Anybody want a gay cowboy comic?
12-02-02, 09:10 PM
#1
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Thread Starter
Anybody want a gay cowboy comic?
Link to story
Nice pistol positioning.
Question: I have nothing against gay people. And I have nothing against cowboys. And I have nothing against gay cowboys, provided you show it in some sort of sensical context (not Priscilla, Queen of the Six Gun). But why do you need to take an established character with a loooong history and make him gay? Wouldn't it make more sense to create a new character who is gay and deal with him in a mature way, rather than trying to shoehorn homosexuality onto a character?
"It's Superman... but now, he's a pot-smoking hippie!"
"It's Daredevil... but now, he's not a crime fighter... he's an elite anti-terrorist commando in Afghanistan!"
Now the Kid's back with writer Ron Zimmerman and artist John Severin. The miniseries promises to show a Rawhide Kid unlike any other. Rumors are flying since editor Axel Alonso hinted here that this wouldn't be a straight Western.
Nice pistol positioning.
Question: I have nothing against gay people. And I have nothing against cowboys. And I have nothing against gay cowboys, provided you show it in some sort of sensical context (not Priscilla, Queen of the Six Gun). But why do you need to take an established character with a loooong history and make him gay? Wouldn't it make more sense to create a new character who is gay and deal with him in a mature way, rather than trying to shoehorn homosexuality onto a character?
"It's Superman... but now, he's a pot-smoking hippie!"
"It's Daredevil... but now, he's not a crime fighter... he's an elite anti-terrorist commando in Afghanistan!"
12-03-02, 02:27 PM
#3
DVD Talk Legend
Originally posted by grunter
Especially if he's eating pudding.
Especially if he's eating pudding.
edited to add: I was thinking chocolate.
Last edited by DodgingCars; 12-03-02 at 03:04 PM.
12-03-02, 04:35 PM
#5
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Originally posted by DodgingCars
ewwwww..... If that's what I think it means.
edited to add: I was thinking chocolate.
ewwwww..... If that's what I think it means.
edited to add: I was thinking chocolate.
Although conceivably I suppose it could be taken . . . uh . . . that way.
And that's not a kid in the second picture, that's just a shorter sidekick. There's no real way to tell how old that sidekick is without more context.
12-04-02, 07:12 AM
#7
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 1,471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't see any problems with reimagining established characters. Batman has had a number of incarnations, from the Elseworlds series to Dark Knight Returns to the various animated series. After the brief death of Superman bit, they took an established character/paradigm and reimagined it in the form of four other related characters. There's a huge interest in alternate history-based fiction that changes events and actions of real people to see how things would be different, often with extremely satisfying results.
If the story is engaging, what difference does it make?
If the story is engaging, what difference does it make?
12-04-02, 07:35 AM
#8
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Thread Starter
Originally posted by Caoimhin
I don't see any problems with reimagining established characters. Batman has had a number of incarnations, from the Elseworlds series to Dark Knight Returns to the various animated series. After the brief death of Superman bit, they took an established character/paradigm and reimagined it in the form of four other related characters. There's a huge interest in alternate history-based fiction that changes events and actions of real people to see how things would be different, often with extremely satisfying results.
I don't see any problems with reimagining established characters. Batman has had a number of incarnations, from the Elseworlds series to Dark Knight Returns to the various animated series. After the brief death of Superman bit, they took an established character/paradigm and reimagined it in the form of four other related characters. There's a huge interest in alternate history-based fiction that changes events and actions of real people to see how things would be different, often with extremely satisfying results.
As for Batman and Superman, yeah, they shook things up, but they did it in a way that made sense. Superman wasn't alive one day, and then dead and replaced the next by 4 versions with no reason... the reason he was dead was they killed him. Here, he's been straight for years and years and years, and now he's gay. I'm sure a lot of writers could come up with a good explanation for that, but I don't trust this particular one to do so.
12-21-02, 03:10 AM
#10
DVD Talk Hero
Why not create a new character?
Because the "New Marvel" is essentially the "Old DC."
They're borrowing parts of DC's late 80s playbook by dusting off old, established characters that aren't being used and letting writers revamp them into "hip" mature readers comics.
This worked well for DC -- giving us classics like Alan Moore's "Swamp Thing," Grant Morrison's "Animal Man" and "Doom Patrol," Neil Gaiman's "Sandman," Milligan's "Shade The Changing Man," and "Watchmen," among others. (Watchmen was initially supposed to be based on the Charlton stable DC bought out, but the characters were than changed into original characters when DC decided to integrate those characters into the DCU. Dr. Manhattan = Captain Atom, Nite Owl = Blue Beetle, Rorschach = The Question, etc.)
So far, Marvel hasn't really hit anything out of the ball park yet. I don't think Azz's "Cage" was very well received, nor was Ennis' "Fury."
Because the "New Marvel" is essentially the "Old DC."
They're borrowing parts of DC's late 80s playbook by dusting off old, established characters that aren't being used and letting writers revamp them into "hip" mature readers comics.
This worked well for DC -- giving us classics like Alan Moore's "Swamp Thing," Grant Morrison's "Animal Man" and "Doom Patrol," Neil Gaiman's "Sandman," Milligan's "Shade The Changing Man," and "Watchmen," among others. (Watchmen was initially supposed to be based on the Charlton stable DC bought out, but the characters were than changed into original characters when DC decided to integrate those characters into the DCU. Dr. Manhattan = Captain Atom, Nite Owl = Blue Beetle, Rorschach = The Question, etc.)
So far, Marvel hasn't really hit anything out of the ball park yet. I don't think Azz's "Cage" was very well received, nor was Ennis' "Fury."
12-24-02, 07:16 AM
#12
DVD Talk Godfather
Originally posted by CaptainMarvel
New picture up... now they've got kids in the act. I'm not sure if I was gay that I would want these people to handle the subject.
New picture up... now they've got kids in the act. I'm not sure if I was gay that I would want these people to handle the subject.
12-24-02, 08:14 AM
#13
DVD Talk Hero
Actually, the "log" cover for Rawhide Kid is a parody of an old Rifelman cover.
I also don't think Marvel is going to use that for a cover, anyway.
I also don't think Marvel is going to use that for a cover, anyway.
