|
Daredevil Message Board
The Board Without Fear!
|
The Message Board is currently in read-only mode, as the software is now out of date. Several features and pages have been removed. If/When I get time I intend to re-launch the board with updated software.
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Katerine
Flying Blind
Joined: 05 Feb 2008
Posts: 45
Location: USA
|
 Posted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:19 pm Post subject: Rant about DD "by Mark Waid, Volume 4" TPB |
 |
|
Sorry this is so behind-the-times. I just read this TPB last night, and now I need to rant a bit.
For the record, I really liked Waid's work on DD up until this point. Especially Vol. 3 (the one where DD is kidnapped by Dr. Doom's financial minister and goes through total sensory deprivation) - that was fantastic. Dramatic, and it really brought me into what that must have been like for him.
As for the rest of his run - DD's sudden cheeriness was very jarring... right up until he explained it to Foggy. Then, it made perfect sense. To me, at least. Apparently, not to Foggy. His best friend... *ahem*
Ok, I should probably explain where I'm coming from, in terms of how I view Matt Murdock. My favorite runs were Bendis and Brubaker, precisely because they showed Matt at his lowest point, pushing through even when he really did, desperately, need help that he wasn't getting.
I do believe, very strongly, that it is not a judgement on a person's character to say that they need help. That has nothing to do with their character or their strength - when a person gets past a certain point, whether it's because of trauma or chemical imbalance, it is simply not possible to pull themselves back from the abyss, without help.
I strongly believe that Matt's in-universe reason for not getting help years ago, isn't that he doesn't think he needs it. He knows he needs it! There's just nothing he can do about it. For him, there are at least ten legitimate, practical obstacles to getting help. Just off the top of my head:
- What's the percentage of psychologists who wouldn't be able to resist the temptation to write an article on superhero psychology, given the chance? Even if they don't use names, journalists would be able to put two and two together. Would the doctor understand the dangers inherent in writing an article, or would they think he was just being paranoid?
- If it gets out that he's going to counseling, that would significantly impact his survival chances in the field, because suddenly his enemies would see him as a human being (whereas right now, most of them see him as an unstoppable force. This perception is a huge part of the reason he's still alive).
- What about the danger to the doctor? If anybody thinks that he (the doctor) has information on Daredevil that they don't have, they would do anything to get it.
That's just off the top of my head.
So when other characters in the Bendis/Brubaker runs tried to tell DD that he needed help, he always got furious... and I'm certain that the reason, is that he knows perfectly well that he needs help, but there's nothing he can do about that. He needs it, but he can't get it. So he's just left floundering, doing the best that he can.
So...
Then Waid's run begins, and DD is suddenly, seemingly, better. Again, this is jarring, until he flat-out explains to Foggy that this is the thread that he's holding onto. This makes sense. This makes perfect sense. It could even work, if life cooperates.
So then we have volume 4.
It starts out strong, with the chapter with the Avengers and Ant Man helping him with the nanobots that Doom's men put in his brain. The implications, especially the fact that he was actually some *telepathy* there (there were signs of empathy earlier as well. Matt could barely perceive anything about the nurse, but he knew her heart was breaking for him). That's fascinating! I hope that gets followed up on. He's always had a kind of sense of "good person" vs. "bad person" that went beyond his normal senses, even back to the... I think the Nocenti run. That's fascinating! I hope he follows up on it.
But then it goes downhill. There are three separate things in this one book, that I'd like to rant about now. 
---
Rant #1: Foggy. Ok, so you've been having doubts about your best friend's hold on sanity for a while. He vanishes for a while, during which you discover something very disturbing, but not life-threatening, that cements your belief that he has gone insane. Ok, fine. Do you, as his good friend:
a) Sit down and use this time, your strategic training, your knowledge, and your apparently much better hold on sanity, to figure out all of the obstacles to his getting the help he needs, and then figure out exactly how you're going to get past those obstacles, possibly bringing in help from others (like the Avengers)? Since, you know, if you can't figure out a way past the obstacles to getting help, how can you possibly expect him to?
Also, since you are presumably well aware that any good intervention ends with a simple choice: get this help that we have already lined up for you, or don't, and face the consequences.
...or...
b) blame your friend for not doing the impossible, and completely cut him out of your life, when you know perfectly well that he's already lost pretty-much everybody else?
---
Rant #2: The scene in the DA's office. Ok. So... you're the DA. You've just found out that one of your ADA's is dating a supposed superhero. Then, suddenly, she comes in and very sincerely expresses a concern that this same superhero may be mentally unbalanced and need to be brought in for observation for the sake of the safety of the public. Do you:
a) assume that she's just saying this as part of a lover's spat, and laugh at her to her face, as well as behind her back, and not even hear her out?
...or...
b) briefly consider that this might be personal, before realizing that 1) she's an ADA, and therefore should be assumed to be more professional than that, and 2) by anybody's standards, responding to a lover's quarrel by trying to get them involuntarily committed without legitimate cause, is kind of extreme, not to mention (I'm pretty sure) illegal. And 3) she is, after all, talking about somebody who, you believe, makes decisions every day that affect the lives and deaths of the general public.
So then, you ask questions, such as, "Are you joking? If you are, tell me now, because this is serious," followed by, "ok then... have you ever personally observed anything that makes you question his stability," and, "no? then why are you questioning his stability?" You know... questions that make sense.
And then, you look into it. See if what she's saying is backed up by anybody else.
---
Rant #3: Spidey? Ok, admittedly, I haven't read past this TPB yet, so I don't actually know if that's actually Spidey or not. He's in silhouette. If it's not, then never mind (although... does Kirsten think it's Spidey? If so, why can't she tell the difference)? If it is Spidey... GAAH!
Ok, this ties into another rant about the fight between DD and Cap earlier ("So, you threw your shield at the head of somebody dressed in a DD costume... as a test, to make sure it's really DD? So... if he dodges, then it's really DD, and if he doesn't, then... you've just beheaded somebody for being in a DD costume.")... I am SO SICK of comic-book writers completely ignoring characterization, just for the sake of having a superhero fight!
---
Ok, I feel a little better now, having gotten all that off my chest.  Thanks for reading my rantings... and I welcome discussion (I'm mad at the book, not at people's opinions, as long as they're explained).  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Daredevil24
Humanity's Fathom
Joined: 06 Apr 2011
Posts: 367
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I hate Waid's run. I stopped reading Daredevil because of Mark Waid and I have read and collected almost every Daredevil comic ever made |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thank god for stilt-man
Flying Blind
Joined: 14 Sep 2013
Posts: 37
Location: United States
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 9:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
My favorite runs are Bendis (when I started reading the series) and Miller, but I've enjoyed Waid and Vol. 3 so far. There have been some issues I didn't really care for, but that's going to happen.
I absolutely hated Diggle's run and welcomed the somewhat lighter tone. The series was getting too "dark for the sake of dark", imo. I felt like if they had to resort to demonic posession, something should change.
Anyway, I did sort of find how Foggy handled things...odd. But he had his own stresses which probably weren't helping him think logically.
And I agree that there are legitimate obstacles to Matt getting help, but I think he just doesn't mainly because of stubbornness.
That nonsense in the DA office...o_O I agree with you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
james castle
Devil in Cell-Block D
Joined: 30 Jul 2004
Posts: 1999
Location: Toronto, Ontario
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 10:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm loving Mark Waid's run.
I loved the majority of Bendis' run but I don't think anyone can deny that it got sort of crappy near the end. Same with Brubaker. He started so strong but his later arcs were just garbage. The most you can say for Diggle is that at least he was consistant: garbage from beginning to end. All three went the dark, brooding Miller route and I'm one of the people who was kinda tired of it so I love the new tone.
As for the tiny points Katrine raises: okay, you would have written the issues differently. Noted.
_________________
JC
So why can't you see the funny side?
Why aren't you laughing? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Katerine
Flying Blind
Joined: 05 Feb 2008
Posts: 45
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 12:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
A little pressed for time, so I'll just comment on the statements I disagree with for now. There's just the one. Will try to give a more even response to everybody later; and thanks again for reading.
| james castle wrote: | | As for the tiny points Katrine raises: okay, you would have written the issues differently. Noted. |
To enjoy any fiction, I need to be able to suspend disbelief. For that, I'm pretty flexible (hence being able to do it with a superhero comic in the first place), but I still need characters to behave like people would behave, in their situation. A character-driven plot (which is... every plot, except, perhaps, alien invasions) should always serve the characters' characters and motivations, not the other way around.
This means that long-standing characters, like Foggy or Spidey, should behave like themselves, unless we're given a valid reason why they're not.
It means that somebody like Foggy doesn't just abandon his best friend precisely because he thinks his friend needs help, without even trying to get him the help he thinks Matt needs. That's backwards. That's what a fair-weather friend would do in his situation, not a real friend. How are we supposed to buy that Foggy is his friend after that? How are we supposed to reconcile the present evidence that Foggy is only a fair-weather friend (or he wouldn't have done this), with all of the past evidence saying that he was a true friend? Answer... we can't. It's out of character, and not in the good way (where there's an actual in-universe reason for it). And so it should never have been written.
And it means that a bit character like the DA, needs to act like a DA. I can't think that any DA would get away with that behavior.
At best, his behavior was dismissive, disrespectful to his employee, and reeked of sexism. Not to mention, it's illogical (possibly the most unbelievable aspect of this entire scene; respected attorneys are nothing if not possessing a sense of logic)... no logical person could believe that an ADA would respond to a lover's quarrel by trying to get her partner involuntarily committed under false pretenses (not unless she's a sociopath... and if you think that, then why did you hire her?). Not only is that... really, really extreme... it's also false imprisonment, if she succeeds.
And at worst, his behavior was criminally negligent. He believes Matt is Daredevil. If her concern had been warranted, then by laughing that concern off, the DA would have just been responsible for letting somebody with severely-impaired judgement, continue to be responsible for the safety and well-being of other people.
In short, NOT a believable DA. Or at least, not one that we can respect. For all of Waid's talk (through DD) about respecting law enforcement and respecting the system, he certainly doesn't show it here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
james castle
Devil in Cell-Block D
Joined: 30 Jul 2004
Posts: 1999
Location: Toronto, Ontario
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 2:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sure, sure, but I just think it's a bit rich to get so upset over two things (I didn't follow your Spidey complaint at all and maybe it won't be a complaint when you read further) that are, no matter what else is true, up for debate.
Sure, maybe Foggy could be more caring but he could also throw up his hands and abandoned Matt. I get that you would prefer the former but the later COULD happen. It's not completely out of the realm of possibility.
And, yeah, the DA thing was a bit weird and maybe a bit convenient but it's not so insane that it breaks the suspension of disbelief (that is busy still accepting superheroes).
Generally, I think what you're doing is taking an odd (and wrong) approach to what writers are doing. Sure Waid (and every other writer) takes liberties a bit with how people react to things in order to further his story but what is the alternative? Just sit down and try to reason out, as strictly as possible, how the pre-existing character would react in every situation? That's boring.
You're letting fanboy/girl nitpicking get in the way of your enjoyment of a larger story. Which, in my opinion, isn't the best way to go about it.
_________________
JC
So why can't you see the funny side?
Why aren't you laughing? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Katerine
Flying Blind
Joined: 05 Feb 2008
Posts: 45
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 2:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| james castle wrote: | Generally, I think what you're doing is taking an odd (and wrong) approach to what writers are doing. Sure Waid (and every other writer) takes liberties a bit with how people react to things in order to further his story but what is the alternative? Just sit down and try to reason out, as strictly as possible, how the pre-existing character would react in every situation? That's boring.
You're letting fanboy/girl nitpicking get in the way of your enjoyment of a larger story. Which, in my opinion, isn't the best way to go about it. |
What exactly is the larger story in your view, if it's not about characters that we care about? I'm confused. That's what makes stories exciting, is the fact that we care. And it's not nitpicking when you did care about these characters and what happened to them, and suddenly you can't, because you can't believe in the characters anymore.
Characters are what make the world believable and exciting. Any world can be believable and exciting, if the characters are believable and interesting. But you have to go all-out, and make ALL of the characters believable (although bit characters can get away with only being believable, not interesting... although "interesting" certainly helps).
I'll allow that perhaps I am a bit spoiled. I just spent the past several months reading GRRM's A Song of Ice and Fire, which successfully juggles literally thousands of consistent, three-dimensional, and believable characters and relationships, not to mention intricate politics, zombies (although they're not called that), and dragons, and about 18 different simultaneous wars.
When done right, characters behaving in character make the story more exciting, not less. Actually, I can't imagine being excited about any story where I can't believe in the characters. That's why I stopped watching Heroes after the first couple seasons, after all... I no longer knew (or cared) about the characters, so the show became a chore to watch. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Katerine
Flying Blind
Joined: 05 Feb 2008
Posts: 45
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 3:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| james castle wrote: | Generally, I think what you're doing is taking an odd (and wrong) approach to what writers are doing. Sure Waid (and every other writer) takes liberties a bit with how people react to things in order to further his story but what is the alternative? Just sit down and try to reason out, as strictly as possible, how the pre-existing character would react in every situation? That's boring.
You're letting fanboy/girl nitpicking get in the way of your enjoyment of a larger story. Which, in my opinion, isn't the best way to go about it. |
What exactly is the larger story in your view, if it's not about characters that we care about? I'm confused. That's what makes stories exciting, is the fact that we care. And it's not nitpicking when you did care about these characters and what happened to them, and suddenly you can't, because you can't believe in the characters anymore.
Characters are what make the world believable and exciting. Any world can be believable and exciting, if the characters are believable and interesting.
I'll allow that perhaps I am a bit spoiled. I just spent the past several months reading GRRM's A Song of Ice and Fire, which successfully juggles literally thousands of consistent, three-dimensional, and believable characters and relationships, not to mention intricate politics, zombies (although they're not called that), and dragons, and about 18 different simultaneous wars.
When done right, characters behaving in character make the story more exciting, not less. Actually, I can't imagine being excited about any story where I can't believe in the characters. That's why I stopped watching Heroes after the first couple seasons, after all... I no longer knew (or cared) about the characters, so the show became a chore to watch. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Katerine
Flying Blind
Joined: 05 Feb 2008
Posts: 45
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 3:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sorry about the multiple, but I'd posted an edit that got undone due to my bad use of the Back button, and I realized that this should have its own post, since it's a completely different topic.
When it comes to the DA's behavior, specifically... I do have a problem with the believability of that scene, but it's not the only problem I have. I also have a problem with the mixed messages in the scene.
A couple of volumes ago, Waid (through DD) chews out... I forget her name... the Punisher's ally, for saying something that shows a lack of respect for law enforcement (and by extension, the system). But then, in this scene in the DA's office, he (Waid) shows a law enforcement (and by extension, a system) that's just not worthy of any respect or trust.
Especially not trust. Because we're shown a DA and chief of police who are more concerned about their pride and taking advantage of the opportunity to be dismissive and sexist, then about following up on a concern that might affect the public welfare. That's... just... wrong.
Which also ties into my other objection, this time about Foggy's behavior... it's just wrong. And not wrong in a good way (where the writer clearly knows he's wrong), but wrong in a bad way (where it seems to be the writer who's wrong).
The way the story is presented, the implication is that Foggy was wrong because Matt is not insane. Which is true, but that's not why Foggy's behavior was wrong. It was wrong, because it is wrong to blame someone for needing help. And it was wrong, because when a person needs help, but can't get help, because there are too many obstacles, it's a friend's job to figure out a way past those obstacles, not just leave their friend completely alone to flounder in the darkness.
So... yeah. While I do have a huge problem with the believability of the characters in this set of 6 issues (or, really, 5 issues - I had no problem at all with the first issue in this TPB), that's not the only problem I had with this TPB. Not by a long shot. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
james castle
Devil in Cell-Block D
Joined: 30 Jul 2004
Posts: 1999
Location: Toronto, Ontario
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 4:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Now I'm properly confused. First you say this:
| Katerine wrote: |
What exactly is the larger story in your view, if it's not about characters that we care about? I'm confused. That's what makes stories exciting, is the fact that we care. And it's not nitpicking when you did care about these characters and what happened to them, and suddenly you can't, because you can't believe in the characters anymore. |
Sure. But do you care about the DA? He was probably in issues prior to the one you're talking about but if he was, I can't remember. Are you honestly saying that you're invested in the consistency of how the DA acts?
But then I get even more confused when you do this:
| Katerine wrote: |
A couple of volumes ago, Waid (through DD) chews out... I forget her name... the Punisher's ally, for saying something that shows a lack of respect for law enforcement (and by extension, the system). But then, in this scene in the DA's office, he (Waid) shows a law enforcement (and by extension, a system) that's just not worthy of any respect or trust. |
How do you know Waid was chewing out the Punisher's ally (who I guess you aren't invested in) through DD? Didn't DD just say something? And how is that inconsistent with different character acting otherwise? That's like saying "in Star Wars Luke says the Dark Side is bad but then later Darth Vadar says it's good!". Different characters have different perspectives.
It's so odd that this sort of hyper continuity stuff haunts comics so much. The thing is that none of these characters are real. It's all made up. The idea that they should "act like themselves" is odd given that they have no self to act like. I know you might point out that there's a consistency built up over the years. But that's the crazy thing. In comics there isn't. Bendis' Matt is different than Miller's which is different than Nocenti's. Do you really think Foggy has been presented in an entirely consistent way up to now? Of course he hasn't.
Anyway, to each his own but I think you're focusing on the wrong things.
_________________
JC
So why can't you see the funny side?
Why aren't you laughing? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Katerine
Flying Blind
Joined: 05 Feb 2008
Posts: 45
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 26, 2013 4:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| james castle wrote: | Now I'm properly confused. First you say this:
| Katerine wrote: |
What exactly is the larger story in your view, if it's not about characters that we care about? I'm confused. That's what makes stories exciting, is the fact that we care. And it's not nitpicking when you did care about these characters and what happened to them, and suddenly you can't, because you can't believe in the characters anymore. |
Sure. But do you care about the DA? He was probably in issues prior to the one you're talking about but if he was, I can't remember. Are you honestly saying that you're invested in the consistency of how the DA acts? |
I'm invested in the idea that this is a universe where people act like people. For that, all of the characters have to act, believably, like people in their positions.
You didn't answer my question, btw, and now I'm really curious: what exactly is the larger story, in your view? What are the things we should be focused on, if not the story of the characters (and by extension, the universe they inhabit)?
| Quote: | But then I get even more confused when you do this:
| Katerine wrote: |
A couple of volumes ago, Waid (through DD) chews out... I forget her name... the Punisher's ally, for saying something that shows a lack of respect for law enforcement (and by extension, the system). But then, in this scene in the DA's office, he (Waid) shows a law enforcement (and by extension, a system) that's just not worthy of any respect or trust. |
How do you know Waid was chewing out the Punisher's ally (who I guess you aren't invested in) through DD? Didn't DD just say something? And how is that inconsistent with different character acting otherwise? That's like saying "in Star Wars Luke says the Dark Side is bad but then later Darth Vadar says it's good!". Different characters have different perspectives. |
As I said, this is a totally different issue for me, than the continuity issue. This is more of an issue of right and wrong, than just bad writing. Daredevil is supposed to be about justice, and a huge part of his character has always been his respect for the system, and the regular people who make that system work. One would expect the writers to have the same respect for that system and the people in that system.
I actually had this problem in the Bendis and especially the Brubaker run as well... the contempt that they showed... in their case, for the FBI. It's one thing to show one character that's a stupid idiot sleazeball, but when all you see, in that entire organization, are stupid idiot sleazeballs, except for one profiler who leaves the FBI in order to "do good" in the world...
| Quote: | | It's so odd that this sort of hyper continuity stuff haunts comics so much. The thing is that none of these characters are real. It's all made up. The idea that they should "act like themselves" is odd given that they have no self to act like. I know you might point out that there's a consistency built up over the years. But that's the crazy thing. In comics there isn't. Bendis' Matt is different than Miller's which is different than Nocenti's. Do you really think Foggy has been presented in an entirely consistent way up to now? Of course he hasn't. |
So we rationalize. When there are slight inconsistencies, we make them match up, precisely because this is a fantasy character in a fantasy universe, and fantasy universes are only as believable as their consistencies. Bendis' Matt is different from Nocenti's, because things happened to Matt that changed him. That makes sense. How good the writing is, is largely determined by how much the character changes make sense, from an in-universe perspective, based on basic psychology.
| Quote: | | Anyway, to each his own but I think you're focusing on the wrong things. |
Again, what exactly do you feel are the right things to be focusing on? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
james castle
Devil in Cell-Block D
Joined: 30 Jul 2004
Posts: 1999
Location: Toronto, Ontario
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 9:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Katerine wrote: |
I'm invested in the idea that this is a universe where people act like people. For that, all of the characters have to act, believably, like people in their positions. |
Ah, I think I'm beginning to see the issue here. Look, the fact is that DA acted like a sexist idiot and you think that's unrealistic because a DA would never treat an ADA like that. He is not acting as someone "in his position" would. I hate to be the one to break this to you but lots of people in the real world are jerks. As someone who deals with law enforcement officials every day I can tell you that there is no shortage of sexism among the police or the prosecutor's office (there are lots of great cops and prosecutors too, of course). So Waid's writing doesn't match your world view. That doesn't make him a bad writer that just means you don't agree with him.
| Katerine wrote: |
You didn't answer my question, btw, and now I'm really curious: what exactly is the larger story, in your view? What are the things we should be focused on, if not the story of the characters (and by extension, the universe they inhabit)? |
You know, plot, dialogue, character development (of the central characters). That kinda stuff. What challenges Matt has and how he over comes them. The funny stuff that happens. The problem is that you're not willing to engage with the story on it's own terms. You seem to insist on bringing your own assumptions (i.e. all DAs are smart and nice, Foggy would never leave Matt) into it and get angry when Waid fails to read your mind.
| Quote: | But then I get even more confused when you do this:
[quote="Katerine"]
As I said, this is a totally different issue for me, than the continuity issue. This is more of an issue of right and wrong, than just bad writing. Daredevil is supposed to be about justice, and a huge part of his character has always been his respect for the system, and the regular people who make that system work. One would expect the writers to have the same respect for that system and the people in that system.
I actually had this problem in the Bendis and especially the Brubaker run as well... the contempt that they showed... in their case, for the FBI. It's one thing to show one character that's a stupid idiot sleazeball, but when all you see, in that entire organization, are stupid idiot sleazeballs, except for one profiler who leaves the FBI in order to "do good" in the world...
|
Yeah, so this is just flat out wrong. Like, very wrong. You realize DD is a vigilante right? Even worse than that you say that because DD has always been about respect for the system (which is wrong) the writers must also show respect for the system? That's ridiculous. Superhero books used to be used as propaganda for "the system" but that was a long, long time ago and thank heavens for that.
It's obvious you haven't read a tonne of DD comics. If you don't like how Bendis and Brubaker dealt with the system you sure aren't going to like Nocenti and Miller.
_________________
JC
So why can't you see the funny side?
Why aren't you laughing? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Katerine
Flying Blind
Joined: 05 Feb 2008
Posts: 45
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 27, 2013 12:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
james: I just wanted to give you a quick heads-up... I do plan to make a real reply to your last post (as well as a belated reply to other peoples' posts from before)... but it'll be a while. Probably sometime next week. Definitely not before Sunday.
(Priorities. Bah! Who needs them?  )
I just thought I should let you know ahead of time, since we'd been exchanging several posts a day for the last couple of days. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dimetre
Underboss
Joined: 16 Feb 2006
Posts: 1366
Location: Toronto
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 28, 2013 4:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I have to say that, in regards to Foggy, I agree with James Castle. Thirty years ago, he temporarily dissolved his friendship with Matt during Denny O'Neil's run. Ten years later he temporarily dissolved his friendship with Matt again after finding out he was Daredevil. It's within Foggy's character to threaten and end to the friendship from time to time. And honestly, I get where he's coming from. From time to time, Matt makes unhealthy choices, and while Foggy mostly plays the steadfast buddy, he has to wonder whether such a role just enables Matt. I don't think he ever intends to permanently dissolve the friendship, but just wants to send a strong message. It may not be the most noble gambit, but it works.
As for the District Attorney, I don't remember thinking that the sexism was unrealistic. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Francesco
Underboss
Joined: 08 Jun 2006
Posts: 1307
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 01, 2013 6:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
I'm invested in the idea that this is a universe where people act like people. For that, all of the characters have to act, believably, like people in their positions. |
I _wish_ people acted like people in their position, in real life. Turns out they don't, and so I don't expect a comic to portray them differently. Unless it's a comic aimed at kids with anthropomorphic puppies and kittens living in an idealized world. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
