|
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The Message Board is currently in read-only mode, as the software is now out of date.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 |
The Overlord
Paradiso
Joined: 22 Aug 2004
Posts: 1095
|
 Posted: Tue Jul 12, 2016 4:21 pm Post subject: Re: Some frank talk about the current Daredevil run |
 |
|
| jriddle wrote: |
This has been a vast improvement over Waid. That doesn't make it particularly good--being a vast improvement over Waid isn't much of a trick. |
You asked for something different from Waid, you got something different Waid, if Soule's writing wasn't what you wanted, then what do you want? If you ask for something different and don't explain what you want that is done differently, then you set yourself up for disappointment.
| jriddle wrote: |
No, it really doesn't. |
Well that is close as you are going to get, because New 52/One More Day style reboots are more trouble then they are worth.
Seriously though, what has Soule continued from Waid's run, this is at least soft reboot, complaining that it wasn't a hard reboot seems like trying to have your cake and eat it too.
| jriddle wrote: |
This isn't a "continuity reboot." The problems with it emerge from trying to leave Waid in continuity. The smart option in this case would have been to simply erase the entire Waid disaster from DD's history and blame it on "Secret Wars." Waid had no interest in writing Daredevil, so he'd completely destroyed the book in order to turn it into something he did want to write. The problem this presented any successor is that, while scores of talented writers would love to tackle DD, no other writer in the world gives a good goddamn about continuing Grinning Happy Devil the San Francisco Celebrity & His Knee-Slapping Early Bronze Age Hijinks. The book hadn't been remotely identifiable as Daredevil for years. So if Daredevil is continued, this has to be fixed, no matter who takes up the creative reigns.
From that point, it's just a matter of how, and the world-shaping of Secret Wars offered the best out. Soule opted for a different path. As I said before, that path may have been forced upon him by editorial, so it may not even be right to blame him for it, but it presents a raft of intractable problems that expand outward to the entire Marvel Universe in a devastating way--it's using a hydrogen bomb to kill a weasel when a small-caliber rifle was readily available. At the same time, as already noted, no explanation Soule is going to offer--and no explanation anyone else could either--is going to be dramatically satisfying or anything less than an inane insult. It's a reset button, no matter how you cut it. What he's done was a VERY bad idea. |
Yeah and how did those continuity reboots works for DC with New 52 and with Spider-Man with One More Day? Spoiler alert they didn't work very well.
Here is the problem, you demanded a continuity reboot with DD because you hated Waid's run and when anyone asked you for details on how that work well, you shrugged your shoulders. I'm not sympathizing with your grievances when you don't realize you were calling for something that would have huge fallout and no plan to deal with that.
If you think reboots magically solve every problem, look at DC characters like Donna Troy and Hawkman, they have had their back stories changed so often they make no sense anymore, I don't want DD to end up like that.
| jriddle wrote: |
...and clearly, that's exactly what I'm insisting Marvel do in this case. Tell me again why we have these discussion boards? |
Except when you demand runs you don't like be exiled from continuity or demand a writer get fired after one arc, you are demanding your opinion be worth more then others here.
Like I said, some people liked the Waid run and some people didn't like the Bendis run, you can't please everyone and you can't seriously demand reboots or writers getting fired whenever you just don't happen to a particular run.
If you want to be more productive, when don't you be constructive in your criticism and tell people what you want to see in a DD title, instead of just telling people what you don't like.
| james castle wrote: |
See, I think the core problem here is that you're applying a standard of continuity or sense that just doesn't apply to comics. Are you honestly suggesting that continuity of Marvel comics have to make sense for the entire run of the comic/character? That's impossible. No character and no comic lives up to that standard. How could it? The Marvel Universe is full, absolutely full, of "intractable problems".
Demanding that continuity be respected or made sense of or whatever is just a crutch people use when they just want to complain. |
Well anyone who thinks DD has bad continuity has not read many comics, DD's continuity is super easy to understand compared to many DC and Marvel characters I can name.
If you want comics with better continuity, you will have to start reading Vertigo or indie books or Manga. Though those can have their problems depending on the individual title, even though Spawn is technically an indie book, it has really bad continuity and even though I'm not a huge Manga fan, I have heard of some Mangas starting out strong and become ridiculous over time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
james castle
Devil in Cell-Block D
Joined: 30 Jul 2004
Posts: 1999
Location: Toronto, Ontario
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 12, 2016 5:04 pm Post subject: Re: Some frank talk about the current Daredevil run |
|
|
| The Overlord wrote: |
Well anyone who thinks DD has bad continuity has not read many comics, DD's continuity is super easy to understand compared to many DC and Marvel characters I can name.
If you want comics with better continuity, you will have to start reading Vertigo or indie books or Manga. Though those can have their problems depending on the individual title, even though Spawn is technically an indie book, it has really bad continuity and even though I'm not a huge Manga fan, I have heard of some Mangas starting out strong and become ridiculous over time. |
Daredevil has relatively good continuity but any book that started in the 60s just isn't going to make sense. Too much time has passed and too many stories have been told. The result is contradictions, etc.. Which is fine by me. I'm fine with comics, especially Marvel and DC comics, being loose frameworks that different stories can be hung on.
_________________
JC
So why can't you see the funny side?
Why aren't you laughing? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jriddle
Playing to the Camera
Joined: 19 May 2011
Posts: 129
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 12, 2016 11:10 pm Post subject: Re: Some frank talk about the current Daredevil run |
|
|
| james castle wrote: | | jriddle wrote: |
From that point, it's just a matter of how, and the world-shaping of Secret Wars offered the best out. Soule opted for a different path. As I said before, that path may have been forced upon him by editorial, so it may not even be right to blame him for it, but it presents a raft of intractable problems that expand outward to the entire Marvel Universe in a devastating way--it's using a hydrogen bomb to kill a weasel when a small-caliber rifle was readily available. At the same time, as already noted, no explanation Soule is going to offer--and no explanation anyone else could either--is going to be dramatically satisfying or anything less than an inane insult. It's a reset button, no matter how you cut it. What he's done was a VERY bad idea.
|
See, I think the core problem here is that you're applying a standard of continuity or sense that just doesn't apply to comics. |
No, the problem is that Soule (or his editor) is doing that, only very badly. Waid's run could have simply been erased as if it never happened; the current mess leaves it in continuity but no one remembers why it happened.
| james castle wrote: | | Are you honestly suggesting that continuity of Marvel comics have to make sense for the entire run of the comic/character? That's impossible. |
Not really but in this context, it isn't really relevant either. Huge swathes of DD's history and the histories of those who have interacted with him have been nuked by the current change. It's not, as you're trying to suggest, some matter of a story not matching up with some minor tale that was done in 1971; we're talking decades and effects that spread out across the entire MU.
| james castle wrote: | | Demanding that continuity be respected or made sense of or whatever is just a crutch people use when they just want to complain. |
The problem here is with an insistence upon keeping in continuity things that should have simply been erased--things that should never have been allowed to happen in the first place. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jriddle
Playing to the Camera
Joined: 19 May 2011
Posts: 129
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 12, 2016 11:38 pm Post subject: Re: Some frank talk about the current Daredevil run |
|
|
| The Overlord wrote: | | jriddle wrote: | | This has been a vast improvement over Waid. That doesn't make it particularly good--being a vast improvement over Waid isn't much of a trick. |
You asked for something different from Waid, you got something different Waid, if Soule's writing wasn't what you wanted, then what do you want? If you ask for something different and don't explain what you want that is done differently, then you set yourself up for disappointment. |
I want good Daredevil. It's not my place to author the next writer's arc for him, nor am I engaging in anything shifty, stupid or in any way inappropriate if I fail to do so. The writer will do what he'll do and I'll react to it. That's how criticism works.
| The Overlord wrote: | | Seriously though, what has Soule continued from Waid's run, this is at least soft reboot, complaining that it wasn't a hard reboot seems like trying to have your cake and eat it too. |
For reasons already covered, the Waid material was going to have to be deleted in some way. Everyone always knew that. Those at Marvel knew it even as they allowed that disaster to drag on as long as they did. It's just a matter of the best way to delete it. Picking up from, say, the end of Brubaker and just saying "Secret Wars" would have been the best and doesn't require any "hard reboot," which starts the character over from scratch rather than just slapping a patch on it and cleaning out the sewage that had seeped in.
| The Overlord wrote: | | Here is the problem, you demanded a continuity reboot with DD because you hated Waid's run |
No, it isn't just a matter of hating it. Waid had completely destroyed the character and his world and no one was going to be willing to pick up the reigns from where Waid had dropped them. Leaving Waid in place was never an option.
| The Overlord wrote: | | If you think reboots magically solve every problem, |
Funny, not only have I never written anything like that, my long post that began this thread is about a half-hearted reboot effort that has failed.
| The Overlord wrote: | | jriddle wrote: | | ...and clearly, that's exactly what I'm insisting Marvel do in this case. Tell me again why we have these discussion boards? |
Except when you demand runs you don't like be exiled from continuity |
That was always going to happen with Waid and it would be helpful to this discussion to stop pretending as if continuing that trainwreck was ever an option.
| The Overlord wrote: | | or demand a writer get fired after one arc, you are demanding your opinion be worth more then others here. |
And yet others here have agreed with me on the deficiencies of Soule's run. What selfish bastards they are!
Last edited by jriddle on Sat Jul 16, 2016 12:57 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
james castle
Devil in Cell-Block D
Joined: 30 Jul 2004
Posts: 1999
Location: Toronto, Ontario
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 13, 2016 4:22 pm Post subject: Re: Some frank talk about the current Daredevil run |
|
|
| jriddle wrote: |
| james castle wrote: | | Demanding that continuity be respected or made sense of or whatever is just a crutch people use when they just want to complain. |
The problem here is with an insistence upon keeping in continuity things that should have simply been erased--things that should never have been allowed to happen in the first place. |
Hahaha. According to who? You?
First, the whole idea of erasing an entire run is basically unheard of when you're dealing with Marvel comics. So whatever Soule and the editors are doing now is almost by definition less insane then what you're suggesting.
Second, why would they wipe out an acclaimed run by an acclaimed creator? Sure, a lot of people (myself included) thought Waid's run lost a little steam in the end. A much smaller group don't like his run at all. It was still a super acclaimed run. The idea that Marvel would erase such an important run so soon is ludicrous.
Third, you don't seem to think any Daredevil is good (aside from a very few specific runs (one of which (Bendis') is actually pretty crappy)). So what are you talking about? Guy who doesn't like the majority of modern Daredevil comics continues to dislike Daredevil comics. So what? They should nuke an important run because a non-fan says so?
_________________
JC
So why can't you see the funny side?
Why aren't you laughing? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike Murdock
Golden Age
Joined: 08 Sep 2014
Posts: 1750
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 13, 2016 5:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't think they erased Mark Waid's run. It's still be referenced as much as anything else so far. They erased the biggest consequence of Volume 4, which is no less dramatic than OMD.
_________________
Matt Murdock's cooler twin brother
Not sure what to read next? Check out the Book Club for some ideas!
I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!
Thomas More - A Man for All Seasons |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Francesco
Underboss
Joined: 08 Jun 2006
Posts: 1307
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2016 9:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Oh, about the fact that "bringing in Elektra is the nuclear option", it's worth noting that Waid had Elektra brought in during his run for no reason at all in a completely unnecessary filler scene. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DesignDevil
Playing to the Camera
Joined: 11 Sep 2009
Posts: 157
Location: Tennessee
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2016 10:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Oh, about the fact that "bringing in Elektra is the nuclear option", it's worth noting that Waid had Elektra brought in during his run for no reason at all in a completely unnecessary filler scene |
I didn't think that scene was necessarily filler, but when it first came out I was convinced that Waid and Samnee originally meant for that to be Natasha and someone told them they needed to use Elektra. So then Samnee just tweaked the art. Elektra was never the chatty ex-girlfriend that Matt would hash out problems with, but thats exactly who Natasha was.
Looking back in retrospect though, I think its just as likely Waid had no idea how to write Elektra properly. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dimetre
Underboss
Joined: 16 Feb 2006
Posts: 1366
Location: Toronto
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 15, 2016 6:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| RGdesigner wrote: | | I didn't think that scene was necessarily filler, but when it first came out I was convinced that Waid and Samnee originally meant for that to be Natasha and someone told them they needed to use Elektra. So then Samnee just tweaked the art. Elektra was never the chatty ex-girlfriend that Matt would hash out problems with, but thats exactly who Natasha was. |
That's still how I see it. I think the editors wanted to promote Elektra since she was getting a new series of her own. The timing couldn't have been better, but it would have made more sense for the scene if it were Natasha. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jriddle
Playing to the Camera
Joined: 19 May 2011
Posts: 129
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2016 1:51 am Post subject: Re: Some frank talk about the current Daredevil run |
|
|
| james castle wrote: | | jriddle wrote: |
| james castle wrote: | | Demanding that continuity be respected or made sense of or whatever is just a crutch people use when they just want to complain. |
The problem here is with an insistence upon keeping in continuity things that should have simply been erased--things that should never have been allowed to happen in the first place. |
Hahaha. According to who? You? |
You know as well as anyone here that was a dead-end as a direction and never going to be allowed to stand, so we can put the appeal-to-incredulity "haha"s aside. Superman Red and Blue were never going to be accepted as the status quo.
| james castle wrote: | | Second, why would they wipe out an acclaimed run by an acclaimed creator? |
Because--as covered more than a few times by now--that "acclaimed" run had entirely wiped out the character and his world. I really don't see any point in continuing to pretend as if there was any chance that what Waid did was going to be continued by anyone. It's taking Batman and making him a grinning jokester who relocates to Ottawa, tells the world who he is and lives as a celebrity--as alien to the book and its mythology as anything that has ever been done to it.
| james castle wrote: | | Sure, a lot of people (myself included) thought Waid's run lost a little steam in the end. A much smaller group don't like his run at all. It was still a super acclaimed run. The idea that Marvel would erase such an important run so soon is ludicrous. |
"Acclaim"--basically, the uncritical praise of a relative handful of internet Waid fanboys who follow him from book to book and slobber all over anything he does--can't make it "important" (you didn't think anyone would notice you trying to pull that?). Waid didn't do a damn thing with the character that will be remembered, say, 6 or 7 years from now except as one of the all-time blunders Marvel has ever undertaken. Teen Tony redux. The punchline of a joke.
| james castle wrote: | | Third, you don't seem to think any Daredevil is good (aside from a very few specific runs (one of which (Bendis') is actually pretty crappy)). So what are you talking about? Guy who doesn't like the majority of modern Daredevil comics continues to dislike Daredevil comics. So what? They should nuke an important run because a non-fan says so? |
I've been with DD for decades, hoss--if you want to start playing "whip out the fan credentials," you're the one who's going to end up back in the Pee Wee League. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Francesco
Underboss
Joined: 08 Jun 2006
Posts: 1307
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2016 3:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'd like to add something to the discussion. I have checked, and there actually IS a "precedent for an entire run to be retconned" and it is in fact relatively recent in comic book time (about 15 years ago).
It was The Incredible Hulk vol. 2 #34–76 (2002–2004), by Bruce Jones. It was a decent storyarc, but it got entirely handwaved as a dream induced in the Hulk by Nightmare (even though it made little sense, given that multiple viewpoints of the story were shown, not just Hulk's), essentially giving Greg Pak a clean slate to start the whole Planet Hulk/World War Hulk arc. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike Murdock
Golden Age
Joined: 08 Sep 2014
Posts: 1750
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2016 8:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'd also argue Waid's run didn't get retconned in the slightest. It got reset, but it still happened and has at least been referenced. It's like saying Bendis's run get retconned because people don't suspect Matt of being Daredevil right now and he's not married.
_________________
Matt Murdock's cooler twin brother
Not sure what to read next? Check out the Book Club for some ideas!
I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!
Thomas More - A Man for All Seasons |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Belfan
Flying Blind
Joined: 12 Apr 2014
Posts: 19
Location: Dining Room table
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 17, 2016 2:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm just going to insert a small comment here:
I absolutely abhor when a story, series, arc... whatever you want to insert here... is simply erased, because it didn't work. It is lazy and unimaginative.
While I wasn't a fan of everything that Waid did, it wasn't all bad. The Foggy cancer stuff was interesting. I thought the original concept, or reason, for Matt's happier demeanor was explained pretty well. I was wiling to give it a shot. Let us not forget that Waid wasn't really the writer that let the secret identity "out of the bag".
Mind you, I'm not some new fan of the character either. I've been reading the various ongoing titles of DD since the mid 80's, and have read nearly everything back before that.
We can't all agree on the way the character is written. I hated the celebrity stuff also, and the different direction the title was going. But I AM a Daredevil fan! I think that Soule is doing what he can, to undo some things to the character that never should have been aloud to happen.
Wow, that went on for a lot longer than I intended. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike Murdock
Golden Age
Joined: 08 Sep 2014
Posts: 1750
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 17, 2016 8:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
Once again, he didn't erase what happened, what he did was change the status quo regarding his secret identity (which, as you pointed out, started with Bendis). All those stories still happened. One of the characters created in Volume 3 was mentioned. However, there are stories for Daredevil you can't tell with his identity known, simple as that.
_________________
Matt Murdock's cooler twin brother
Not sure what to read next? Check out the Book Club for some ideas!
I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!
Thomas More - A Man for All Seasons |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
james castle
Devil in Cell-Block D
Joined: 30 Jul 2004
Posts: 1999
Location: Toronto, Ontario
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 17, 2016 10:18 am Post subject: Re: Some frank talk about the current Daredevil run |
|
|
| jriddle wrote: |
I've been with DD for decades, hoss--if you want to start playing "whip out the fan credentials," you're the one who's going to end up back in the Pee Wee League. |
Please. You joined the board right around the time you started hating Daredevil comics. You just signed up to complain.
And your complaints aren't even that lucid. It is painfully clear that you haven't even bothered to read Waid's run before criticizing it. The idea that he completely "destroyed" the character and his world is ludicrous in the extreme. Anyone who thinks Waid made Daredevil a grinning jokester hasn't actually read the comics. There are a lot of great and very Daredevily moments through out the run.
Just ranting in overly flowery language isn't actually an argument. It's completely ridiculously and childish that you would, without even reading the issues, come on the board just to throw a tantrum.
You want to go toe to toe on who is the biggest Daredevil fan? Well, I read the comics. You don't. Let's start there. Of course, I expect that you'll bleat and insist that you have read the comics but it's painfully clear you haven't.
Go find a character you actually gel with and read that.
_________________
JC
So why can't you see the funny side?
Why aren't you laughing?
Last edited by james castle on Sun Jul 17, 2016 3:22 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| 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
