I posted this morning about not enjoying the new Scarlet Spider as he is a total dirt bag, Ive never really liked Punisher, and although I enjoyed Logan it re emphases how damn psychotic Wolverine is. Logging in this morning it occurred to me that Conan fit the bill as well, the difference being he is generally well received here, hes not as divisive as the others can be. I love the Sword ad Sorcery genre, had all the Conan books, worship Frazzetta, and it helped grow my love for Fantasy fiction. The Hyborian setting is amazing, and also such a huge wish fulfillment. As a chubby kid who struggled to make friends, living vicariously in Conans life, the confidence, the sheer prowess, the lusty maidens, being able to fight like a mutha@#$&%÷ ... it was a heady mix, and as has been pointed out to me, his loyalty to friends was something else I yearned for. As a comic fanatic there were so many moments that messed my head up, none more so than the crucifixion story in SSOC... BUT ...as an adult, and a father, a stepfather, an uncle, a friend, a partner, Im spending more time choosing morally...entertainment, advice, politics, etc etc and while the big guy is THE person you want swinging a battleaxe by your side(him or Druss the Legend)a good person he aint.
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on May 2, 2017 9:09:39 GMT -5
That's an intersting point of view, Paste Pot Paul, but if we pursue that line of thought we can conclude that each and every superhero is an irresponsible, violent and dangerous vigilante. For all his kind heart and good intentions, Peter Parker tries to curb criminal propensities by inflicting bodily harm on individuals who have the same constitutional rights as everyone, and who probably need counselling more than a concussion. Is Captain America a better man than Conan? He certainly refrains from stealing or from killing people, that's certain; but he still defies the legally elected government of his country when it suits him, and the rashness of his actions often cause as much death and destruction as Conan's more interested career. In this field of escapist literature, we must make allowance for a certain moral ambiguity... otherwise, it's very hard to have any kind of story that involves fighting of any kind. (Not that there is anything wrong with comics that do not involve fights or conflicts, but the super-hero and the fantasy genres seem to be built on them).
|
|
|
Post by Paste Pot Paul on May 2, 2017 17:19:01 GMT -5
That's an interesting point of view, Paste Pot Paul , but if we pursue that line of thought we can conclude that each and every superhero is an irresponsible, violent and dangerous vigilante. For all his kind heart and good intentions, Peter Parker tries to curb criminal propensities by inflicting bodily harm on individuals who have the same constitutional rights as everyone, and who probably need counselling more than a concussion. Is Captain America a better man than Conan? He certainly refrains from stealing or from killing people, that's certain; but he still defies the legally elected government of his country when it suits him, and the rashness of his actions often cause as much death and destruction as Conan's more interested career. In this field of escapist literature, we must make allowance for a certain moral ambiguity... otherwise, it's very hard to have any kind of story that involves fighting of any kind. (Not that there is anything wrong with comics that do not involve fights or conflicts, but the super-hero and the fantasy genres seem to be built on them). While every superhero may well be an irresponsible, violent and dangerous vigilante, I don't think it addresses the extreme moral choices of some characters. We seem happy to accept that with some "heroes" the ability and willingness to take life is alright. Whether this is Conan, Frank Castle, the Shadow, or Dirty Harry, there is that part of us which respects or admires those able to go where we cant. Your examples of Spider-Man and Captain America however,are almost perfect examples of what I admire in a superhero. Spider-Man has a virtual mantra of "no one dies today", and Cap, IMHO, embodies the person who will lead by example, set the standard, never kill(if possible, or if not in a line wide interstellar multi-dimensional war between alien/mutant/god/cosmic personifications)much like Superman at DC, the moral compass of their universes. Read the new Mighty Thor with Jane Foster, as she fights against the Shi'Ar gods, and makes moral choices that aren't fight/smash/hammertime (tho to be fair these do get plenty of airtime) even though they could cost her badly. I really like that some books now are trying to have their capes play it different. Superhero books, hell even most comics are full of incongruities with real life, and we have to accept that the rules change from book to book. Capes, cartoon characters, manga, hard boiled, sword and sorcery...all seem to have their own "laws of physics", and I'm cool with that...but morals are morals.
|
|
|
Post by Mormel on May 4, 2017 14:58:44 GMT -5
Just wanted to say that whilst Abnett and Lanning are (deservedly!) credited with cementing the popularity of the new incarnation of the Guardians of the Galaxy featuring Peter Quill and Rocket Raccoon among others, it was Keith Giffen who laid the seeds for the team dynamic and the off-beat sense of humour in his "Annihilation Conquest: Starlord" mini.
On a side note, I think the Mini-Groot he featured in that series was potentially funnier than the movie's Baby Groot. Rocket 'moisturizing' Groot by spitting on him, followed by a very well-spoken Groot's angry tirade was one of the mini's many comical highlights.
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on May 4, 2017 15:39:22 GMT -5
Just wanted to say that whilst Abnett and Lanning are (deservedly!) credited with cementing the popularity of the new incarnation of the Guardians of the Galaxy featuring Peter Quill and Rocket Raccoon among others, it was Keith Giffen who laid the seeds for the team dynamic and the off-beat sense of humour in his "Annihilation Conquest: Starlord" mini. I agree! I really didn't like the idea of a guilt-ridden cyborg Star-Lord, but the character Giffen described in that miniseries was a great improvement, even over Star-Lord's original characterization! And the way he had that team interact was so much fun. He certainly had a larger vocabulary. On another side note, do you think that the Star-Lord we currently see in the Marvel Universe is a different one from the Star-Lord who was first introduced in comics? That one apparently lived in a world without super-heroes, and in which NASA had a huge Star Trek-y space station. What's more, the current one has a very different personality fro the original Peter Quill.
|
|
|
Post by Mormel on May 4, 2017 16:45:51 GMT -5
On another side note, do you think that the Star-Lord we currently see in the Marvel Universe is a different one from the Star-Lord who was first introduced in comics? That one apparently lived in a world without super-heroes, and in which NASA had a huge Star Trek-y space station. What's more, the current one has a very different personality fro the original Peter Quill. I wish I could comment on that, but I unfortunately never got around to reading the 'new Guardians' older appearances... save for some of Starlin's work on Drax, Gamora, and Adam Warlock, natch. But the ones that Giffen brought back from obscurity so to speak, I hadn't read any comics about . (I know there was a pretty cool collection called 'GotG Solo Classic', but I only thumbed through it a bit before making a different purchase).
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on May 4, 2017 17:53:32 GMT -5
On another side note, do you think that the Star-Lord we currently see in the Marvel Universe is a different one from the Star-Lord who was first introduced in comics? That one apparently lived in a world without super-heroes, and in which NASA had a huge Star Trek-y space station. What's more, the current one has a very different personality fro the original Peter Quill. I wish I could comment on that, but I unfortunately never got around to reading the 'new Guardians' older appearances... save for some of Starlin's work on Drax, Gamora, and Adam Warlock, natch. But the ones that Giffen brought back from obscurity so to speak, I hadn't read any comics about . (I know there was a pretty cool collection called 'GotG Solo Classic', but I only thumbed through it a bit before making a different purchase). The old Peter Quill had been seen in black and white mags such as Marvel Preview, as well as in a Marvel Super Special and in Marvel Spotlight. Initially shown as something of a bastard, he quickly became a very Claremontesque explorer/philosopher given to introspection and long monologues. His companion, Ship, was a sentient star that had been turned into a spaceship thanks to the magic of comic-book science. That old Peter Quill was definitely not a wisecracking and party-loving womanizer! Not only wasn't the old Peter Quill anything like the new one, but the trauma that started him in the modern age also didn't fit quite well with what we knew of him... He and Ship murdered an entire population to gain enough energy to defeat a rogue herald of Galactus and save an even greater number, but since Ship herself had lived through the genocide of her people (the people living on the planet whose star she had been), I find it unbelievable that she would have acquiesced to impose the same fate on anyone... even if it meant helping a greater number. But anyway. It's really not that important!
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on May 4, 2017 18:04:16 GMT -5
There's also the Timothy Zahn version of Star Lord from the mid 90s, which I think was different both from the old one and the new one.
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on May 4, 2017 22:39:08 GMT -5
I guess this worlds Starlord is the one from the movies. Other versions need not apply.
|
|