Two years, folks. Thatís how long the death of the DC Multiverse, the entire stated reason for Crisis
, managed to last.
I am not huge into comic books anymore. It is not that I donít love the characters because I do. It is not that I donít love the adventure; I do. It is because comic culture has this neurotic fear of change. This is something that is shared by both the makers and the buyers. Now I can understand why from both sides. From the comic book company perspective you want to keep things as static as possible to keep the run going as long as possible to sell the most books. After all, if Batman
for examples conquers his demons then that would kind of be it
. There would be nothing left for his character to do. From the public perspective we kind of dislike things that are different and prefer the safe norm. Much like fast food we know what we are getting and are fine with the same but fulfilling formula.
But there just reaches a point where it all gets ridiculous...evolution is more observable than character changes in comics. It took what: 60 years for Superman to marry Lois Lane? People still go into full blown freak outs at Superman Returns
í sub plot that Superman and Lois had a kid. Spider-Man even made A DEAL WITH THE DEVIL
in order to bring the comics back to the status quo. It reaches damn near comedic levels at times. Batman has either reached self parody or is doing its closest modern interpretation of Sisyphus. Instead of being destined to pushing a boulder uphill for all eternity, Batman has to catch the Joker again and again and again
to the end of time.
Because the older characters are the ones that fans remember and relate to, and because they stick with characters much longer, it becomes easier and more profitable
to simply go back and tell stories of Bruce Wayne or Clark Kent or Oliver Queen
or Peter Parker or 'James Howlett
' or Tony Stark...What this does is simply recycle old ideas even more and more, not allowing these characters to grow and change.
This has led to dubious editorial decisions, like Peter Parker making a deal with Satan to destroy his marriage. Characters that occasionally changed and struck out on their own (Scott Summers leaving the X-Men
after Jean Grey died, for instance) are now locked into their positions, calcified and stagnant. The flip side to this is that new characters get strangled in the crib.
This is the dank hell of the neverending adventure. To sustain such a narrative there must always be the suffering of the world in which the adventure is crafted... the story will uphold its degradations
just so that its hero can, every week, save a tiny fraction of infinity. There is no ending. There is no release. Nothing ever changes except the iconography. Because change is death, and the show refuses death.
We've been told that this next episode will change the series forever
, and put it on the right track
. Take it from a guy that's read a ton of comic books in his time. When they say that, they're trying to sell comic books, and it's only true one time in ten after a few weeks have passed.
: This is supposed to be Supermanís origin story, but itís not. Iím sure thatís what they meant it to be at one time, but as the show dragged on
, it changed along the way...they could never actually pull the trigger on anything. So it hits a point where absolutely nothing about it make sense. Clark Kent forms the Justice League
, he fights Doomsday
, he works at the Daily Planet
, he marries Lois Lane
, but he never becomes Superman, so the show has to go through these crazy acrobatics to explain how all this is happening. And then it becomes a matter of how much Superman stuff they can cram in
, because they realize thatís what everyone wants to see, but the one thing that would make it all make some semblance of sense, they canít, or donít do. David
: And every time he meets any of these people, they always have to end it in a way where it can happen again a few years later with Clark wearing a costume. Like, Doomsdayís buried underground
, and he can kill Clark later. Chris
: Exactly! So thereís this entire sense of futility and dishonesty to everything about it. David
: Itís all just an overture. Itís all going to happen over again, in a cooler way, that we wonít get to see.
was under siege at the end of seasons five and the Dominion took over
the writers took the bold step to have a six episode arc where Starfleet was no longer in charge of the station. Unfortunately the writers of Voyager
are no where near as bold and they set up the elements in the first part that will wind up bringing back the crew in the second part. It renders the cliffhanger a joke
because you know that things will be back to normal (minus all the best characters
) at the end so what was the point of it all? ...This is some seriously lazy writing. The Kazon in control of Voyager
is so ineptly handled Ė they walk around with tricorders talking technobabble
Öits like the Starfleet crew isnít even away! Why didnít they start stripping the ship and mass-producing the technology? Or give it some personal touches? Or attack some of the Kazon enemies? Or anything?
The ongoing gag in Mario RPGs, when Bowser is enlisted as an anti-hero, is that he opposes the new villain because he considers kidnapping the princess to be his territory alone
. This is a pretty firm indicator that Bowser is just as invested in the status quo as everyone else. His attempts to kidnap the princess seem almost ceremonial. I believe that the very first Super Mario Bros represented the only time when Bowser was genuinely kidnapping the princess to pursue his goals, presumably the attainment of power and influence. And he succeeded. From that point on, he is occasionally seen wearing a crown and being identified as 'King of the Koopas'. He lives in a castle and employs most of the land's monster workforce. Why does he need to keep kidnapping her?
He's already a king. I don't see the saccharine lands she rules
appealing to his taste for lava and perpetual twilight
. It must just be some regular ceremony recreating the original successful revolt, like a friendly game between two rival footballing nations.
The fact that nobody believes in ghosts anymore? That makes no
sense. After all the events of the first movie? A giant marshmallow man walked down the city streets,
but nobody believes in anything supernatural anymore? Did everybody forget
Because proof of the existence of ghosts would change the world too much.
You still wanna ground the movie in reality— Mike:
That's the thing, though, Ghostbusters
wasn't specifically ghosts
; it was more interdimensional beings. Especially the ending: it was, like... an interdimensional god was attacking the Earth.
It wasn't dead humans coming back to life, it was more an alien kinda thing. But you're right, it would change society dramatically. And writing that kinda thing into a sequel would be complex. Jay: But that would make it interesting
. I mean, there is
a certain science element to these movies, too. Mike:
Ehh, they went and threw it all into the garbage. And listened to the people at the boardroom table who said, "This is the best way to make a buncha money." Rich:
"Look, Jay: You make a plot about slime so you can sell jars of slime to kids.
And you can also make a new backpack that they wear that kids'll wanna buy that shoots
When I first encountered your vessel, it was badly damaged - barely functioning. What if I told you in a blink of an eye, I can restore her to its former condition? Chuck!Annorax
: All we have to do is... let the episode end
, and you'll be right as rain next week. Trust me, I know it doesn't make any sense but it always
works that way for you.
on ''Star Trek: Voyager: "Year of Hell"
It's the same people who are at the top, all the time. There's a certain number of people who are protected that generally always win
, and everyone else is at the same level. Everybody. Everyone else just trades wins.
Whenever they're feuding, one guys wins, then they have another match, the other guy wins, they have another match, the other guy wins, they have another match, the other guy wins. And so everyone has essentially the same win-loss record (except Dolph Ziggler
loses, and the Intercontinental Champion who always
loses, the U.S. Champion always
The problem with that is, when everyone trades wins, the roster... is a flat line.
And there's no interest...anywhere. Beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep.
It's just a matter of knowing the secret of all
TV shows; At the end of the episode, everything is always right back to normal.
And I further decree that everything will be just like it was before all this happened! And no one will ever mention it again... under penalty of torture. [The townspeople cheer.]
Yeah, how did you lose your job anyway, Lois? Lois:
Ah, I don't know, Peter. Do you really care? Does anyone really care? Peter:
I guess you're right. The story's over, everything's back to normal 'til next week, so who gives a damn?
We protect the status quo, and make steady war on revision and improvement.
Status quo, you know, is Latin for 'the mess we're in'.
Without deviation, progress is not possible.
I think the audience intuitively knows when something is true and something is not true....the ship would not look spic-and-span every week, after all these battles it goes through. How many times has the bridge been destroyed? How many shuttlecrafts have vanished, and another one just comes out of the oven?
That kind of bullshitting the audience, I think, takes its toll. At some point the audience stops taking it seriously, because they know that this is not really the way this would happen.
If you take a look at a current Spider-Man
comic, youíll find that heís maybe twenty years old, he worries a lot about whats right and whatís wrong, and he has a lot of trouble with his girlfriends.
Do you know what Spider-Man was doing fifteen years ago? Well, he was about nineteen years old, he worried a lot about what was right and what was wrong and he had a lot of trouble with his girlfriends.