michaelpatrick wrote:While I agree that the Joes should remain timeless there are still some positives about aging them just a little. For example, Bazooka. I thought it added to his character that he became out of shape and had to work hard to get back to being his old self again. That happens to people everyday and added a bit of realism to his personality. No, I don't want to see old geezers running around with walkers and wheechairs, but they should age at least a little. It's comic book time, you can stretch it as far as you want and still make things believable.
Bazooka was out of shape because the premise of the story had him as being out of the military leading a largely sedentary life. While it's true that people actively serving in the service do tend to get a bit more out of shape as they get older, it's not widespread by any means. If you're starting from scratch, none of these dudes should be out of shape. The concept and story of GI Joe is a covert/black-ops unit with its operators largely coming from existing special operations, combat, and intel units. Spec-ops personnel are NOT out of shape, though I've seen a couple of grizzled old SF Master Sergeants that had a slight beer belly going on. A command that allows a modest amount of fat people is a command that fails its soldiers, fails its parent unit and its service, fails the nation and fails its mission. Now, if you've got returning veterans who've been out for a while, as was the case with Bazooka and the relaunching of GI Joe after years of being closed, that's a different story.
I do have to disagree on there being no deaths in the Joe world, though. Again, it is a comic about war. People do die and I like to see that aspect of the comic. I think it presents an opportunity for a little bit of shock factor as well. When characters die and it is done right and unexpected it only adds to the stories. I mean, what do you expect? For everything to be solved and tied up all squeaky clean by the end of the comic with a safety message for kids at the end? How is that G.I. Joe?
There's a difference in plot devices where main or support characters die, and then just having ridiculous glory-killing for the sake of having people die to shock people. I'm not impressed by the latter because there was far too much blatant STUPIDITY going on with Devil's Due and their moronic decisions to axe people, and the former should be used sparingly - the purpose of a main character is to tell the story. A main character's death should BE the story, not be a justification for telling a good story. When you start picking off characters for the sake of sales, it's because your writers suck and your editors don't know what they're doing. This should result in real-world firing, not weapons firing on cartoon characters.