Originally posted by srankmissingnin
Superman's motivations, personality and idealogical is the same now as it has always been. He's had an ass ton of stories but he hasn't had any substantial character development. Superman is Superman, he doesn't change.
that's not actually true, tbh. you can't define development by those three criteria, imo.
and his motivations and personality have actually developed quite a bit.
^ The character development and evolution of Superman in four easy steps:
"Truth, Justice, and the American Way!"
changed to
"Truth, Justice, and Tolerance for all the World's Cultures!"
changed to
"Truth, Justice, and Love for all the Universe's Denizens!"
changed to
"Truth, Justice, and the Salvation of the entire DC Multiverse!!! (except Darkseid)"
Originally posted by OneDumbG0
^ The character development and evolution of Superman in four easy steps:[b]"Truth, Justice, and the American Way!"
changed to
"Truth, Justice, and Tolerance for all the World's Cultures!"
changed to
"Truth, Justice, and Love for all the Universe's Denizens!"
changed to
"Truth, Justice, and the Salvation of the entire DC Multiverse!!! (except Darkseid)" [/B]
Hehe pretty much.
If you took current Superman and replaced him with himself in different times in his history, you aren't going get stories that would change much at all. Any decision Superman would have made 10 years ago, he'll make the same one now. Superman is Superman. If you took Cyclops and did the same thing you get radically different stories. Superman has hardly changed at all.
Originally posted by srankmissingnin
Hehe pretty much.If you took current Superman and replaced him with himself in different times in his history, you aren't going get stories that would change much at all. Any decision Superman would have made 10 years ago, he'll make the same one now. Superman is Superman. If you took Cyclops and did the same thing you get radically different stories. Superman has hardly changed at all.
how is his decisions being the same meaning he hasn't been developed as a character?
development and evolution don't necessarily have to mean complete changes.
and they ballsed cyclops up completely when fraction, kyle and yost came on board. that's not development. that's idiocy. he would have made similar choices up until the end of whedon's run even though he had been well developed as a character.
What do you think character development is exactly? Superman man hasn't changed at all. His opinion doesn't change. His outlook doesn't change. His methods don't change. Everything he does just further reaffirms the choices he made. That's not character development... thats called stagnation. He is the same place he was 10 years ago, and he'll still be there 10 years from now. Thats not necessarily a bad thing though. Superman is who he is for a reason: it works. No one wants Superman to change, so he doesn't change.
Whedon's Astonishing X-Men existed in a continuity black-hole so he didn't have the acknowledge the string of events that culminated in where Scott is now. Don't worry though, comics are very circular in their story telling method. When Marvel gets tired of Cyclops being an interesting full formed character they will turn him back into the bland, archetypal "boy-scout", cardboard cutout character stand-in you love so much. 😈
Originally posted by srankmissingnin
What do you think character development is exactly? Superman man hasn't changed at all. His opinion doesn't change. His outlook doesn't change. His methods don't change. Everything he does just further reaffirms the choices he made. That's not character development... thats called stagnation. He is the same place he was 10 years ago, and he'll still be there 10 years from now. Thats not necessarily a bad thing though. Superman is who he is for a reason: it works. No one wants Superman to change, so he doesn't change.Whedon's Astonishing X-Men existed in a continuity black-hole so he didn't have the acknowledge the string of events that culminated in where Scott is now. Don't worry though, comics are very circular in their story telling method. When Marvel gets tired of Cyclops being an interesting full formed character they will turn him back into the bland, archetypal "boy-scout", cardboard cutout character stand-in you love so much. 😈
his outlook did change. his opinion on several things changed. his methods have changed more than once.
just because he's still a good guy doesn't mean they didn't develop and deepen the character.
the whedon run was only the culmination of a good 6 or 7 years of work done by morrison, brubaker et al. i know you're only kidding, but i'd literally smack anyone in the mouth that tried to tell me that fraction's cyclops was a more rounded character than what whedon or morrison did.
Originally posted by -Pr-
his outlook did change. his opinion on several things changed. his methods have changed more than once.just because he's still a good guy doesn't mean they didn't develop and deepen the character.
the whedon run was only the culmination of a good 6 or 7 years of work done by morrison, brubaker et al. i know you're only kidding, but i'd literally smack anyone in the mouth that tried to tell me that fraction's cyclops was a more rounded character than what whedon or morrison did.
I agree with you, but I wouldn't hit anyone over it......it's just comics 😉
I'd burn their family and post the remains through their letterbox.