>>116541341>it was more like he tried to make him a man from the 1910's
Yeah, that's the justification he gave for it.
Which, again, is really fucking shitty because The Shadow in the original stories was never even remotely as sexist as Chaykin wrote him as, and Blood & Judgment itself is really sexist to it's female characters, which seems to be a trend in his writing from what I've read.>He would have done it differently...basically he was told to bring the Shadow into modern times (1980's) and he really thought there just wasn't very much of a Shadow fanbase left and was told to do burn the past and while it claimed to be a continuation it was really a hard reboot. Turns out there WAS still a fanbase left and the response was pretty blistering and Chaykin kind went into troll mode and claimed that was his intent but...it really wasn't. He really thought it was a clean break for a new audience.
...You know what, that makes sense. I never thought of it like that but it totally checks out.
I mean, obviously he should have known that there was still a fanbase left to piss off, DC's Shadow series was barely a decade prior, but I can absolutely see him writing B&J under the idea he was gonna do this big and loud revitalization of the character like what Frank Miller did with Batman, and pretending it was always his intent to piss people off when it wasn't received as well. >Nowadays Chaykin espouses that any comic story you don't own must serve the character which I think is the lesson he learned with the Shadow since he revisited the character a few years ago and played it very straight.
This totally explains why Midnight in Moscow was so tame, which I didn't get why. It was him trying to do a standard Shadow narrative and doing a, well, not good job at it, but it wasn't B&J.
Thank you anon. Your post was a real eye opener for me.