|
Post by Crom-Cruach on Apr 20, 2011 14:57:35 GMT -5
I actually think spidey has made a good point. no he hasn't and his argument is getting worse by the minute. We know what these powers do what they have, what they are, their limits and what physica and internal laws make that universe. That is doesn't exist in the real world has absolute no bearing whatsoever on if something completely beyond what is established and logical within that universe happening should be accepted. Because within that universe no logic makes it possible none. Wolverine's healing factor; is it illogical? We don't know because that doesn't exist. Yes we know because we know what it does and how his body is made. Therefore him surviving conscious a blow from Thor is illogical.
|
|
|
Post by NexusOfLight on Apr 20, 2011 15:03:06 GMT -5
See, if only everyone read Radical, none of this would be an issue. Okay, maybe not really but still, Radical comics need more people reading them. That said, this is simply another example of science going against comic logic. Is it bad writing for someone like Wolverine to be a match against Hulk? On paper, yes. It's PIS because there's nothing listed in his ability set that allows for that, but since he's been doing it since his first appearance, and still continues doing it, in comics that means he has the ability to do it. So the real question is, just because there's nothing explicitly pointed out under Wolverine's profile page, does that mean he has nothing in his ability set to work with? Maybe, maybe not. It's sorta like how we were going on about Karate Kid? Does he have super powers or some super ability that allows him to do things on a super human level, or is it just martial arts? DC says it's just martial arts. Me, I'm still not too sure about that, but another time, another thread.
|
|
|
Post by Crom-Cruach on Apr 20, 2011 15:22:02 GMT -5
So the real question is, just because there's nothing explicitly pointed out under Wolverine's profile page, does that mean he has nothing in his ability set to work with? Maybe, maybe not. sorry but no, in writing if you establish what defines a certain aspect then you cannot allow something beyond those definitions without having some profound redefinition to explain it.
|
|
|
Post by Supreme Marvel on Apr 20, 2011 15:56:28 GMT -5
How does Superman fly, again?
|
|
|
Post by Supreme Marvel on Apr 20, 2011 15:58:13 GMT -5
I don't mind magical people breaking the laws of physic.
|
|
|
Post by NexusOfLight on Apr 20, 2011 16:32:32 GMT -5
So the real question is, just because there's nothing explicitly pointed out under Wolverine's profile page, does that mean he has nothing in his ability set to work with? Maybe, maybe not. sorry but no, in writing if you establish what defines a certain aspect then you cannot allow something beyond those definitions without having some profound redefinition to explain it. So despite the on panel evidence that someone may have some form of enhanced durability, until a writer explicitly says that person has enhanced durability, along with the other powers that that character has, it's not true? Not to revive an old topic, but to me, that seems exactly like what you were trying to say with the Karate Kid having/not having powers.
|
|
|
Post by DedmanWalkin on Apr 21, 2011 1:12:32 GMT -5
I find the "given how many writers a character can have there can be no real consistency" argument that has been brought up to be a cop out. In the News industry, if a reporter starts crapping up the paper, the editor steps in and either fires him or doesn't publishes them. Why doesn't the same rules apply to the comic book industry. If a writer starts crapping up the universe canon, the editor should step in and fire or refuse to publish them. The fact is that this has not been happening in Marvel or DC for far too long. Now editors in the News industry make use if Fact Checkers to insure that they aren't publishing lies, Comic Editors could likewise employ Continuity Checkers which verify if something is contradicting canon. Now this is where the analogy ends as News is about facts and comics are about art. A writer can override canon if they can provide good reason to do so to the editor. If a system like this existed, consistency could easily be maintained. However, the comics industry, much like the most entertainment industries, are run by money grubbing producers who will override canon to make more money. Now, I have no problem with the rule of cool and I like seeing cool shit but you can do it without violating canon. Wolverine's durability made sense when he first fought the Hulk in his debut because the Hulk was not at the world breaking levels he is now. Unfortunately, dumb writers saw his fight with the early Hulk and thought that Wolverine could take super strong blows equivalent to current Hulk. Any decent fact checker could have looked at the facts available and determined that idea to be crap but now it is unfortunately canon despite its bullshit. A major problem with most writers is that they don't take the time to understand the hows and whys of someone's powers and thus it leads us into ridiculous situations. I think that in order to write a character, a writer must pass a test or something that shows they know their shit. As for the "its comics durr, science doesn't matter" argument, I would direct you to my Science versus Comics thread.
|
|
|
Post by Phantom Stargrave on Apr 21, 2011 3:21:21 GMT -5
In the News industry, if a reporter starts crapping up the paper, the editor steps in and either fires him or doesn't publishes them. Why doesn't the same rules apply to the comic book industry. If a writer starts crapping up the universe canon, the editor should step in and fire or refuse to publish them. The fact is that this has not been happening in Marvel or DC for far too long. Now editors in the News industry make use if Fact Checkers to insure that they aren't publishing lies, Comic Editors could likewise employ Continuity Checkers which verify if something is contradicting canon. Now this is where the analogy ends as News is about facts and comics are about art. A writer can override canon if they can provide good reason to do so to the editor. If a system like this existed, consistency could easily be maintained. However, the comics industry, much like the most entertainment industries, are run by money grubbing producers who will override canon to make more money. This comparison doesn't work for one simple reason: Reporters report fact. Writers make continuity.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Barbatos on Apr 21, 2011 3:50:06 GMT -5
I'm not too bothered,as long as it's consistent overall.It's not like those guys who write martial arts books know kung fu themselves.
|
|
|
Post by Supreme Marvel on Apr 21, 2011 3:56:11 GMT -5
It's not like those guys who write martial arts books know kung fu themselves. I always thought that. I can't imagine Chuck Dixon knowing it. Maybe read a lot, but not know it. However I could be surprised.
|
|
|
Post by Erik-El on Apr 21, 2011 9:14:32 GMT -5
@dedman: The first fight with the Hulk, Wolverine was not written with a healing factor. He rolled with the punch, which saved his life according to the omniscient narrator (who I always think of as Uatu).
The fight as since been retconned and Wolverine was shown with the healing factor and Hulk with a retconned power level. The fight pretty much went the same way with slight changes.
|
|
|
Post by DedmanWalkin on Apr 21, 2011 13:00:24 GMT -5
It does work, editors control what gets published and who writes what. It is completely possible for a newspaper to publish stories that are completely untrue and unless someone calls them on it, they have affected the canon of our universe. There was a rather famous news writer who made up almost all of their stories and managed to get them published for years effectively altering canon for that newspaper and the world at large. Had the newspapers fact checkers or editor taken the time to ensure the truthfulness of the story, it would not have been published. Had Marvel editors taken the time to Spider-man beating Firelord, it would not have been published. We can't blame the writers for writing but we can blame the editors for not doing their job and reining them in. What do we call a newspaper with crappy editors? A tabloid. Also, newspapers don't just employ reporters that report fact they also employ a wide range of columnists, commentators, and reviewers who write their opinion. That opinion can be anything but any facts used must be true. The same should be true for comics. Erik-ElIt has been awhile since I read the first fight, I suppose I was remembering another fight between them, maybe the retconned one.
|
|
InnerVenom123
Team Buster Ledger
Venom: Lethal Avenger!
Posts: 2,570
|
Post by InnerVenom123 on Apr 22, 2011 14:08:47 GMT -5
In the News industry, if a reporter starts crapping up the paper, the editor steps in and either fires him or doesn't publishes them. Why doesn't the same rules apply to the comic book industry. If a writer starts crapping up the universe canon, the editor should step in and fire or refuse to publish them. The fact is that this has not been happening in Marvel or DC for far too long. Now editors in the News industry make use if Fact Checkers to insure that they aren't publishing lies, Comic Editors could likewise employ Continuity Checkers which verify if something is contradicting canon. Now this is where the analogy ends as News is about facts and comics are about art. A writer can override canon if they can provide good reason to do so to the editor. If a system like this existed, consistency could easily be maintained. However, the comics industry, much like the most entertainment industries, are run by money grubbing producers who will override canon to make more money. This comparison doesn't work for one simple reason: Reporters report fact. Writers make continuity. I'm so tempted to post a pic of the FOX logo....
|
|
|
Post by Phantom Stargrave on Apr 22, 2011 14:36:00 GMT -5
I'm so tempted to post a pic of the FOX logo.... Let me rephrase: Reporters should report fact, while writers are supposed to make continuity.
|
|
|
Post by DedmanWalkin on Apr 22, 2011 23:28:32 GMT -5
Are you trying to defend inconsistency in comics? Do you want it to continue? I propose a solution that we know works for upholding consistency, do you have one?
If a writer starts writing a character uncharacteristically, they should have to rewrite it so that it is written characteristically. The same applies for news writers, if they start writing a story factually incorrect, they are forced to rewrite it by their editors/fact checkers.
|
|
|
Post by Erik-El on Apr 23, 2011 11:56:13 GMT -5
I like the continuity checkers idea. It makes a lot of sense.
It is supposed to be the editors job to do that but they are too busy to worry about things like that so they should employ people who are actual experts on the characters.
|
|
nelomaxwell
Team Buster Ledger
This groove F***kin suits me, swag two button
Posts: 1,668
|
Post by nelomaxwell on Apr 26, 2011 8:52:03 GMT -5
How does Superman fly, again? Kryptonia sun exposure powers, your point? Gravitons actually the same way everyone else flies.
|
|
nelomaxwell
Team Buster Ledger
This groove F***kin suits me, swag two button
Posts: 1,668
|
Post by nelomaxwell on Apr 26, 2011 8:56:17 GMT -5
This is why my characters will always operate at levels that makes sense within the realms of magic.
|
|
creator
Team Buster Ledger
It's time for Powergrids 2.0
Posts: 1,217
|
Post by creator on Apr 28, 2011 7:08:12 GMT -5
I have read this thread and it refelcts some thoughts I had a long time ago and made reference to something like 3.5 yrs ago on Comicvine. As a scientist in real life, my natural inclination is to look at all aspects of life with a science hat on (hard to break that habit ). When I read a comic I look for details in the pictures and text that give me facts and data, Many of you have seen me do this on Comicvine (like weight calculations for estimations of strength). I recognise that not everyone has my breadth or depth of science understanding (Chemistry, Physics, Materials) but I face this everyday in my day job in explining to directors of the company why this material works and that ones fails, so I accept it. I do however recognise that today there are many sources of information readily available to 'Joe public' that can help them research science facts. I also know that most writers have familiarity with obvious recognisable science i.e. Rockets, lasers etc just because of the schooling and information based societies we live in. So when a writer creates a story I expect them to employ some basic level of everyday science understanding in their writing. The only exceptions to this is where magic is involved or where science so far beyond our understanding is employed. However writers can always ask other more informed people about science issues to be more fact based (many S/F writers have done this). Comicbook companies are the 'guardians and owners' of the data for their characters. They should be the most knowledgable source of information on said characters. Thus they should be in the best place to offer character continuity in the sense of a characters abilities and feats. I belive they can and should do a better job with characters and not rely on poor story writing as to why character X should survive the explosion when he obviouisly should not. The Editors can and should enforce better continuity. Many S/Fwriters research the founding ideas of their book before launching in to writing it. In the same vein comic book writers should immerse themselves in the characters background and powers before embarking on their writing. A detailed 'bible' of characters should be held by the companies to describe all there is to know about their characters and also note any potential developments that could / will be made. As an example the Thing's strength is fixed and writers clearly know his defined limits until the Thing undergoes a further mutation and his strength is 25% higher. They know the changes, they know when the changes will be made and thus continuity is mainted. It's quite easy to do, all it requires is planning and communication amongst the writers and Editors. Some people might think this takes away some of the open ended element of comics by defining how strong a character really is but instead it should make the writer streatch to make the story more inventive. For instance the Thing should not normally be able to punch out the Hulk, but Mr Smith, the new FF writer crafts his story and makes it so.......instantly we have a problem with continuity mof feats/ / powers. Instead the writer should have come up with a better solution, like maybe Mr Fantastic coming up with a device that drained off some of the Hulk's power and lowered his durability allowing the Thing's blow to KO the Hulk. Whatever the story solution might be, it is certainly not lazy writing that results in PIS or CIS (2 terms I hate and the companies could easily prevent by some of the actions I mention above). Rant over ;D
|
|
Beatboks
Team Buster Ledger
Posts: 2,206
|
Post by Beatboks on Apr 28, 2011 8:36:09 GMT -5
While I don't see a need for exact quantification of abilities there should be a "ball park" in which they are drawn from. There is after all a lot of things that can effect the level of physical ability a normal human can achieve. When stressed or pushed by adrenaline for example. When tired or fatigued our ability is reduced etc.
As for the argument that a writer can't maintain some level consistency , I have to disagree. A good writer certainly can. I would like to point to the very large body of work done by Roy Thomas. In all his work at Marvel DC and independents, he has been able to consistently write a character within the established canon that has come before him. He has had such respect for the characters he writes, that where there have been large inconsistencies he's actually come up with plots that explain why. Look for example to his work on All Star Squadron. Back in the 40's Dr fate was first a sorcerer who could wave his hand and do wondrous things wearing one helmet. Then he was a GA Superman rip off with mystic (TP senses) with another piece of headgear. GL was leader of the JSA in one issue and not even a member in the next. Likewise Hourman disappeared from membership between the pages. In two stories Roy explains it all away and ties up all loose ends. He gives a quantified reason as to why such powerful mysterymen didn't just end the war. He explained the changing power levels of characters (e.g. Al Pratt Atom).
He did similar work on many other books. He took contradictory stories of charactes in more than a few Marvel titles and did the same. There's no reason why you can't still change characters up to explore new ideas and make great tales. I like change when written well. For example when Winnick (yeah I know I'll get off the soap box soon) wrote GA so badly out of character in GA/BC I was appalled. And yet when Grell completely changed Ollie into a killer. Then had him explore himself and find his way back to a more moderate character, I loved it. that's because Grell created a scenario where the change to the character had true development, reason, cause and effect. Ollie's change back was handled the same way. In doing so Grell help the reader (at least this reader) explore their own moral center.
|
|