|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2014 22:04:48 GMT -5
Like mrp said so eloquently, I find the Punisher much better as a foil for a protagonist than as a protagonist in his own right. He's too much of a murderous asshole for me to find him enjoyable to read on his own. Hey, hey, hey, don't go potty-mouthing my man Frank Castle...them be fighting words.  I like him as a murderous a**hole. The vermin he metes out dark justice to deserves it. And just so you'd know, I'd buy him a coffee. |
|
|
|
Post by hondobrode on Nov 16, 2014 22:07:03 GMT -5
Gotta agree with  though I'm hoping that'll change, cause Vision is one of my favorites. Was really pumped for  but she's nothing more than a plot device with zero personality and no direction for her. Sorry Slam. I didn't even think that she's new enough that some here might not know her. She's the character from Flashpoint that brought the DCU, Vertigo and Wildstorm into the Nu52. FWIW, despite the fact that he's practically a saint, I still loves me some Superman. |
|
|
|
Post by Cei-U! on Nov 16, 2014 22:23:09 GMT -5
The original X-Men, with the exception of the Beast, bore me to the point of catatonia.
Cei-U!
I summon the yawn!
|
|
|
|
Post by fanboystranger on Nov 16, 2014 22:26:05 GMT -5
Like mrp said so eloquently, I find the Punisher much better as a foil for a protagonist than as a protagonist in his own right. He's too much of a murderous asshole for me to find him enjoyable to read on his own. Going off on a tangent here, but I think it's an interesting one. Not directed to Pharo specifically, but everyone: Do you need to like a character to enjoy his/her/its (it's comics, so "its" is fair game) stories? For example, there's a lot about the Bat mythos that I find morally and ethically repugnant-- I mean, here's this mentally ill, traumatically stunted man-child beating up on criminals because he's rich enough to be allowed to behave in such a manner-- but there's a lot of really great Bat-stories. I don't really like Batman, but I find him a great "engine" for telling stories. I feel the same about The Punisher and, to a lesser extent, John Constantine, although as a lapsed Irish Catholic, I do get that guilt aspect in John, which the best Hellblazer writers always got right.
On the other hand, I love Superman as a concept. It's such a great parable about finding your way in the world and behaving in a responsible manner within the society that you've adopted. Yet, I don't like a lot of Superman stories. Now part of that is because I find it weak and lazy that DC feels the need to limit a character that can pretty much do anything he wants rather than let creators run wild with their imaginations. However, it also seems to me that emphasizing the "man" at the expense of the "super" has left us with a very bland, greatest common denominator "everyman" that attempts to be everything for everyone, but in truth, really doesn't connect with anyone. The "man" should be a given when it comes to Superman-- we know he's a great guy; it's the "super" that gets the short end.
|
|
|
|
Post by fanboystranger on Nov 16, 2014 22:30:33 GMT -5
The original X-Men, with the exception of the Beast, bore me to the point of catatonia. Cei-U! I summon the yawn! Totally agree with this, but I'll go a step further and say Beast didn't become an interesting character until he broke with the X-Men.
I do kinda like Cyclops, but that's because the Simonson's run on X-Factor was such a formative influence on my comics reading habit when I was growing up. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that X-F, vol 1 13-14 are the greatest single Cyclops story ever published because they show that he's a walking wreck so damaged by Xavier that he can't stand on his own unless he deludes himself. Cyclops needs people around him just to function.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Nov 16, 2014 22:36:17 GMT -5
Like mrp said so eloquently, I find the Punisher much better as a foil for a protagonist than as a protagonist in his own right. He's too much of a murderous asshole for me to find him enjoyable to read on his own. Going off on a tangent here, but I think it's an interesting one. Not directed to Pharo specifically, but everyone: Do you need to like a character to enjoy his/her/its (it's comics, so "its" is fair game) stories? For example, there's a lot about the Bat mythos that I find morally and ethically repugnant-- I mean, here's this mentally ill, traumatically stunted man-child beating up on criminals because he's rich enough to be allowed to behave in such a manner-- but there's a lot of really great Bat-stories. I don't really like Batman, but I find him a great "engine" for telling stories. I feel the same about The Punisher and, to a lesser extent, John Constantine, although as a lapsed Irish Catholic, I do get that guilt aspect in John, which the best Hellblazer writers always got right.
On the other hand, I love Superman as a concept. It's such a great parable about finding your way in the world and behaving in a responsible manner within the society that you've adopted. Yet, I don't like a lot of Superman stories. Now part of that is because I find it weak and lazy that DC feels the need to limit a character that can pretty much do anything he wants rather than let creators run wild with their imaginations. However, it also seems to me that emphasizing the "man" at the expense of the "super" has left us with a very bland, greatest common denominator "everyman" that attempts to be everything for everyone, but in truth, really doesn't connect with anyone. The "man" should be a given when it comes to Superman-- we know he's a great guy; it's the "super" that gets the short end.
Well, it's no secret that my favorite character is Conan... who's a thief, a reaver, a slayer, a pirate, an assassin, a mercenary, a bully, a drunkard, a womanizer and supersticious to boot; none of which are things I'd spontaneously like to say about any friend of mine. He still makes for good reading, though! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2014 22:38:13 GMT -5
Going off on a tangent here, but I think it's an interesting one. Not directed to Pharo specifically, but everyone: Do you need to like a character to enjoy his/her/its (it's comics, so "its" is fair game) stories? It certainly helps to like the character, or at least have an indifference about her/him. But a change in direction can also put an end to that. I can't stand the current Ghost Rider at all. There are a multitude of other characters that I find 'boring.' It doesn't mean they are bad, especially if they interest others. They just don't do anything for me. |
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Nov 16, 2014 22:54:03 GMT -5
The original X-Men, with the exception of the Beast, bore me to the point of catatonia. Cei-U! I summon the yawn! Totally agree with this, but I'll go a step further and say Beast didn't become an interesting character until he broke with the X-Men.
I do kinda like Cyclops, but that's because the Simonson's run on X-Factor was such a formative influence on my comics reading habit when I was growing up. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that X-F, vol 1 13-14 are the greatest single Cyclops story ever published because they show that he's a walking wreck so damaged by Xavier that he can't stand on his own unless he deludes himself. Cyclops needs people around him just to function.
That's interesting and illustrates how any comic must be someone's favorite; that period is probably the nadir of Scott Summers stories to me. Louise Simonson decided to make an emotional wreck of Scott, an idea that stuck for many, many years, but that went against all we had learned about him before X-Factor #1; before that, we had seen him pick himself up after the devastating blow that was Jean's death, rebuild a life for himself outside of the X-men, meet and marry Madelyne Pryor and fully realize that life goes on and one must not dwell forever on the past. His going all self-centered after X-Men #201, his abandoning Madelyne in X-Factor#1 and then having a nervous breakdown (or something that really looked like one) when he couldn't find her again and started hallucinating were really not to my taste. Scott had been job-driven before, and certainly on the introspective side, but never mentally imbalanced. X-Factor is responsible for many sins in my eyes. Causing Jean's tragic and well-written death to be turned into a continuity nightmare is one, and almost damaging Scott beyond repair is another. Creating Apocalypse would be a third. |
|
|
|
Post by Randle-El on Nov 17, 2014 0:34:45 GMT -5
Regarding Punisher... so admittedly most of my reading has been stories where he is the guest star of a character that I do like or follow more closely (usually Spidey or Daredevil -- he seems to make frequency guest appearances in both of their books). And more often than not, those stories tend to be one-note, serving mostly to show the contrast between a hero with no reservations about killing criminals and one who prefers to deliver them to the criminal justice system. The problem is that those stories usually don't portray Frank Castle with any depth, and coupled with the fact that he's basically just a guy with a lot of guns, it doesn't really make me want to read any more of his stories.
I think I'm just not a big fan of heroes that resort to guns to get the bad guys. I don't have anything against guns themselves -- not to get political, but I tend to lean a little more to the right on this issue -- I just find heroes that use guns to be less appealing than super heroes, gadget/tech users, or slick martial artists.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 17, 2014 1:17:19 GMT -5
Nobody mentioned Jubilee and her ability to mildly annoy bad guys?
|
|
|
|
Post by foxley on Nov 17, 2014 1:35:41 GMT -5
Maybe not a fit, but I bet there was at least a slight teeth clenching or a nostril flare. None of the above. I felt it was disrespectful to firebomb a thread that celebrated Adam Strange , do I started a separate thread about characters that kinda suck. Action Ace stated that Thanos was boring ( which most of the comic reading population disagrees with) and he is intitled to his opinion, even though he's wrong. I think he pretty much nailed it. "I want to kill everyone in the universe" is a dumb motivation, and the character is made even less interesting by Starlin's insistence that he is unbeatable. And any time another writer has the temerity to suggest he could be beaten, Starlin immediately does a story where we learn that the being who was beaten was actually a Doombot.. sorry, I mean a "Thanosi". Most boring villain ever! |
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Nov 17, 2014 6:22:21 GMT -5
None of the above. I felt it was disrespectful to firebomb a thread that celebrated Adam Strange , do I started a separate thread about characters that kinda suck. Action Ace stated that Thanos was boring ( which most of the comic reading population disagrees with) and he is intitled to his opinion, even though he's wrong. I think he pretty much nailed it. "I want to kill everyone in the universe" is a dumb motivation, and the character is made even less interesting by Starlin's insistence that he is unbeatable. And any time another writer has the temerity to suggest he could be beaten, Starlin immediately does a story where we learn that the being who was beaten was actually a Doombot.. sorry, I mean a "Thanosi". Most boring villain ever! I think Starlin attempted to explain away the obvious stories where he jobbed and lost when he shouldn't have. Everyone can be beat but what makes Thanos more than a one note character is that he's a schemer and has intelligence on the level near Reed Richards .Put all the power and smarts and add serial killer and there's a character that is awesome. |
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Nov 17, 2014 6:29:02 GMT -5
As for the Punisher, I always felt he was created to show an opposite to the heroic model. Before he came along, you never saw crime fighters kill( not in this era anyway).Anyway, it became where every appearance created a buzz and the fans clamored for more and more. I fell the same way about Wolverine. I never thought Wolverine should have his own comic and that he worked better as a supporting guy. I will admit that the Ennis/Dillon 12 issue Punisher Mini was entertaining- in a tongue and cheek sorta way. The violence was over the top almost like Bugs Bunny with a gun.
|
|
|
|
Post by foxley on Nov 17, 2014 7:09:05 GMT -5
I think he pretty much nailed it. "I want to kill everyone in the universe" is a dumb motivation, and the character is made even less interesting by Starlin's insistence that he is unbeatable. And any time another writer has the temerity to suggest he could be beaten, Starlin immediately does a story where we learn that the being who was beaten was actually a Doombot.. sorry, I mean a "Thanosi". Most boring villain ever! I think Starlin attempted to explain away the obvious stories where he jobbed and lost when he shouldn't have. Everyone can be beat but what makes Thanos more than a one note character is that he's a schemer and has intelligence on the level near Reed Richards .Put all the power and smarts and add serial killer and there's a character that is awesome. You see awesome, I see dull as ditch water. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 17, 2014 7:24:53 GMT -5
The original X-Men, with the exception of the Beast, bore me to the point of catatonia. Cei-U! I summon the yawn! awwww, I AGREE!!!!! I think Roy Thomas and Neil Adams helped GREATLY to improve interest (for me) in the team, if for nothing more than the Adams art, but yeesh, yeah, boring as hell. |
|
