Milk Carton Characters: Black & Bi-racial Edition

With its upcoming universal reboot The Dawn of the DCU , DC has (another) opportunity to fix whatever is still messed up since (or because of) their last universal reboot. I'm going to take a look at some wrinkles and missing characters I personally think they should address.  Because there are so many I'm going to have to do so in installments.

It's clear that DC is invested in diversifying representation in their cast of characters. How nice; I applaud the effort.  However, their job would be easier if they didn't keep misplacing the ones they already have.  DC spends a lot of time running in place trying to replace characters they've allowed to fall of the edge of the Earth-1 (or -2, or -you-get-the-idea).

The Cosmic Treadmill is the perfect metaphor for the DCU. It uses infinite energy to run in place, has no forward motion, resets the timeline, and Barry Allen is always in the middle of it.

Here are some of the black and biracial characters whose status deserves to be cleaned up going forward.

1. Wallace R. West.  I get what you were trying to do by introducing this character in 2014, DC. But it's 2022, and delightful Keiynan Lonsdale hasn't been on the soon-to-end "The Flash" show in years.  Even for the Flash family, his comic book backstory is absurd.  In his eight years of existence, I think I have seen him appear beside Barry Allen exactly once.

I'd rather remember him as he was:
cooler than Barry in every possible way.

Delete him; the DCU is already lousy with speedsters, most of whom are less problematic than WRW (even though almost all of them are quite problematic).

2. Melba Manton. Sure, I sound crazy when I mention this '70s back-up character from Lois Lane. But DC confirmed her existence as recently as 2017.  DC wouldn't be in a state of continual concern over lack of minority representation in their cast of characters if they didn't regularly jettison all supporting characters who lack Golden Age pedigrees every time a writer or editor changes on a title. Just bring back Melba already and stick to it. 

And she'd damned well better be wearing that outfit when you do.

3-5.  Ron Troupe.  Speaking of black characters, remember Ron Troupe, who's been around for over 30 years now? Does anyone remember that when last we saw him, he was Superman's brother-in-law,  because he married Lois's sister, Lucy Lane, with whom he had a son, Sam Troupe? Do any of these people still exist, DC? Do you realize I am more interested in knowing that than in hearing about Gosh-Darn, or whatever other latest Kryptonian villain you've pulled out of your ***?  

One of the distinguishing characteristics of Superman stories over the years is that his civilian supporting cast was an integral part of the storylines; we knew who they were and they mattered.  You can only do that if they are large and diverse enough to be interesting and Ron Troupe is part of what can make that possible again.

6-7. Lucius and Luke Fox.  Look.  It's pretty simple, DC. I don't know how many times you have to see this happen before you get it.  You create characters like the Foxes as part of an iconic character's dynasty. Then you (or one of your writers) immediately decides to 'grow' the character and they 'outgrow' being part of the dynasty.  Or you never really had a unique role planned for them in the first place.  Then you have them boldly set out on their own in the own title, which, naturally, flops (or folds after an initial splash).  Then you shuffle the character around as the diaspora representative of that dynasty in various ad hoc team books, usually of similar characters. Harley Quinn and The Outliers; The D-Listers; Odd-Man and the Also-Rans; the Underwhelmers. 

It's never the time, Luke.

Then after those fail, you either forget the character, have them Question Their Path, or relegate them to special guest-star in dynasty-wide crossovers when Dynasty City is threatened. Even Ace the Bat-Hound got treated better than that. **** or get off the pot. Either make Luke Batwing with something to DO, or put him in the Batcave doing the backup stuff every hero in the field needs and let Lucius do tech research for Bruce so that Alfred can do some DUSTING. That mansion is BIG and the man's come back from the dead twice now to clean it.

P.S. No, I am not going to mention Jace Fox. The situation is bad enough as it is.

8.  Power Girl.  Not the one with the boob window. The one with the pom-pom hair.  Tanya Spears was from Earth-2. Does that still exist? Does she? Or does she now exist again, because multiverse? I don't know; do you?  How would I even find out if I wanted to?  From what little I know of her, she seemed like an interesting concept. But she suffered from the same problem so many of today's "young heroes" do. 

Because the concept of 'kid sidekicks" is considered passé, such characters almost never appear with the heroes they are supposed to be connected to.  They are created only to be junior versions of those heroes in Teenager Hero Group. If you don't read Teenager Hero Group, you have zero idea who they are.  The multiverse is back, DC: just confirm that she's on Earth-2 and ignore her until you need her. That's still better than leaving her in limbo.

9.  Miss Martian. I know what you are thinking: Miss Martian's not a black character. I know; that's the problem.  Because J'onn Jonzz is a black character.  Or, rather his "human guise" has generally been depicted as one, rather consistently, for quite some time now.  And Miss Martian's human guise, as Megan Morse, is supposed to be his niece. Yes, people of different races can be close relatives. But even Martians should realize it might raise fewer question if her human guise were also a black character. It's an easy fix, DC.  

The CW certainly mishandles lots of things, but generally they do really well on handling race and sexuality with equanimity.

I mean... assuming Miss Martin still exists.  There's really no way of knowing these things unless you read Teenager Hero Group, is there? And I don't think that's even being published right now.

10-12. Icon, Rocket, Hardware, & Static. Give the Milestone characters their own Earth. They deserve it, because as time has made extremely clear, they will never get any attention if you keep pretending they are on the earth of your main continuity.  

Treat them like Milestone characters, not millstone characters.

Lazarus Planet

During its "Explore the Universe Panel" at New York Comic Con on Thursday, DC announced its first 2023 event: Lazarus Planet.

Gee, a giant crossover event based on the signature magic wand prop of Batman's least interesting foe, a Fu Manchu rip-off who, despite limitless time and resources, is less effective in his eco-goals than Greta Thunberg.

What could possibly go wrong?

Well, the Martian Manhunter could become mentally unstable. 
But, as Dorothy Parker said when Calvin Coolidge died,
"How can they tell?"

Quite a lot, I'm sure. I can already tell from the solicits that this will follow a familiar pattern. To wit: DC wants to make some big line-wide changes, so instead of just, you know, doing them...

If Kanigher were here, he'd just shove Damian Wayne
and "Sideways" in a drawer and that would be it.

they are building them into a story that makes the changes happen diegetically. DC loves doing this. 

DC invented doing this.

So, they take a throwaway device that was introduced for convenience for one story, one which has grow monstrously overused in the 50 years across all continuity since, and they blow it even more wildly out of proportion so they can use it alter the status quo.

Literally.

In Crisis on Infinite Earths, the device was the parallel universe concept introduced in the Flash of Two Worlds story shown above (which grew monstrously over the years with each 'crisis' crossover with Earth-2,-3,-S,-X,etc.).  

The anti-matter universe from Green Lantern was piled on, too, because Hal Jordan can always be relied upon to tagalong on Barry's nonsense.

In Zero Hour, it was the Time Trapper, who had become a recurring and increasingly powerful foe of the Legion of Super-Heroes. 

Courtesy of the Legion of Superbloggers: The Time-Trapper being waapped by the imbecilic Wonder Twins, in the days before he used to casually alter all of reality repeatedly.
I hope he didn't land on any universes in his pockets when he fell.

In Infinite Crisis, the device was Superboy Prime, a throwaway character from Crisis on Infinite Earths, who was blown up into a being of nearly limitless power into order to accomplish the editorial aims of the crossover from inside the boundaries of the story. 

Actually, Superboy Prime was introduced the year before in DC Comics Presents 87,  but who cares about him any more? In one version of reality, he BECAME the Time Trapper, but the less one thinks about such things, the more sleep one gets.

In the Flashpoint/New 52, the device was the key figure in the concept of the multiverse: Barry Allen (or, more accurately, his ability to alter the timeline, a power that grew monstrously since its introduction). 

Always remember that, appearances notwithstanding, Barry Allen is DC's greatest monster.

Then All Known Heroes will be thrown together in grab-bag combos to deal with the situation, including: 

Highly Iconic Ones (the JLAers and such), 

Congratulations, DC; that's Batman's third-most ludicrous hat.

Niche Characters That Somebody Likes (Harley Quin, Poison Ivy, Power Girl, Raven)

"On this week's episode of Our Man, Hal, hilarity ensues when Karen uses Hal's power battery in one of her personal pleasure devices."

Characters DC Always Insists You Like (Cyborg, Firestorm, Natasha Irons);

Of course, it could always be worse.
Actually, if they ever used this sassy queen of the quantumverse version instead of the Silver Surfer knockoff, I'd be willing to give him a try. Um, I mean as a part of the DCU.

New Characters The Publisher Wants to Jumpstart (Monkey Prince, Dreamer, City Boy, The Twins); 

So, they both have queues? Oh, that won't be confusing to readers at all. They aren't old enough to have even grown their hair that long yet, unless they are ghosts in an Asian horror movie.
I guess now that we no longer have a child-from-nowhere in the Superman dynasty, two cropped up to take his slot (who are of course twins). Sigh--comics.

and Existing Characters The Publisher Wants to Revitalize (Mercy Graves, Question, Super-Man, Connor Kent, Supergirl).

I love these designs, but there is NO way they will last because there is MUCH too much muchness going on there. Stop hiring Alan Scott as as a costume consultant; Tim Gunn he ain't.

It will be an insane mess, but impossible to ignore because major changes will hinge upon it, including important changes to the status quo and elements of the origin of new characters.  Regardless, in time, storytellers will distance themselves from its stupider ramifications and start ignoring it, directly or indirectly undermining the roots of the new status quo.

Example:  I am pretty sure that Superman's secret identity is secret again, isn't it?  And yet, Jon Kent's first date with, um, that reporter kid with pink hair, was interrupted by Some Villain dropping a bomb on them at the Kent Farm and blowing it to smithereens because everyone knows the Kents are Superman's parents and that's how Jon finds out his boyfriend (Johnny Nelson, cub reporter?) has powers.  

It's Jay Nakamura, by the way.
I think DC could have tried to make Jon's relationship a bit less yaoi.
Maybe give the kid, you know, red hair and a bow tie, like a regular reporter.

Even if I'm not (yet) right about that exact example, there are plenty of others (I'm sure you can cite them!)  Tying character origins or changes into crossover events that will inevitably become dated is always a bad idea. And yet.

Oh, I'm sure there will be lots of changes from this I will enjoy.  I've always thought that Batman should run around Gotham City fighting muggers with the Helm of Nabu!  That what the Superman Family lacked was twin members who looked liked they worked on building the transcontinental railroad. That Power Girl should shoot energy blasts from her pelvic region.  That Mercy Graves needed to become the next Harley Quin.  That you just can't have enough Trigon Family.  That all Supergirl needs is another new costume. That Monkey Prince was going to be the Sensational Character Find of 2022.

Drawing from myth and folklore can work but this is WAY too on the nose.

Seriously, it looks like they are giving Jon Kent Electric Blue Superman power(s), which might be an interesting way of distinguishing him from his father.  But keep everything else I've said here about Lazarus Planet in mind because it's going to come in handy elsewhere pretty soon....

the Golden Age of Comics board game

This looks like fun.

Rather fiddly, but fun.

I'm backing it, so I thought you might be interested, too.

The Heck With That

Individually, each choice--Jackson Hyde, Jon Kent, Tim Drake--makes some sense.  DC deserved some higher profile gay characters, particularly some younger ones for kids to have as role models of confidence.  Really, it's part of a larger issue we may discuss another time (DC not knowing what to do with "younger heroes", now that the days of "kid sidekicks" running around with their mentors on rooftops are over).

Jackson Hyde was introduced as and to be a gay character, but his real hook is that he's Aquaman's heir apparent despite being the son of his nemesis, Black Manta.  The character he was based on (Kaldur'ahm) wasn't gay; he had a crush on Aquagirl/Tula. That's why in later seasons of Young Justice, when they adjusted Kaldur'ahm to better align with Jackson by giving him a boyfriend, they made Kal bisexual so as not to create an apparent conflict with his original portrayal.  

"So; 'Thriller Moth'. Is that just your screen name or your actual superhero name? You... are a hero, right? I mean... you're not just...wearing that for no reason, right?"

Jackson's introduction certainly could have been "cleaner".  It's kind of amazing that even when DC has complete control and all the properties are theirs, they always seem to be trying to reconcile and merge similar characters or various versions of the same character.  Such is the process of mythic syncretism, whether it's in Greece 2500 years ago or in the DCU right now.  

Jon Kent was a known character before this reveal, but, since he was a child, sexuality was not at issue.  it was dealt with pretty much as soon as he was aged-up (and pretty tastefully, I thought).  Is his relationship with his boyfriend developed too fast and too corny? Absolutely. But, you know modern writers hate decompression and thus modern comics move so FAST! It's not like we're going to get 40+ years of will-they-or-won't-they courtship.

How absurd and tedious would THAT be?

Jon Kent's sexuality is, honestly, the only normal thing about him, because his backstory is NONSENSE. He went immediately from non-existence to 10-year-old cuteness and then just as immediately to 17-year-old sexy earnestness.  I mean, even on SOAP OPERAS you get a few scenes as a baby or a toddler first.  Fans of Moppet Jon have been understandably upset that that character basically got overwritten overnight. Well, I still don't understand when, how, or why Clark and Lois got married (let alone had a 10-year-old), so welcome to my world.

I mean, Lois is, objectively, a terrible person, you know.

I think much of the resentment against "bisexual (young) Superman" is really about "you stole our adorable super-tot from us and turned him into sexy agit-prop for headlines' sake!" No one wants to think of Their Innocent Little Child growing up into a sexual being, but usually they have TIME to get used to the idea.  DC did not give readers who thought of Jon Kent that way that kind of time.  Heck, I still I shake my head sadly at youthful ward Dick Grayson shacking up with that foreign girl in the metal bikini.  

Tim Drake?  My sissy-sense tells me that DC would have liked to have made Tim Drake gay, but thought it might be too inconsistent with his history; he had already had several girlfriends (especially Stephanie "Spoiler" Brown). Now, young men who've had girlfriends can certainly turn out to, in fact, be gay, but that's a bumpier reality than comics usually embraces. Besides, doing that would have seemed to undercut or invalidate Tim's relationship with Stephanie, and fans of Stephanie Brown--well, I guess DC figured they'd been pushed far enough over the years.  And so Bisexual Tim was born. 

Tim always seemed to have selfhood issues of some kind. What kind of Robin to be, what his motivations were, whether to become Batman, whether to insanely attempt to clone his dead friend, blah blah blah.  

He always seemed to be in the middle of some...
identity crisis.

I myself could never figure out how old he was supposed to be.  And, as previously discussed, it all got worse when his very literary raison d'être was undermined by the arrival of that Elseworlds invasive weed, Damian Wayne.  

DC's been looking for SOMETHING to do with Tim. And with Jon. And to a lesser degree, Jackson. So they now they are serving a broader purpose: to bring some "representation" to DC's headliner dynasties.  And it's working. Face it; Bunker (who has been around for ELEVEN YEARS) never made headlines like these three have.  

I'll give you a MILLION DOLLARS if you know Bunker's real name without looking it up.
Didn't think so.

It does seem like "a lot at once" to some people and it's rattling their little worlds.  For a while I was sympathetic. Perhaps it is a bit too much, too fast, too forced. But after looking at some actual timelines and at some very unpleasant chat sites, I finally decided:

the heck with that.

First of all, we underestimate how fast changes in comics used to come. FAST. When the original Robin, the Sensational Character Find of 1940, was introduced, it not only completely changed Batman overnight, it changed COMICS; within a year, they were LOUSY with sidekicks.  You couldn't cross a rooftop without knocking one over.

What kind of archer says "Great Guns!"?
You're an idiot, Ollie.

Well, Jon Kent came out as bisexual (not even just 'gay') a YEAR ago, Tim Drake did so OVER a year ago (August 2021), and Jackson Hyde was introduced SIX years ago. 

You may not love the idea, but your time window for 'shock' has expired and your denial doesn't make it less true.  This evolution of these characters is 10,000 times more believable and in character than THEIR VERY EXISTENCE (the teenager who deduced Batman's identity and becomes Robin just because someone should, the son of a supervillain who becomes his nemesis's apprentice, and the 17-year-old son of a couple who can't be a day over 35 and were NOT teen parents), so LUMP IT.  

Next, I thought about the substance of the problem. The reason I decided to stop having sympathy for all the people bitching about "teh ghey" invading their private comic book pantheon was the sudden realization:  

if that's the reaction they have to a FICTIONAL CHARACTER they imagined to have been straight turning out to be something-other-than-straight, how would/will they react if the same thing happens with their OWN CHILD?  

People bitching that 'every character is gay now' is tedious over-reaction. Sure, there's going to be a period where you see more such characters being introduced just to catch up from having had few before (just as was the case at one point with black characters).  I get it, people; things are changing faster than you can handle. But the harsh reality is: for a lot of you that will ALWAYS BE THE CASE.  There is little reason to slow down the train for you, since you are determined to fall off if it moves at all.

He's not going to save you.

But you can stop saying dumb things like "all/ most / half of  DC's characters are gay nowadays"; you just sound stupid and I really don't want to have to sit down and DO THE STATISTICS, because that's a power I have and you don't want me to do that.  Even if you look across various media versions, it's not that many, certainly compared to the INSANE number of characters in the DCU.  

You're not mad because it's so MANY characters. You're mad because it's now characters that you can no longer ignore. You didn't really care when it was 'gay ghetto' characters like Bunker.

I like his idea much better, Tim; give him a call.
His name's "Miguel Barragan", by the way.

Is DC 'turning their characters gay' a shameless ploy to appeal to 'more liberal readers'? Maybe it is; good for DC!  Being shameless in trying to have appeal to as broad an audience as possible is not the worst survival strategy for any company, I should think.  

There's really only ONE comic that DESERVES to be called 'shameless'.

I guess black characters are shameless ploys, too. And hispanic ones, and females ones, and well, white and male ones, too since those appeal to lots of people. Let's hear it for shamelessness.  The people who labeled "pride" as one of the seven deadly sins are people who wanted to use shame as a weapon against others.

A rationale level of pride in lieu of shame, in fact, is quite emotionally healthy.

DC's motivations are irrelevant.  These characters are now what and who they are.  If I let people piss on them for that, I'm setting the stage for them to do that to REAL PEOPLE; their own children, the children of others.  That would be truly shameless.

The Lavender League

The Gay Bloggers Union has officially requested that I weigh on an issue I have been punting on, one of the truly novel phenomena in contemporary comics: the sudden proliferation of gay legacy characters.

Now, we have had gay characters before in the DCU, and not just fly-by-night ones.

Not quite what I meant. Besides, Mr. & Mr. Estate-Sale are hardly "in the DCU" as much as they are "owned by DC now and kept in the attic". You know it's true.

At first it was supporting characters, like The Great Extraño (1988), Maggie Sawyer (1988), Mitch Sekovsky (1989), Pied Piper (1991) Terry Berg (2000), Renee Montoya.  

We all love "Auntie" Gregorio (IN RETROSPECT), but let's not kid ourselves. Despite all the in-story hype, nobody really believed the "New Guardians" were going to amount to anything or even last long and we were right.  They just props in a miniseries to make a point about about diversity and bigotry.

I'm not counting all the revisionist bisexual box-checkers like Constantine, Ice (Maiden), Blue Starman, Cat-Man, Catwoman, Poison Ivy, Harley Quin, et al., because I think that's a different and much less significant phenomenon and if you'd like to argue about that, let's do.

But the first real high-profile DCU gay hero, of course, was Batwoman who was introduced in 2006 as a crime-fighting socialite (NOT yet Bruce Wayne's cousin; that was an ingenious retcon that happened in a later universal reboot, I forget which one-- so..many...reboots...).  

She had an immediate, widespread, and lasting impact on lesbian fashion.

There have been new gay characters with tenuous or no dynastic connections (e.g, Bunker, Anissa Pierce, Grace Choi).  There have been some pre-existing heroes now revealed to be gay, like the Tasmanian Devil, the Ray (current multiversal status uncertain?), or, most prominently, Golden Age Green Lantern Alan Scott and his son, Todd "Obsidian" Rice.  

That awkwardness when your date intercepts and misinterprets a hologram message from your actual dad, who happens to be a serious zaddy.

Prominent or not, such characters are still in the 'suburbs' of superhero-dom; they are on the edges of the real metropolises: the dynasties of DC's Big Iconic Heroes. That's the classic Justice Leaguers, of course: Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman; Green Lantern & Flash; Green Arrow & Aquaman. Arguably others could be included, but over time they are DC's most consistent roster of royalty.  

Characters like Batwoman and Alan Scott are certainly well known and pedigreed; they are definitely dukes and duchesses in DC's royal houses.  But they are not in the line of succession, so to speak; they will not inherit that seat at the Justice League table.

Who wouldn't want THAT thrilling opportunity to watch Hal stare at his own beautiful hands?

Naturally, NO ONE will actually inherit that seat, as repeated attempts to oust the original JLAers have proven over the years (including several recent spectacular failures).  "Batman/Superman/et al." aren't just costumes and skill sets, they are actual individuals. You can give the codenames 'Superman', 'Aquaman', 'Green Lantern', and 'Flash', to Jon Kent, Jackson Hyde, Girl with Weird Glasses, and Wally West (yeah, I went there), but that's all you are doing.  Superman is still Clark Kent, Aquaman is still Arthur Curry, Green Lantern is still Hal Jordan, and the Flash is still Barry Allen. Despite 70+ years of various creators/editors to 'fix' the "problem" they feel that consistency represents.

Nowadays we're not just talking about Odd Man's nephew, Queer Fellow, or Woozy Winks adopted pansexual son Flirty, or even some Black Canary-lite with short dark hair, butch skillz, big boots, a motorcycle, and a leather jacket, who immediate pair-bonds with literally the first available person she meets.

Waitaminute:
That IS Black Canary.

No. Now,  we are talking about the "heirs apparent".  We are talking about: 

Batman's protégé, Tim Drake.  A long-standing character (1989) who served as Robin--many believe as the best Robin--for twenty years. He's been buried in the background for years since Bruce Wayne's son Damian began his reign of terror as Robin (2009).  His recent emergence from Damian's shadow has coincided with the reveal of his bisexuality.

Uhhh...
13 does NOT look like the minimum age for that ride.

Aquaman's protégé, Jackson Hyde. A comparative new character (2016), son of Black Manta and a Xebellian rebel, Jackson was introduced as a gay teenager.  He seems to have had some trouble gaining traction, probably because his look, power set, and origin are clearly based on the "Kaldur'am" character in the Young Justice cartoon and yet... he is very much NOT that character.

For one thing, Jackson understands how important it is that Aquaman-characters have fabulous hair.

and Superman's instant-son, Jon Kent.  Through temporal shenanigans driven by fan-service, Clark Kent and Lois Lane wound up with a pre-pubescent 10 year-old son after some reboot (Convergence 2015) without they or readers having to slog through the real-world tedium of, you know, pregnancy and infancy and toddlerhood and childhood.

 I mean, any SILVER AGE writer knows those are the FUN part. Aren't those playsuits ADORABLE?

Jon's principal narrative function in the DCU seemed to be as saccharine poured over Damian Wayne stories to make them less bitter and easier to swallow.  As previously discussed, Damian's clearly on his way out of favor as l'enfant terrible among DC's editorship, so some more temporal shenanigans were employed to have Jon suddenly become a POST-pubescent 17-year-old son of Superman. Puberty came with the reveal of bisexuality (his love interest is male; that he is bisexual and not gay is known only through external evidence from the creator and publisher, not internal story evidence).

 

You know, Jon, I'm sure Jackson would be glad to go through a stylebook with you at Supercuts.
Heroes are here to help those in need, after all.

How do I feel about all this?

Let's discuss that tomorrow; but feel free to tell me your thoughts today.

Our Heroes Have Always Been Above That Sort of Thing

A recent youtube video asked the question,

"Why do all superheroes sound the same?"

They don't, of course. What it really means is that "All Marvel superheroes sounds the same."  

The other thing that won't die: comics-civilians lumping Marvel and DC characters together as if there's no difference.

I'll be frank with you: I didn't watch the video. Not one second. Why would you? You know the answer to the question and what they are going to say.  The only real interest is in how the question is mis-formed ("all superheroes" rather than "all Marvel superheroes").

Can you imagine a world or era where Batman was a wise-ass?

A lot of the commenters (including me) point that out. Most blame the modern screenwriter(s) whose hallmarks are annoyingly sarcastic, wise-ass, quippy dialog. You know: Joss Whedon, Brian Mumblecore Bendis, Sam Raimi, James Gunn, Peter David, Keith Giffen; pick one (or more).  

Fortunately, DC heroes don't treat life-and-death situations flippantly like Marvel heroes do.

Certainly, there is some true in that. Buffy Masters has much to answer for. You can blame a particular writer whose style that got copied.  Or the style of an era (the '90s) coming to its full, monstrous fruition.  

Marvel fans put up with the childish joking of their heroes because as a validation of their own childishness.  It's sad, really.

Sadly, a lot of people who watch superhero movies haven't really read many of the comics that underlie those characters, so I tried to point out the comic book roots of the problem.  It's not merely that some modern comic books writer affect a quippy, snarky, flip style of dialog for all characters.  It was, in fact, a hallmark of early Marvel comics. 

It's one thing if Marvel  heroes want to joke with one another but REAL heroes do not joke with their foes. 

The DCU is a quilt, patched together from different characters created by different creators and a times in different styles, sometimes for different companies.  The Marvel superhero universe is an afghan, knit much more coherently with an intentional plan as an integral whole. 

Wise-cracking is just built into Marvel's historical DNA.

Each approach has pros and cons.  DC's Quilt Approach naturally brings variety and diversity, both in characters and styles, which means you have a chance to appeal to more people. 

Marvel heroes just don't take what they are doing seriously enough on a consistent basis.

It also offers separability and deniability!  If some contradictory development crops up between titles you can ignore it more easily.  If some title or part of your publishings doesn't work, you can cut it out entirely, and probably patch it up easily.

Some quippy characters? Sure. But it's EVERYONE in Marvel, making it tedious and oppressive.

Marvel's Afghan Approach offers coherence and consistency. If read something in one comic, you know it 'counts' in every other; if you liked Title A, you will probably like Title B.  Its world-building is organic and, well, more seamless.

Only Marvel heroes go for the wisecrack rather than use their powers judiciously.

One of the cons of the integral approach is that a "house style" can be suffocating and unnatural.  Everyone looks the same and sounds the same, which isn't how people are.  Or, at best there's a small handful of speech patterns assigned based on which stereotype a character most clearly aligns with.  

I think it's the sarcasm, the snarkiness of Marvel characters that really irritates me. Make mine DC.

If you want to know what those are just read any Jack Kirby story with Fantastic Four or the Newsboy Legion; I'd rather not suffer through them here.

I'm safe from that sort of non-stop meaningless prattle in DC stories.

But it just doubles-down on the point: "all Marvel superheroes in the movies talk the same because they are MARVEL heroes."  To the degree DC heroes do that in movies, it's because writers are aping Marvel writers (or because Marvel writers have been hired to WRITE DC heroes).  

Marvel can't even manage to allow its cosmic figures maintain their seriousness and dignity.

It's certainly not because DC heroes naturally or historically speaking with that annoyingly sarcastic, wise-ass quippy dialog style.

At least Marvel manages to avoid the lowest form of humor: puns.