Poll: Was "Identity Crisis" and its legacy a positive or a negative for DC Comics?

[Mikintosh]

Simple enough. I thought the story was well-written and back in 2004 I respected what they were planning to do with the DC Universe from that point on starting with that story, but on the other hand looking at the issues again it's hard to stomach a lot of the "mature content" suddenly thrust upon our colorful superheroes, and the next five years have caused massive disruptions through the entire comic line, to the point that when I picked up a few issues a couple months ago the only characters I recognized as similar from half a decade ago were Robin & Wonder Girl in the Teen Titans. And I think they've been mucking even that up too.

However, since I really stopped following comics around that time, I figured I'd throw the question to more ardent readers who actually know what they're talking about.

EDIT: Gee whiz that title got messed up. Can someone fix that?

[Antiyonder]

Mature stories are fine, no denying, but the problem stems from the misconception that maturity comes from excessive gratuitous content rather than strong writing and complex characters.

[Mikintosh]

Mature stories are fine, no denying, but the problem stems from the misconception that maturity comes from excessive gratuitous content rather than strong writing and complex characters.

Yeah, and I've found that over the years, despite how "progressive" our society becomes, there are still too many "Women in Refrigerator" stories; Sub Dibny comes right to mind. I think it was reading her fate in IC (and what a degrading one at that) at the same moment that I was reading the light-hearted JLI reunion that she appears in (alive) that put me off comics, because that's when I realized the people running my favorite comic book company really didn't give a (rat's patootie) about the big picture. The excess retcons in the time since really haven't done much to lure me back.

Also, I remember them saying at the time that by having Dr. Light be the villain, it would bringing him back to the "top tier", but haven't they in fact ruined him by making him a rapist? What kind of person can have fun with a comic book story where the bad guy is a rapist? I miss the post-Crisis years...

[Antiyonder]

Also, I remember them saying at the time that by having Dr. Light be the villain, it would bringing him back to the "top tier", but haven't they in fact ruined him by making him a rapist? What kind of person can have fun with a comic book story where the bad guy is a rapist? I miss the post-Crisis years...

To be fair, some titles like JSA and Booster Gold are pretty fun reads (BG especially). They don't get excessive with their content either.

[Mikintosh]

To be fair, some titles like JSA and Booster Gold are pretty fun reads (BG especially). They don't get excessive with their content either.

Yeah, JSA seems alright, but I tie in Booster Gold with the whole Maxwell Lord/Blue Beetle thing and it bums me out. Who thought that'd be a better idea than actually revitalizing those characters?

[Antiyonder]

Yeah, JSA seems alright, but I tie in Booster Gold with the whole Maxwell Lord/Blue Beetle thing and it bums me out. Who thought that'd be a better idea than actually revitalizing those characters?

Trust me, the series nonetheless isn't light on the fun content. It actually balances well between light and serious tones. You won't regret reading it.

[Jin Kazama]

I have to say, as much as I loved Identity and Infinite Crisis, the end of Infinite Crisis and the start of 52 is where I pinpoint as the downfall of the current DCU.

I still stand on my belief that, had Identity Crisis not caught on, we'd have no multi-verse, hence them introducing that in 52 and not Infinite Crisis. Once the multi-verse came back, they just tried everything to see if it would stick, weather it was a good idea or not. They'd just fix it later when they get around to re-merging the earths. Whenever the heck that is.

So, yeah, I have to go with a negative on this one, despite how much I liked how we got to that point.

[Jacob T. Paschal]

Yeah, I started reading JSA because of KC Superman showing up and lemme say it's quite awesome. I love the stories about the older heroes so the JSA's current theme of the older generation training the newer one is pretty cool. Not to mention Alan Scott is gangsta'.

EDIT: On topic...I too miss the Post-CoIE world, despite not having read too much of it. I don't like DC's moves, espicially with Superman. I think their trying to incorporate elements from Pre-CoIE is a little...farfetched, on their part, but alas...I'm not totally in on the subject. I think it'd be cool if they introduced Post-CoIE Earth-1 as a world in the 52 or even better, outside of the 52.

I'm also a little peeved at how there can be 100,000 Kryptonians but no Kal-L or older Superman. Who knows, maybe after this Blackest Night stuff Kal-L and his Lois can return and hang with the JSA.

[Anthonynotes]

Identity Crisis gets a big "no" from me. A serious subject as rape being treated as a throwaway/disposable plot device or a secondary plot point is *NOT* acceptable in a dramatic story. Yes, mature stories are fine, but only if they truly deal with the subject at hand in an intelligent manner, which Identity Crisis didn't---- otherwise, her being raped would've *been* the focus of the story (not nonsense about secret identities being erased that nobody cared about until this story), particularly such plot elements as how she dealt with what happened, how both Ralph *and* her handled things, etc. (Dealing with it in some crossover/tie-in book, if they did at all, also doesn't count, and would just exemplify their general thoughlessness/crassness).

As for what it's wrought, that and Infinite Crisis managed to do what I thought wasn't possible: come up with a story worse than "Zero Hour".

About the only good thing to come out of DC's mega-crossovers in the past few years would be the multiverse being brought back (insisting there's "only one Earth" seems stupid IMO in a sci-fi setting like superhero comics), and maybe the idea of a Sinestro Corps (Sinestro making up his *own* corps, only for an evil purpose, is a good plot idea... though sounds like even that's been muddled---Kal-L as a "Black" Lantern zombie-thing?!). Otherwise, wishing someone would show DiDio the door already...

-B.

[Antiyonder]

Since the dark tone nature seems to be part of the debate, I've read on Scans Daily that Superboy/Superman-Prime's behavior is suppose to be a jab on comic fans who complain about the dark tones.

Think the statement is speculation or truth?

[The Overlord]

Yeah, I started reading JSA because of KC Superman showing up and lemme say it's quite awesome. I love the stories about the older heroes so the JSA's current theme of the older generation training the newer one is pretty cool. Not to mention Alan Scott is gangsta'.

EDIT: On topic...I too miss the Post-CoIE world, despite not having read too much of it. I don't like DC's moves, espicially with Superman. I think their trying to incorporate elements from Pre-CoIE is a little...farfetched, on their part, but alas...I'm not totally in on the subject. I think it'd be cool if they introduced Post-CoIE Earth-1 as a world in the 52 or even better, outside of the 52.

I'm also a little peeved at how there can be 100,000 Kryptonians but no Kal-L or older Superman. Who knows, maybe after this Blackest Night stuff Kal-L and his Lois can return and hang with the JSA.

Not be a nitpick, the man topic is Identity crisis, not 52. I think the inclusion of rape in a superhero story is for offesnive then bringing back Kandor (though I think the number of Kryptonians (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Kryptonians) should be limited to less then 10: Superman, Supergirl, Zod and a few minions and maybe the dog).

To put this perspective, imagine if Bulma got raped in DBZ arc by Pilaf, wouldn't that just ruin the whole tone of DBZ? Rape doesn't belong in certain comic books, where the tone is supposed to somewhat light hearted and Justice league is one of them.

Purple Man becoming a rqapist made more sense, it happened in Alias an R rated comic, was imporant to the story and Purple man was a DD villain, he was always kinda of a dark character (in his first appearancce, he kidnapped Karen Page and brought her to a hotel room, it was never said outright what he was planning, but you could read between the lines), so it didn't come out of nowhere. Dr. Light was a comic relief villain, so him becoming a rapist came out of nowhere and seriously in a Justice League comic, where they fight alien conquerors, you are goning to have them fight a rapist?! A guy who dresses up a light bulb and rapes people, that does not compute. Plus the rape was a throwaway plot point, that's just insulting.

[Jacob T. Paschal]

To put this perspective, imagine if Bulma got raped in DBZ arc by Pilaf, wouldn't that just ruin the whole tone of DBZ? Rape doesn't belong in certain comic books, where the tone is supposed to somewhat light hearted and Justice league is one of them.

Where did I ever talk about the subject in my post? Anyhow...the difference is comics pretend to be serious and realistic...Dragonball's a mildly violent and crude kids' comic written by a guy who became famous for writing poop jokes.

Rereading the topic title...I think I mistook Identity Crisis for Infinite Crisis.


Damn you, Meltzer! :p

[The Overlord]

Where did I ever talk about the subject in my post? Anyhow...the difference is comics pretend to be serious and realistic...Dragonball's a mildly violent and crude kids' comic written by a guy who became famous for writing poop jokes.

Rereading the topic title...I think I mistook Identity Crisis for Infinite Crisis.


Damn you, Meltzer! :p

I was just addressing that you seemed not understand the context of the topic, I was just trying to see if we were on the same page. That's what I was getting at.

I'm just saying putting rape in a justice league comic is like putting rape in a DBZ comic, it doesn't fit the context of the story. There comics where rape could be dealt with, just not light superhero fare.

A villain's actions should match the context of the title, for example the red Skull is vile, monstrous and completely unlikable villain in a book that could be considered light fare like captain America, makes sense because Cap fights Nazis and making Nazis likable is a big no-no.

[Jacob T. Paschal]

I was just addressing that you seemed not understand the context of the topic, I was just trying to see if we were on the same page. That's what I was getting at.

I'm just saying putting rape in a justice league comic is like putting rape in a DBZ comic, it doesn't fit the context of the story. There comics where rape could be dealt with, just not light superhero fare.

And as I said: the DCU isn't trying to be light 'read 'em while waiting for the doctor to call you' material anymore. ;p

[Jin Kazama]

Not be a nitpick, the man topic is Identity crisis, not 52.


Actually, it's about the legacy of Identity Crisis. Most people agree that Identity Crisis was pretty much the start of where we are at the moment in the DCU.

Identity Crisis had a pretty big impact plot-wise on Infinite Crisis, which was the start of the multi-verse coming back, which a lot of major DC stories right now are starting to touch on. So to ask about the impact of Identity Crisis is to pretty much ask "Are You Happy With How The DCU Is Right Now?"

[Temple Fugate]

I can't really answer "yes" or "no" to this. There's a lot of good and bad that have come out of that mini-series.


Since the dark tone nature seems to be part of the debate, I've read on Scans Daily that Superboy/Superman-Prime's behavior is suppose to be a jab on comic fans who complain about the dark tones.

Think the statement is speculation or truth?I've always seen it that way before hearing writers like Johns mention it, and I totally believe that's how Johns envisions the character.

In fact, directly addressing the dark tones of the DCU was my favorite plot element of Infinite Crisis. I agreed with Alexander Luthor and Superboy Prime about their reasoning, though I disagreed with their method of execution. At the time I wished the DCU was actually going to be restored to a more pristine, kid-friendly collection of comics. Nothing like Blue's Clues sterile or idiotic, just something with less blood, less swearing, but still keeping the focus on mature themes of morality and justice. No rape. No tearing people in half. I wanted comics I could read on a bus or a plane without the person next to me wondering if I was a sadist.

The wake of Infinite Crisis almost completely ignored the "We can be better heroes" lesson. For a few months, we saw Bruce Wayne acting more like a human being. He adopted Tim as his son and things like that. But too quickly things went right back to the way they were.

My point is, when you set out to create a Crisis, whether it's Infinite or Final or whatever, and you have a very clear message, ("Our heroes are too dark") if you don't FOLLOW THROUGH with the acknowledgment of that message once the Crisis is over, it's a slap in the face to everyone who read the book to begin with. It sends the message that nothing you have to say really matters, but you still think it's somehow important. It's the equivalent of getting on a soapbox and preaching for an hour, then shutting up and stepping down and somehow expecting the people who heard you to even remember what you said.

I loved 52. I liked a couple of the Final Crisis tie-ins. But for reasons that have nothing to do with how they tie into the DCU history. I just like the stories as stories, nothing more.

Overall, I think the repercussions of Identity Crisis are being carried way too far. Meltzer couldn't have possibly foreseen the extent to which the DC staff would take his concept. We're so far away from it now, it pretty much doesn't matter anymore. Dr. Light was killed by the Spectre and the heroes have a lot of other issues to deal with from the more recent past instead of discussing what happened in a 2004 mini-series.

Superboy Prime is an enjoyable character to read in Legion of 3 Worlds. I like how Johns writes him as a crazy fanboy. The Lantern stuff is intriguing. The concept of taking JSA and making it a society that focuses on training the next generation of heroes for a brighter future is one of the few good carry-overs from Infinite Crisis. Heck, Johns seems to have a great mind for pursuing good ideas and ignoring bad ones. Rucka's not bad either, although his stories are darker and more nihilistic. (Focusing on the Crime Bible will do that.)

I just wish the DCU would slow down and catch its breath, and let us catch ours. We still have Battle for the Cowl and The Blackest Night coming up, but at least those will be contained in a handful of series and not affect every aspect of the DCU.

[Jacob T. Paschal]

It's sort of ironic that the subject of superheroes being dark and whathaveyou is brought up when I'm currently working on a fan fic crossover with DragonBall where the character of Vegeta--who is primarily a villain throughout the series--stumbles into the DCU (along with his ten year old Trunks and nine year old Son Goten) where the main theme is the contrast between the heroes of DragonBall not minding killing their foes as opposed to the superheroes who--at least in my fic--are so utterly against it that Vegeta turns himself over to the authorities after killing several of the DCU villains who were ignoring him (Parasite is humorously killed by vexxed Vegeta after he interrupts his trying to eat lunch with the two very hungry Saiyan brats). The story plays with the idea of an arrogant--by highly powerful--man (Vegeta) having no problem with killing criminals, espicially when he knows about their level of crimes. Of course it's also a shameless chance to write one of those legendary Superman v. Son Gokû fights...

It goes back to a theme we were discussing in the talkback for Smallvile episode 8.15 Requiem (http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?t=224445) where Green Arrow...

kills Lex.

Personally, I think 'dark' is a little subjective. We certainly don't need 1950s lack of storytelling ability to return while on the otherhand I don't think any lines have been totally crossed, I will say I've not yet read Identity Crisis in whole although I do understand the premise well.

[Antiyonder]

Personally, I think 'dark' is a little subjective. We certainly don't need 1950s lack of storytelling ability to return while on the otherhand I don't think any lines have been totally crossed, I will say I've not yet read Identity Crisis in whole although I do understand the premise well.

Now that where the problem lies. The problem isn't whether the story is light hearted or dark, but the fact that a writer in question will take it to the extreme.

Whether comic stories should be light hearted or dark is up for debate, but the fact is too much of a good thing is always a bad thing.

Now take the Dark Phoenix Saga back when the story was recently done (Jean's death wasn't retconned yet). Sure the story's end is dark, but it's not depressing nor is gratuitous. Heck, unlike his other media appearances, Cyclops is actually looking at the future rather than clinging to his past with Jean. That and Kitty's arrivial to the team brings an uplifting feel to the story.

Light hearted stories don't have to be 1950's plot lacking tales anymore than a dark story having to be depressing and chocked full of gratuitous content.

[Mikintosh]

Now that where the problem lies. The problem isn't whether the story is light hearted or dark, but the fact that a writer in question will take it to the extreme.

Whether comic stories should be light hearted or dark is up for debate, but the fact is too much of a good thing is always a bad thing.

Now take the Dark Phoenix Saga back when the story was recently done (Jean's death wasn't retconned yet). Sure the story's end is dark, but it's not depressing nor is gratuitous. Heck, unlike his other media appearances, Cyclops is actually looking at the future rather than clinging to his past with Jean. That and Kitty's arrivial to the team brings an uplifting feel to the story.

Light hearted stories don't have to be 1950's plot lacking tales anymore than a dark story having to be depressing and chocked full of gratuitous content.

Very true; it's hard to get excited about a medium that is constant drama, with none of the ebb and flow that episodic television does so well. Plus, would it kill them to do more stand-alone issues? I haven't really bought many comics in awhile, but reading the solicits it seems like every title is *always* in a multi-part storyline. I know this is nothing new, but considering how expensive the things are now, you'd think they'd be wanting to give people more bang for their buck, not less (by only giving them part of a story with each issue).

And yeah, with the thread I meant 52, Countdown, Infinite & Final Crisis, and everything else post-2004, not just Identity Crisis; I really haven't read anything since Infinite Crisis (and not much in the year or two before that), so I was curious what the people who did read those titles think.

[The Overlord]

It's sort of ironic that the subject of superheroes being dark and whathaveyou is brought up when I'm currently working on a fan fic crossover with DragonBall where the character of Vegeta--who is primarily a villain throughout the series--stumbles into the DCU (along with his ten year old Trunks and nine year old Son Goten) where the main theme is the contrast between the heroes of DragonBall not minding killing their foes as opposed to the superheroes who--at least in my fic--are so utterly against it that Vegeta turns himself over to the authorities after killing several of the DCU villains who were ignoring him (Parasite is humorously killed by vexxed Vegeta after he interrupts his trying to eat lunch with the two very hungry Saiyan brats). The story plays with the idea of an arrogant--by highly powerful--man (Vegeta) having no problem with killing criminals, espicially when he knows about their level of crimes. Of course it's also a shameless chance to write one of those legendary Superman v. Son Gokû fights...

It goes back to a theme we were discussing in the talkback for Smallvile episode 8.15 Requiem (http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?t=224445) where Green Arrow...

kills Lex.

Personally, I think 'dark' is a little subjective. We certainly don't need 1950s lack of storytelling ability to return while on the otherhand I don't think any lines have been totally crossed, I will say I've not yet read Identity Crisis in whole although I do understand the premise well.

Well there are comic book characters who kill, Punisher for example. Punisher Max is so dark it makes death Note look like carebears. Punisher meets up with the worse scum of humanity (sex slavers, war criminals and a guy who dug up Punisher's family and urinated on them) The villains in that series are so vile you cheer when Punisher brutally kills them. Its dark, but darkness works in the context.

[Icer]

I had no problem with it at the time, nor now.

It worked well, and set up the next few years very nicely and I enjoyed it.

[TheVileOne]

I still don't know what the heck happened in most of these books despite reading them.

Identity Crisis was very underwhelming.

[Mikintosh]

Oh and I also apparently missed the issue of Teen Titans where they killed off Wendy & Marvin from the Super Friends by having the dog eat Marvin and put Wendy in a coma. Charming.

http://fourcolormedmon.blogspot.com/2008/09/wonder-twins-get-slaughtered-by-wonder.html

[AlgeaX]

Oh and I also apparently missed the issue of Teen Titans where they killed off Wendy & Marvin from the Super Friends by having the dog eat Marvin and put Wendy in a coma. Charming.

http://fourcolormedmon.blogspot.com/2008/09/wonder-twins-get-slaughtered-by-wonder.html

Counterpoint! (http://comiccritics.com/2008/10/01/dream-deferred/)

P.S. Whoever wrote that peice really needs redo their homework, Wendy and Marvin =/= The Wonder Twins. Come on dudes there's no excuse for this kind of sloppyness in the age of Wikipedia.

[Mikintosh]

Counterpoint! (http://comiccritics.com/2008/10/01/dream-deferred/)

P.S. Whoever wrote that peice really needs redo their homework, Wendy and Marvin =/= The Wonder Twins. Come on dudes there's no excuse for this kind of sloppyness in the age of Wikipedia.

Well disregarding the name mix-up, as people who've commented on it said, these characters are a part of a number of peoples' fond childhood memories, and having them be part of sick "revenge" joke rather than making them characters that you actually care about shows that these people suck at their jobs.

[Robin2099]

Well disregarding the name mix-up, as people who've commented on it said, these characters are a part of a number of peoples' fond childhood memories, and having them be part of sick "revenge" joke rather than making them characters that you actually care about shows that these people suck at their jobs.

Not really. They had no need to because they weren't planning to keep them around for a long time anyway. They literally got killed two issues later, and even then, bringing them in was more of a "Huh why did they bring those two back?" scenario.

[Mikintosh]

Not really. They had no need to because they weren't planning to keep them around for a long time anyway. They literally got killed two issues later, and even then, bringing them in was more of a "Huh why did they bring those two back?" scenario.

Well yeah, that's a valid point too. What was the point in bringing them back at all?

[TheVileOne]

Just curious Jacob, anywhere we can read that DBZ/DC crossover fic?

[AlgeaX]

Well disregarding the name mix-up, as people who've commented on it said, these characters are a part of a number of peoples' fond childhood memories, and having them be part of sick "revenge" joke rather than making them characters that you actually care about shows that these people suck at their jobs.

Whose fond childhood memories? From what I've gathered Wendy and Marvin are universely despised.

[Jacob T. Paschal]

Just curious Jacob, anywhere we can read that DBZ/DC crossover fic?

I'm still just working on the general summary of events :( (which is still unfinished at 6 pages) but I could PM ya what I've planned so far! :sweat:

[Mikintosh]

Whose fond childhood memories? From what I've gathered Wendy and Marvin are universely despised.

Well, not necessarily those characters, but the show. I didn't like the Ewoks in "Return of the Jedi", but I wouldn't want to see them, y'know, garroted on spikes or what have you. It's not that they removed the characters, it's that they maimed and killed them, which is bad storytelling even if you aren't handling someone else's character.

[AlgeaX]

It's not that they removed the characters, it's that they maimed and killed them, which is bad storytelling even if you aren't handling someone else's character.

How is it bad storytelling? Shakespeare maimed and killed people all the time.

[Mikintosh]

How is it bad storytelling? Shakespeare maimed and killed people all the time.

Not the mere act, but in a medium that has to come up with continuing stories every month, year after year, it seems like a waste to introduce characters for the sole purpose of killing them off immediately afterwards if that death has no strong purpose. Gwen Stacy's death was meaningful, and this was not. Shakespeare did not kill for shock value.

[EinBebop]

it seems like a waste to introduce characters for the sole purpose of killing them off immediately afterwards if that death has no strong purposeI reject this statement. If you're trying to establish a murderous baddie, it helps to show the murder part. Having him kill a familiar character makes him seem that much more badass. But you don't always have a familiar character to use as fodder, hence you must invest the time to create one.

[Mikintosh]

I reject this statement. If you're trying to establish a murderous baddie, it helps to show the murder part. Having him kill a familiar character makes him seem that much more badass. But you don't always have a familiar character to use as fodder, hence you must invest the time to create one.

And I understand that, but they had just introduced them in to the pages of Teen Titans; the deaths were not of characters that were that meaningful to the readers of the title, but are meaningful (or represent something meaningful) to their nostalgic base, which is a much larger number. I'm also not insisting that you agree with me here.

Boy oh boy have I let us get side-tracked! Can anyone tell me how Final Crisis fits into all post Identity Crisis "legacy"? I read a summary of the events but I don't understand how they got from A in 2004 to B in 2009.

[wonderfly]

Please note that I haven't read the issues in question, but upon doing some research online, (in regards to the recent Teen Titans issue)...


I reject this statement. If you're trying to establish a murderous baddie, it helps to show the murder part. Having him kill a familiar character makes him seem that much more badass. But you don't always have a familiar character to use as fodder, hence you must invest the time to create one.

But this isn't the creation of a new character, these are characters that have been in existence since the early 70's. This wasn't done to promote a villain, this was social commentary, with a bit of morbid satire, (it's someone's way of saying "Death to all 70's cartoons!")

Beyond that, whether it's good writing or not, I leave for others to decide...but I do have to admit to liking a line from this article: (http://pwbeat.publishersweekly.com/blog/2008/08/29/death-comes-suddenlyunexpectedly/)


Plus, let’s face it, if Grant Morrison or Alan Moore had written this issue, we’d all think it was genius. :D

[EinBebop]

But this isn't the creation of a new character, these are characters that have been in existence since the early 70's.I wasn't so much addressing Wendy and Marvin as the general comment about introducing characters to be killed. Although I don't have a problem with killing Wendy and Marvin; I'm actually surprised anyone would, and the writer is probably just as surprised as me.

[Ed Liu]

To digress back to the topic at hand ;), one of these days, I'm going to write up my critique of Identity Crisis that explains why the first page of the comic encapsulates almost every problem I have with it. The short version is that the opening dialogue between Elongated Man and that other person is clearly meant to be meaningful, but there are patches where you can interchange their dialogue and it won't matter. Pretty much the definition of bad dialogue, and the same terrible characterization seems to happen throughout the book. It's talky and tells rather than shows, which the series loves to do, too (Green Arrow's recollections of the funeral saying "Wonder Woman's eulogy is the most beautiful thing I've ever heard" seems more like a cop-out so Metzler doesn't have to actually write anything like the most beautiful thing anyone's ever heard because I don't think he has it in him).

That opening scene is also clearly meant to be a stakeout of something really important, but is ultimately 100% inconsequential -- despite its heavy portents, absolutely nothing that happens in that stakeout matters to the larger story, and exactly the same thing happens in the larger narrative. Nothing like a mystery where nearly the entire thing is just a big fat red herring (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RedHerring) to disguise a last-minute reveal that's completely out of left-field, makes no sense at all, and has nothing to do with nearly anything that happened before in the series or any of the comics that came before it. Finally, it has some laughably rotten attempts at giving Ralph Dibny, of all people, street cred by making him talk tough with modern slang and not in an ironic way, which seems to completely miss the reason why he's cool -- something that the series does writ-large for Ralph and Sue, Ray Palmer and Jean Loring, Dr. Light, and the Justice League in general.

And, looking at it now, I think the shorter version actually works better than the longer one. In any event, put me firmly in the "negative" column -- I think the series was mediocre to awful, and its success caused a lot more harm than good in the long run.

[Mikintosh]

To digress back to the topic at hand ;), one of these days, I'm going to write up my critique of Identity Crisis that explains why the first page of the comic encapsulates almost every problem I have with it. The short version is that the opening dialogue between Elongated Man and that other person is clearly meant to be meaningful, but there are patches where you can interchange their dialogue and it won't matter. Pretty much the definition of bad dialogue, and the same terrible characterization seems to happen throughout the book. It's talky and tells rather than shows, which the series loves to do, too (Green Arrow's recollections of the funeral saying "Wonder Woman's eulogy is the most beautiful thing I've ever heard" seems more like a cop-out so Metzler doesn't have to actually write anything like the most beautiful thing anyone's ever heard because I don't think he has it in him).

I think Meltzer's a good storyman, but yeah I agree with this. I read a lot of DC's comics between 2001-2004 from a wide variety of writers before Identity Crisis, so I felt I had a good handle on what each characters consistent personality across all titles was supposed to be (Black Canary and Hal Jordan are still sort of enigmas)...and I was surprised how little of that transferred over to IC; it seemed like everybody was talking with the same voice, and the divisiveness over mind-wiping Dr. Light didn't really seem organic (tho they did make an effort for Batman). Not to mention that I think "Death in the Family", the Batman arc that killed Jason Todd in the late '80s, did a much better job utilizing the personalities of the characters involved to make a story about the death of a character more powerful, not making every superhero in the story be a symbol for "how superheroes conduct themselves".

[Temple Fugate]

It's been a while since I read Identity Crisis, but since we're talking about the mini-series itself, the one thing that irked me (not necessarily a problem, just an irksome thing) was how loosely related the current events seemed to be. Maybe I'm forgetting elements that connected them better, but Sue Dibny's murder, Batman's realization that his memory has a gap, and Dr. Light's remembering of what he did to Sue, all just seemed to happen simultaneously by coincidence.

By the time IC ended, it seemed to be about a different kind of story than when it started. Serialized series can switch between plotlines just fine, but when we're talking about a limited run of 7 issues, I think they should have a more cohesive focus. Sue's murder seemed more like the B-story in the final issues, with the Zatanna incident stealing a lot of attention.

[Ed Liu]

By the time IC ended, it seemed to be about a different kind of story than when it started. Serialized series can switch between plotlines just fine, but when we're talking about a limited run of 7 issues, I think they should have a more cohesive focus. Sue's murder seemed more like the B-story in the final issues, with the Zatanna incident stealing a lot of attention.
Yeah, that's exactly what I meant when I said that most of the events that drive Identity Crisis have nothing to do with the mystery that kicks the whole thing off. What it means is that you have a bunch of superheroes who really weren't very smart jumping to exactly the wrong conclusion about a murder and unveiling a ton of their dirty laundry in the process. You might argue that this was the point -- the REAL point was to reveal this super secret past history of the Justice League, but then I don't see why murdering Sue was necessary or why using the murderer they did does anything other than sully an otherwise decent character. Start with some inciting incident that makes Batman and/or Superman realize there's a hole in his memory and work forward from there. I suppose you could also do this with Wonder Woman, but I don't know that she was part of the League at that point, or if her regular usage of the magic lasso on herself wouldn't have nipped that in the bud right off.

The fact that two of the DCU's "greatest detectives" (Batman and Ralph himself) couldn't walk into the room and figure out what happened in 15 minutes was another thing that really irked me, especially since there wasn't anything in the final reveal that they shouldn't have been able to figure out.

[Jacob T. Paschal]

The fact that two of the DCU's "greatest detectives" (Batman and Ralph himself) couldn't walk into the room and figure out what happened in 15 minutes was another thing that really irked me, especially since there wasn't anything in the final reveal that they shouldn't have been able to figure out.

Meltzer's a thriller writer, not a mystery writer. :p


Anyhow, reading Identiy Crisis right now. Initial thoughts: "Stop [innuendo I'm not sure I can use] to Barry Allen. Good Lord Almighty, this is annoying."

[DisneyBoy]

I still stand on my belief that, had Identity Crisis not caught on, we'd have no multi-verse, hence them introducing that in 52 and not Infinite Crisis. Once the multi-verse came back, they just tried everything to see if it would stick, weather it was a good idea or not. They'd just fix it later when they get around to re-merging the earths. Whenever the heck that is.

I have reread that a few times...and still don't understand. At all. 52 brought back the multi-verse concept?

...


...

Why don't these editors just worry about writing good books? All the efforts for "cohesion" have, I think it's safe to say, failed.

[AlgeaX]

I have reread that a few times...and still don't understand. At all. 52 brought back the multi-verse concept?

That was kind of the whole point of 52, creating 52 alternate earths.

[DisneyBoy]

Oh.


I seeeee.


And this was exciting for people....because....?

[AlgeaX]

Oh.


I seeeee.


And this was exciting for people....because....?

Don't know but I guess if your one of those fans who really missed the multiverse it's a big deal.

[Jin Kazama]

DC probably thought that the Multi-verse would be a good idea because it allows them to do nothing but shock-value, and just chalk it up to "it happened in another earth" or, as I said, when they eventually re-merge the earths (because you know it'll happen at some point), they can just do another universe re-boot and correct the stuff that went horribly, horribly wrong.

The sad thing is, shock value sells. Having a multi-verse allows them to do nothing but shock value and blame it on that. People dying. People coming back. Characters acting nothing like they should. It's probably how they'll explain Barry Allen coming back. He died merging the earths, so when they un-merge, boom. He's back. You just brought back a dead character and chalked it up to a horrible plot device.

[Antiyonder]

DC probably thought that the Multi-verse would be a good idea because it allows them to do nothing but shock-value, and just chalk it up to "it happened in another earth" or, as I said, when they eventually re-merge the earths (because you know it'll happen at some point), they can just do another universe re-boot and correct the stuff that went horribly, horribly wrong.

Are you talking about the recent Multiverse or the Pre-Crisis one?

[Jin Kazama]

The current one.

The old one was created as a means to explain inconsistencies. The current one was created to make them, it seems.

[EinBebop]

The old one was created as a means to explain inconsistencies. The old one was created as a way for silver age characters to meet the golden-age counterparts, which provided fertile ground for new stories in that universe, and hey, why stop at two? The inconsistencies were created when they took it away and had to shoehorn everyone into one universe. :) I'm not familiar any story that they tried to explain away after the fact like you say... pre-crisis, anyway.

[Antiyonder]

The inconsistencies were created when they took it away and had to shoehorn everyone into one universe.

Post-Crisis complications stemmed from DC getting cold feet when rebooting their continuity. They restarted Superman, eliminating Superboy from his backstory, which is fine. But they decided to keep Legion Of Super Heroes from restarting, hence having to explain how a nonexistant hero (Superboy) could inspire and even team up with them.

They decided to restart Wonder Woman explaining that she only just now entered man's world, but then decide that Wonder Girl history could remain intact.

They should have just stuck with the original plan and start everybody from ground zero.

[Ed Liu]

Post-Crisis complications stemmed from DC getting cold feet when rebooting their continuity. They restarted Superman, eliminating Superboy from his backstory, which is fine. But they decided to keep Legion Of Super Heroes from restarting, hence having to explain how a nonexistant hero (Superboy) could inspire and even team up with them.

They decided to restart Wonder Woman explaining that she only just now entered man's world, but then decide that Wonder Girl history could remain intact.

There was also just good old-fashioned poor planning or disorganization that was just made worse by an attitude that nothing could be contradicted once it was in print. Hawkman was probably the worst offender in this regard, because little continuity mistakes led to attempted corrections that just made things worse until they reached a point where his history was so completely tangled and messed up that they literally threw him into Limbo so nobody would mess him up further until they resolved his real history (i.e., until Geoff Johns came along). The easiest solution would have just been to either own up to or completely ignore the initial mistakes and keep going. There was a Hawkman FAQ (http://www.geocities.com/seanmacdonald_2000/hawk.html) that chronicled the whole sorry mess, but it seems that the site isn't up now.

I also am not sure that the return of the multi-verse was anything that fans were really demanding, nor was it something I detected a whole lot of excitement over, but editorial seemed big on the idea.

[Jin Kazama]

The old one was created as a way for silver age characters to meet the golden-age counterparts, which provided fertile ground for new stories in that universe, and hey, why stop at two? The inconsistencies were created when they took it away and had to shoehorn everyone into one universe. :) I'm not familiar any story that they tried to explain away after the fact like you say... pre-crisis, anyway.

But the multi-verse was, in itself, an explanation for the inconsistencies.

DC started the silver age without really stopping the golden age, just so much not really using them much anymore. Some were more drastic than others (like trying to explain the early off-the-wall and sort of zany Superman stories), but they had to have a way of saying "Hey, those characters you love? They're still around, and all the stuff they did happened, just on another universe."

The cross-overs weren't the intent of the multi-verse, from what I understood it, it was just a way to get a "big moment" out of it once it was already put in place.

[Anthonynotes]

But the multi-verse was, in itself, an explanation for the inconsistencies.

DC started the silver age without really stopping the golden age, just so much not really using them much anymore. Some were more drastic than others (like trying to explain the early off-the-wall and sort of zany Superman stories), but they had to have a way of saying "Hey, those characters you love? They're still around, and all the stuff they did happened, just on another universe."

The cross-overs weren't the intent of the multi-verse, from what I understood it, it was just a way to get a "big moment" out of it once it was already put in place.


The multiverse was intended (like any other idea) as fodder for story ideas---specifically initially laid out in "The Flash of Two Worlds" as a way of having Barry "meet" his favorite hero, Jay Garrick (who until then was just a "comic book character" to Barry). After the success of that story, the writers soon came up with a few other Barry-Jay meetings, then figured the time was ripe to bring back the JSA wholesale (as being Jay's cohorts and all---thus extending Jay's Earth as where all of DC's Golden Age characters lived), and soon came the first JLA-JSA teamup ("Crisis on Earth-One", the first time Jay's world was named "Earth-Two"). Said teamup was popular enough that they became an annual event, and laid the groundwork for other alternate Earths to show up (in said crossovers, such as Earth-3, Earth-X, etc., plus a few "oddball" worlds like Earth-C in the Zoo Crew's series), as well as other meetings of Golden and Silver Age characters/explanations for such---or stories just about the Earth-2 characters (the 70s "Mr. and Mrs. Superman" tales, etc.).

Post-Crisis' continuity problems IMO stemmed from A) not starting over with a clean slate on *everyone* at the same time (leading to characters not rebooted at all---Flash, GL---interacting with the rebooted Supes and Wondy, or Hawkman's debacle), B) trying to squeeze all 876 zillion heroes into one Earth (and trying to reconcile them), C) forbidding any use of alternate Earths (or, after Zero Hour, even alternate *timelines*), and D) the fact they still had the same overall issues re: comic-book time as pre-Crisis Earth-1: a modern-day timeline where Supes is the first hero and still young, yet a zillion things happened in a narrow timespan (particular issue of Dick Grayson growing up/seemingly aging faster than Supes and Bats :-p ).

While I'm glad to see them bring the multiverse back, not sure the way they've gone about it was particularly well-thought out (the pre-Crisis books didn't harp on it/shove it in reader's faces as much as the recent comics have, or limit it to an arbitrary # of Earths, or show some crazed version of Superboy on a cross-Earth killing spree...).

-B.

[DisneyBoy]

They decided to restart Wonder Woman explaining that she only just now entered man's world, but then decide that Wonder Girl history could remain intact.

Yeah...what's up with that? People really liked Wonder Girl that much? I know Donna has her fans (what character doesn't?), but it seems more like laziness to me on the part of DC for them to reboot everything and then keep all the same characters around, rather than actually respect the new groundwork they've set up.

I remember reading those first Perez issues where Diana meets Donna/Troia and thinking "Um....what the heck is this about?!" She just comes out of nowhere and has mental connections to Diana, and then eventually dies/disappears and then comes back again in 2004 or something. Why? Just because DC wanted fans of the original Teen Titans to buy their newer stories? Either you're cleaning house by ditching the sillier characters or re-imagining their origins and purposes...or you're not.

a modern-day timeline where Supes is the first hero and still young, yet a zillion things happened in a narrow timespan (particular issue of Dick Grayson growing up/seemingly aging faster than Supes and Bats :-p ).

Yeah...Perez had trouble with that in his first year...forcing Diana to be integrated into the Justice League without really having time to grow as a character or get to know various heroes individually.

It's probably how they'll explain Barry Allen coming back. He died merging the earths, so when they un-merge, boom. He's back. You just brought back a dead character and chalked it up to a horrible plot device.

It seems to me that all these "Event" stories are just over-the-top explanations for having favourite characters return...when that isn't what fans really enjoy reading. From what I see and hear...folks prefer just picking a book with a character they love and seeing them treated the way they should be. It worked for Cooke's Catwoman which, yes, did explain connections to the last Catwoman series, but generally still marched to it's own tune. It's why folks take to The Brave and The Bold, or Batman Adventures or whatever. It isn't about the mechanics of how this dead hero was ressurected using magic and a time machine...it's about just writing a Barry Allen series and letting that be what it is.

If we can deal with TV shows putting their own spins on things and starting from scratch without having to reconcile differences with the source material (John Shea with hair anyone?), why can't comics be the same way?

[EinBebop]

Yeah...what's up with that? People really liked Wonder Girl that much? I know Donna has her fans (what character doesn't?)...The New Teen Titans was a top seller for DC during the first half of the 80's, with a pretty firm line-up. Writing Wonder Girl out would have been screwing with a good thing.

[Antiyonder]

They decided to restart Wonder Woman explaining that she only just now entered man's world, but then decide that Wonder Girl history could remain intact.

Yeah...what's up with that? People really liked Wonder Girl that much? I know Donna has her fans (what character doesn't?), but it seems more like laziness to me on the part of DC for them to reboot everything and then keep all the same characters around, rather than actually respect the new groundwork they've set up.

I remember reading those first Perez issues where Diana meets Donna/Troia and thinking "Um....what the heck is this about?!" She just comes out of nowhere and has mental connections to Diana, and then eventually dies/disappears and then comes back again in 2004 or something. Why? Just because DC wanted fans of the original Teen Titans to buy their newer stories? Either you're cleaning house by ditching the sillier characters or re-imagining their origins and purposes...or you're not.

Even then, they could have easily just rebooted Wonder Woman, but establish her as a veteran hero like they did with Superman.

[Jacob T. Paschal]

As I understand it, CoIE's merging of the Earths was the wrong choice. They should have closed the DC multiverse in question (the one from 1938-1985) and begun a new, not merge them.

[DisneyBoy]

I get that New Teen Titans was a big deal (it's still the watermark for Titans books, as I understand it), but keeping Donna around...

...ah nevermind. I mean, she has her fans, and I'm not saying she shouldn't exist. Just that...it's strange that she does, and it created some issues. I haven't found a reason to like her much.

Except in the Teen Titans GO! books, where she was a fun addition that didn't hurt your head to think about.

[Antiyonder]

Is there any reason why Wonder Woman was literally back to square one? I mean, Batman and Superman were allowed to be established as long time heroes despite their new revisions. They could have done that with Wonder Woman, thus keeping WG without the headaches.

[EinBebop]

Is there any reason why Wonder Woman was literally back to square one? I mean, Batman and Superman were allowed to be established as long time heroes despite their new revisions. They could have done that with Wonder Woman, thus keeping WG without the headaches.No, Superman was rebooted also. I think the reason they wanted to reboot the whole DC universe was they felt the history of some of these characters was of a hindrance than a jumping-off point... that with a fresh start could make these characters interesting again. and that seems pretty valid in the case of Superman and Wonder Woman. But then you've got, among others, the aforementioned Batman and Titans... books that a reboot would hurt more then help. So they tried to have both, and ended up with a flippin' mess. But I think most would agree that aside from the continuity issues, that the results for Superman and Wonder Woman were pretty positive.

[Antiyonder]

No, Superman was rebooted also. I think the reason they wanted to reboot the whole DC universe was they felt the history of some of these characters was of a hindrance than a jumping-off point... that with a fresh start could make these characters interesting again. and that seems pretty valid in the case of Superman and Wonder Woman. But then you've got, among others, the aforementioned Batman and Titans... books that a reboot would hurt more then help. So they tried to have both, and ended up with a flippin' mess. But I think most would agree that aside from the continuity issues, that the results for Superman and Wonder Woman were pretty positive.

Superman had a new origin yes, but it was still established that he's been around for quite some time. Wonder Womans first Post Crisis story wasn't told in a miniseries/flashback, and made it clear that she just now entered Man's World.

[Ed Liu]

Superman had a new origin yes, but it was still established that he's been around for quite some time. Wonder Womans first Post Crisis story wasn't told in a miniseries/flashback, and made it clear that she just now entered Man's World.

I think it's true that both were reasonably well-established when Wonder Woman finally came to Man's World, but I didn't think that Superman or Batman had been around for appreciably longer than Wonder Woman in the post-Crisis chronology. Or was that what you meant?

Regardless, it's pretty clear by now that DC hadn't thought through much of the history before they started writing comics, so attempting to pick it apart too much is just going to leave you frustrated and confused. Annoying and stupid and partially avoidable, but also water under the bridge and, to some extent, partially unavoidable if you're working the way DC and Marvel do.

[Mikintosh]

I think Perez's (and his successors') focusing on Wonder Woman's "Amazon warrior" nature rather then letting her be a regular superhero with a secret identity and a civilian life has made her cold and not that much fun to read, and it also allowed them to have her murder Max Lord, which I thought was the final straw in my tolerance of DC's handling of the character post-Crisis. Yes, one can see how she didn't have a choice in the context of the story, but that story needn't have been written. Also, I find the Greek gods tiring, even when a better class of writers like Greg Rucka are tackling them. When the characters are dealing with demigods every single issue, what's supposed to astonish the reader?

Even worse, they're turning Wonder Girl (Cassie) into a mini-WW; why is that franchise such a black hole? Is having the main female superhero be charismatic and relatable such a bad thing?

[Jacob T. Paschal]

How is killing a villain not relateable? I'm not sure of the context (I know it led to Infinite Crisis), but people die in wars. And fighting crime and evil is a war. People die.

But, alas. Sometimes you can't change the masses, just gotta save one person at a time.

[Mikintosh]

How is killing a villain not relateable? I'm not sure of the context (I know it led to Infinite Crisis), but people die in wars. And fighting crime and evil is a war. People die.

But, alas. Sometimes you can't change the masses, just gotta save one person at a time.

Well, let's not drag politics into this, but only Batman considers what he does a "war" (Superman seems to carry himself as a policeman, and one without the right to use lethal force at that). And by relatable, I mean not acting like some kind of warrior who has a different moral code than the other super-heroes. As long as Batman doesn't kill the Joker, Wonder Woman (as part of the "Trinity") shouldn't be doing similar. Not to mention that I'm sure parents who catch wind of this story might not be so eager to get their daughters a Wonder Woman costume this year?

Also, there are just too many supervillains being killed in today's comic books; reading a summary of the major events since Identity Crisis, my head spun. I know criminal types open themselves up to violence, but even 15 years ago they weren't attempting this kind of slaughter at DC. What characters will be left at this point?

[Jacob T. Paschal]

I wasn't getting political, I was simply offering up a plausible reason why Lord was killed. Having read up on the situation, it was surely the best thing to do at the time.

Sure, you can say "She shouldn't have been in that position," however Lord was pretty much asking for it.

Meh, what do I know.

[Anthonynotes]

I think it's true that both were reasonably well-established when Wonder Woman finally came to Man's World, but I didn't think that Superman or Batman had been around for appreciably longer than Wonder Woman in the post-Crisis chronology. Or was that what you meant?


Post-Crisis, Superman was the "first hero of the modern era", with Batman showing up about the same time. Both were shown in the early post-Crisis stories as being the veteran heroes by the time Wonder Woman came along (as the newest hero on the block).

These days, from what I've read, they seem to have put WW's career back as starting alongside Supes' and Bats', making her a veteran hero as well (and restoring her place in the Silver Age JLA stories---post-Crisis she'd been "replaced" with Black Canary).

[Antiyonder]

Post-Crisis, Superman was the "first hero of the modern era", with Batman showing up about the same time. Both were shown in the early post-Crisis stories as being the veteran heroes by the time Wonder Woman came along (as the newest hero on the block).

These days, from what I've read, they seem to have put WW's career back as starting alongside Supes' and Bats', making her a veteran hero as well (and restoring her place in the Silver Age JLA stories---post-Crisis she'd been "replaced" with Black Canary).

Has it been specified why she was made into the new hero on the block?

[AlgeaX]

Well, let's not drag politics into this, but only Batman considers what he does a "war" (Superman seems to carry himself as a policeman, and one without the right to use lethal force at that). And by relatable, I mean not acting like some kind of warrior who has a different moral code than the other super-heroes. As long as Batman doesn't kill the Joker, Wonder Woman (as part of the "Trinity") shouldn't be doing similar. Not to mention that I'm sure parents who catch wind of this story might not be so eager to get their daughters a Wonder Woman costume this year?

My personal ethical litumus test is this: If Wonder Woman and Max Lord were real life people rather the fictional characters, would I have had any ethical problem with Diana icing Lord in the circumstances as presented in the comics?

I'd have to give a resounding no. Lord was a direct threat to countless innocent lives and there was no real way to incapacitate him without putting those lives at further risk. What Diana did was know worse then what any cop would have been expected to do in the same position. Clark and Bruce should have given her a freaking medal, not acted like self-righteous jackasses.

[Temple Fugate]

I'd have to give a resounding no. Lord was a direct threat to countless innocent lives and there was no real way to incapacitate him without putting those lives at further risk. What Diana did was know worse then what any cop would have been expected to do in the same position. Clark and Bruce should have given her a freaking medal, not acted like self-righteous jackasses.I completely agree. The "murder" of Max Lord is one of the more annoying parts of the Infinite Crisis events. On the bright side, I can understand how it tarnishes Wonder Woman's image by having it be broadcast to every television on the planet (A brilliant move by Max). However, Superman and Batman should have sided with WW on the issue. Batman was one to talk. His Brother Eye was what got them in that situation in the first place.

All in all, it added up to be not that big a deal, except for the fact that for some reason the pages of the comics insisted "Yes, It Is A Very Big Deal."

In a smaller story context, Wonder Woman could have spent some time coming to grips emotionally with what she did, finding a way to justify her actions to herself and to her peers. It would have been a touching little arc that helped define her character and asserted her potition in the Trinity once more.

But NOPE THERE'S A CRISIS ON LET'S GO FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT!

As I've said on this forum before, if there was just some breathing room within these Crises that gave us more focused perspectives, we as readers could have a little more empathy and become more absorbed into what's going on. But 7-issue mini-series that are required to feature every DC hero just don't have the room for slower pacing like that.

[Mikintosh]

Yeah, besides my own personal uneasiness with the act, I had more trouble with the fact that Wonder Woman seemed unaffected by it, even though she's never made a habit of offing her foes before. If that's the kind of Wonder Woman DC wants to publish these days, then I won't be putting down my good money to read her book because that's not the kind of character I want to read about.

[Ed Liu]

Yeah, besides my own personal uneasiness with the act, I had more trouble with the fact that Wonder Woman seemed unaffected by it, even though she's never made a habit of offing her foes before. If that's the kind of Wonder Woman DC wants to publish these days, then I won't be putting down my good money to read her book because that's not the kind of character I want to read about.

I think one of the bigger problems Wonder Woman has had over time is that no matter how Wonder Woman is being depicted at any given time, she always seems to come out different once the next creative team takes over. In this case, I think that even though Greg Rucka wrote both the WW monthly book and at least co-wrote the comic where she killed Max Lord, I felt like the WW that killed Lord was different from the one that started off in his run on the monthly book. She'd change again when Allan Heinberg would get around to writing her (or, at least, I think it was supposed to be a different one -- I thought his first issue was so abysmally bad (http://forums.toonzone.net/showpost.php?p=2264154&postcount=17) that...well, I just waited for a new creative team where she'd be different again ;)). I do remember her expressing some remorse over killing Lord later, although I can't place quite when or where.

I think the whole incident is another negative long-term effect of Identity Crisis. I think that book showed that you could just write everyone wildly out of character and make them "shocking" and you'd get fanboys to buy and argue about the comics, even if it was just to complain that everyone was acting out of character or the book was contradicting long-standing continuity. Of all the characters in the DC Trinity who wouldn't have a strict "No Killing" rule, it's Diana, and I'm pretty sure Lorendiac has a list around the forum detailing the dozens of incidents where she killed someone before Infinite Crisis, sometimes with the explicit approval of Superman or Batman, who acted so shocked in the aftermath of killing Max Lord.

I also think your earlier criticism of WW is just a variation on the "I can't identify with Superman because he's too powerful" argument, and I remain unconvinced by those arguments (http://forums.toonzone.net/showpost.php?p=2838641&postcount=3), although I don't think my explanation for the root cause of Superman antipathy applies at all to Wonder Woman.

[Anthonynotes]

Has it been specified why she was made into the new hero on the block?

Far as I can guess, probably the "we get to see Wonder Woman do xyz for the very first time!" mentality, along with whatever reasons George Perez had at the time, as well as the general "change for the sake of change" mentality in place post-Crisis (making Lois have brown hair instead of black, the post-Crisis Fortress of Solitude originally appearing in the *Antarctic* instead of Arctic, etc.).

Either way, making her be a rookie who debuted/only having a career as long as fellow "Legends"-era "very first time" debuters Captain Marvel, Booster Gold, and so forth wouldn't seem to make her a Superman/Batman-level icon in the DCU, especially if there's a zillion female heroes before her in the modern era post-Crisis (particularly the post-Crisis retcon of making Black Canary a founding JLAer instead of WW). Then there's the havok it wreaked upon Donna Troy's backstory...

[Mikintosh]

I also think your earlier criticism of WW is just a variation on the "I can't identify with Superman because he's too powerful" argument, and I remain unconvinced by those arguments (http://forums.toonzone.net/showpost.php?p=2838641&postcount=3), although I don't think my explanation for the root cause of Superman antipathy applies at all to Wonder Woman.

I don't really understand how the two ae related. I don't have a problem with Wonder Woman being powerful (I love the Superman characters), nor do I have a problem with her taking her job seriously (I love the Batman characters). I just find her a boring and unlikeable character as she's been portrayed by most writers for the past couple decades (her "Justice League" animated version was a little bit better), and she's rarely put into setting or situations that are very involving to me, the average reader.

As I said before, I've enjoyed the Wonder Girl [Cassie] character much more than WW (tho mostly the way Peter David wrote her) because she had personality, a sense of humor, and behaved like an actual woman in the real world, as opposed to some lofty "goddess." These are changes to the character that were not the case in back issues I've read from the pre-Crisis era, so it's not a problem with the core character, just the way she's being written now. Unlike Superman, Wonder Woman just isn't very fun anymore.

[Ed Liu]

I don't really understand how the two ae related. I don't have a problem with Wonder Woman being powerful (I love the Superman characters), nor do I have a problem with her taking her job seriously (I love the Batman characters). I just find her a boring and unlikeable character as she's been portrayed by most writers for the past couple decades (her "Justice League" animated version was a little bit better), and she's rarely put into setting or situations that are very involving to me, the average reader.

Sorry, I think I skipped a step or two in my head in response to your criticisms of Wonder Woman. Specifically, the leap I'm making is this:


I think Perez's (and his successors') focusing on Wonder Woman's "Amazon warrior" nature rather then letting her be a regular superhero with a secret identity and a civilian life has made her cold and not that much fun to read, and it also allowed them to have her murder Max Lord, which I thought was the final straw in my tolerance of DC's handling of the character post-Crisis.
I think I read this as meaning that you felt that excising the secret identity and emphasizing the mythical elements made Diana cold and unrelatable. I related that to the argument I hear all the time that "I don't like Superman because he's too powerful and so I can't relate to him." I don't dispute that people don't like Superman, but I think the root cause isn't what they think it is. In this case, I'm not convinced that it's the lack of a secret identity that makes WW seem cold to you. I thought that the Perez post-Crisis reboot booted the secret identity and bolstered the mythical content, but also made her warmth and compassion central parts of her character, which definitely separated her from the boys and made her appealing. I'd also point to JLA: A League of One, which is one of my favorite WW stories, but where it is really all about Wonder Woman and why she's distinctive among members of the Justice League.

The funny thing is that I thought Justice League didn't "get" Diana until around season 3 or 4, taking all the stuff that makes her interesting and dumping it in favor of making her a Xena clone. She just became another large blunt object in a team full of large blunt objects when I think what makes her interesting is that she's NOT just a large blunt object. The new DTV movie strikes a nice balance between the two, I think, although in hindsight, it probably swings a bit further over to the Xena side than not.

Aside from that, the current WW comics being written by Gail Simone does restore the idea of the dual/civilian identity. It might have even been added in the Allan Heinberg reboot and the short Jodi Picoult run, but the former got mixed reviews, at best, and the second was generally panned across the board, so I'm not sure I'd want to use either as a serious counter-argument :). Simone gets the character, though, and if you find you can relate to her, I'd credit it less to the surface stuff like the secret identity and more to the fact that it's just good writing.

[Mikintosh]

Sorry, I think I skipped a step or two in my head in response to your criticisms of Wonder Woman. Specifically, the leap I'm making is this:


I think I read this as meaning that you felt that excising the secret identity and emphasizing the mythical elements made Diana cold and unrelatable. I related that to the argument I hear all the time that "I don't like Superman because he's too powerful and so I can't relate to him." I don't dispute that people don't like Superman, but I think the root cause isn't what they think it is. In this case, I'm not convinced that it's the lack of a secret identity that makes WW seem cold to you. I thought that the Perez post-Crisis reboot booted the secret identity and bolstered the mythical content, but also made her warmth and compassion central parts of her character, which definitely separated her from the boys and made her appealing. I'd also point to JLA: A League of One, which is one of my favorite WW stories, but where it is really all about Wonder Woman and why she's distinctive among members of the Justice League.

The funny thing is that I thought Justice League didn't "get" Diana until around season 3 or 4, taking all the stuff that makes her interesting and dumping it in favor of making her a Xena clone. She just became another large blunt object in a team full of large blunt objects when I think what makes her interesting is that she's NOT just a large blunt object. The new DTV movie strikes a nice balance between the two, I think, although in hindsight, it probably swings a bit further over to the Xena side than not.

Aside from that, the current WW comics being written by Gail Simone does restore the idea of the dual/civilian identity. It might have even been added in the Allan Heinberg reboot and the short Jodi Picoult run, but the former got mixed reviews, at best, and the second was generally panned across the board, so I'm not sure I'd want to use either as a serious counter-argument :). Simone gets the character, though, and if you find you can relate to her, I'd credit it less to the surface stuff like the secret identity and more to the fact that it's just good writing.

I'll admit I haven't read any of Gail Simone's run, though I'll try to check it out. And yes, good writing tends to trump premise in comics (see how much mileage they got out of the "bad boy" Superboy in the '90s), but since I've read many objectively good issues of WW (mostly by Rucka) but still couldn't remember a single thing about them after I was done, I think I just didn't care about what was going on. I appreciated the attempt to give her a supporting cast at the UN (especially that minotaur guy) but yeah, it felt too much like what I imagine Xena was like, and I still didn't care about the main character. I've also read JLA: A League of One, and while it was terrific, I felt you could switch out WW for anyone else in the league with little change to the story (though it's been awhile since I've read the book).

This may seem silly, but I think it'd be a good idea to return the character to something like how she was portrayed in the Super Friends. The show was silly and largely stupid, yes, but it painted WW like a real human person and not like some living legend. Yes, I know her origin means she's not neccessarily a regular person like Batman or even Superman is (since she grew up among Amazons), but her always being portrayed as a god walking amongst mortals has I think siphoned a lot of interest in the character from a pop culture perspective. Remember when Wonder Woman has her own show? Now she's just another comic book character, and I think that's a shame.

[Comic Book Boy]

IDENTITY CRISIS was a well-crafted piece of art and fiction. Any story as good as IDENTITY CRISIS benefits DC Comics and its characters. The fact that it lead to lesser work is a moot point. Is THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS and less special because of ALL-STAR BATMAN & ROBIN? Of course not.

[J'onn J'onzz]

My problem with the legacy of Identity Crisis wasn't so much that it made comics more serious, or more violent, or anything like that. I used to hate it for that reason, when I was younger, more easily offended, and less jaded, but I don't really anymore. I do think it killed off a lot of good characters who didn't need to die, but oh well, it's DC, they'll be back. I mean, they brought back Barry Allen of all people.

Anyway, my main problem with Identity Crisis's legacy is that it's sort of tossed DC into a perpetual company-wide crossover. I mean, there's been no real break between Identity Crisis and Final Crisis. Hopefully now that Final Crisis is over and the economy is tightening and people can't waste money on 500 crossover mini-series, they'll cut down on those, because honestly it is really annoying that DC does series like Countdown where they rely so heavily on reading other, probably quickly thrown together, books. I don't mind weekly comics like Countdown. I liked 52 quite a bit. Recently I've been reading the old Action Comics Weekly issues, which are pretty good, even though I can totally see why they failed. (DC went from one seventy five cent issue a month to four dollar fifty issues a month... People have to pay EIGHT TIMES AS MUCH to follow the same comic book. I like anthologies, but unless you're publishing on cheap black and white paper and are run by a presumably wealthy company, ala Shonen Jump, you're going to fail. With DC Comics Weekly, even though you technically WERE getting the same deal, with double the amount of pages, and double the price, you DO have to pay more money more often.)

Man, I'm getting off topic... Anyway, Identity Crisis ITSELF was a good stand alone read, I thought. It was a little too dark at times and some of the stuff it explained really... didn't need to be explained, but in the end, it wasn't nearly as bad as some of the things that followed.