|
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The Message Board is currently in read-only mode, as the software is now out of date.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 |
Forrest
Lowlife
Joined: 07 Dec 2004
Posts: 1439
|
 Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 11:03 am Post subject: |
 |
|
As previously stated, nothing in DD:Father is a retcon, as long as you accept Miller's MWOF. ...If anyone complaining about the ending of DD Father is a big fan of Miller's DD, then I just don't understand the complaints about a retcon which never happened in Father, when MWOF was such a crazy retcon that it even slightly appeared to retcon Miller's own Elektra Saga. (Matt's meeting Elektra, Elektra's wild anger and such now appears to always have been present, etc.)
Recently, DD has been great in that there are so many DD stories out there with such different styles, etc. Compare Bendis's DD with Father, DD/Punisher, etc. So, each his own.
Having said that, this was an outstanding story!!! It was crafted expertly. The art was adventurous both in the breakdowns and finished product. Quite simply, this is just behind Yellow for my favorite DD mini ever.
_________________
"Flash is back. Worlds will die again!" |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
james castle
Devil in Cell-Block D
Joined: 30 Jul 2004
Posts: 1999
Location: Toronto, Ontario
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 12:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Like it's so far fetch'd that the guy that Matt saved wasn't flawed in anyway. |
Well, I'd say being a child molester is a flaw. Wouldn't you?
| Quote: |
This isn't anything near the Typhoid/Hooker connection. This guy didn't turn into one of the world's deadliest supervillains. |
In fairness, neither did Typhoid.
| Quote: |
He was a regular nobody which is why the story was good. The origin wasn't retconned it was branched off and expanded on. There's a difference.
|
I agree, there was no retcon (and who cares if there was? retcons rock). The problem I have is that now it sort of changes (adds onto) the origin in a subtle and kinda unnecessary way. For me all the Marvel origins are kinda campy, innocent stories that are the stuff of legends. That being so, I figure they should be left alone as much as possible. Like, okay, remember when DD (and most marvel comics) used to have that little intro thing on the first page. It would be like "As a young man, Matt Murdock saved an old man from near death and was blinded in the process. However, his remaining five senses were heightened and he developed a radar sense. Now he is DAREDEVIL". I always liked that thing. If I remember correctly they had it even up through Nocenti and Chichester. Even though the stories were way out there, there was still a nod to DD's Silver Age roots.
Well now that thing has to read "As a young man, Matt Murdock saved an old child molester from near death and was blinded in the process. However, his remaining five senses were heightened and he developed a radar sense. Now he is DAREDEVIL."
It just doesn't sit right with me.
| Quote: |
Child Molesting in the MU... hmmm
Ultimate Spider-Man, no.
Ultimate X-Men, no.
Ultimates, no.
Ultimate Fantastic Four, no.
|
You realize, don't you, that these four titles aren't actually in the MU. They beef up your list though, so good work.
| Quote: |
Captain America, no.
X-Factor, no.
Runaways, no.
Cable/Deadpool, no.
Hulk, no.
New Avengers, no...
|
What a strange and random list.
| Quote: |
I just can't seem to find a recent storyline in any of my marvel books about child molestation.
Oh, the Black Cat/Spider-Man Mini and Daredevil: Father. Child molestation is rampant. Maybe I just need to read more of the Marvel Universe. |
I fully admit that the only two books I was thinking of were Black Cat/Spider-Man and Father. Maybe 3000% was a bit (a couple 1000) of an overstatement. Still, two high profile mini's both ending with child molesters all over the place is odd. Indeed, we're talking about two super delayed mini's that relied on child molesting for the final act's punch. It's also odd that it's Smith and Joey Q. The problem I have is that it seems like these two both just tacked on child molesting in an effort to make the work "serious".
| Quote: |
Scratchin' the bottom and most likely just repeating other people's complaints whenever the topic "Child molestation" comes up. This was a good f'n book. |
First, to whom or what does the first sentence in the above para refer to? Whose complaints? What? Second, how is the second sentence relate to the first sentence? And yeah, maybe it's a good f'n (sigh) book. I'm just a little suspicious of the whole origin/child molesting business.
_________________
JC
So why can't you see the funny side?
Why aren't you laughing? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Forrest
Lowlife
Joined: 07 Dec 2004
Posts: 1439
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 1:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| james castle wrote: | Well now that thing has to read "As a young man, Matt Murdock saved an old child molester from near death and was blinded in the process. However, his remaining five senses were heightened and he developed a radar sense. Now he is DAREDEVIL."
It just doesn't sit right with me. |
DD: Father is a furthering of Daredevil's origin, rather than just a twist on it. A huge part of DD's origin is his upbringing by his father who saved him the criminal lives often led in Hell's Kitchen, of which Jack himself fell into. Frank Miller made a good point when he asserted that it is amazing that Matt did not end up a criminal. Jack Murdock is a key reason for this and the origin of DD. (Keep in mind, Matt did not become DD until well after he received his abilities. He became DD to pursue his father's killers in the name of justice and defense for those who stand up for justice, like Jack.)
Jack Murdock was a prize fighter with a heart for justice and compassion, even if he slipped at times, in effort to give Matt a better life. Nero's father had similar motivation in the end. Maggie's father never came through for her and quite the opposite, abused her. This story is a further elaboration on the impact of Jack Murdock, who gave everything, including his life, for Matt. In return, Matt fights for the same ideals in defense of everyone.
| james castle wrote: | | I'm just a little suspicious of the whole origin/child molesting business. |
Matt saved a man from getting hit by a truck. This was a man he never met before, just a common man on the streets. In reality a number of child molesters walk the streets of NYC everyday. So, is it really so unrealistic that Matt saved a child molester without knowing it? Heck, he intentionally saved the likes of Bullseye, knowing full well what Bullseye is capable of.
Didn't we ever think that it was odd that the man he saved never showed up? Heck, he was right there when Matt got hit. Why didn't he visit Matt in the hospital and say "thank you?" Most people probably would do this or a similar jesture. It is logical that the man Matt saved had something to hide or was simply a selfish/bad person. I see no stretch or sensational shock marketing in the reveal of DD:Father 6.
I loved this story!
I'm grabbing the HC of this one when it comes out! 
_________________
"Flash is back. Worlds will die again!" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
james castle
Devil in Cell-Block D
Joined: 30 Jul 2004
Posts: 1999
Location: Toronto, Ontario
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 2:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Forrest wrote: |
DD: Father is a furthering of Daredevil's origin, rather than just a twist on it. A huge part of DD's origin is his upbringing by his father who saved him the criminal lives often led in Hell's Kitchen, of which Jack himself fell into. Frank Miller made a good point when he asserted that it is amazing that Matt did not end up a criminal. Jack Murdock is a key reason for this and the origin of DD. (Keep in mind, Matt did not become DD until well after he received his abilities. He became DD to pursue his father's killers in the name of justice and defense for those who stand up for justice, like Jack.)
|
I have no problem with (and, in fact, agree with) all of this.
| Quote: |
Jack Murdock was a prize fighter with a heart for justice and compassion, even if he slipped at times, in effort to give Matt a better life. Nero's father had similar motivation in the end. Maggie's father never came through for her and quite the opposite, abused her. This story is a further elaboration on the impact of Jack Murdock, who gave everything, including his life, for Matt. In return, Matt fights for the same ideals in defense of everyone.
|
I agree with this sort of story theme thing too. I mean, it's a good point and I can see how showing the opposite (bad father) is a good way to highlight what you want to highlight (good father). But, again, why did the molester have to be the guy Matt saved? That's the bit that makes me roll my eyes.
| Quote: |
Matt saved a man from getting hit by a truck. This was a man he never met before, just a common man on the streets. In reality a number of child molesters walk the streets of NYC everyday. So, is it really so unrealistic that Matt saved a child molester without knowing it? Heck, he intentionally saved the likes of Bullseye, knowing full well what Bullseye is capable of.
|
My point isn't that it's "unrealistic" or in any way unbelievable. I mean, sure, of course the guy Matt saved could have been a child molester or a theif or a younger Stiltman (man, what an awesome idea that is!). My point is that it's just unnecessary and contrived. Plus, it needlessly grits up the silver age origin.
| Quote: |
Didn't we ever think that it was odd that the man he saved never showed up? Heck, he was right there when Matt got hit. Why didn't he visit Matt in the hospital and say "thank you?" Most people probably would do this or a similar jesture. It is logical that the man Matt saved had something to hide or was simply a selfish/bad person. I see no stretch or sensational shock marketing in the reveal of DD:Father 6.
|
Oh please. Do you honestly think even one person ever, ever thought "oh, gee, I wonder where the guy Matt saved went". No, of course not. Making him a bad guy/child molester isn't a matter of "logic" it's a matter of just monkeying around with the origin to give Father importance.
You know, and just like that Erik Larson comes to my aid. He wrote a really good article over at comicbookresources.com this week. The link is:
http://www.comicbookresources.com/columns/?column=20
Basically he talks about Marvel's obsession with shoehorning people into the origin stories of Marvel characters in an effort ot make current stories more relevant. He focuses mainly on Spiderman (since he's writing in reaction to the SM3 trailer) and says this:
| Quote: |
Taken as a whole, Spider-Man has the most ridiculous life in all of comics.
Peter Parker has not known a single normal person. Everybody he's come into contact with is related to or has been touched by or held hostage by some sinister supervillain. Flash Thompson dated the Black Cat and was taken hostage by Dr. Doom. Liz Allen was related to the Molten Man. Aunt May dated, and nearly married, Dr. Octopus. Harry Osborn was Peter's roommate and his dad was the Green Goblin and later he was the Green Goblin. The Green Goblin killed Gwen (and had a lovechild with him according to recent comics). J. Jonah Jameson's son was transformed into a big brutal behemoth and later a Man-Wolf. Glory Grant dated a bad guy - Betty Brant's brother was murdered by a bad guy - the list goes on and on and every time a connection is made, the goal is the same: to make you care. Because nobody cares about the unknown victims that Spider-Man rescues. So, Spider-Man's entire supporting cast stands in for whatever unknown victims would make more logical sense to have being held hostage or worse.
|
and concludes:
| Quote: | | And we've ended up with characters that have the most contrived, ridiculous, tenuous motivation and the coincidences and shocking revelations are ludicrous and there are endless stories where villains aren't out to perpetrate a crime particularly - they just want to kick the heroes' asses. If the hero didn't exist, the problems would all go away (and property insurance would go way down). |
Daredevil's history is (thankfully) less ridiculous than Spiderman's. However, if people keep this sort of stuff up (not only was the faceless guy Matt saved a child molester...his daughter killed people (?) (I haven't read Father but that's what I gather happens)) then DD is well on his way.
_________________
JC
So why can't you see the funny side?
Why aren't you laughing? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Darediva
Wake Up
Joined: 29 Jul 2004
Posts: 1208
Location: Hell's Kitchen South, Arkansas, USA
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2006 4:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Finally read the last issue today, and I must say I am underwhelmed at most. I didn't even carry it out of the store today, leaving it to molder in my file until I get more resources to pick up the really good things that are still sitting there, too.
Too tired to go into details tonight, but it just didn't grab me at all. Save your money, JC. Just not that great a read.
_________________
Alice
Those who throw dirt merely lose ground. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dave Wallace
Paradiso
Joined: 29 Jul 2004
Posts: 1074
Location: Birmingham, UK
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2006 5:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| james castle wrote: | You know, and just like that Erik Larson comes to my aid. He wrote a really good article over at comicbookresources.com this week. The link is:
http://www.comicbookresources.com/columns/?column=20
Basically he talks about Marvel's obsession with shoehorning people into the origin stories of Marvel characters in an effort ot make current stories more relevant. He focuses mainly on Spiderman (since he's writing in reaction to the SM3 trailer) and says this:
| Quote: |
Taken as a whole, Spider-Man has the most ridiculous life in all of comics.
Peter Parker has not known a single normal person. Everybody he's come into contact with is related to or has been touched by or held hostage by some sinister supervillain. Flash Thompson dated the Black Cat and was taken hostage by Dr. Doom. Liz Allen was related to the Molten Man. Aunt May dated, and nearly married, Dr. Octopus. Harry Osborn was Peter's roommate and his dad was the Green Goblin and later he was the Green Goblin. The Green Goblin killed Gwen (and had a lovechild with him according to recent comics). J. Jonah Jameson's son was transformed into a big brutal behemoth and later a Man-Wolf. Glory Grant dated a bad guy - Betty Brant's brother was murdered by a bad guy - the list goes on and on and every time a connection is made, the goal is the same: to make you care. Because nobody cares about the unknown victims that Spider-Man rescues. So, Spider-Man's entire supporting cast stands in for whatever unknown victims would make more logical sense to have being held hostage or worse.
|
and concludes:
| Quote: | | And we've ended up with characters that have the most contrived, ridiculous, tenuous motivation and the coincidences and shocking revelations are ludicrous and there are endless stories where villains aren't out to perpetrate a crime particularly - they just want to kick the heroes' asses. If the hero didn't exist, the problems would all go away (and property insurance would go way down). |
Daredevil's history is (thankfully) less ridiculous than Spiderman's. However, if people keep this sort of stuff up (not only was the faceless guy Matt saved a child molester...his daughter killed people (?) (I haven't read Father but that's what I gather happens)) then DD is well on his way. |
Articles like this make me wonder why people go to superhero comics and expect realism and plausibility at every turn. Just as Spider-Man's origin is contrived, so are his adventures: they're created as good stories, not as absolutely true-to-life tales of a teenager living in Queens. If a boy was bitten by a radioactive Spider, he would get leukemia and die (or at least get very ill). Ditto Matt Murdock's incident with the radioactive waste. If we accept these out-there origin stories, I don't see why it's so hard to accept that the civilian cast of the book will become involved in the super-hero aspect of the character's life in one way or another too.
Yes, every character and their dog has become a Spidey villain or been affected by his superhero antics at some point in the past. Why? Because it makes for a better story for the hero to have some higher level of involvement with the villain than just some punch-up. Why do you think each superhero's rogues' gallery tends to stick to their own hero? Because there's not as much emotional resonance in a Spidey vs. Red Skull fight as there is when he's fighting the Green Goblin, or Venom, or Doc Ock.
I think we have to embrace the contrived elements of super-hero stories if we're to truly love them. Daredevil fans have been spoiled to an extent by the last few years of the book, as Bendis and Brubaker have mixed a very grounded, real-world texture with the superhero elements of the character, and it's easy to get used to that. But most superhero comics don't aim to be as true-to-life as DD often is - they simply don't need to be that realistic in order to tell enjoyable stories - and that variety is what keeps so many different books going.
In my opinion, Marvel Comics execute the whole mix of fantastical elements with world-outside-your-window detail better than anyone else, but we have to understand what has made these stories work so well for 40+ years - and it isn't always ultra-realism. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
james castle
Devil in Cell-Block D
Joined: 30 Jul 2004
Posts: 1999
Location: Toronto, Ontario
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2006 10:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Dave Wallace wrote: | | Articles like this make me wonder why people go to superhero comics and expect realism and plausibility at every turn. Just as Spider-Man's origin is contrived, so are his adventures: they're created as good stories, not as absolutely true-to-life tales of a teenager living in Queens. If a boy was bitten by a radioactive Spider, he would get leukemia and die (or at least get very ill). Ditto Matt Murdock's incident with the radioactive waste. If we accept these out-there origin stories, I don't see why it's so hard to accept that the civilian cast of the book will become involved in the super-hero aspect of the character's life in one way or another too. |
Did you even read the article? First off, no one's saying the problem lies with things being unrealistic or implausible. As you point out, that's what comics are all about. The problem is with things being contrived. Spider-man's origin is not contrived. It's fantastical but it's not contrived. My understand is that something because contrived at the point where the audience goes "comon" and the suspension of disbelief that the audience was clinging to goes tumbling out the window. It's like when you find out that it was Typhoid who fell out the window. You don't go "that's unrealistic!", you go "comon" and roll your eyes.
| Dave Wallace wrote: |
Yes, every character and their dog has become a Spidey villain or been affected by his superhero antics at some point in the past. Why? Because it makes for a better story for the hero to have some higher level of involvement with the villain than just some punch-up. Why do you think each superhero's rogues' gallery tends to stick to their own hero? Because there's not as much emotional resonance in a Spidey vs. Red Skull fight as there is when he's fighting the Green Goblin, or Venom, or Doc Ock. |
This is why I wonder if you read the article. The above para is nothing more than a paraphrasing of Larson's point in the first place. As he points out, making things personal makes things matter. His finer point, however, is that you can go too far. When the cat in the background of the DD origin becomes a major player or when baby Karen becomes Stick (sigh) it's just too far.
| Dave Wallace wrote: |
I think we have to embrace the contrived elements of super-hero stories if we're to truly love them. Daredevil fans have been spoiled to an extent by the last few years of the book, as Bendis and Brubaker have mixed a very grounded, real-world texture with the superhero elements of the character, and it's easy to get used to that. But most superhero comics don't aim to be as true-to-life as DD often is - they simply don't need to be that realistic in order to tell enjoyable stories - and that variety is what keeps so many different books going.
|
There's a difference between contrived and fantastic. Fantastic is good. Contrived is bad. Stories become contrived for one reason: lazy writing. You don't really want us to embrace lazy writing.
| Dave Wallace wrote: |
In my opinion, Marvel Comics execute the whole mix of fantastical elements with world-outside-your-window detail better than anyone else, but we have to understand what has made these stories work so well for 40+ years - and it isn't always ultra-realism. |
I assume you're kidding. Unless you simply haven't heard of Verigo or a handful of kick ass Image titles that are running right now. Marvel's been doing it for years, true but right now they're the best at nothing.
_________________
JC
So why can't you see the funny side?
Why aren't you laughing? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dave Wallace
Paradiso
Joined: 29 Jul 2004
Posts: 1074
Location: Birmingham, UK
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2006 1:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yes, I read the article when it was first posted at CBR.
I think the difference between your saying "Comon" and my saying that something is unrealistic or implausible is simply a matter of the degree to which we'll put up with story contrivances. I don't think we fundamentally disagree on the subject, actually, I just think that I'm perhaps a little more willing to suspend my disbelief in some cases - usually if the contrivances are there to support a strong story.
I've been as critical as anyone when it comes to comics retcons that change or connect up past events unneccessarily (Sins Past or the disappointing Spider-Man/Black Cat mini, for example), but I can also see why creators have sometimes decided to use already-existing elements to strengthen their story, rather than coming up with something new or unconnected that would be less resonant. In DD: Father #6, I thought it worked. Clearly, you didn't. I'll happily agree to disagree.
I understand where you're coming from though - it reminds me of the Star Wars prequels, where a lot of stuff from the original trilogy was shown to be a lot more connected and tied up than you thought, with the effect that the "universe" of the stories actually felt a lot smaller and less imaginative. I never read the infamous Typhoid Mary story, but it sounds like another example of an unnecessary connection that detracted from the original stories rather than building on them. However, all of these judgements are a matter of opinion, and one man's misguided retcon might be another man's insightful and innovative character development.
Oh, and as for the Marvel thing - I was talking about Marvel Comics' entire 40-year+ output, not just the state of things today (much of which I'm enjoying too, but anyway...). I haven't come on here to start a Marvel vs. DC argument, and I think it would be pointless. Many of my favourite books aren't published by Marvel, but quite a few of them are, and I grew up reading about Marvel characters rather than DC books. For these reasons, I'm generally biased towards their output. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
james castle
Devil in Cell-Block D
Joined: 30 Jul 2004
Posts: 1999
Location: Toronto, Ontario
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2006 1:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Dave Wallace wrote: |
I understand where you're coming from though - it reminds me of the Star Wars prequels, where a lot of stuff from the original trilogy was shown to be a lot more connected and tied up than you thought, with the effect that the "universe" of the stories actually felt a lot smaller and less imaginative. I never read the infamous Typhoid Mary story, but it sounds like another example of an unnecessary connection that detracted from the original stories rather than building on them. However, all of these judgements are a matter of opinion, and one man's misguided retcon might be another man's insightful and innovative character development. |
That's exactly what I'm talking about. For days and days (weeks) after watching Episode I, I was like "why in god's name did Darth Vadar build C3-PO...why?". It was just so unnecessary. And you're right, it did take away from the "bigness" (is that a word?) or the universe. That's exactly the same feeling I have about this except that it's sort of the silver age, myth quality of the origin that I feel is losing out. In the end though, I think you're also dead on with the agree to disagree thing. Perhaps my "oh, for f's sake" scale is simply a little more sensative than yours.
| Quote: |
Oh, and as for the Marvel thing - I was talking about Marvel Comics' entire output, not just the state of things today (much of which I'm enjoying too, but anyway...). I haven't come on here to start a Marvel vs. DC argument, and I think it would be pointless. Many of my favourite books aren't published by Marvel, but quite a few of them are, and I grew up reading about Marvel characters rather than DC books. For these reasons, I'm generally biased towards their output. |
I may agree with you wrt Marvel as a whole. Growing up I only bought Marvel comics (DD and X-Books mainly) so I have a certain love for them. Plus, there's no denying that Marvel has published some amazing comics (and, yes, continue to). Maybe I should start a new topic for this but as far as I'm concerned I think Marvel's on a really weird course right now. Like no matter what they did in the past, what they're doing now (and have been doing for the last couple years) is a cause for concern. Surely you'd agree that lately Marvel simply isn't the innovator anymore. They've taken to pulling transparent marketing ploy after transparent marketing ploy while other companys are the ones who are offering new ideas. "House of Ideas" is getting more and more ironic by the day.
_________________
JC
So why can't you see the funny side?
Why aren't you laughing? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dave Wallace
Paradiso
Joined: 29 Jul 2004
Posts: 1074
Location: Birmingham, UK
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2006 1:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| james castle wrote: | | Maybe I should start a new topic for this... |
Nah, let's carry on here!
| james castle wrote: | | ...but as far as I'm concerned I think Marvel's on a really weird course right now. Like no matter what they did in the past, what they're doing now (and have been doing for the last couple years) is a cause for concern. Surely you'd agree that lately Marvel simply isn't the innovator anymore. They've taken to pulling transparent marketing ploy after transparent marketing ploy while other companys are the ones who are offering new ideas. "House of Ideas" is getting more and more ironic by the day. |
I think the difference between Marvel and DC's approaches is very interesting. A couple of years ago, DC produced Identity Crisis, which I really enjoyed as a good mystery yarn which was accessible and entertaining even from someone like me who isn't 'up' on the DC Universe. I thought that was a great sign of things to come, and a possible gateway for me to get more into DC titles. Since then, though, I feel that a lot of their output has been very geared towards longtime fans (Countdown, Infinite Crisis and the whole One Year Later/52 thing) and as a result I find it hard to get into. I still pick up a couple of DC titles, but I feel as though the general overall approach of the DCU is that they're building on their Crises in a way which is really thorough and resonant if you're a longtime DC fan, but quite impenetrable and off-putting if you're not.
Marvel, however, has gone completely the other way. I'm not a big continuity freak, but I know a lot of fans have been turned off by the laissez faire approach to their characters and their Universe's shared history that Marvel seems to have employed in an apparent effort to accomodate their higher-profile creators. You only have to look at the criticisms of mis-characterisation in flagship books like Civil War to see how happy they are to mix things up on a whim. However, I do think that they're going to great pains to make their books accessible (recap pages are a good example, as well as the self-contained nature of many of their books' story arcs) and this is reflected in their sales figures. I also think that the Ultimate Universe has been a great idea (even if the bloom is coming off the rose a little lately... but still) and I only wish DC's own All-Star line was a little more timely.
I think that they've both been very opportunistic with their crossovers and marketing, but catering for quite different audiences. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ddelafuente
Flying Blind
Joined: 23 Nov 2006
Posts: 3
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 24, 2006 2:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi, new here on the boards.
got DD: Father # 6 last week. Still need to reread the whole thing this weekend but I found the conclusion satisfying. The flashback scenes from the first issue tied well with the events.
I wish Joe Q did more on his Origin.
The Santerians, I don't really like even as a red herring device it doesn't have to be a whole new team which I don't know what part they'll play in DD's stories.
The (minor) moments I least liked about the series were:
- Foggy flirting(?) a bit with Maggie on #5 does he really like cheating and adultery?
- Daredevil (yellow) discovering NeRo's dad with NeRO as a child (I know age doesn't matter but that would make a huge age difference with DD and NeRO)
- Jack Murdock portrayed as beating Matt to study. I know its referenced from Miller's The Man Without Fear but in that story Jack only hit his son only once and he was under the influence of alcohol and Matt forgave his father afterwards. If I was a new reader and read DD:Father I'd think Jack Murdock repeatedly beats his child because it lacks what happened in Miller's story.
Tnx |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Francesco
Underboss
Joined: 08 Jun 2006
Posts: 1307
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 26, 2006 10:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Like, okay, remember when DD (and most marvel comics) used to have that little intro thing on the first page. It would be like "As a young man, Matt Murdock saved an old man from near death and was blinded in the process. However, his remaining five senses were heightened and he developed a radar sense. Now he is DAREDEVIL". |
His remaining four senses.
| Quote: | Well now that thing has to read "As a young man, Matt Murdock saved an old child molester from near death and was blinded in the process. However, his remaining five senses were heightened and he developed a radar sense. Now he is DAREDEVIL."
It just doesn't sit right with me. |
You're kidding, right? Apart from the fact that the coolness of those lines would amplify by 120%, the media would start a pandemonium and the sales would sky rocket. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
james castle
Devil in Cell-Block D
Joined: 30 Jul 2004
Posts: 1999
Location: Toronto, Ontario
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 26, 2006 1:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Francesco wrote: | | Quote: | | Like, okay, remember when DD (and most marvel comics) used to have that little intro thing on the first page. It would be like "As a young man, Matt Murdock saved an old man from near death and was blinded in the process. However, his remaining five senses were heightened and he developed a radar sense. Now he is DAREDEVIL". |
His remaining four senses.
| Quote: | Well now that thing has to read "As a young man, Matt Murdock saved an old child molester from near death and was blinded in the process. However, his remaining five senses were heightened and he developed a radar sense. Now he is DAREDEVIL."
It just doesn't sit right with me. |
You're kidding, right? Apart from the fact that the coolness of those lines would amplify by 120%, the media would start a pandemonium and the sales would sky rocket. |
Yes. The inclusion of a child molester does up the "coolness" doesn't it? Does it? Where am I?
_________________
JC
So why can't you see the funny side?
Why aren't you laughing? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rgj
Hardcore
Joined: 29 Jul 2004
Posts: 1580
Location: The Rio Grande Valley of Texas
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 26, 2006 10:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I just hope the spider that bit Peter Parker wasn't a child molester too.
Anyway, I agree with jc. There really wasn't any need to give this, once, poor old blind man some kind of ominous backstory. This is Quesada trying to make something cool with Matt's past and, sorry to say, Miller he's not. It is, transparently, obvious that Quesada, like he did with Kevin Smith, wants to put some sort of "stamp" on the DD mythos, a la Frank Miller. The fact is that Matt was really the only hero I can think of that gained his powers (curse) with an act of heroism. And, now, this act is tied to child molestation. Sure, I understand what some of you are saying, the blind guy could be anybody. A good man or bad. But, I just don't see why Quesda felt he HAD TO BE a bad guy. So, he could say he wrote some "clever" story? That's probably the only reason he did it.
Basically, Queada has postulated that
1) Matt is a "playboy"
2) Matt was a battered child
Are we all reading the same comic??
rgj |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
train
Guardian Devil
Joined: 29 Jul 2004
Posts: 659
Location: Hell's Pantry
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 26, 2006 11:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| rgj wrote: | ...I just don't see why Quesda felt he HAD TO BE a bad guy....
rgj |
just thinking as i'm typing, so if i "talk" in circles, forgive me.
for the most part, i'm pretty indifferent about the whole conclusion of the story. but rgj makes a nice point. i think that the story would have been a little more satisfying (perhaps a little pollyanne-ish) if the man the matt saved went on to do something to benefit mankind...longer lasting lightbulb, better mousetrap...you get the idea. on the other hand, an act of heroism doesn't discern between deserving people and undeserving people. |
|
| 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
