What We’ll Be Reading: Wonder Twins — Please only read issues 1-6
Description from comicvine.gamespot.com: The League of Annoyance was described by Lex Luthor as “a sort of farm team for the Legion of Doom.”
Now that that’s over with, here are some discussion questions:
The League of Annoyance often features characters with lesser-known or overlooked abilities. How does this focus on unconventional powers contribute to the exploration of diverse superhuman abilities within the DC Universe?
The League of Annoyance is often portrayed as a comedic relief in contrast to more serious storylines. Do you think this comedic aspect detracts from their credibility as villains or adds to their overall appeal?
How does the League of Annoyance typically antagonize the heroes of the DC Universe? Are their motives purely for mischief and annoyance, or do you think they have deeper motivations?
The League of Annoyance often provides a lighter and more comedic tone compared to other supervillain groups. How does this humor affect the portrayal of villains in the DC Universe, and how does it contrast with more serious storylines?
Who was your favorite member of the League of Annoyance? Why?
Do you have an interest in exploring the unknown? Do you like discussing comics? Do you like pineapple on pizza? If so, The Obscurity of DC Club is the club for you! Join HERE if you’re interested!
Bendis deserves all the scorn for being, well, Bendis but Byrne on art and getting a good Russell script was just too irresistible. Highly, highly recommend the entire series and I’ll never forgive the DISCO suits, NEVER, for killing a live action Wonder Twins movie, even if KJ was way too old and somewhat unsuitable for Zan (an Asher Angel type would have been far better).
I love it. It fleshes out the universe with the idea that not every power is amazing and worthy of heroics/villainy. It gives us fun side stories, but also a glimpse into the world in the shadow of the League. (Similar to the hero-con seen in Morrisson’s Seven Soldiers…) The idea that someone’s “laughable” powers can be leveraged to bring the whole world to its knees (in a somewhat justified play) is also a powerful comment about those who rule from on high needing to be more compassionate. (Which works on both the hero and villain side, but I think I’m getting beyond issue 6 to comment beyond that.)
They feel like a bit of a flipped echo of Marvel’s Bailey Hoskins (whom I adore). What would have happened if he didn’t have Miranda?
It adds to the appeal. Most of them wouldn’t be villains if they were taken more seriously. Lex is willing to see the little guy if there’s some way he can exploit them for his own benefit, but the world as a whole sees them as a joke. That’s why Lex’s manipulations work so well with minimal effort from him. He’s relying on mankind’s generally despicable nature to serve his ends, which is all too real. The comedy of these characters is also their tragedy, and it hits harder than most square jawed “serious” stories.
I think most of them just want to be a nuisance, but once you’re in you’re in. Kind of like “oh, I’m not in the mob, I just needed a loan to keep my business from going under so now I’m stuck running guns for them…”
Heh, I think I half answered this in the second question, but to extend upon that … I despise stories that rely on “because he’s the villain” mustache-twirling logic. (Well, I despise when they’re the only villains.) I like a villain to have a motivation that gives them a reason to be a villain (whether that be a “hero of their own story” logic or a “scorned by X so I will destroy all X” logic). Being the bottom of a barrel is perhaps the most pitiful of origins, but is a strongly origin than many “serious” villains get.
In name, Red Flag.
In character, Drunkula. I want more Drunkula stories. Maybe its my Terry Pratchett fandom seeing light echoes of the Überwald League of Temperance here, but there are so many alcoholic characters in DC (recovering and otherwise) and so many vampires, I’m loving seeing the combination in one miserable character.