I'll post in a few hours, still got a half finished Nightcrawler post in my notepad that needs to be touched up and finished.

@Sep Go ahead and post. The world's not going to come to an end if you do, I'm sure.

but, it might.

Someone go post :P

I got a Colossus post sitting waiting xD

I'm working on posts. Just not Cap or Ivy posts. :D

I'm working on posts. Just not Cap or Ivy posts. :D

Me when I read the second sentence.

@Lord Wraith, that is a lovely hypothesis about the Death/Return of Superman, and I only wish it had been in the writers' minds when they conceived the story. If that story were to be rewritten today with that message at heart, I could grow to love it, but I can't love it in its current form as an obvious sales gimmick.

As for Jason, I'm cool with him coming back simply because Under the Red Hood is such a great story. Someone finally takes Batman to task for never doing what needs to be done, according to some, and putting Joker in the dirt. What I care less for is that they felt obligated to keep Jason around once that story had run its course, eventually neutering him so he could come back into the Bat-fold.

I'll post in a few hours eventually, still got a half finished Nightcrawler Batman post in my notepad that needs to be touched up and finished.

Yeah, what they said.

You're the worst. @Blue Demon

<Snipped quote by TimeMasterX>

I feel like Jason's murder was highly effective at the time it was done but I honestly hate the fact that they resurrected him. I get that 'no one stays dead in comics' but I really though Jason being dead was great because he served as a warning. Now that's undone, same with Damian's death. It's well known I hate Jason but likewise it's also known that Damian is one of my favourite characters (who I for some reason forgot to name yesterday...) but I really feel that Damian coming back from death undermines the effect it had when he died.

Now to go off on a slightly different tangent, I don't think Superman coming back from death undermines it at all. This is because I see Superman as a Christ or Resurrection figure. And I know I'm not the only one who sees him this way, numerous media go out of their way to ensure they put the symbolism in your head. Heck 'Jor-El sent his own son to Earth to save its people' sounds awfully familiar. The 'S' on Superman's chest doesn't stand for 'Super', it doesn't mean 'Hope' in some alien language. It means 'Savior' because Superman came to save us from ourselves. So for that reason, I think Superman rising from his grave, rejuvenated and conquering death reinforces his themes as opposed to undermining them.

And hey if you want to run with the 'Hope' theme instead, Superman coming back just shows that 'Hope never dies.'

I don't mind resurrection when done well, I think Jason's resurrection was a much more interesting story than his death was with the whole Red Hood thing.
The part where I have a bit of a problem is where there can be no progress because no one ages or dies anymore. Marvel put more change into their books but even then, everything goes back to the status quo whenever a film comes out.

@Morden ManYou know you love me.

@Lord Wraith, that is a lovely hypothesis about the Death/Return of Superman, and I only wish it had been in the writers' minds when they conceived the story. If that story were to be rewritten today with that message at heart, I could grow to love it, but I can't love it in its current form as an obvious sales gimmick.

As for Jason, I'm cool with him coming back simply because Under the Red Hood is such a great story. Someone finally takes Batman to task for never doing what needs to be done, according to some, and putting Joker in the dirt. What I care less for is that they felt obligated to keep Jason around once that story had run its course, eventually neutering him so he could come back into the Bat-fold.

Is that not what they're essentially doing in Marvel with Civil War:2? one of their big sales pitches it that someone will die!

It's like a budding romance that's happening in ANAD which is just a sales pitch that everyone saw coming.

<Snipped quote by Lord Wraith>

I don't mind resurrection when done well, I think Jason's resurrection was a much more interesting story than his death was with the whole Red Hood thing.
The part where I have a bit of a problem is where there can be no progress because no one ages or dies anymore. Marvel put more change into their books but even then, everything goes back to the status quo whenever a film comes out.

Yeah, the lack of progress is irritating. There's no reason that Peter Parker and Mary Jane shouldn't be married and raising little May right now, except that the writers want Pete to be able to sleep around. Also and that Quesada and Dan Slott hate MJ for some reason.

@Lord Wraith, that is a lovely hypothesis about the Death/Return of Superman, and I only wish it had been in the writers' minds when they conceived the story. If that story were to be rewritten today with that message at heart, I could grow to love it, but I can't love it in its current form as an obvious sales gimmick.

As for Jason, I'm cool with him coming back simply because Under the Red Hood is such a great story. Someone finally takes Batman to task for never doing what needs to be done, according to some, and putting Joker in the dirt. What I care less for is that they felt obligated to keep Jason around once that story had run its course, eventually neutering him so he could come back into the Bat-fold.

Well the story was obvious a sales gimmick, but I think the ideal might be there if you do some digging into the Man of Steel's creators. Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster were both children of Jewish immigrants so it's fair to say the religious imagery may not be accidental.

But yes regarding Jason you hit the nail on the head. Under the Red Hood is a good story, but I don't know if it necessarily needed Jason. Jason does add a lot to the story but I'm getting off course again. Like you said, there was no need to keep the character around and definitely no need to redeem him. At least Pre-Flashpoint Jason was still fairly antagonistic but as of the New52 he's almost unrecognizable. I've never understood why his fandom grew so rapidly.

But as Blue Demon already pointed out, the audience for comics has significantly widened especially over the past few years and as such DC has had to make its characters appeal to a new audience something that I hate to say it, Marvel for the most part has been significantly better at over the years.

@Eddie Brock Says the guy who has been writing the Peter Parker/Mary Jane/Gwen Stacy love triangle for half a decade.

But I agree on the progression front: it's maddening to see the same stories rehashed over and over again. Plus it holds both Marvel and DC back. There's an endless cycle of promising young characters brought through (remember when the Young Avengers were a thing? Gravity?) that end up on the scrap heap because the older characters will never be allowed to age out for fear of the new ones not catching on. If Marvel had any cajones, Bucky would have stayed Captain America, Steve would have stayed dead, and old, grey-haired men over at DC would stop forcing Barry and Hal onto people that grew up with Kyle and Wally. (And I say that as a fan of Hal Jordan)

@Lord Wraith Oh, for sure, I'm not denying that Superman is a religious allegory -- only that Death/Return wasn't concerned with being presented through that lens.

And yeah, you can do Under the Red Hood without using Jason. In fact, it's almost better if Red Hood thinks he's Jason just for that added tragedy factor when Batman has to go, "I can't kill the Joker. And also, it won't bring the real Jason back anyway."

EDIT: @Morden Man I take offense to that claim! This is actually the first time I've written for the triangle, so I plan to have fun with it. In all my other short-lived attempts at Spidey, he's either already been past Gwen's death or he hasn't met one or the other yet.

@Eddie Brock Says the guy who has been writing the Peter Parker/Mary Jane/Gwen Stacy love triangle for half a decade.

But I agree on the progression front: it's maddening to see the same stories rehashed over and over again. Plus it holds both Marvel and DC back. There's an endless cycle of promising young characters brought through (remember when the Young Avengers were a thing? Gravity?) that end up on the scrap heap because the older characters will never be allowed to age out for fear of the new ones not catching on. If Marvel had any cajones, Bucky would have stayed Captain America, Steve would have stayed dead, and old, grey-haired men over at DC would stop forcing Barry and Hal onto people that grew up with Kyle and Wally. (And I say that as a fan of Hal Jordan)

I honestly believe we're at a point now where they could do almost (and this probably isn't the right word for it but) 'period' issues or annuals that allow fans of say Steve to get that Cap fix while Bucky or Sam are currently holding the shield. Or hey since Batman has like two or three monthlies why not have Gordon as Robo-Bunny-Cop Batman in the self titled series while having Detective Comics set earlier with Bruce under the cowl. Time is so malleable in comics anyways I don't see why this would necessarily be a hard feat to accomplish. Look at how much DC is milking out of this Batman and Robin Eternal series.

@Lord WraithWell, Sam is currently holding the shield. And Cap isn't taking it back, even with his new series. So that's a win right? (Plus, Canonically Barnes never wanted the Mantle. He only took it because he felt he had to.)

But change does happen. Just slowly. If a lot of people had their way, I'd never happen at all.

There's been a few comic series based on the idea of everything happening in real time. My favourite was Batman/Superman Generations which did told a narrative going over a few lifetimes with the idea that everyone was aging as normal (except for superman) but this meant that new characters came to be prominent and take over.
I gather Spidergirl had a similar idea?

@Eddie Brock I concede.

@Lord Wraith I guess with more and more films coming out both DC and Marvel are always going to opt on the side of simplifying things as much as possible for new readers. They want to capitalise on people that see Dawn of Justice and Suicide Squad by making the comic book versions of those characters as much like the film versions. It makes business sense if you presume existing readers aren't going to leave in their droves - which they currently haven't done.

@Blue Demon Sure, Bucky didn't want to be Captain America to begin with but he didn't want anybody else being Captain America (if not Steve) more. I feel like Brubaker was forced into cutting what he had in mind short because Marvel needed Steve back seeing as the film was coming out. Then they shuffled Barnes off into irrelevancy despite his being at the heart of the best Captain America story in... well, forever.

As someone who's written a lot of Superboy over the years, it was a lot of fun to deal with the "heir apparent" status, but ultimately it was Sisyphusean because I knew there would never be payoff, not in the RPGs' lifespan and certainly not in the comics.