I have been idling on facebook a great deal lately, so I happen to catch most of the posts that come my way. This isn't necessarily a good thing. A lot of redundancies happen because different like-groups talk/post like things. One that I've noticed over the past few weeks (and really tried to ignore it) is the discussions about Superman's outfit. Where's his red undies, it's the wrong blue, the S is different, etc.
Here's the thing: this isn't something new. Every movie, comic, new iteration of any media franchise does this, mostly when it changes hands. The Spider man in the Sam Raimi movies is different from the Marc Webb version, Batman's suit was different in ALL those movies.
I'm sure someone will say, "Well, that's not how he looks in the comics." - I hate to tell you this, but it changes a lot there too. Here's a good list (why make one when it already exists) http://screenrant.com/superman-man-of-steel-suit-costume-history-versions/
Costumes change with the times and it's sometimes hard to remember that we, the older people in the audience, aren't always the reason things are made. For every one of us old enough to remember the Christopher Reeve movies I barely made that cut), there are just as many young adults/children out there who are seeing this all for the first time. They are who these movies are made for, they are the ones who will buy the games, the toys, the comics. We might, but I'm going to guess it's a far smaller percentage.
I was watching a video on youtube for the upcoming game, Injustice. In case you don't know its DC comics based fighting game, made by the people who made Mortal Kombat. The video was detailing the author's hopes for characters from the "batman family". You see, over the course of Batman's career, he's had SEVERAL robins; 5 to be exact, 6 if you count Frank Miller's piece when Batman comes out of retirement..bla bla bla. The video got me thinking - how the heck old is Batman? I did some half-assed research (internet).
I am not an avid Batman reader. I know a good chunk of the main plot lines and a few tid bits from here and there, that's about it. To answer this little question I set forth and, more or less, pieced it together.
The easy part. Bruce Wayne became Batman at age 25 (I've also seen 26). The hard part - where to go from there. The easiest route was finding out how long he kept each Robin around. So, here we go, in order.
Dick Grayson (becomes Nightwing) was Robin for 9 years
Jason Todd (dies, comes back as Red Hood) 3 years
Tim Drake (Red Robin) 7 years
Stephanie Brown (became Batgirl) roughly a year - she trained for several months and did a couple cases with the bat
Damien (at the moment he's dead) roughly a year - I'm guessing that because I could find much info on it.
As you can see...not exactly conclusive data, but enough to show something interesting. Based entirely on this, Bruce Wayne is roughly 46.
This is saying that he had Robin from day 1 of being Batman AND there's no gaps between Robins. Chances are there was some time at the beginning without a Robin and some time between each, so I'm betting he's over 50. Pretty spry for an older gent! From what I've read, Batman has fallen into a Lazarus pit, that Ra's Al Ghul, has a couple of times, making him younger, better, faster, stronger...sorry...Daft Punk tanget... Fun little waste of time
I added another game tonight, "Stick RPG Full." It seemed like it could be a fun game, but I honestly didn't play it a lot. If anyone has any suggestions on games they would like to see here, drop me an email or comment on this posting and I'll see what I can do. I am limited to html embeded games (meaning the site the game from hosts the game)
I was thinking about adding a section that lists the days when an author's book(s) are free to the public. I would just have them email me and I would post it with the book cover, a link to it on amazon (US and UK) and maybe a description of the book. Would anyone be interested in that that comes on here? Thoughts, comments appreciated. :D
This isn't so much a complaint as it is an observation I've made in the past week, or so. I've been checking out reviews of other fiction writers, mostly in contemporary fiction. I've noticed a few reviews here and there that state the author was incorrect in their statement and they needed to check their facts, bla bla bla.
I don't know what the author said, if it was sound, or stated falsely, but I have to wonder - who reads fiction for facts? I'm not saying it doesn't happen, most of Star Trek is based on working (and not so working) theories, but was that why any of us watched it? If the theory on Warp Drive on Star Trek differed from the real theory does it matter? I believe it does not. So why critique a piece of fiction based on that?
Let's say this little piece of information is key to some major part of the story. It's still fiction, it still does not matter. That would be like getting upset that a martial arts movie has people floating around in the air and fighting. "It's not possible!" You know what, it's not, but we aren't watching a documentary, we're watching two guys beat the piss out of each other with swords and somehow never die. I won't lie and say I like the floating around fighting, but it isn't because it's fake. It's because it's slow and a little stupid (to me).