| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| What did you think of DAREDEVIL #18? |
| 5 |
|
23% |
[ 3 ] |
| 4 |
|
30% |
[ 4 ] |
| 3 |
|
15% |
[ 2 ] |
| 2 |
|
15% |
[ 2 ] |
| 1 |
|
15% |
[ 2 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 13 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Dayle88
Playing to the Camera
Joined: 25 Mar 2015
Posts: 140
|
 Posted: Fri Sep 11, 2015 3:45 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Isn't it up to each individual to decide what their Daredevil is? I get the point you're making but I don't think anyone would suggest there is a base level of how Daredevil's book should be but every one has their own idea of who the character is to themselves.
I don't think Waid's Daredevil tone was happy go lucky I just thought at a certain point the book became lame. I enjoyed the first half of volume three.
Last edited by Dayle88 on Fri Sep 11, 2015 3:49 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Dimetre
Underboss
Joined: 16 Feb 2006
Posts: 1366
Location: Toronto
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 11, 2015 3:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Nightwing2001 wrote: | Where did I say that I don't understand how anyone could enjoy the Waid run? I actually loved this comic all the way up until about issue 30 of Vol. 3 and then after that I thought it all went downhill. The majority of people who post on here have been unhappy with Waid's run whether it was all of it or people like me who were unhappy with how it became later on. So I'm just saying what has already been said by others here. In no way did I think I was the official spokesman for all the "long time fans" like you've said. Lots of others on here have said the same things as me so I'm not sure why you decided to single me out. But then again you have done this to me in the past so I can't say I'm surprised. Anyways thanks for reminding me why I don't post here much anymore.
Oh ya BTW I didn't enjoy the Bendis run much either. |
I think I may have flown off the handle. After all, you didn't say ALL long-time fans were unhappy with Waid's run. I have big problems when people make blanket statements. I would like to extend my apologies, especially since you also don't like Bendis.
I'm not sure I agree with you that the majority of the people on this site are unhappy with Waid's work. It seems like we have a few people that are especially vocal. I can't be too angry with them, since I remember constantly complaining on this site when Bendis was writing, while feeling everyone else was gulping down his Kool-Aid. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Daredevil24
Humanity's Fathom
Joined: 06 Apr 2011
Posts: 367
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 11, 2015 5:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| james castle wrote: | | Daredevil24 wrote: | | When we call Waid's run happy-go-lucky we're speaking in terms of the overall tone of the book.You can almost pick out any comic on the shelf and find something depressing or somewhat serious at times.My problem with Waid is I didn't feel like I was reading about Matt Murdock,I felt like I was reading a parody of Mat Murdock and that is my issue with the whole series.I can tolerate bad Daredevil stories,but if I can't recognize the character I'm reading about any longer than I can't stick with it. |
I honestly don't get think complaint. Was Bendis writing "Matt Murdock" when he just had Matt sort of wander around the edge of the story brooding? Was Nocenti writing "Matt Murdock" when Matt suddenly started hanging out with street kids and opened a law clinic? How about Lee when "Matt Murdock" was getting by on pings? Matt has a very generally character but it's ridiculous to pretend that there is a clear and defining character or tone to him. It's even more ridiculous to suggest that you're in a position to parse through and identify that tone; to identify when the "true Matt Murdock" is being portrayed.
If you don't like Waid's take, then fine but don't pretend there's some platonic form of "Matt Murdock" that he failed to capture.
As for the "overall tone of the book" anyone who describes the run as "happy-go-lucky" hasn't read it. Period. |
I didn't say his run was completely happy-go-lucky,I said the overall tone probabaly is which a lot of other writers have mentioned as well.As to saying there's a definite version of Matt Murdock,true,everybody writes him differently,a charater is never written the same to the letter from a previous writer, but I still felt(in Daredevil's case) most were closely in tone with what I've read from previous writers.I didn't feel that with Waid.I'm speaking from my personal point of view so I don't get why you're getting so bent out of shape for.I'm not saying my opinion is a fact I was only saying why I didn't like Waid's run.Lol. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Francesco
Underboss
Joined: 08 Jun 2006
Posts: 1307
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 12, 2015 9:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I wonder if you guys would say the same things regarding the fact that there isn't a true version of the character if someone out of the blue decidd to write Batman as the campy batman of the forties. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Daredevil24
Humanity's Fathom
Joined: 06 Apr 2011
Posts: 367
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 12, 2015 12:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| That's what I always ask people.Most writers have their takes on characters but they MOSTLY still stay within the guidelines of a character's personality.I wasn't saying there's a definite version of Matt Murdock but there is enough of him out there with steady characterization for me to notice that Waid wrote him pretty differently than how he's been portrayed in the last decade or so.That's all I was trying to say.Didn't mean to jump down no one's throat.I'm trying to be civil here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Darkdevil
Humanity's Fathom
Joined: 04 Apr 2009
Posts: 331
Location: The Bright, Sunny South
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 13, 2015 12:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Francesco wrote: | | I wonder if you guys would say the same things regarding the fact that there isn't a true version of the character if someone out of the blue decidd to write Batman as the campy batman of the forties. |
DC has been publishing the digital comic, Batman '66, which features the camp Adam West version of Batman for the past two years. From all indications, it's as popular as the modern Batman book.
I don't think there is an absolute 'core' character definition of Matt Murdock. The fact that we can have a tragic Matt, a depressed Matt, a happy Matt, a swashbuckler Matt, a noir Matt, and every aspect in-between is a testament to the strength of his overall character, not a weakness. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Francesco
Underboss
Joined: 08 Jun 2006
Posts: 1307
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I knew someone would've said that.
no. too easy. we had this crappy version of DD in the ongoing series.
so let me specify, this time.
I wonder if you guys would say the same things regarding the fact that there isn't a true version of the character if someone out of the blue decided to write one of the ongoing series of Batman as the campy batman of the forties. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Darkdevil
Humanity's Fathom
Joined: 04 Apr 2009
Posts: 331
Location: The Bright, Sunny South
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 13, 2015 7:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Francesco wrote: | I knew someone would've said that.
no. too easy. we had this crappy version of DD in the ongoing series.
so let me specify, this time.
I wonder if you guys would say the same things regarding the fact that there isn't a true version of the character if someone out of the blue decided to write one of the ongoing series of Batman as the campy batman of the forties. |
As with any such change, I would judge it on the story's merits after reading it. If I didn't agree with that direction, then I would stop reading it and wait till the next creative team change.
For I understand that in this industry, what comes around, goes around. I don't sweat these types of changes, I have no problem dropping any title or character if I don't like the current creative direction for eventually, things will swing around again.
For, once again, I believe part of a character's true strength is the ability to adapt to various genres, scenarios, and types. It's resilience, it's creativity, not a limitation.
So tell me, why do you feel Marvel must be beholden to your singular opinion of what Matt's 'true' character is (if such a concept exists)? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Francesco
Underboss
Joined: 08 Jun 2006
Posts: 1307
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 14, 2015 11:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Oh! now he stresses the word "your opinion" and "true character" as if I'm stating who knows what and I have no right to say if I dislike something.
so you'd say that people would simply stop reading the batman _ongoing_ series if he was back to fighting the Joker while jumping around on pogo sticks.
that's laughable. some people would quietly stop reading, but I grant you that everybody on the internet would have something to say about that.
True, we should expect that you then come around and cry that that's just their opinion and that no one can say what's batman's true character.
Last edited by Francesco on Mon Sep 14, 2015 11:21 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ryu Murdock
Playing to the Camera
Joined: 05 Jan 2005
Posts: 175
Location: Cainta Rizal, Philippines
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 14, 2015 11:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Daredevil24 wrote: | | That's what I always ask people.Most writers have their takes on characters but they MOSTLY still stay within the guidelines of a character's personality.I wasn't saying there's a definite version of Matt Murdock but there is enough of him out there with steady characterization for me to notice that Waid wrote him pretty differently than how he's been portrayed in the last decade or so.That's all I was trying to say.Didn't mean to jump down no one's throat.I'm trying to be civil here. |
I do not think that Waid strayed at all, IMO. Bendis' Matt Murdock is crazier than that of Waid's if you ask me. I can site parallels here of Waid's writing and that of DD writers in the past, but I see no need because I know people here know what I am talking about. I ain't gonna ask you either why you think Waid wrote a diffierent Matt Murdock/Daredevil but let me just say I can understand why you feel or think that Waid's take is different.
_________________
"I'm only a DEVIL to those who are demonic." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Francesco
Underboss
Joined: 08 Jun 2006
Posts: 1307
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 14, 2015 11:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Most writers have their takes on characters but they MOSTLY still stay within the guidelines of a character's personality |
Alright, let's stress this before someone else comes out babbling incoherently about opinions and true characters. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DesignDevil
Playing to the Camera
Joined: 11 Sep 2009
Posts: 157
Location: Tennessee
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 14, 2015 12:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Bendis' Matt Murdock is crazier than that of Waid's if you ask me. |
I'd absolutely agree with this statement. Under Bendis Matt was acting really crazy, also recklessly and selfishly. Crazy, but not stupid. Waid's Matt since fully outing himself has been acting ridiculously stupid.
The "suit" that got everyone so riled up isn't even in the top five stupid things he's done. Writing an autobiography? The whole "justification" for Matt writing it was to pay for Foggy's treatments, yet at the same time he's spending frivolously while his law practice is suffering? Thinking that after outing himself that everyone and their grandmother wouldn't be coming after him and using his former secrets against him? Not going to any of the numerous allies he has for help like he actually did earlier in Waid's run?
My true dislike of Volume 4 has nothing to do with "tone", it has to do with Matt Murdock, who has always been a pretty sharp guy, being turned into an idiot and a punchline for Kirsten. I honestly wondered for a while if Waid was gonna have some reveal/twist of Kirsten as the actual villain who had been manipulating Matt's mind this whole time. It was the only explanation I could think of for the severe drop in IQ for Matt and Foggy. Nope, this is actually how Mark Waid and many fans think Matt Murdock should be portrayed.
I'll reiterate that I loved Volume 3 and have been a fan of Waid's for 2 decades, but these last two years feel he went totally off the rails… and then over a cliff. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
james castle
Devil in Cell-Block D
Joined: 30 Jul 2004
Posts: 1999
Location: Toronto, Ontario
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 14, 2015 12:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Francesco wrote: | Oh! now he stresses the word "your opinion" and "true character" as if I'm stating who knows what and I have no right to say if I dislike something.
so you'd say that people would simply stop reading the batman _ongoing_ series if he was back to fighting the Joker while jumping around on pogo sticks.
that's laughable. some people would quietly stop reading, but I grant you that everybody on the internet would have something to say about that.
True, we should expect that you then come around and cry that that's just their opinion and that no one can say what's batman's true character. |
Am I the only person who kinda wants to read a modern Batman book where he fights the Joke while jumping around on pogo sticks? That sounds pretty cool.
_________________
JC
So why can't you see the funny side?
Why aren't you laughing? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
james castle
Devil in Cell-Block D
Joined: 30 Jul 2004
Posts: 1999
Location: Toronto, Ontario
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 14, 2015 1:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Daredevil24 wrote: | | james castle wrote: | | Daredevil24 wrote: | | When we call Waid's run happy-go-lucky we're speaking in terms of the overall tone of the book.You can almost pick out any comic on the shelf and find something depressing or somewhat serious at times.My problem with Waid is I didn't feel like I was reading about Matt Murdock,I felt like I was reading a parody of Mat Murdock and that is my issue with the whole series.I can tolerate bad Daredevil stories,but if I can't recognize the character I'm reading about any longer than I can't stick with it. |
I honestly don't get think complaint. Was Bendis writing "Matt Murdock" when he just had Matt sort of wander around the edge of the story brooding? Was Nocenti writing "Matt Murdock" when Matt suddenly started hanging out with street kids and opened a law clinic? How about Lee when "Matt Murdock" was getting by on pings? Matt has a very generally character but it's ridiculous to pretend that there is a clear and defining character or tone to him. It's even more ridiculous to suggest that you're in a position to parse through and identify that tone; to identify when the "true Matt Murdock" is being portrayed.
If you don't like Waid's take, then fine but don't pretend there's some platonic form of "Matt Murdock" that he failed to capture.
As for the "overall tone of the book" anyone who describes the run as "happy-go-lucky" hasn't read it. Period. |
I didn't say his run was completely happy-go-lucky,I said the overall tone probabaly is which a lot of other writers have mentioned as well.As to saying there's a definite version of Matt Murdock,true,everybody writes him differently,a charater is never written the same to the letter from a previous writer, but I still felt(in Daredevil's case) most were closely in tone with what I've read from previous writers.I didn't feel that with Waid.I'm speaking from my personal point of view so I don't get why you're getting so bent out of shape for.I'm not saying my opinion is a fact I was only saying why I didn't like Waid's run.Lol. |
Because even though you've retreated to "that's just my opinion" you were originally opining that Waid's run was bad because he didn't portray DD correctly. If you just didn't like it because it didn't tickle your fancy then fine. But just because something doesn't tickle your fancy doesn't mean it's bad. Guardian Devil was bad because it objectively made no sense. Daredevil: Father was bad because of the word "diddle". But if you just don't like something you just don't like something. It happens.
_________________
JC
So why can't you see the funny side?
Why aren't you laughing? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Daredevil24
Humanity's Fathom
Joined: 06 Apr 2011
Posts: 367
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 14, 2015 4:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| RGdesigner wrote: | | Quote: | | Bendis' Matt Murdock is crazier than that of Waid's if you ask me. |
I'd absolutely agree with this statement. Under Bendis Matt was acting really crazy, also recklessly and selfishly. Crazy, but not stupid. Waid's Matt since fully outing himself has been acting ridiculously stupid.
The "suit" that got everyone so riled up isn't even in the top five stupid things he's done. Writing an autobiography? The whole "justification" for Matt writing it was to pay for Foggy's treatments, yet at the same time he's spending frivolously while his law practice is suffering? Thinking that after outing himself that everyone and their grandmother wouldn't be coming after him and using his former secrets against him? Not going to any of the numerous allies he has for help like he actually did earlier in Waid's run?
My true dislike of Volume 4 has nothing to do with "tone", it has to do with Matt Murdock, who has always been a pretty sharp guy, being turned into an idiot and a punchline for Kirsten. I honestly wondered for a while if Waid was gonna have some reveal/twist of Kirsten as the actual villain who had been manipulating Matt's mind this whole time. It was the only explanation I could think of for the severe drop in IQ for Matt and Foggy. Nope, this is actually how Mark Waid and many fans think Matt Murdock should be portrayed.
I'll reiterate that I loved Volume 3 and have been a fan of Waid's for 2 decades, but these last two years feel he went totally off the rails… and then over a cliff. |
I agree with this.I'm not gonna further explain myself on this topic any longer.I believe everybody is entitled to their opinion and no one's gonna bend theirs anyway lol.I'm just glad the nightmare of Waid is finally over.Ready for Soule & Garney!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
