DC/WB Confirm ''The Flash: Flashpoint'' Movie

[mrmaczaps]

Originally Posted by Sumac

She'll look very strange with a blonde hair.

Yeah, she will but an olive (ish?) complexion & black hair for Supergirl? Not gonna work.

[Andrew NDB]

Why are they so vehemently against just making new characters of different races and persuasions? If the only way a new character can stand any chance at survival is by hijacking an existing one to suit "diversity"... then it kind of doesn't deserve to, IMHO.

That said... I dunno. This actress but with blond hair? Could look a bit like the Michael Turner Supergirl.

[mrmaczaps]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

Why are they so vehemently against just making new characters of different races and persuasions? If the only way a new character can stand any chance at survival is by hijacking an existing one to suit "diversity"... then it kind of doesn't deserve to, IMHO.

That said... I dunno. This actress but with blond hair? Could look a bit like the Michael Turner Supergirl.

Exactly. Just imagine if a Static Shock movie got green lit & the main character was some pasty white dude. The angry mob with pitch forks would be out in full force for white washing a beloved character.

[Turo602]

Originally Posted by mrmaczaps

Exactly. Just imagine if a Static Shock movie got green lit & the main character was some pasty white dude. The angry mob with pitch forks would be out in full force for white washing a beloved character.

It's not the same because the blacks have been oppressed for so long and held down in society by the rich white man and some other forced ethical speech about I don't know Batman is racist now.

[CyberCubed]

At least Melissa Benoist looked like Supergirl. She should have gotten a movie with better writers.

[frank_one]

Well, after an English Superman and a couple lesbian Batwoman I'm ok with a Latina Supergirl.

[Galactus]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

Why are they so vehemently against just making new characters of different races and persuasions? If the only way a new character can stand any chance at survival is by hijacking an existing one to suit "diversity"... then it kind of doesn't deserve to, IMHO.

That said... I dunno. This actress but with blond hair? Could look a bit like the Michael Turner Supergirl.

New characters struggle to catch on in general. How many new comic characters have been able to sustain long running ongoing titles since the 60s? Pretty much Wolverine and Deadpool are the best examples and then Marvel had to really shove Wade Wilson down our throats before he caught on.

It's not exactly a surprise that an industry kept on life support by guys in their thirties and forties really only want to read about characters they've been reading about for thirty years. Those characters just happen to be straight, white males. That's fine but an unsustainable to run a business.

Marvel had a run of successful new diverse characters from Miles Morales to Kamala Khan, Moon Girl but they were all taking on established identities of other heroes. Hence the fanboy pissing and moaning about it endlessly.

When Marvel did exactly what you say; inventing a completely new character in hopes of increasing diversity there was even more fanboy bitching and moaning about it. He was being "shoved down our throats" apparently because the writer had the audacity to give two interviews promoting the character and he had a one panel cameo in another book.

Originally Posted by mrmaczaps

Exactly. Just imagine if a Static Shock movie got green lit & the main character was some pasty white dude. The angry mob with pitch forks would be out in full force for white washing a beloved character.

Y'know that does happen, right? Quite a lot in fact.

[sdp]

Originally Posted by Galactus

New characters struggle to catch on in general. How many new comic characters have been able to sustain long running ongoing titles since the 60s?

Spawn and he's black. Marvel and DC heroes are definitely a product of their time, it's more and more difficult to keep them relevant in today's age. Baffles me they are more popular than ever, like Tarzan and other pulp heroes DC and Marvel heroes should've hit a wall where they just aren't relevant anymore no matter how much they try to revive them.

I'm tired of the same crap over and over, this is what anime used to do so well, each decade they had new heroes and icons, instead of the same heroes in western media. We need fresh ideas that make sense in today's world instead of trying to make old ideas fit better. I feel any Marvel or DC stories just work better set in the past, not in the age of smartphones. The more tech is introduced the less sense most heroes make, granted there'll be a few exceptions.

[Sumac]

Originally Posted by Galactus

New characters struggle to catch on in general. How many new comic characters have been able to sustain long running ongoing titles since the 60s? Pretty much Wolverine and Deadpool are the best examples and then Marvel had to really shove Wade Wilson down our throats before he caught on.

White chars failed as much as Black ones.

Originally Posted by Galactus

When Marvel did exactly what you say; inventing a completely new character in hopes of increasing diversity there was even more fanboy bitching and moaning about it. He was being "shoved down our throats" apparently because the writer had the audacity to give two interviews promoting the character and he had a one panel cameo in another book.

I don't think that if character failed it somehow fault of screaming fanboys.

[mrmaczaps]

Originally Posted by Galactus

New characters struggle to catch on in general. How many new comic characters have been able to sustain long running ongoing titles since the 60s? Pretty much Wolverine and Deadpool are the best examples and then Marvel had to really shove Wade Wilson down our throats before he caught on.

It's not exactly a surprise that an industry kept on life support by guys in their thirties and forties really only want to read about characters they've been reading about for thirty years. Those characters just happen to be straight, white males. That's fine but an unsustainable to run a business.

Marvel had a run of successful new diverse characters from Miles Morales to Kamala Khan, Moon Girl but they were all taking on established identities of other heroes. Hence the fanboy pissing and moaning about it endlessly.

When Marvel did exactly what you say; inventing a completely new character in hopes of increasing diversity there was even more fanboy bitching and moaning about it. He was being "shoved down our throats" apparently because the writer had the audacity to give two interviews promoting the character and he had a one panel cameo in another book.



Y'know that does happen, right? Quite a lot in fact.

Green Lantern Kyle Rayner isn't a white dude but he got sidelined for the return of Hal Jordan and barely used right now... Wally's wife is Asian and their kids are mixed but where they at? Connor Hawke/GA was wiped from existence in New 52 & hasn't been seen since. Even though they could have brought him back via Convergence or something else. Alan Scott's kids, Jade & Obsidian. She's green & he's gay. Both MIA for almost a decade now or over. New characters can be done but they have to be more than shallow 2 dimensional checked boxes or shoe horned into place via a change to an existing character. I used to enjoy reading Static & Black Lightning & I own the entire run of GL Mosaic which starred John Stewart. Never cared what color the character was as long as the stories were good stories & their characters were well defined.
Kyle, John & Guy always worked well when Kyle was the only GL.

What always been black characters have been white washed? I'd legit like to know so I can look them up.

[ZariusTwo]

Originally Posted by sdp

Marvel and DC heroes are definitely a product of their time, it's more and more difficult to keep them relevant in today's age. Baffles me they are more popular than ever, like Tarzan and other pulp heroes DC and Marvel heroes should've hit a wall where they just aren't relevant anymore no matter how much they try to revive them

We're steadily seeing the cracks in Marvel on the printed side, same with DC. All DC can do now is promote and market Batman books to keep them afloat,
Marvel's only popular because of the films and TV content, and is struggling just as much as DC in keeping readers interested in what they're doing. Manga has quite a lead over both of them nowadays.

[Coola Yagami]

Originally Posted by Galactus

New characters struggle to catch on in general. How many new comic characters have been able to sustain long running ongoing titles since the 60s? Pretty much Wolverine and Deadpool are the best examples and then Marvel had to really shove Wade Wilson down our throats before he caught on.

It's not exactly a surprise that an industry kept on life support by guys in their thirties and forties really only want to read about characters they've been reading about for thirty years. Those characters just happen to be straight, white males. That's fine but an unsustainable to run a business.

Marvel had a run of successful new diverse characters from Miles Morales to Kamala Khan, Moon Girl but they were all taking on established identities of other heroes. Hence the fanboy pissing and moaning about it endlessly.

When Marvel did exactly what you say; inventing a completely new character in hopes of increasing diversity there was even more fanboy bitching and moaning about it. He was being "shoved down our throats" apparently because the writer had the audacity to give two interviews promoting the character and he had a one panel cameo in another book.



Y'know that does happen, right? Quite a lot in fact.

The sad truth is, for all the calls for equality or virtue signalling, these people don't buy books. Most of these all-new original characters don't sell, not cause of whining fanboys, but because their so-called intended audience does not buy books.

Like, Iceman for example was turned gay and had his own mini-series to show Marvel can make comics centered around gays.... and it flopped.

Why? Where were all the gay readers at? Why didn't the gay community make this one a top seller? Hell, the book sucked, where was the outcry from the gay community for them to make a better Iceman book?

Captain Marvel gets cancelled all the time and Marvel is trying to use her as some sort of feminist icon. Where are all the feminists buying the book? Why isn't she a top seller?

From what I understand this new Future State Wonder Woman is actually doing pretty good, but because she's a cool character and the book is actually good. And I'll tell ya one thing, it's not selling well cause a bunch of Brazilian-Americans came outta nowhere and bought up all the books.

Make good characters, make good books. Stop worrying about the race and gender of who's buying it as long as people are buying it. ****, I'm a POC, and I never EVER needed Batman or Spider-Man to be Hispanic for me to buy their comics. That's just stupid.

STOP TRYING TO PANDER TO GROUPS THAT DON'T BUY YOUR BOOKS. THE PEOPLE YOU ARE SO CONCERNED ABOUT PANDERING WILL ONLY USE YOUR CHARACTER AS SOMETHING TO TALK ABOUT ON TWITTER OR TO MAKE A HEADLINE BUT THEY. WILL. NOT. BUY. YOUR. BOOK.

[frank_one]

You are basically saying that gays don't buy books. And you're wrong: gays actually buy books. The problem is how many gays are out there? Not so many. They are a niche, no matter what the media say. So a book that only targets gays is doomed to fail because it has a very small audience in the first place.

[sgtfbomb]

Originally Posted by Galactus

Y'know that does happen, right? Quite a lot in fact.

Heck, it almost happened with Shredder.

It also used to be very common in Hollywood to keep the ethnicity but still hire a white guy, such as the time John Wayne played Genghis Khan.

[ZariusTwo]

One of the owners of my local comic book store is gay and was quite miffed when Marvel had Iceman come out. I'm not entirely sure if that was because of that or it was the circumstances behind the reveal though (Jean Grey creeping into his mind and outing his sexuality)

[CyberCubed]

Originally Posted by frank_one

You are basically saying that gays don't buy books. And you're wrong: gays actually buy books. The problem is how many gays are out there? Not so many. They are a niche, no matter what the media say. So a book that only targets gays is doomed to fail because it has a very small audience in the first place.

Is that really true? Honestly these days it feels like *everyone* is gay now. I mean we're not in 1992 anymore, now being gay is "the new norm" and now transgender is basically how being gay was viewed in the 90's or early 2000's.

I remember back in the 80's and 90's people would say things like, "the gays are taking over," and now it seems like that's exactly what happened. I mean I have no problem with gay people, they're all nice, so the more the merrier I say.

[Sumac]

Originally Posted by frank_one

You are basically saying that gays don't buy books. And you're wrong: gays actually buy books. The problem is how many gays are out there? Not so many. They are a niche, no matter what the media say. So a book that only targets gays is doomed to fail because it has a very small audience in the first place.

According to modern publishers, there are enough of them to make their products stay afloat. Also, regardless how many Gays are out there, good book would appeal to everyone. Even if its supposedly for Gays (though, wtf does it mean I am not sure).

Originally Posted by CyberCubed

Is that really true? Honestly these days it feels like *everyone* is gay now. I mean we're not in 1992 anymore, now being gay is "the new norm" and now transgender is basically how being gay was viewed in the 90's or early 2000's.

I remember back in the 80's and 90's people would say things like, "the gays are taking over," and now it seems like that's exactly what happened. I mean I have no problem with gay people, they're all nice, so the more the merrier I say.

Only good ol'cubed can make a statement supporting Gays, which at the same time manages to be Homophobic.

[sdp]

Being gay is like being "rebellious" for this generation, no different than getting a tattoo or a piercing in previous generations. Doesn't really harm anyone and brings awareness that being gay is fine so in a way more productive than tattoos. The point is there really isn't as many gay people as social media makes it out to be, just a loud minority + people wanting to be rebellious or fit in so they identify with it. Just like you can't "pray the gay away", you can't "become gay" just because it's "cool" now. It's ridiculous how explicit they need to be in telling you characters are gay now in tv shows and cartoons albeit it must have sucked to have been stigmatized for being gay all these past decades.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by sdp

Being gay is like being "rebellious" for this generation, no different than getting a tattoo or a piercing in previous generations.

I think the biggest draw nowadays with the younger crowd is about getting to "belong" to something, and a free ticket to a support community with 24/7 tech support.

[Coola Yagami]

Originally Posted by ZariusTwo

One of the owners of my local comic book store is gay and was quite miffed when Marvel had Iceman come out. I'm not entirely sure if that was because of that or it was the circumstances behind the reveal though (Jean Grey creeping into his mind and outing his sexuality)

It's not just that, but they basically made Iceman's entire personality as 'gay'. As in being gay is suddenly all he is, and he lost any other personality trait like his sense of humor and so forth in the process. And I mean that in his solo books that bombed, not sure how he's portrayed on the actual team books.