DC Cinematic Universe ( The James Gunn era)

[The Realist]

And here's the real answer. I suppose you'd feel differently if he did what he did to... I dunno, Kara?

You understand that Wally was the Flash for a generation of fans and had a well-developed history going back decades before that?

People are entitled to object to King's use of Wally if they choose, of course. I've already admitted that I'm pretty protective of Superman as a character, myself. My reaction to Heroes in Crisis is my own, and no one else's.

Off the top of my head, however, I've seen fans complain about King's portrayal of the following characters: Supergirl, Adam Strange, Alanna, Mr. Terrific, Orion, Lightray, Highfather, Booster Gold, Guy Gardner, Martian Manhunter, Ice, Fire, and probably a few others I'm forgetting. Some of those are, let's face it, barely D-listers. Yet to at least some comics fans, they're all untouchable sacred cows, allowed to be written in only the most narrowly-defined and calcified of fashions.

I saw one reviewer -- a generally smart and perceptive guy, with whom I've had a number of pleasant online interactions -- drop The Human Target less than halfway through its utterly brilliant run because (a) Ice suggested that people respected Martian Manhunter more than they actually liked him, and (b) one panel implied that he and Fire were engaged in a consensually kinky sexual relationship. Those are reasons to abandon an otherwise great book? Really? I mean, certainly it's his prerogative, but it seems kind of petty and provincial to me.

As for Kara specifically, while she doesn't fare as harshly at King's hands as Wally does, there are Supergirl fans who HATE Woman of Tomorrow. The reviewer I mentioned is one, and the guy who runs probably the most Kara-centric blog on the web is another. The latter fellow is actually dismayed that his favorite character is getting a brand-new big-screen adaptation, because it's based on King's book.

I think that's unfortunate, for those fans more than anyone else. The book is wonderful, beautifully written and illustrated, remarkably moving and powerful. Kara's rougher personal edges, and her arc over the course of the story -- which carries her to a dark place, from which she is ultimately redeemed by the power of her own kindness to another -- in no way disrespect her character or compromise her in any meaningful way, IMO. Indeed, her heroism is affirmed in such an emotionally affecting manner that I read the book's climactic sequence through a sheen of tears. I regret that some people -- especially people who are dedicated fans of the character -- can't experience the book as I do, because they demand that Kara be portrayed in only a single limited way, and can accept nothing other.

 

[Christopher]

Fans want to put the characters they love on pedestals. Writers want to put the characters they love through hell.

 

[The Realist]

Damn, that's a lot pithier than my fucking dissertation on the subject. Nicely done.

 

[Commander Troi]

I only heard of Tom King because I found his Batman comics and adored them. And I thought Human Target was brilliant. I have several more of his books on my TBR shelf.

 

[JD]

Thanks for all the answers about King's books. I'm looking forward to his Batman run once I finish Snyder's, most of what I've read about it sounds interesting. For the record, I have been loving Snyder's run so far, the last storyline I read so far was Year Zero.

 

[theenglish]

I loved Snyder's run on Batman--I had used the New 52 to get back into Batman's story and was blown away by how good the issues were. As for King, he certainly has a unique style and, for those who want the traditional comic book format, it will not be for them.

A couple of stand out things about King's style that I've noticed, one of which I like and the other I find over-used and annoying--

Narration: I enjoy the way he narrates a story, sometimes from the point of view of a character telling their story to the reader and other times as an omniscient voice. This narration gives a sense of weight to the story and tends to elevate the narrative. Also, it is nice to be able to read through an action sequence rather than flip through page after page of artwork with minimal dialogue.

Talking Heads: In many of the issues I've read, there is at least a page with small panels and characters looking straight ahead, discussing their thoughts or opinions about what is happening in the story. This was cute the first few times, but really Mr. King--it is possible to overuse your own gimmick.

Overall, I really enjoy his work, and at the same time, it is not flawless or even up there in the top tier of comics writers. I would grade him at an A- or a solid B+.

 

[The Realist]

As for King, he certainly has a unique style and, for those who want the traditional comic book format, it will not be for them.

A couple of stand out things about King's style that I've noticed, one of which I like and the other I find over-used and annoying--

Narration: I enjoy the way he narrates a story, sometimes from the point of view of a character telling their story to the reader and other times as an omniscient voice. This narration gives a sense of weight to the story and tends to elevate the narrative. Also, it is nice to be able to read through an action sequence rather than flip through page after page of artwork with minimal dialogue.

Talking Heads: In many of the issues I've read, there is at least a page with small panels and characters looking straight ahead, discussing their thoughts or opinions about what is happening in the story. This was cute the first few times, but really Mr. King--it is possible to overuse your own gimmick.

Overall, I really enjoy his work, and at the same time, it is not flawless or even up there in the top tier of comics writers. I would grade him at an A- or a solid B+.

Appreciate your fair assessment. Obviously, I rate him much higher than you, but this is a reasonable perspective without an axe to grind.

Agreed completely on the narration. I find I read King's books much, much slower than most comics, not only because they have subtlety and depth that reward careful reading, but because it's a pleasure just to immerse myself in the rich narration and dialogue. I've heard complaints that Ruthye's narration in Supergirl: Woman of Tomorrow is too wordy, but I find it a joy to read. I could wallow in the personality and rhythm of her words all day long.

(I've also found that not reading King's work closely and attentively can cause problems. In particular, many, many readers misinterpret what happens on the final page of WoT, in a way that sometimes negatively colors their impression of the entire book. But in fact, King and his brilliant artist, Bilquis Evely, tell you everything you need to know to understand the intent.)

In the end, it's probably the case that -- while I think he's a fine writer by any standard -- King hits a number of personal sweet spots for me as a reader that make me the unabashed fanboy I am.

 

[theenglish]

Appreciate your fair assessment. Obviously, I rate him much higher than you, but this is a reasonable perspective without an axe to grind.

Yeah, no axe. He's an original--and FWIW, I meant my statement as a total compliment--and I don't really like ranking my favorite writers anyway because art is not a sports competition. If a writer is that important to you than don't let anyone tell you differently.

FWIW, my A+'s are people like Neil Gaiman, Alan Moore, Grant Morrison.

 

[Christopher]

I'm glad to hear about the narration. I'd been told that narration in comics was passe these days because the trend was to make them more "cinematic." I always felt that was shelving a valuable storytelling device for no good reason. So if it's making a comeback, great!

 

[The Realist]

I'm glad to hear about the narration. I'd been told that narration in comics was passe these days because the trend was to make them more "cinematic." I always felt that was shelving a valuable storytelling device for no good reason. So if it's making a comeback, great!

Supergirl: Woman of Tomorrow is extensively narrated throughout by Ruthye, an original character who sets out on a journey with Kara in the story. This first page is an example of the style:

(Both the setup and Ruthye's narrative voice take inspiration from True Grit. Kara, in a sense, is the Rooster Cogburn of the story to Ruthye's Mattie Ross.)

The narration in The Human Target isn't as pervasive, but there's a lot of it, in classic noir mode:

So yeah, as theenglish noted, narration is pretty heavily present in King's work.

 

[kirk55555]

His Booster Gold/Batman arc made me wish he was writing a Booster Gold book, I loved the way he wrote him fhat much.

Bonus points to King, meeting him years ago at a local comic con, we mostly spent our few minutes talking of our love of The Next Generation! He actually had a REALLY cool Picard story idea.

Tom King literally completely misunderstands Booster Gold. Seriously, all my complaints about Tom King as a writer aside, I'd beg anyone unfamiliar with Booster Gold to read the Post 52 (the weekly series) Booster Gold Volume 2, its 47 issues (from 2007-2011) and most of it is co-written with Booster's creator Dan Jurgens (with people like Geoff Johns, Keith Giffen and JM Demattis having occasional spots as writers/co-writers). It shows Booster Gold as the character should be, a boisterous doofus on the outside but with a real heroic side to him. It also gives him a great status quo as a guy who protects time but can never get any real recognition for it, which goes directly against Tom King's story.

Booster Gold would never do what he did in that Batman story because Booster Gold, despite all of his personality flaws, is actually really good about protecting time. The Tom King Batman story writes Booster Gold like its the mid-90s and he's the almost worthless comedic idiot of the JLI, a version of Booster that was really not the case even by the time of Identity Crisis, and the New 52 didn't even revert him to that.

This is actually the main reason I hate Tom King, its that if he doesn't care about a character he really doesn't give a shit about them, he uses characters he doesn't care about as basically props in stories about the characters he actually likes. From making Guy Gardner a literally violently abusive boyfriend to making Booster Gold way stupider then he ever was to making Wally West a murderer, Tom King just doesn't care very much about anything except telling the story in his head, and he'll do any character assassination necessary to get there. Screw the fans of the characters, screw continuity, Tom King's "vision" is the most important thing in King's world. In creator owned work, or even just Elseworlds stories, thats acceptable, but its a real shitty thing to do in stories set in a shared universe.

 

[The Realist]

That's actually a relatively measured post, so I'm gonna try to engage with a couple of points. I can't speak at all to the Booster Gold thing, because I haven't yet read the Batman story in question, and in any case, Booster is another character I don't know or care much about. But putting that aside ....

From making Guy Gardner a literally violently abusive boyfriend

Admittedly, I don't know a ton about Guy Gardner either, but isn't "asshole" pretty much the thumbnail description of his personality? I thought he slotted into his role in The Human Target perfectly. You may say (as I've seen others do) that he's only a macho jerk on the surface, that he actually has a super-squishy heart of gold and is always super-nice to Ice, but I find it more than plausible, given his psychological type, that that would last only as long as she stayed the sweet and submissive girlfriend. But if she spurned him? If she slept with someone else? He seems like exactly the kind of guy (no pun, etc.) who would turn threatening stalker on a dime.

Again, I'm sure you have much more acquaintance with Gardner than I, and could chapter-and-verse me about how King's take is a travesty. But as a reader with only a casual knowledge of the character, I thought his use in King's story worked splendidly.

to making Wally West a murderer

This is simply inaccurate and hyperbolic. West didn't "murder" the Sanctuary victims. The deaths were clearly shown to be a horrific accident.

Tom King just doesn't care very much about anything except telling the story in his head, and he'll do any character assassination necessary to get there. Screw the fans of the characters, screw continuity, Tom King's "vision" is the most important thing in King's world. In creator owned work, or even just Elseworlds stories, thats acceptable, but its a real shitty thing to do in stories set in a shared universe.

I thought it was the case that Black Label books were not considered in continuity? If that's so, it should assuage your objections to The Human Target, at least.

 

[JD]

I believe Black Label is basically the new Vertigo, although it does tend to have a bigger focus on the DC characters than the Vertigo did.

 

[theenglish]

I believe Black Label is basically the new Vertigo, although it does tend to have a bigger focus on the DC characters than the Vertigo did.

Black Label is kind of a mix between Elseworlds and Vertigo, I think. The characters that appear in Black Label books are not beholden to their "in continuity" counterparts so it frees up the writers to tell the stories they want to tell. If that is the story where Guy is presented as an abuser? If so, then King certainly has free reign to tell that story. In continuity, Gardner is rough around the edges, but he is genuinely heroic. He's a good friend and an honorable and respected Lantern.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Black Label is kind of a mix between Elseworlds and Vertigo, I think. The characters that appear in Black Label books are not beholden to their "in continuity" counterparts so it frees up the writers to tell the stories they want to tell. If that is the story where Guy is presented as an abuser? If so, then King certainly has free reign to tell that story. In continuity, Gardner is rough around the edges, but he is genuinely heroic. He's a good friend and an honorable and respected Lantern.

I heard Batman knocked him out with one punch.

 

[The Realist]

Gardner takes a couple of memorable hits in The Human Target, too.

 

[Captaindemotion]

From Gunn on Facebook (probably threads too, but I’m not on it):

Yes, it’s true. The Lanterns DCU series is putting together a crack team of writers, based on a wonderful pilot script and bible by Chris Mundy, Tom King, and Damon Lindelof. A hearty welcome to Chris and Damon as they join the DC Studios family (no welcome necessary for old Tom, who has been here nearly since inception).

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/XqboqYdntLWTxnfH/?mibextid=WC7FNe

 

[The Realist]

Cool. I'm not much of a Green Lantern guy, but I may check this out at some point.

I expect there may be opinions on the creative staff involved, however.

 

[Ovation]

may be opinions

Big fan of understatement, are we?

 

[JD]

Not sure who Chris Mundy is, but I'm one of the few people who actually likes Damon Lindelof's stuff that I've seen, so I'm OK with him working on the Green Lantern series.