I can't say that any of this sounds particularly good to me. The description "A hero defined by anger, rage," really illustrates a complete and total misunderstanding of the character, one that has plagued him for way too freaking long at this point. After his father dies, Arthur Curry spends his time brawling in bars? Yeah, HEROISM! Hooray for postmodern cynicism. I really enjoy a story about a character learning to be a hero, but that just doesn't sound anything like the character I love. It sounds like the rageaholoic Namor-lite that haunted DC for a decade and we've only recently moved past.I want this to be good. I REALLY want this to be good, but pretty much every time the folks behind it opened their mouths, I found myself thinking, "who gave these people control over the DC movies?" I found their description of the team dynamic of the JLA particularly enlightening, focusing as it did on how they can't get along for two minutes at a time and how that was their favorite element. I like some tension and repartee, but come on, there's more motivations than selfishness and arrogance. These people are heroes, and they should darn well act like it.As for Aquaman, I hope my fears will be unfounded, but I can't say this fills me with much hope.
I thought the chemistry between the characters as presented in "Crisis on Two Earths" was just right; there was disagreement and debate that illustrated their different personalities and their different viewpoints, but it wasn't constant obnoxious sniping and posturing. Though I'm afraid if that's not what you want, you might be fighting the cultural zeitgeist; childish sniping and chest-thumping is the stuff of which reality tv empires have been built.
"Though I'm afraid if that's not what you want, you might be fighting the cultural zeitgeist..."So what else is new. Yeah, I think you're right, but I'm afraid I've seen the world moving in a different direction than me for most of my life.
Post a Comment