All-New, All-Different [Superhero Thread]: Howard the Duck gets a new hat!

BlankZoe

hahahahaha holy shit

that is the most LOOK HOW DARK AND EDGY WE ARE shit ever

oh jesus Harley is literally in lingere

like

her costume is underwear

masterofmetroid

Chincymcchilla wrote: »

Its extra weird coming from a guy who helmed a series where superman lobotomizing doomsday with his heat vision was considered A HUGE FUCKING RED FLAG that supes had gone evil

No see it's actually worse than killing him

it's totally not but that's probably the level of logic being used here

BlankZoe

If that is Bruce Timm's unchecked creative vision holy shit I am glad he wasn't solely in charge of the DCAU

Gvzbgul

The lingerie thing isn't new, the Batman animated series pushed the boundaries a bit with her.

BlankZoe

Gvzbgul wrote: »

The lingerie thing isn't new, the Batman animated series pushed the boundaries a bit with her.

That had her in a teddy while she and Joker were alone at home

that is, apparently, her costume in that universe

Fakefaux

I don't know why anyone would be surprised by Bruce Timm's opinion. He outright has Superman kill Darkseid in the Justice League show. As in, Superman sets out to fight Darkseid with murder specifically on his mind, beats Darkseid to a pulp, preventing him from escaping an exploding space station, and then Batman shows up and drags Superman off while the space station explodes and kills Darkseid. Darkseid is eventually resurrected and comes back pretty pissed that Superman murdered him.

I actually thought it was an interesting twist on the show, between batman and Superman. Batman, the character who is often considered the darker and more morally compromised of the two, never actually kills anyone and even quits being a superhero when he's tempted to. Superman, on the other hand, is this seemingly bottomless well of compassion and hope, but when he finally runs up against someone for whom his endless compassion is meaningless, that well runs dry. Of all the villains in the DCAU, Darkseid is the only one Superman seems to actively hate. He wants to reform all the others, but with Darkseid he feels there's only one option left.

KingofMadCows

Yeah, the problem with MoS wasn't just that he killed Zod but that it wasn't earned at all. Superman had no problem letting thousands of people die before that point so it was ridiculous that he suddenly cared about those four or five people. In fact, it would have made sense for Superman to try to kill Zod sooner in order to prevent more destruction.

BlankZoe

I mean I would say that Superman killing Zod at all is a problem

I can buy Superman killing a mindless beast built only for murder or the literal embodiment of evil but anything other than that? Nope.

Mr. G

Would Superman kill MODOK

Dex Dynamo

Fakefaux wrote: »

I don't know why anyone would be surprised by Bruce Timm's opinion. He outright has Superman kill Darkseid in the Justice League show. As in, Superman sets out to fight Darkseid with murder specifically on his mind, beats Darkseid to a pulp, preventing him from escaping an exploding space station, and then Batman shows up and drags Superman off while the space station explodes and kills Darkseid. Darkseid is eventually resurrected and comes back pretty pissed that Superman murdered him.

I actually thought it was an interesting twist on the show, between batman and Superman. Batman, the character who is often considered the darker and more morally compromised of the two, never actually kills anyone and even quits being a superhero when he's tempted to. Superman, on the other hand, is this seemingly bottomless well of compassion and hope, but when he finally runs up against someone for whom his endless compassion is meaningless, that well runs dry. Of all the villains in the DCAU, Darkseid is the only one Superman seems to actively hate. He wants to reform all the others, but with Darkseid he feels there's only one option left.

Max Landis touches on a similar point RE: Batman and Superman's respective views on killing in his Adventures of Superman story.

At one point Superman says to the Joker, "Batman has a code against killing. I don't have a code. I just don't generally kill people."

I like that quote a lot, because it speaks to the differences between them really well--Superman doesn't need a code, or hard limits, because he's a good dude who's been freed of fear and moral concerns. But that has the potential to backfire, as it does with Darkseid--if his patience/compassion runs out, he's fallible and can let his emotions take over. Batman, on the other hand, is all too mortal, and all too aware that there's a razor-thin line between Him and Them, so he has to keep hard, impassable lines in place to make sure he never goes too far into the darkness.

BlankZoe

Mr. G wrote: »

Would Superman kill MODOK

No, because despite what MODOK constantly yells he is not only designed for killing

as seen in Secret Avengers

HadjiQuest

Maybe adapting all those Frank Miller stories finally just broke Bruce Timm. Also it's hard to say that this is what Timm looks like unchecked because Alan Burnett, the third part of the DCAU with Timm and Dini, is also heavily involved in the Gods and Monsters stuff.

Also these mini-episodes have been renewed for a second season next year already. There are also no other DC Direct-to-Video movies announced so far.

masterofmetroid

Wanting to kill Darksied is

Well i guess it really never bothered me because what the fuck are you going to do to rehabilitate Darksied, his entire thing is being a literal deity of hate who seeks the Anti-Life equation to destroy all existence

Normal rules do not apply in that situation, and it doesn't feel like much of a reach for Superman to say "Nope, i'm not letting you walk away to kill another civilization for shits"

HadjiQuest

Dex Dynamo wrote: »

Fakefaux wrote: »

I don't know why anyone would be surprised by Bruce Timm's opinion. He outright has Superman kill Darkseid in the Justice League show. As in, Superman sets out to fight Darkseid with murder specifically on his mind, beats Darkseid to a pulp, preventing him from escaping an exploding space station, and then Batman shows up and drags Superman off while the space station explodes and kills Darkseid. Darkseid is eventually resurrected and comes back pretty pissed that Superman murdered him.

I actually thought it was an interesting twist on the show, between batman and Superman. Batman, the character who is often considered the darker and more morally compromised of the two, never actually kills anyone and even quits being a superhero when he's tempted to. Superman, on the other hand, is this seemingly bottomless well of compassion and hope, but when he finally runs up against someone for whom his endless compassion is meaningless, that well runs dry. Of all the villains in the DCAU, Darkseid is the only one Superman seems to actively hate. He wants to reform all the others, but with Darkseid he feels there's only one option left.

Max Landis touches on a similar point RE: Batman and Superman's respective views on killing in his Adventures of Superman story.

At one point Superman says to the Joker, "Batman has a code against killing. I don't have a code. I just don't generally kill people."

I like that quote a lot, because it speaks to the differences between them really well--Superman doesn't need a code, or hard limits, because he's a good dude who's been freed of fear and moral concerns. But that has the potential to backfire, as it does with Darkseid--if his patience/compassion runs out, he's fallible and can let his emotions take over. Batman, on the other hand, is all too mortal, and all too aware that there's a razor-thin line between Him and Them, so he has to keep hard, impassable lines in place to make sure he never goes too far into the darkness.

I am so glad Max Landis didn't end up writing the Superman books. He apparently came super close to co-writing Doomed with Pak, instead of Charles Soule. I don't have a problem with his movies or whatever, but I don't think he has a very solid understanding of Superman, and his pitch was essentially to make Superman more of a bad-ass awesome violent fighting guy.

Fakefaux

That take on Harley in the video on the last page doesn't actually bother me that much. I know a lot of people like her as a goofy, comic relief character, but to me she's always been more tragic and disturbing. She's a villain, after all. The comedy, like with Joker, is a patina that covers a harsher reality. Plus, that clip definitely plays into an idea that MightyGodKing once voiced that I think has a decent amount of weight, namely that Batman's psychotic villains re-frame things into a horror story. Most of them can't outfight Batman, and you know he'll probably live through the story, so instead the best they can do is try to out-weird Batman. Their plots are ghoulish and horrific, and that's what gets to Batman (and the reader) more than the violence they inflict on him.

Sander Cohen Harley certainly fits the bill.

KingofMadCows

HadjiQuest wrote: »

Maybe adapting all those Frank Miller stories finally just broke Bruce Timm. Also it's hard to say that this is what Timm looks like unchecked because Alan Burnett, the third part of the DCAU with Timm and Dini, is also heavily involved in the Gods and Monsters stuff.

Also these mini-episodes have been renewed for a second season next year already. There are also no other DC Direct-to-Video movies announced so far.

He is still working for WB. It's not like he can just say that MoS was crap even if he did hate it.

Dex Dynamo

HadjiQuest wrote: »

Dex Dynamo wrote: »

Fakefaux wrote: »

I don't know why anyone would be surprised by Bruce Timm's opinion. He outright has Superman kill Darkseid in the Justice League show. As in, Superman sets out to fight Darkseid with murder specifically on his mind, beats Darkseid to a pulp, preventing him from escaping an exploding space station, and then Batman shows up and drags Superman off while the space station explodes and kills Darkseid. Darkseid is eventually resurrected and comes back pretty pissed that Superman murdered him.

I actually thought it was an interesting twist on the show, between batman and Superman. Batman, the character who is often considered the darker and more morally compromised of the two, never actually kills anyone and even quits being a superhero when he's tempted to. Superman, on the other hand, is this seemingly bottomless well of compassion and hope, but when he finally runs up against someone for whom his endless compassion is meaningless, that well runs dry. Of all the villains in the DCAU, Darkseid is the only one Superman seems to actively hate. He wants to reform all the others, but with Darkseid he feels there's only one option left.

Max Landis touches on a similar point RE: Batman and Superman's respective views on killing in his Adventures of Superman story.

At one point Superman says to the Joker, "Batman has a code against killing. I don't have a code. I just don't generally kill people."

I like that quote a lot, because it speaks to the differences between them really well--Superman doesn't need a code, or hard limits, because he's a good dude who's been freed of fear and moral concerns. But that has the potential to backfire, as it does with Darkseid--if his patience/compassion runs out, he's fallible and can let his emotions take over. Batman, on the other hand, is all too mortal, and all too aware that there's a razor-thin line between Him and Them, so he has to keep hard, impassable lines in place to make sure he never goes too far into the darkness.

I am so glad Max Landis didn't end up writing the Superman books. He apparently came super close to co-writing Doomed with Pak, instead of Charles Soule. I don't have a problem with his movies or whatever, but I don't think he has a very solid understanding of Superman, and his pitch was essentially to make Superman more of a bad-ass awesome violent fighting guy.

Ugh, blech, that is a super disappointing pitch

and weirdly out-of-sync with both his Adventures of Superman story, as well as comments I've heard him make before about Superman being great because he isn't a badass awesome fighter guy

I agree with you if that's the case, that seems like it'd be a real misstep for the character

HadjiQuest

KingofMadCows wrote: »

HadjiQuest wrote: »

Maybe adapting all those Frank Miller stories finally just broke Bruce Timm. Also it's hard to say that this is what Timm looks like unchecked because Alan Burnett, the third part of the DCAU with Timm and Dini, is also heavily involved in the Gods and Monsters stuff.

Also these mini-episodes have been renewed for a second season next year already. There are also no other DC Direct-to-Video movies announced so far.

He is still working for WB. It's not like he can just say that MoS was crap even if he did hate it.

Yeah, but here's an interview with him on Kotaku today where he basically says he doesn't understand why Superheroes still have no-kill rules in 2015, when the audience for comics has gotten older. It seems like he feels that would be the legitimate progression of superhero stories, to revoke that rule.

HadjiQuest

Dex Dynamo wrote: »

HadjiQuest wrote: »

Dex Dynamo wrote: »

Fakefaux wrote: »

I don't know why anyone would be surprised by Bruce Timm's opinion. He outright has Superman kill Darkseid in the Justice League show. As in, Superman sets out to fight Darkseid with murder specifically on his mind, beats Darkseid to a pulp, preventing him from escaping an exploding space station, and then Batman shows up and drags Superman off while the space station explodes and kills Darkseid. Darkseid is eventually resurrected and comes back pretty pissed that Superman murdered him.

I actually thought it was an interesting twist on the show, between batman and Superman. Batman, the character who is often considered the darker and more morally compromised of the two, never actually kills anyone and even quits being a superhero when he's tempted to. Superman, on the other hand, is this seemingly bottomless well of compassion and hope, but when he finally runs up against someone for whom his endless compassion is meaningless, that well runs dry. Of all the villains in the DCAU, Darkseid is the only one Superman seems to actively hate. He wants to reform all the others, but with Darkseid he feels there's only one option left.

Max Landis touches on a similar point RE: Batman and Superman's respective views on killing in his Adventures of Superman story.

At one point Superman says to the Joker, "Batman has a code against killing. I don't have a code. I just don't generally kill people."

I like that quote a lot, because it speaks to the differences between them really well--Superman doesn't need a code, or hard limits, because he's a good dude who's been freed of fear and moral concerns. But that has the potential to backfire, as it does with Darkseid--if his patience/compassion runs out, he's fallible and can let his emotions take over. Batman, on the other hand, is all too mortal, and all too aware that there's a razor-thin line between Him and Them, so he has to keep hard, impassable lines in place to make sure he never goes too far into the darkness.

I am so glad Max Landis didn't end up writing the Superman books. He apparently came super close to co-writing Doomed with Pak, instead of Charles Soule. I don't have a problem with his movies or whatever, but I don't think he has a very solid understanding of Superman, and his pitch was essentially to make Superman more of a bad-ass awesome violent fighting guy.

Ugh, blech, that is a super disappointing pitch

and weirdly out-of-sync with both his Adventures of Superman story, as well as comments I've heard him make before about Superman being great because he isn't a badass awesome fighter guy

I agree with you if that's the case, that seems like it'd be a real misstep for the character

There's a video he posted to YouTube where he gives a version of his pitch that he has retooled into a movie idea. It's weird because he seems to have a really solid understanding of the character's fundamentals, but he follows those ideas to places that are really off-base.

Gustav

You know when I first saw Harley in that short I thought he might take an interesting route in deconstructing what DC has done to his character.

But nah. It's just dumb.

Kevin Crist

Why dosn't Galactus just eat Krypton.

Langly

Haha that was super dumb but the ending made it totally worth it

HadjiQuest

Speaking of General Zod, I guess he fronts a Smiths cover band now.

Langly

Like I don't know if it is supposed to be funny but t totally is.

-Tal

Just draw Harley naked already, just have her fuck a clown on screen, let's get it all out of our systems

nightmarenny

HadjiQuest wrote: »

KingofMadCows wrote: »

HadjiQuest wrote: »

Maybe adapting all those Frank Miller stories finally just broke Bruce Timm. Also it's hard to say that this is what Timm looks like unchecked because Alan Burnett, the third part of the DCAU with Timm and Dini, is also heavily involved in the Gods and Monsters stuff.

Also these mini-episodes have been renewed for a second season next year already. There are also no other DC Direct-to-Video movies announced so far.

He is still working for WB. It's not like he can just say that MoS was crap even if he did hate it.

Yeah, but here's an interview with him on Kotaku today where he basically says he doesn't understand why Superheroes still have no-kill rules in 2015, when the audience for comics has gotten older. It seems like he feels that would be the legitimate progression of superhero stories, to revoke that rule.

I mean the only superheroes that still have no kill rules are the ones for whom its an ingrained part of the character.

Langly

The fact he's asking is proof he has no idea

LockedOnTarget

The Superman arc in JL/JLU was super well done and handled with a lot of care, which is the difference. Between that and most "what if Superman loses it" story lines.

Clark's feelings of frustration were pulled off believably and they were able to portray a Superman who was stumbling a bit while still being Superman. And in the end his friends were there for him and he got his shit together and was the hero he's supposed to be.

Fakefaux

nightmarenny wrote: »

HadjiQuest wrote: »

KingofMadCows wrote: »

HadjiQuest wrote: »

Maybe adapting all those Frank Miller stories finally just broke Bruce Timm. Also it's hard to say that this is what Timm looks like unchecked because Alan Burnett, the third part of the DCAU with Timm and Dini, is also heavily involved in the Gods and Monsters stuff.

Also these mini-episodes have been renewed for a second season next year already. There are also no other DC Direct-to-Video movies announced so far.

He is still working for WB. It's not like he can just say that MoS was crap even if he did hate it.

Yeah, but here's an interview with him on Kotaku today where he basically says he doesn't understand why Superheroes still have no-kill rules in 2015, when the audience for comics has gotten older. It seems like he feels that would be the legitimate progression of superhero stories, to revoke that rule.

I mean the only superheroes that still have no kill rules are the ones for whom its an ingrained part of the character.

This has me thinking. Which superheroes in the comics still have a pretty strong no-kill rule? Superman, Batman, Shazam, and Flash all spring to mind on the DC side. Daredevil and Spider-Man on the Marvel side. Green Lantern and Captain America used to have no-kill rules, but discarded them in recent years.

I'm sure I'm forgetting many, but those are the ones that readily come to mind.

TrippyJing

I'm pretty okay with God and Monsters, since it seems to be set in a "mostly everything has gone wrong" setting, where Clark, Bruce, and Diana don't seem to exist.

Langly

I'm ok with gods and monsters because the end of that episode felt like they were honestly shooting for self parody

HadjiQuest

It's really odd that there aren't any more DC Animated movies announced.

Normally they announce them 2-3 at a time, and usually maybe one further than that will have some information leaked. I wonder if they're done with them, or if they're going to rework the model again.

TrippyJing

I'm also assuming that it's called Gods and Monsters because it explicitly puts those characters in the position of being extreme creatures of myth that run ramshackle over mere mortals.

It's just conjecture, though.

Uncle PK

Oh boy, Bald Cape is the hottest new superhero on the block!

Ceno

-Tal wrote: »

Just draw Harley naked already, just have her fuck a clown on screen, let's get it all out of our systems

Well I mean

You kind of do see that if you watch The Wolf of Wall Street

PaperLuigi44

Langly wrote: »

Haha that was super dumb but the ending made it totally worth it

I don't like that short at all, but the ending did elicit a "PFFFFFFFFFT" out of me.

Hobnail

-Tal wrote: »

Just draw Harley naked already, just have her fuck a clown

Bruce Timm is way, way, way, way

Way ahead of you

Chincymcchilla

Hobnail wrote: »

-Tal wrote: »

Just draw Harley naked already, just have her fuck a clown

Bruce Timm is way, way, way, way

Way ahead of you

yyyyeah

this is the other thing I am not super into about bruce timm

TrippyJing

So he likes cheesecake.

Chincymcchilla

TrippyJing wrote: »

So he likes cheesecake.

I think there's kind of a difference between cheesecake and straight up porn

and the frank cho thing applies

Its fine to draw porn of characters

it gets weird when you actually work for and represent the company