JLU "The Once and Future Thing, Parts 1 & 2" Talkback, Part III (Spoilers)

Rate and Comment on This Episode!


  • Total voters
    15

paulie

DARN good coffee
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Messages
378
Location
Yay Area
So it seems that GL and Bats were stuck in an infinite time-loop of their own...ooowww, my head hurts from thinking about it.


I agree that TOAFT didn't affect Batman one bit. That WAS a disappointment. But I DO think that it affected GL...he acknowledges it with his "this makes things complicated" line...although we don't get the GL payoff in this episode, maybe we'll get it later? As many people have said, in JLU, we have to wait for things (not my preference)...if they come at all...this would have been a stronger episode if there was more post-time-travel wrap-up/ramifications, or at least a better wrap-up, like in "Legends" where the full weight of what the Justice Guild did was felt by GL and HG.
 

Salvor

You can't take a picture of it
Joined
Apr 30, 2001
Messages
3,562
Location
Paris
SJJ said:
Then again.. you have to look on the bright side - it was a dramatic and memorable scene. Not uplifting, but certainly something one wouldn't forget.
Was it? It felt so anti-climactic and so NOT dramatic to me. Ironically, if it hadn't been for the replies to this thread, I wouldn't even have noticed that he died! To me he was just hurting, and Bruce yelled his usual "TERRY!". Really not that great for a so-called death scene...

Anyway apart from Terry's ridiculously small role in this episode, and putting aside the new record for most memorable cop-out EVER ("I took a good look at his belt"... oh COME ON Dwayne!), it was a pretty good episode. For a BB/JLU crossover it fell a bit short of my expectations... instead of focusing on the Batman meeting Batman subplot, which SHOULD have been handled as a much bigger thing than the mere bright dialogue they granted us, they made it into yet another mindless action episode. Thank god strong animation and good direction were there, so as a whole it did feel like an exciting ride.
 
Joined
Nov 7, 2001
Messages
280
bat313 said:
But it still doesn't make any sense. Every other time he traveled to the past he didn't have to relive his past actions like the loop is causing him to do. For that to work, it would have to send him back in time 5 mintues, take over his old body, FORGET everything which has already happened!!!!, and keep doing the same stupid thing over and over again! How did Batman program that? Magic? Did dr fate help? Maybe Zues helped since he use to date Wonder Woman :rolleyes2 I"m sorry to be so critical, but when you are gonna end an entire season on one cataclismic event, it should at least make some sense.:sad: Like i've said b4, i'm a huge fan of every episode ( minus Hawk and Dove) so i'm not one of the usual JL bashers, but i don't know how you guys let such a huge inconsitantcy slip by. :mad:

Last time I'm getting into this, either it works for you or it doesn't (like Superman flying) but a time machine has to be able to communicate with itself achronally to work at all. Batman (with help from old Bruce, but it was edited out) took advantage of this. At the end, Chronos never gets to press the belt control, time loops before he touches it and he is unaware of anything unusual happening. What Batman did is retroactively program the belt to, instead of carrying David to the Watchtower as it did in part one, put itself in an infinite loop of about 10 seconds duration -which is what we saw at the end of part 2.
 

mahoney

Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2003
Messages
100
Devils_Advocate said:
Now Bruce has the chance to change himself. It is not about changing events as much as changing himself to allow himself a future that is not based on damage, bitterness and loss.
I didn't notice anything in present day Batman's actions or dialogue that implies he reacted in this way to what he saw of his future self. I can see where your theory *could* apply, but I don't see where it *does* apply. Maybe you could give me examples of dialogue/scenes that support this?

Also, I don't think what he saw of old Bruce and Terry is the vision of bitterness and lonliness that you imagine. The Chronos-smashed world is that vision, yes, but old Bruce and Terry's relationship seemed very comfortable, and old Bruce was more capable and energetic than most old fogeys could hope to be (c.f. his taking over the interrogation of Ghoul, for example). Not only did Batman discover that he managed to live to a ripe old age, he finds that he's still in the thick of crime-fighting, still mentoring.

Sure, Terry dies, but not *really.* The whole point of Batman's and GL's actions was to stop Chronos before that version of the future played out, so Batman would at the end have good reason to believe that his future protege did not die and leave his future self all alone again. To take that even further, Batman may have ended the episode by disregarding *everything* he saw, because, again, they stopped that future from happening.

Given Batman's impassivity throughout the episode, I don't think he took anything at all away from the experience. He had no way of knowing how much of what he saw depended on Chronos' blunder versus how much was real, and he seemed to treat the entire experience, from beginning to end, as just another job in a particularly bizarre environment. Like he was fighting a bad guy in a psychotic fun house, and he could just forget the fun house once he got out of it.

So I pretty much agree with stly92's assessment, that the experience had no noticeable affect on Batman, which makes the whole exercise a bit of a waste.
 
R

Robin

Guest
Dens Maris said:
You know what, I have to agree on this. The way Terry "died" in this episode was off for several reasons, but the biggest one actually isn't in the bleakness, it's in the thematics. Just moments after Terry is murdered we see Green Lantern pop off a heroic line, see craziness unfold as Revolutionary War soldiers hunt after Woof, see Enid chew out Chronos, see Chronos go "pretty!" at the end of the world, and all this humorous stuff...
I agree with that. Maybe they were trying to just done it down but keep some of the impact but I thought Terry's death wasn't handled right. A fair amount of us have alot of emotion invested into this character. How he's essentially pushed off screen to die doesn't fly right.
 

James

Administrator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
May 5, 2001
Messages
31,302
Location
UK
stly92 said:
Okay, let's define the problem. First off, ignoring all the useless cameos, who is this episode really about? Well, considering that the only two characters who will remember any of it are Batman and Green Lantern, it's a good bet it's about them. And what is the important thing that happens to them in this episode? Stripped down to the bone, it's basically about them finding out very important things about their futures. THAT is the main thrust of the episode. Anything else is secondary and not important.
I don't agree at all. I agree that there is a natural resolution to the opening scene, but I think you are making too much of Batman's part. Yes, Lantern's opening "issues" are resolved, but the impetus and drive of the show was neither about Batman's issues or Green Lantern's. Lantern's discovery of a possible child (from a fragmented future timeline) renews interest in Hawkgirl, but the stories themselves - parts one and two offer little insight into this. Partiularly part one.

stly92 said:
Okay, so it's about Batman and Green Lantern. How'd they do with that? All I can give you is my view, but basically, two things happened: 1.) They wasted valuable screen time on things not related to this issue that were not important, and 2.) They bungled this, and reduced the centrel issue of the episode, (the revelations of the future,) to meaninglessness. To demonstrate this, I will flesh out both character arcs of the episode, starting the less important, (Batman) and moving to the more important (Green Lantern.)
Or are you over analysing the story into something it wasn't meant to be? Partial devil's advocate there. :)

stly92 said:
Where did Batman start this story arc? With little to no idea or concern for where his life and career were going, and how he'd end up. Strangley, he was discussing his relationship with Dianna, which ultimately proved irrelevant.

What did he learn in the future? That he survives the next 50 years, and goes on to train a young new apprentice.

And what is so wrong with how that is handled? Let me ask: Did it really matter to Batman that he saw his older self? No. Did it matter to him that he saw his successor? No. Does anything about his future interest him? No. Does it prompt Batman to re-examine himself, and the choices he's made? No. DOES THE EXPERIENCE HAVE ANY AFFECT ON HIM IN ANY WAY? No.
I certainly agree there was a journey for Batman, but the reason he doesn't except it as his future is because he knows it isn't. His future doesn't remenber his actions, ergo, it's a null timeline. The future issues make him reflect as to his present, but they don't take him any further. In fairness to Dwayne I think this was very logical. People want him to be affected because they have seen three seasons of BB - Bruce hasn't. If this was a standalone story, I don't think we'd here people say "why isn't he worried or concerned? he's seen his future!!". He's seen a possible future, which makes him reflect just how he's spending his present.

I think you are coming from the Batman angle all wrong. I think highlighting the beginning and end resolution is a great point, but I think you are asking the characters to do things which are inconsistent with their circumstance.

stly92 said:
Where did John Stewart start out the story arc? Confused and uncertain how to handle old feelings for Shayera upon her return to the League, John Cautiously keeps his disance.

What did he learn? He learned that at some point in the future, he and Shayera renconcile and conceive a child, named Rex Stewart, who goes on to become Warhawk.
Again he learns a possible outcome. Yeah, we know Warhawk exists in BB official timeline, he does not. So again, the events will prompt but not convince. I think that was Dwayne's point about making it a fragmented version of the future, so we could have the BB events without making any consolidated evidence for Bruce or John to take back
.
stly92 said:
Umm, What's your point? Point is, for everything John learns, he still doesn't effect a character change. Like Batman, it's almost to the point where the whole thing didn't happen. Nothing came of it. But it's not hard to understand why: considering how John and Rex's interactions were handled, it's easy to see why Rex didn't leave much of an impression. While it might be natural for John to be standoff-ish, wouldn't Rex want to take this opportunity to talk to his father, who has been dead for a while? It's hard to imagine anyone, given that opportunity, would pass it up. There should have been some scenes of these two bonding, and getting to know one another. We should have seen Rex take this opportunity to say the things that might have gone unsaid. We should see John recognize in Rex some of himself, and of his mother, and see where Rex has value in his own right. John learning he has a son should have been a significant event in his life.
First rule of being a hero. Dilemma first, personal issues second. Sort out the whole time collapsing thing before getting too involved with personal issues - no matter how important to you. Warhawk is a pro, as is GL. They know their priorities. They are soldiers.

stly92 said:
And it should have had some permanent effect on him upon returning his own time. It should have made him consider things with Shayera differently. Perhaps it could re-ignite their passion. Or John might only be interested in her to bring Rex into existence. Or it could have made him consider the virtues of having a family, even if it wasn't with Shayera. It should have affected him somehow, in a significant way. But it Did NOT! Nothing happened! The episode ended right where it started, in every conceivable way. When a story does that, then it loses all merit.
No it shouldn't. :) It was a possible future. You offer an argument based on the prior knowledge that the future isn't that much different. Put yourself in their shoes, they have NO idea how accurate a future this is. It could be WAAY off. We know it isn't.. they don't. Enough to make you reflect on how life is going and maybe create changes, but not a mandate to change your whole life! :)

So yes, I agree with you there is an undercurrent to the episode that wraps around Bruce and John, and by the end we see the at least questioning those questions they made at the beginning, but a fragmented alternative future is by no means an excuse to change the present. Changing ones life isn't easy as it is. Enough to ponder and challenge ones lifestyle, not to start gearing up against.

Dwayne McDuffie said:
Last time I'm getting into this, either it works for you or it doesn't (like Superman flying) but a time machine has to be able to communicate with itself achronally to work at all. Batman (with help from old Bruce, but it was edited out) took advantage of this.
Such edits must be hard for a writer. Edits which are consider relevant but do loosen the plot a little based on what one sees. I think it's always worth when watching cartoons, films, TV, that most writers do sort out those plot holes.. it's just the final cut looses some of those relevant scenes. Pity on that one!

Salvor said:
Was it? It felt so anti-climactic and so NOT dramatic to me. Ironically, if it hadn't been for the replies to this thread, I wouldn't even have noticed that he died! To me he was just hurting, and Bruce yelled his usual "TERRY!". Really not that great for a so-called death scene...
My point was that considering that with time limits the other option was probably Terry just not getting any exit at all, I thought it was a nice touch. There was no resolution to the future scenes so to speak, I thought it was nice we got a small shock which was not only mememorable, offered a nice little connection between old Bruce and Terry (which had been lacking) and some element of threat (people dying to save the universe).

Yes I would personally loved more Terry. I would loved to have seen the real BB future.. but that's not what we got and from what we got, I thought it was a surprising scene that they managed to slot in. Glad that one didn't get edited out! :)

Question: Did they not have the Batcave in this ep because of this embargo on Batman elements? Is the Batcave considered exclusive to "The Batman" now? I can't remember if I've seen it this season?
 

WonderRaver

Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2002
Messages
558
Location
North Carolina
Ultimately, John and Bruce saw a possible future. It could be a future that neither of them want. They certainly don't want a future without Supes and the other JLUers who died. Honestly, if John wants to continue to fool himself, he could decide to never ever be alone with Shayera again. Bye-bye Warhawk. If Bruce peeked at some history files in the future Bruce's lair, then maybe he could prevent ROTJ somehow. Bye-bye Batman Beyond.

Just because you've seen a future, it doesn't mean it will be the future.

-Matt
 

WonderRaver

Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2002
Messages
558
Location
North Carolina
Crambam said:
<<Case in point. Diana disappears. Well, from viewing "Secret Origins" we know that Hawkgirl was pretty much toast until WW intervened... and so, Warhawk should've vanished from existence.>>

Unless Diana's disappearance came at a point after Secret Origins. Her disappearance didn't affect the lives of Hawkgirl, GL, and Batman. She either existed, or another WW existed and lived a similar life to that point.
Well, it'd have to be after Starcrossed as well, since Diana initiated the jail-break. Perhaps Chronos slaughtered Wonder-Pig.... Of course, this would've devastated Bruce, so "future" Bruce would've been different at the point that Diana vanished....

MY biggest point is having Diana vanishing without any real repercussions is a cop-out IMO. If she vanished before joining the League, it would've affected the future. If she disappeared after joining the League, it would've affected the future. And I don't think having "another WW exist" would work either.

How about John's change to Hal then back to John? Why would've Chronos affected John's past only to decide later that he would fix it?

Of course, maybe it wasn't Chronos' doing. Maybe it was the timestream doing all the kooky stuff. It would've been nice if that were clearer.

Batman: "Diana!"
John: "She's gone, like she never existed."
Terry: "Who are you talking about?"
John: "Batman, do you think Chronos killed her in the past?"
Batman: "I don't think this is Chronos' doing... at least not intentionally."

-Matt
 

James

Administrator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
May 5, 2001
Messages
31,302
Location
UK
WonderRaver said:
Of course, maybe it wasn't Chronos' doing. Maybe it was the timestream doing all the kooky stuff. It would've been nice if that were clearer.

Batman: "Diana!"
John: "She's gone, like she never existed."
Terry: "Who are you talking about?"
John: "Batman, do you think Chronos killed her in the past?"
Batman: "I don't think this is Chronos' doing... at least not intentionally."

-Matt
Absolutely. That's how I think of it. As the time stream destabilizes, alterations cause and effect scatters out. It's not meant to be taken so seriously. I understand people's need to though. :)

If time changed and a companion disappeared, you wouldn't notice being part of that new continuity. So it's all messy no matter how you look at it. That of course can be the excuse. You can assume, time is so messed up by then cause and effect no longer matter. Things can change without them having a direct continuity. Different temporal ideas are being played out as the time line continually readjusts itself and then those strands start to weave together, like weave in a rope and interlap. That makes explantions FAR easier. :)
 

Alex Weitzman

Got Opinions?
Joined
May 20, 2003
Messages
2,102
Location
California
I'm saving my major thoughts for the inevitable second thread (so I can avoid what happened with Once and Future Thing, Part 1, where I posted the review right before the thread was abandoned), but I'm going to chime in on this one point.

stly92 said:
Well, couldn't it be about Chronos? Inspite of some decent characterization, Chronos still only serves the purpose of facillitating Batman and Green Lantern's trip to the future and as their antagonist. If Chronos got to remember anything, it could have been about him too. But he doesn't, so he is essentially unimportant.
Technically, you are incorrect here. It is true that Chronos does not have a conclusion that he himself can recognize, but it is not necessary for a character to be able to sit down and ask "What happened?" for the story to center around him. Take Forrest Gump, for instance, in no real way a ponderous man and yet undeniably the center of his story.

I'm not saying that Chronos is the center of Once and Future Thing, but I do think the episode deserves its due credit for what it did with him, based on all the focus he gets. Chronos himself may not be able to sit back and reflect on his journey (for lack of a better word), but his journey is indeed a sticking point of the story itself. Character studies still work even if the character being studied isn't especially aware of it. You're writing him off here, and thusly writing off what effort Timm and McDuffie funnelled into him. He functions as a device for GL and Bats, to be sure, but he also functions for himself.
 

SilverKnight

Sigh.
Joined
Apr 28, 2001
Messages
5,914
Location
In my head.
Bah. Paradox schmaradox. I think a lot of people are getting stuck in the minutae--if Diana vanished, Bruce/Warhawk/John/whoever should've been different, if John changed to Hal, Warhawk should've never existed, etc. First of all, every one of those "if such and such happened, so and so wouldn't be here" paradox conclusions are moot. How many times have these people saved each other's lives? If Diana disappeared, then by all rights, everyone in that room would have disappeared, save for maybe Static, and the future which Chronos came from would no longer exist, which would have rendered Diana's disappearance null, allowing the "proper" future to be recreated to be destroyed again. That would most likely be the huge paradox that would occur, and it makes my head hurt just thinking about it. Now, what a lot of people are forgetting is that paradoxes of small and gargantuan size were happening all over the place at an ever-increasing rate, which incidentally was sorta why the universe was falling apart in the first place. Wouldn'tcha know.

At the point in the game in which the Present Day JLU arrived, any paradoxical crap would've been completely pointless and academic. Sure they happened, they happened a lot, but that was the idea. It no longer made any huge impact on the universe at large, because the universe was ceasing to exist regardless. At most, the paradoxes might just have sped up the process some, but that's it. It's like if you were to knock a hole into the wall of a house that was on the verge of collapse--in other circumstances, that hole might cause a major structual problem, but the house is about to come crashing down, anyway, so it doesn't make a difference anymore. I honestly can't see how that's such a hard thing for people to understand. (Not to sound rude, but...well, it's easy, I mean come on.)

As far as styl92's dissertation on how much this episode sucked, I can understand where you're coming from, but I can't say I necessarily agree. As far as the whole Batman thing is concerned, why should that future effect him in any way? Would you believe a future like that if you were him? In all honesty, I think the idea that Batman doesn't take anything from the adventure is almost rather tragic. Here he has the chance to see what could become of his life, but in the end, he decides to utterly disregard it (and rightly so from a logical standpoint, I might add), unwittingly continuing down the same path that leads to it. Who was the one that mentioned the self-fufilling prophecy? I'd say it was ironic, but I'm pretty sure I'd be using the word in the wrong context. Besides, Batman doesn't know that's his future, and even if he did, there's no sure way he could ever avoid it. A lot of things can happen in 50 years. And he wouldn't want to know his future, anyway--as far as he's concerned, it hasn't been written yet; to hell with what he's seen.

With GL, he seemed very interested (and somewhat awkward) with the thought of having a son, but the resolution, to me, wasn't a resolution at all. I mean, he just found out he had a kid and was stuck in a public setting staring at the apparent mother of his child, who quite obviously was not the person he was currently seeing. Yes, it was the cliche male, "deer caught in headlights" look, but come on, what were you expecting? (And don't be cute and say "character development"--I know you want to. :p) The last scene portrayed pretty well that he didn't immediately dismiss what he had seen as Batman had; quite the opposite, in fact. I merely took his "keeping his distance" more as digesting the information the information he was given before going off and making himself look like a crazy ass, and I can't say I blame him. You think he should walk up to her and strike up a conversation? "Hey, Shayera, laid any eggs lately?" Right. By the time Hawkgirl would be done with him, he'd be wearing his ass for a hat. ...Actually, I think I would've liked to see that confrontation. Imagine the hilarity that would ensue.

In essence, it seems to me that your gripe with the GL storyline was that there was no real immediate payoff, and I'm perfectly fine with that. How much less contrived would it have been if he'd suddenly turned a 180, dumped Vixen, and started putting the moves on HG again? I think his reaction was about as good as it got, considering. >shrug<
 

lostrune

Detective Rachel
Joined
Dec 22, 2002
Messages
10,108
Paradox schmaradox. A friend MST3Ked the scene (yeah I know this can't be true):

[Wonder Woman vanishes - never left Themyscira or never existed]
Bruce: "Oh shoot! Does that mean I reverted back to a virgin?!"

Now ya guys should lighten up! :D
 
Joined
Nov 7, 2001
Messages
280
SJJ said:
Such edits must be hard for a writer. Edits which are consider relevant but do loosen the plot a little based on what one sees. I think it's always worth when watching cartoons, films, TV, that most writers do sort out those plot holes.. it's just the final cut looses some of those relevant scenes. Pity on that one!

Edits just as often tighten up things I missed and make me look better.
 

Jade_GL

An Aperture Science Original
Joined
Apr 15, 2002
Messages
5,446
Location
Maine
I just had a thought. Well, I've been working on a thought for a long time, I just decided to write it up as I was listening to Outkast....

People are saying that Chronos' transition from mamby-pamby wimp boy to crazy lord of time was too quick. But I think most people are discounting that, in total, he spent 6 months alone in the 1870s as a pawn, locked in a small ramshackle jail, only let out to show some lame-o villain how to use stolen future tech. That could seriously mess with your psyche.

Not only that, but if we extrapolate that he was at least 6 months ahead of the Justice League when he jumped to the future, he had plenty of time to be coorrupted by the power he was weilding.

At first, he's a pretty weak character, pushed around by his wife and apparently everone in his life. His main success was creating the time machine belt, and his wife immediately dumps on him for not being stronger and more assertive with his use of it. So he escapes, only to be stuck in another time and forced to help out some two-bit cowboy hood.

When he regains his belt and jumps to the future, I would expect him to try to be in more control so that no one could take the belt away from him again, but again, I believe that constant use of the belt corrupts him. He begins to forget his rules, and time starts unraveling. It becomes easier for him to be more callous, more cruel. Imagine having all that power to take whatever you desire, to see anything you want or change anything you want. It would be a dream come true, and make one believe that they were almost a god on Earth.

I think his progression as a character, when viewed with the lost time that we as the viewer are not privy to, makes sense. We don't see at least a year, if not more, of his character development. Who knows what he's done, seen, stolen, changed, and how that has changed him as a man.

From Outkast to Count Basie... Ah, makes me want to write more, but I have to start cooking dinner. :D
 

Style

The Green Style Returns
Joined
Dec 12, 2003
Messages
5,634
Location
St. Charles
SJJ said:
I don't agree at all. I agree that there is a natural resolution to the opening scene, but I think you are making too much of Batman's part. Yes, Lantern's opening "issues" are resolved, but the impetus and drive of the show was neither about Batman's issues or Green Lantern's.
Maybe not, but as structured, those are the only issues that mattered. If it were structured differently, then I wouldn't harp on that point so much. (I hate the amazing self annihilating story.

I certainly agree there was a journey for Batman, but the reason he doesn't except it as his future is because he knows it isn't. His future doesn't remenber his actions, ergo, it's a null timeline. The future issues make him reflect as to his present, but they don't take him any further. In fairness to Dwayne I think this was very logical. People want him to be affected because they have seen three seasons of BB - Bruce hasn't. If this was a standalone story, I don't think we'd here people say "why isn't he worried or concerned? he's seen his future!!". He's seen a possible future, which makes him reflect just how he's spending his present.
Bruce reflecting on his present would have been fine for me, if he had, you know, actually reflected upon his present. But he um, doesn't.

I think you are coming from the Batman angle all wrong. I think highlighting the beginning and end resolution is a great point, but I think you are asking the characters to do things which are inconsistent with their circumstance.
This point seems to ignore one of my points. Okay, it would be inconsistent for Batman to put much stock in the future. But I ask: if Batman isn't going to want to learn much about this future or let it affect him, Then why write a story in the first place where Batman does learn of his future and then structure it so that his learning of the future is only one of two lasting consequences of the episode?

First rule of being a hero. Dilemma first, personal issues second. Sort out the whole time collapsing thing before getting too involved with personal issues - no matter how important to you. Warhawk is a pro, as is GL. They know their priorities. They are soldiers.
We know John is. Is Warhawk? Being part of the JLU doesn't neccisarily mean you are a soldier.

No it shouldn't. It was a possible future. You offer an argument based on the prior knowledge that the future isn't that much different. Put yourself in their shoes, they have NO idea how accurate a future this is. It could be WAAY off. We know it isn't.. they don't. Enough to make you reflect on how life is going and maybe create changes, but not a mandate to change your whole life!
Again, little to no reflection actually happens.

So yes, I agree with you there is an undercurrent to the episode that wraps around Bruce and John, and by the end we see the at least questioning those questions they made at the beginning, but a fragmented alternative future is by no means an excuse to change the present. Changing ones life isn't easy as it is. Enough to ponder and challenge ones lifestyle, not to start gearing up against.
Secret of the time-travel story: sending your characters into the future is ALWAYS more interesting than sending them into the past. That's because seeing the consequences of what you are doing now is the sort of thing that can change your life. That's what makes "A Christmas Carol" so memorable. That's why "How Long is Forever?" is rightly considered the best episode of the Teen Titans series. Personally I think shuffling the issue under the carpet because "it's a possible future," is a cop out. It's ALWAYS a possible future. And I think you are just making excuses for the episode. When the ending leaves the episode 90% invalid, I still want the remaining 10% to be meaningful. And it wasn't.
 

Paul_Cousins

Active Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2004
Messages
8,565
WonderRaver said:
MY biggest point is having Diana vanishing without any real repercussions is a cop-out IMO. If she vanished before joining the League, it would've affected the future. If she disappeared after joining the League, it would've affected the future. And I don't think having "another WW exist" would work either.
Actually if you read the Zero Hour DC Comic Saga, it makes sense in that as time begin to unravel in both the distant past and distance future, the oldest people, the immortals, this includes Diana, started disappearing/ceasing to exist as the temporal waves worked their way up the timestream from both ends.

By the way, I commend the DCAU script crew for addressing one major temporal plot point solidly in that Static thought that because Old Bruce still exist, young had to have survived and that they already won in a way, which Old Bruce points out he had no memory of coming to the future and time itself was becoming fluid. But now since young Bruce remembersn what happened, old Bruce remembers now too from young Bruce's point of view.
 

DLM

Greenman
Joined
May 1, 2004
Messages
1,228
stly92 said:
Well, couldn't it be about Chronos? Inspite of some decent characterization, Chronos still only serves the purpose of facillitating Batman and Green Lantern's trip to the future and as their antagonist. If Chronos got to remember anything, it could have been about him too. But he doesn't, so he is essentially unimportant.
There's no logic to this. Why do you assume that in order for Chronos to be important he has to remember the episode. You are essentially saying that the villian has to learn his lesson in order for the episode to be "about" him. The main character in a story doesn't always have to grow or change. Thats one way to tell a story but not the only one. In fact, sometimes the whole focus of a main character can be that he has a "tragic flaw" and his inability to over come that flaw is the whole point of the story.
 

Style

The Green Style Returns
Joined
Dec 12, 2003
Messages
5,634
Location
St. Charles
DLM said:
There's no logic to this. Why do you assume that in order for Chronos to be important he has to remember the episode. You are essentially saying that the villian has to learn his lesson in order for the episode to be "about" him. The main character in a story doesn't always have to grow or change. Thats one way to tell a story but not the only one. In fact, sometimes the whole focus of a main character can be that he has a "tragic flaw" and his inability to over come that flaw is the whole point of the story.
And yet, his story was not the story of a tragic flaw or an inability to change. His is a story where nothing happens to him. He lives his life until he tries to use the time belt to get away from his wife, and that's it. that's the end.
 

Paul_Cousins

Active Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2004
Messages
8,565
stly92 said:
And yet, his story was not the story of a tragic flaw or an inability to change. His is a story where nothing happens to him. He lives his life until he tries to use the time belt to get away from his wife, and that's it. that's the end.
Until the belt malfuctions. I mean a computer can only do something over and over until it has an error and 'blue screens' itself. Or until Chronos has a major case of deja'vu like the Star Trek Next Generation crew did in that 'temporal loop' episode.
 
How to Make Money as a Kid 2

Spotlight

Staff online

Who's on Discord?

Latest profile posts

I'm watched the Godzilla vs kong trailer
He made a 6 hour video talking about every Simpsons episode.

I am 24 years old today.
I pick the voice actor for Spiderman. Guess who.

I finished the final issue of Gilda And Meek (Gilda And Meek #33 "Dark Child: Part Two: The Pilot, Un-Iverse #47) today. I had been planning it for 30 years, and it ended exactly the way it did in my fifteen-year-old head. This is a milestone I NEVER expected to reach. Huge day for me.

Featured Posts

Top