![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Look, guys, Superman started off as a vaguely socialist vigilante (socialist means "arresting people who are breaking the law," right?) and Wonder Woman started off as a walking bondage fetish. Who cares if those are traits that have been phased out through decades of storytelling and experimentation, to become a character that is "popular" or "recognizable"? Every character should be like they are the very first time they're presented. That's why everyone hates shows where characters grow and change. Mention "character development" to any writer, you'll be lucky to get out of there without a split lip. Why do you think people watch Glee?
So, Batman should clearly kill criminals, with guns, and not have a Robin, since that's the way he started out. And James Bond should hate women, gays, and minorities, since that's the way he started out.
So, Batman should clearly kill criminals, with guns, and not have a Robin, since that's the way he started out. And James Bond should hate women, gays, and minorities, since that's the way he started out.
no subject
Date: 2011-10-03 04:31 am (UTC)http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/EarlyInstallmentWeirdness
Obsessive fans of continuity should really know when to pick and choose which moments are worth keeping, and which to throw away. Too bad everybody keeps chucking out the fun stuff, since "respectable" art has serious themes. Here's a relevant comparision; when Steven Spielberg started making movies for the critics instead of his audiences, his popularity plumented.
Comic companies keep feeling that they've got to prove they're "relevant" to prove that comics are no longer just for kids, but they keep forgetting that potential audience left them when they showed no interest in telling any stories they felt personally invested or relateable to.