DC's New 52: Reviews and Discussion (Spoilers welcolme and likely)

[OdoWanKenobi]

The expansion of the universe with the other Lantern Corps is, in my opinion, one of the best things that ever happened to Green Lantern. We've gotten loads of great new stories with an army of interesting new characters.

[Admiral2]

OdoWanKenobi wrote:

---

The expansion of the universe with the other Lantern Corps is, in my opinion, one of the best things that ever happened to Green Lantern. We've gotten loads of great new stories with an army of interesting new characters.

I know lots of people think that. I'm not one of them. I was happy when only Sinestro had a yellow ring and only Star Sapphire had a purple one. To me, having armies of beings with rainbow colored rings is just so much, "Hey, let's just have armadas of green lanterns fighting each other for fifteen years and just use different colors to disguise our utter lack of imagination." I don't care how good some of the individual stories are. The overall premise just comes off as lazy.

I get that I'm in the minority in that opinion, but knowing that isn't going to change my mind anytime soon.

[Hound of UIster]

Looks like your problems are more due to simple nostalgia than any actual problems with what they did with the colored lantern corps.

[Admiral2]

Hound of UIster wrote:

---

Looks like your problems are more due to simple nostalgia than any actual problems with what they did with the colored lantern corps.

Fine. We'll go with that.


Still not changing my mind on this....

[theenglish]

Admiral2 wrote:

---

The overall premise just comes off as lazy.

Sure, that's why it took somebody sixty years to think of it.

[Derishton]

I guess I can see how the Rainbow Corps could look narratively lazy, although it it also heavily allegorical: all those emotions fighting through avatars. What I think makes it work is that it speaks to historical process: a new weapon always gets either countered or copied. I don't see why the Green Lantern ring would be an exception.

[Admiral2]

theenglish wrote:

---

Sure, that's why it took somebody sixty years to think of it.

Oh, right. I forgot. I'm supposed think an idea is brilliant just because everybody else does. Thanks for reminding me.

Derishton wrote:

---

I guess I can see how the Rainbow Corps could look narratively lazy, although it it also heavily allegorical: all those emotions fighting through avatars. What I think makes it work is that it speaks to historical process: a new weapon always gets either countered or copied. I don't see why the Green Lantern ring would be an exception.

The exception is the rings were originally not powered by emotion but by a short list of very powerful people: The Guardians, The Zamarons and the Qwardians, which means copies that don't receive power from them should be nothing more than really chintzy jewelry. The Rainbow Lantern Coalition storyline changed all that.

It's also evidence of the GL writers running into the same problem Supes's writers did: how do you come up with an enemy challenging enough? The solution was Lantern Color War. There's nothing remotely groundbreaking about that concept.

[Admiral_Young]

Wow. No one has said that you have to like what Johns has done in "Green Lantern", they have been disagreeing with you, not forcing you to change your mind or whatever.

Besides which I thought we were originally talking about "Aquaman" in the first place? I get having problems with his GL work. I don't like what he's done since basically the end of "Blackest Night".

"Aquaman" is something totally separate though and he has done an exceptional job with it. He is a huge Mera fan, and it shows in his work. That has extended to Arthur now and he seems to be having a fun time.

[Trekker4747]

Catwoman: I.... I... I'm actually not sure what I read here.

[OdoWanKenobi]

Trekker4747 wrote:

---

Catwoman: I.... I... I'm actually not sure what I read here.

Agreed completely. That issue was just bizarre. Granted, I haven't been reading the book and only picked it up because of the crossover, but it just made very little sense, and had a Joker characterization the likes of which I've never seen before.

[Agent Richard07]

What happened in Catwoman?

[Admiral_Young]

I dropped "Catwoman" after the first issue (and not because of the "controversy") I just disliked the writing and the art and it isn't really the direction I thought they would take Selina in at all.

[Praetor_Shinzon]

i dropped Catwoman after the Night of Owls thing.

[Trekker4747]

Agent Richard07 wrote:

---

What happened in Catwoman?

Joker kidnaps Catwoman and just does crazy things to her while pontificating about nonsense. (And not even the usual general insanity nonsense he usually goes on about.) He takes her to the stock Abandoned Amusement Park and puts her in one of those barrel rides (you know, the ones that pin you on the wall using centripetal force and then lower the floor) but he's supercharged it supposedly to the point where it'll liquefy her. It doesn't though, he apparently stops it after it's shredded her clothes off (sans underwear) and she passes out.

When she comes to he rambles on about bullshit some more and offers her a new uniform. this one laced with a paralytic or something in it that causes her to be unable to move so he sort of treats her like a doll... or something. Eventually he gives her the antidote and offers to spare Batman's life if she marries him (Batman) she refuses. He pretty much says, "Meh, wattayagonnado?" and leaves, again taunting her a bit with the death of her friend in an earlier storyline.

It was overall just... odd. I mean you expect some level of insanity with The Joker, sure, but this was just out there, man. And it wasn't even for fan-service or anything it was almost out of character or something.

[Hound of UIster]

The mistake of editorial continuing to give assignments to the Harras Gang (Nocenti/DeFalco/Lobdell).