Justice Society of America >> View Post
Post By

Member Since: Thu May 07, 2009
Posts: 3,347
In Reply To

Location: Lancashire
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 39,842
Subj: Re: Tom Taylor Talks Val-Zod and Worlds End...
Posted: Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 04:06:31 pm EDT (Viewed 423 times)
Reply Subj: Tom Taylor Talks Val-Zod and Worlds End...
Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2014 at 03:41:20 pm EDT (Viewed 488 times)

    As an excuse this may make some sense in the practical terms of producing comicbooks, but it is still a cop-out and disservice to the reader.
    After carefully building up the questions of Val-Zod's pacifism and what it would take for him to finally take action to save others and end the carnage being inflicted across the globe, Tom Taylor's decision to wave Zod's dilemma away with a magic epithany short-changes the reader and shows a very poor weakness in writing ability. Did he set this plot up and then find he couldn't devise a credible rationale for Val to come to the decision to take action? The finished page seems to say so...

It really was magic, wasn't it? Doctor Fate's helmet and all that, eh? ;\)

While I don't fault Taylor for his laziness here, I honestly don't know what he could have offered, as I haven't seen any of his work outside of Injustice, and that book is written for an audience that is less demanding of certain things. I do hope he understands that pacifist doesn't mean punching bag, read that issue of GI Joe where Lifeline beats Horrorshow.

    Taylor: Yeah, that was the moment. It was kind of funny; there were all these people tweeting at me saying, hey, he's going to be redeemed, right? And I was like, oh, there's going to be this moment where you're going to realize there's no redemption for this guy.

    It's just about the worst thing I've ever written.

No, Injustice is the worst thing by far, but this action is actually smart and welcomed by me. Superman fans need to understand that not every action is redeemable, and when you change the fundamentals of a character, it's no longer that character. There has to be some definitive direction with moves like this, or else we'll just see an endless supply of Evil Superman characters, or Superman becoming Superdoom, or the Superior Superman.

    I loved Tom Taylor's thinking here, to create a character as high profile as Superman and have him be a commited pacifist who shuns violence is an incredibly bold and brave decision in todays comic marketplace. Whether it can work in real terms is an awkward question to answer, as this is a medium that is fuelled by violence and testosterone and backed by the gutlessness of editorial who balk at showing anything but...
    Can Val-Zod really negotiate with the depravity of Kal-el at this point? Is there anything left of Kal-el's mind and soul to connect with on a rational level? Considering the casual execution of his own father the answer seems to be a firm no. But given none of the upcoming solicits make any reference to Kal-el what will be his fate next issue? And what can Val say to him that will make any impact on one so far gone into Zealotry and single minded mania?

Of course he can. He's Superman. ;\)

R. I. P. Kato: A good friend to one who has so few
Posted with Google Chrome 36.0.1985.125 on Windows NT 4.0
Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2018 Powermad Software
All the content of these boards Copyright © 1996-2018 by Alvaro Ortiz and Dave Galanter. Software Copyright © 2003-2018 Powermad Software