Cool News
AICN COMICS REVIEWS GI JOE! INVINCIBLE! SWAMP THING! DARK AVENGERS! STAR TREK! & MORE!
| #45 | 3/18/09 | #7 |
(Click title to go directly to the review)
GI JOE: COBRA #1
SAGA OF THE SWAMP THING #21
E-MAN: CURSE OF THE IDOL
DARK AVENGERS #3
BEYOND WONDERLAND #6
STAR TREK: COUNTDOWN #3
INVINCIBLE #60
Indie Jones presents…
CHEAP SHOTS!
GI JOE: COBRA #1
Writers: Mike Costa & Christos N. Gage
Art: Antonio Fuso
Publisher: IDW Publishing
Reviewer: Ambush Bug
When I heard about IDW’s relaunch of GI JOE, I was both excited and leery. I was glad to see the talent IDW wrangled to tackle these books. The trifecta of writing action gurus Dixon, Hama, and Gage are a pretty formidable team. I’ve been impressed with Dixon’s main title, even though it is bit of a slow burner, and Hama’s GI JOE: ORIGINS looks to be a fun look at the original team and how they came together. But when I saw a third title in the works, with the title GI JOE: COBRA, I was thinking that IDW was teetering on the edge of over-exposing the property much like they have done with their TRANSFORMERS license and the ga-billion titles they have out there with the robots in disguise.
But I read the book and found it to be the absolute best of the bunch. Mike Castro and Christos Gage have taken the expansive GI JOE universe and put a microscope on one little corner of it and the results are fantastic. By focusing on one Joe operative, undercover con man Chuckles, the book offers a “Yo, Joe!” experience like no other.
I’ve written before about the GI JOE battles I created with my toys as a youth. I’ve also written about my deep hatred for the Chuckles figure and how the Hawiian shirted pretty boy was often used a as a hostage for more bad@$$ed Joes like Beachhead or Snake-Eyes to rescue. I’d wrap a rubber band around Chuckles’ arms and have Firefly and Storm Shadow put the douchebag operative under copious amounts of torture. They’d scream threats that usually ended with “you and that stupid shirt…” and I believe I had the evil Cobra forces enact waterboard torture long before I knew of the term. No one hated Chuckles more than me.
Imagine my surprise when I found this issue that focused solely on Chuckles to be the best GI JOE comic I’ve read in years. Castro and Gage make Chuckles a likable hero--one who is flawed only in the sense that he isn’t a military man. Chuckles is a con man. Even though he may piss off hard nosed soldiers like General Hawk, the crusty general does have a use for him, and deep undercover Chuckles goes.
This is as much a detective noir story as it is a GI JOE book. It’s more sophisticated than the other titles, and as you’d expect the ideology of black and white often merge into shades of grey here. The closest thing I can compare this book to is Ed Brubaker’s SLEEPER, which dealt with the same themes in the super hero world. Here, we get a seedy noir story set in the GI JOE universe and it’s exactly the type of story that isn’t what you’d expect from a GI JOE story and exactly what is needed to reinvigorate the franchise. In the 80’s, Larry Hama created an expansive world filled with fantastic villains and tough as nails grunts combating them. It’s about time someone explored some of the other areas of that world.
The deliciously noir-ish scratchings of Antonio Fuso seal the deal. This is my favorite comic to come along in some time and by far my favorite of the new GI JOE comics. I’m officially shelving my Chuckles prejudice for this one. Gage and Castro have made one of my least favorite toys as a child into one of the coolest reads on the shelves. I loved this book and can’t wait to see what kind of trouble Chuckles can get into within the COBRA ranks.
Ambush Bug is Mark L. Miller, reviewer and co-editor of AICN Comics for over seven years. Check out previews to his short comic book fiction here and here published in MUSCLES & FIGHTS 3 and MUSCLES & FRIGHTS on his ComicSpace page. Bug was interviewed here and here at Cream City Comics. Look for more comics from Bug in 2009 from Bluewater Productions, including the just-announced sequel to THE TINGLER for their VINCENT PRICE PRESENTS ongoing series.
SAGA OF THE SWAMP THING #21 (SPECIAL EDITION REPRINT)
Writer: Alan Moore
Artist: Stephen Bissette, John Totleben
Inker: Stephen Bissette, John Totleben
Publisher: DC Comics
Reviewer: William
I love love love what DC is doing with these special edition titles. Basically they’re reprinting important issues of past/current comics, and titling them under the “After Watchmen…What’s Next?” banner. In this manner they get to reintroduce some nice comics to a whole new generation, I get to read some comics that otherwise would’ve been missed, and they’re only $1 each. I give great kudos to DC for this genius marketing move, especially during a time when many comic book fans are pinching pennies everywhere, and hopefully other comic book publishers out there (I’m looking at you Marvel) follow this trend.
In any case it was due to this genius move that I came across this title. I picked it up because SWAMP THING had been a title I think I had only read once in my life, and because the name “ALAN MOORE” was so prominently displayed in 32 font on the cover. So I thought to myself why not, let’s see if this can be as good as the name Alan Moore promises.
So as I was reading this the other day it slowly dawned on me that I had read this issue before. Like reliving a flashback, I slowly began recalling various images seen in the pages. It finally hit me that this reprint was the very SWAMP THING issue that I had read years ago as a kid in junior high (it was printed within some DC “Best Of” book that I had one day found at my public library). With that neat little information now affirmed in my mind, it was time to see how well this issue had aged between all of these years.
And I must say that I’m still impressed by what I read. I remember thinking back then that this issue was so “talkie”, i.e. my young mind had wanted more action pages rather than pages filled with 30 balloons of dialogue. (Maybe that’s why that remained the only SWAMP THING issue I had read at the time). Reading it now, though, I get to fully understand how brilliantly Alan Moore’s expert exposition was presented here. You have your basic mystery announcing itself within the first few pages; you have some interesting flashbacks showcasing Dr. Jason Woodrue (i.e. the Floronic Man) dissecting a seemingly dead Swamp Thing in order to unravel how a monstrosity could’ve existed; and you have the final payoff nicely ending this wonderfully wrapped up story. There’s something to be said about the days when a comic book contained a great solo story within just 22 pages, something that is missed within today’s 50+ multi-issue events. The artwork by Stephen Bissette and John Totleben only adds to the fine quality of this issue too. I take it that the SWAMP THING title at that time was considered much more adult-oriented than its superhero counterparts, and the artwork greatly reflects this theme. Everyone here is drawn in a “real” and ugly manner, i.e. they’re definitely not portrayed in the clean method that other superhero titles were. “Let the art highlighting the rotten features of these characters reflect the environment this issue prevails in” is the motto the art tries to go for here, and it definitely works.
All in all I found this to be a great read, and if you haven’t given it a chance then I highly recommend it next time you’re at your comic book shop. Also it’s worth mentioning again that hopefully other publishers like Marvel mimic DC’s genius reprinting of these titles. I can only imagine how nice it would be to read the starter issue for the “Kraven’s Last Hunt” storyline for a $1 in my comic book aisle, or “Days of Future Past” or “ The Infinity Gauntlet” or “Secret Wars” and so on to name a few.
E-MAN: CURSE OF THE IDOL
Writer: Nick Cuti, Joe Staton & Randy Buccini
Artist: Joe Staton
Publisher: Digital Webbing
Reviewer: Prof. Challenger
Back in 2006, my review for E-MAN: RECHARGED began like this: “Like a comfortable old pair of shoes, E-Man returns to the comics stands - albeit only for a one-shot. But beggars can't be choosers.”
I was tempted to start this review exactly the same, so I did. E-MAN: CURSE OF THE IDOL has actually been out for a few weeks, but life has continued to get in the way of my recommendation to the world of comic fans to pick up a copy or order one from the publisher.
E-MAN is one of those little gems from the 70s that kind of just disappeared because of the spotty distribution and crappy printing of the time. But yet, he always seems to pop up when I least expect him to. And once again, this one-shot showed up and took me by surprise. In honor of 35 years of E-Man, this comic includes a nice introduction by TwoMorrows' Michael Eury and an excellent interview/bio with the criminally underrated artist/co-creator Joe Staton.
Nick Cuti (along with Staton and Randy Buccini) have once again crafted a stand-alone comic book that could be a textbook on how to pace and unfold a mystery. It's a very densely packed comic such that I didn't even realize (or miss) that E-Man never appears in costume until near the end of the story. There is a specific tone for E-Man comics that is a unique combination of Cuti's writing and Staton's artwork and they honestly never miss a beat. This feels as fresh as the original 70s stories. In fact, the way they handle the continuity of 35 years is perfect. Everyone is exactly as they should be, they just dress more modern and have modern technology. But the concept of E-Man as an energy being taking physical form still works perfectly.
The tone is not near as slapsticky as, say, most of the E-Man series published by FIRST Comics in the 80s. This is a serious story that deals with the ancient Incan culture but also an intrusion into our plane of existence by Cthulhu-like creatures from the “dark” universe that infuses the dark energy that pervades our universe. Heady stuff, but it is treated with a light enough touch that it never feels heavy. E-Man (Alec Tronn), Nova, and Mickey Mauser are all fully involved and the character development is strong. The strongest aspect of the story for me was the relationship between Alec and Nova and the degree of trust Alec has in her and the inner struggle Nova goes through in keeping secrets from Alec. That could've been a one-note soap opera gimmick, but it felt real and right and functioned as more than just a perfunctory character moment but was essential to the development of the plot. Again, my hats off to the writing for this ability to craft a complete and solid story within the covers of this comic.
Before I wrap this up, I have to give credit to Joe Staton for not allowing himself to be a static and unchanging artist. His ability to design panels in creative ways and cram a lot of visual information into each and every page is impressive. He is one of our best working cartoonists and while I do occasionally enjoy his work on SCOOBY DOO (definitely the best artist that comic has ever had), I ache to see him do something like E-Man on a regular basis. We have reached this point where it almost seems like to be successful as a comic artist, you have to have an obsessive need for realism or bug-eyed manga expressiveness. It would be nice to see more artists with cartoony styles like Staton get more work from the Big Two. Sure, there's Darwyn Cooke and even the unparalleled Amanda Connor working out there but not many more.
I was and am an E-MAN fan and I am happy, once again, to highly recommend that fans of comics track down a copy of this story and read it many times like I have.
Prof. Challenger is illustrator and "Renaissance Man" Keith Howell who is married with two kids, a dog and a cat. Headquartered in the Republic of Texas, he has a glorious ability to annoy people, the strength of ten men, and sometimes updates his website at profchallenger.com.
DARK AVENGERS #3
Writer: Brian Michael Bendis
Art: Mike Deodato
Publisher: Marvel Comics
Reviewer: steverodgers
I have finally fallen under the spell of Brian Michael Bendis. I gave up on NEW AVENGERS soon after it started—the pacing felt awkward, the team felt wrong (I still don’t see Spider-Man joining up…and Wolverine? Please) and I didn’t buy into the way he was writing the characters. The book is selling like pot in a freshman dorm, however, so there are people out there who think it’s great, and good for them. Fortunately for me I am a guy who loves crossovers—love them: throw some heroes together, make them face impossible odds, get their asses kicked, regroup and then come out on top with some wild battle in space or whatever, and I am completely on board. Not wanting to miss out on another one (I didn’t buy SECRET INVASION--more Bendis Avengers), I decided to give Bendis another shot. I picked up DARK AVENGERS, and I am loving every madcap panel.
I ‘m seeing what folks are saying--that Bendis writes great dialogue; however, I just needed to see it being spouted by characters I don’t give a crap about. I don’t care what they sound like or act like, because they’re blank slates to me—I can just enjoy the way Bendis writes them without years of vested time and interest getting in the way. It’s refreshing. Instead of gnashing my teeth if everyone sounds similar, or says something that I think is out of character, I have Ares, Bullseye, Sentry, Marvel Boy, Moonstone, Wolverine’s goofy son in Wolvie’s kick ass old duds (I decided that “Daken” must be Madriporian for “needless comic book character”), and Norman Osborn with his splendid Ditko hair. They might as well be the Wolfpack or Kickers Inc.
The great joy of this book to me is the pure lunacy of the characters. For a comic called DARK AVENGERS, it’s awfully funny. Norman is flying around over Latveria as Iron Patriot in Iron Man’s armor painted like a flag, carrying Doctor Doom like Thomas Magnum teaching some beach babe how to swim. Bullseye is careening around in Hawkeye’s costume firing arrows into anyone in his path (in this issue he pegs Morgan Le Fey with like a dozen arrows and Norman shouts “Ten gold stars!”) and Venom is chomping on people and being a total nutjob. It’s splendid. Norman is just a pleasure to follow; his happy-go-lucky, flying-by-the-seat-of-his-pants, just-thrilled-to-be-here nuttiness is infectious. He’s so positive! I like Norman so much that even the nine-page (NINE PAGES) of dialogue between him and Sentry, which normally would have made me throw down the book and start mumbling like an old man about the way comics used to be, was totally enjoyable. He convinces Sentry that the Void isn’t real, he just needs some new meds and to eat some burgers. Problem solved! (Who needs Doc Sampson’s bullshit with advice like that?)
This issue has the Dark Avengers dealing with a pissed off Morgan Le Fey and her minions out to kill Dr. Doom, and the Dark Avengers can’t seem to kill her because she keeps coming back through some magical time-traveling each time they off her. The art by Deodato is fine with me; everyone poses mightily which fits the overall ridiculousness of the characters and Ms. Marvel (Moonstone) is absolutely fetching in her 1970’s costume. If you’re like me and gave up on Bendis, I invite you to give him one more try, and if you already think he is the cat’s meow, then jump on board and join the goofy fun.
BEYOND WONDERLAND #6
Written by: Raven Gregory
Art by: Dan Leister
Published by: Zenescope Entertainment
Reviewed by: Ryan McLelland
BEYOND WONDERLAND just continues to get better and better with each passing issue. Though the miniseries wraps with this very issue the story will continue with the final series in the trilogy shortly. But who cares about that since it is a ways off? I do, for one, because this issue ends in a killer cliffhanger like most good middle sequels should.
BEYOND WONDERLAND is full of tricks, surprises, and payoffs as any great homage to a classic fairytale should. The story remains beyond dark for the very pregnant Calie who has her hands VERY full has to deal with the Mad Hatter and the minions of Wonderland invading her life in New York City. For those unfamiliar with this series, these aren’t your Disney Wonderland creatures. Vicious, evil, and with their own sinister motives, Mad Hatter battles for his own twisted reasons while Calie fights for her life--not fun at all for a woman who is about to begin her contractions.
Raven Gregory has continued to step up his game with each subsequent issue of this series, making it one of my favorite must-read books from Zenescope. Gregory has mastered his characters and gracefully brings on the horror from panel to panel. He’s joined by Dan Leister’s phenomenal artwork – a man quite adept at making good girl art look positively amazing. There’s not many times you see a super hot pregnant lady in comic books, but Leister accomplishes this with ease.
As BEYOND WONDERLAND comes to a close and the cliffhanger boggles my mind, now is the time to run out and snag all of this great series before the next mini comes out to conclude this Wonderland trilogy. I’ve honestly never had more fun reading the classics being slain and you’ll never quite look at the Cheshire Cat the same again.
Ryan McLelland has worked in movies and comics journalism for the past several years before joining the @$$holes here at AICN. Ryan’s comic work has already graced comic shelves with Arcana’s PHILLY, WISE INTELLIGENCE, UPTOWN GIRL, and THE SENTINELS ANTHOLOGY. He rarely updates his blog but when he does it can be read at www.eyewannabe.com. The first issue of his new WISE INTELLIGENCE miniseries can be found here.
STAR TREK: COUNTDOWN #3
Story: Roberto Orci & Alex Kurtzman
Writers: Tim Jones & Mike Johnson
Art: David Messina
Publisher: IDW Publishing
Reviewer: Optimous Douche
If J.J. Abrams’ STAR TREK movie this May is the minty fresh take on Roddenberry’s brain child, then this four issue lead-in to the film is quite simply a final swan song to the universe that was. However, with the exception of Spock, this is not a series for those who love Tribbles over Q, or spanked one out to Uhura’s short skirt over Counselor Troy’s. This is a series for anyone whose soul ached over the fact the craptacular STAR TREK: NEMESIS was the rusty nail used in sealing the coffin of STAR TREK: THE NEXT GENERATION.
Spoilers ahoy, celestial travelers: you have been warned.
For the better part of two years we’ve been seeing leaked production shots, insider previews provided to Harry by J.J. himself, and a cavalcade of toys that would put George Lucas to shame. These little morsels of spoiler goodness have certainly whetted my appetite for the new Trek, especially in light of the fact we are experiencing one of the greatest Sci-Fi (or ScyFy®™ if you’re a branding whore) droughts in two decades (keep in mind I write this two days after the lackluster finale of BSG).
So, you can imagine how downtrodden my soul felt when the first issue of this movie prequel set the stage for territory we have traversed many times before in STAR TREK. The Romulan Empire’s sun is about to go nova and decimate their entire galaxy leaving them to question their isolationist ways. While the stakes are greater, a true Trek fan might find this set-up eerily similar thematically to STAR TREK VI: THE UNDISCOVERED COUNTRY when the Klingon moon Praxis went kaboom and they were left relying on the good nature of their sworn enemy the Federation.
After thinking about things, though, this is STAR TREK. Danger will always come from a celestial body or be spurred by some cosmic force. Then I realized that the true beauty of STAR TREK has never been the macro story, but the characters and moments that are interlaced throughout the greater danger. Well, page for page and moment for moment the three issues of this series thus far have given me fangasms not felt since the first airing of the final “Next Generation” episode, “All Good Things.” (Please consult a STAR TREK fan if you don’t understand how high this praise is).
Despite this being a final swan song for the old Trek verse rife with guest appearances from Spock (no surprise there), Captain Data of the Enterprise (surprise for anyone who thought he was still as smart as a frakkin toaster) and Ambassador Picard, this series’ true focus is the genesis of the greatest villain in my opinion since Kahn – Eric Bana’s Nero.
Like Kahn, Nero has a rich back story, which in my opinion always makes for the best villains. Nero starts the story as a Romulan miner who makes the discovery about the finite nature of the Romulan star. Realizing that time is of the essence, he tries to reason with the xenophobic high council to enlist the help of their pointy eared nerdy cousins the Vulcans to abate this disaster. After much debate and a plea from Ambassador Spock, the council agrees -- begrudgingly. And this sparks the beginning of the end. The Romulan home world is not saved; Nero is driven mad with grief and given Borg technology to enhance his ship to exact his vengeance. Some of the best moments of issue 3 center around Nero’s grief and how he acquires his Borg enhancements via a shadow government installation established by the Romulans in the event of Armageddon.
I’ve given away enough at this point; just know that one more guest appearance occurs (I won’t say who exactly, “but take a look it’s in a book”), when it is discovered that the dying star emits an anomaly that threatens not only Romulan, but also the entire Alpha quadrant.
Before I officially close things out, I want to throw some love towards Messina’s pencils. Very often when trying to bring TV characters to the funny pages the result goes one of two ways. Either the rendering is so ethereal it could be anyone’s head form any TV series or the rendering is so photo realistic it ends up being downright creepy (think the covers of the last SERENITY book). Messina strikes that precarious balance masterfully between being able to recognize each beloved character without it looking like a cropped in Photoshop job.
As I’ve stated before, this book is clearly for the fans by providing what in essence is unnecessary back-story for the upcoming movie. I have full faith that the next issue will bleed into the opening sequences of the upcoming film and that anyone who might have missed this book will do just fine following along when the lights dim.
When Optimous Douche isn’t reading comics and misspelling the names of 80’s icons, he “transforms” into a corporate communications guru. "What if the whole world had superpowers? Find out in the pages of Optimous’ original book AVERAGE JOE. Read the first full issue on Optimous’ New Blog and see original sketches by fellow @$$hole Bottleimp. If you are a publisher or can help these guys get AVERAGE JOE up, up, and on the shelves in any way, drop Optimous a line."
INVINCIBLE #60
Writer: Robert Kirkman
Penciler: Ryan Ottley
Inker: Cliff Rathburn
Colorist: FCO Plascencia
Published by: Image Comics
Reviewer: BottleImp
For the most part, I think that we comic book readers tend to gravitate towards the new. I don’t think I’m out of line by assuming that most of us prefer the levels of writing, art, and overall storytelling found in the books published today versus the comics of the 1960s and ‘70s, let alone the Golden Age comics that started it all. In general, modern comic books (and I’m thinking from 2000 ‘til now here; let’s not dwell on the aberrations of the ‘90s) showcase a more mature grasp of the medium in both the scripts and the artwork than their predecessors. But there is one element you’ll find in those old comics that seems lacking in many of today’s books: the ability to jam-pack a hell of a lot of story into one thin stack of folded stapled paper. In the interests of showing off the art, going for a more “cinematic” feel, or just stretching a story as thin as it can be stretched, three-panel pages and double page splashes have become more and more common as the multi-panel page designs of the comics of old become more and more obsolete. It seemed like the old comic book tradition of action bursting on every page was dead and gone.
That is, until I read INVINCIBLE #60.
Kirkman gets it. And Ottley, too. They have given comic book readers a jolt to shake them out of the stupor of wading through pages and pages of talking heads month after month. There is more action and drama in the 32 pages of this issue than you’ll glean from the SEVEN WHOLE ISSUES of FINAL CRISIS! And you know what the amazing thing is? The story works. You have pages divided into nine or more panels, a huge cast fighting over multiple locations—
(Here’s the basic plot—multiple versions of Invincible have been culled from alternate dimensions and are wreaking havoc in order to discredit our dimension’s Invincible, all at the command of Invincible’s foe Angstrom Levy, and basically every superhero in the Image Comics roster is fighting the alternate Invincibles.)
—as well as jumping the reader’s viewpoint from one fight to the next, and goddammit it works! Kirkman and Ottley have crafted their story so well that it can be read, enjoyed and understood instantly—even with the multiple elements that the creative team had to juggle, they never let the story threads become confusing. And not only is this super-brawl easily comprehended, it is also compelling.
I started out reading old Batman and Spider-Man comics before I gravitated towards Marvel in a big way. After a while, my tastes shifted in DC’s direction, and they’ve pretty much stayed that way (although lately there’s been a definite shift back toward Marvel). I was never into the Image comics—that was when the worst of the ‘90s comic book bust was coming to a head—so I never gave a rat’s ass about the characters or their universe. But Kirkman and Ottley make their story so compelling that I can’t help but care about these characters I know next to nothing about. I can’t help but inwardly cheer as Pitt (that’s his name, right? The big gray thing with the chains?) rips one evil-Invincible’s head apart, or smile as another Invincible is taken down by Shadowhawk, Madman and his yo-yo. I can’t help but be moved by Rex-Plode, the hero with the stupidest name since “Strong Guy,” makes the ultimate sacrifice.
And all this for action and drama for $3.99! Suck it, Marvel (and to a slightly lesser extent, DC).
If you are a superhero comic reader and you still haven’t tried INVINCIBLE, smack yourself in the forehead and go read it. You don’t want to miss out on one of the best written, best drawn, best colored (can’t overlook Plascencia’s amazing color palette) superhero books published today—old-school action for the modern set.
When released from his Bottle, the Imp takes the form of Stephen Andrade, an artist/illustrator/pirate monkey painter from the Northeast. You can see some of his artwork athere. He’s given up comics more times than he can remember. But every time he thinks he's out, they pull him back in.
Welcome back to your one stop shop for indie fun. It’s Ambush Bug back again. This week I’ve got a pair of indie reviews for you…
BUMP #1-4
Fangoria Graphix
I had a chance to read all four of Fango's BUMP miniseries. In doing so, I was taken back to my childhood. See, I had one of those cool moms who let me read Fango as a kid and have free reign at the horror section of my local video store. One by one, I devoured them all, from the best to the worst of horror. Sure, my mom called my brother and I ghoulish for liking such things, but she let us watch them nevertheless. BUMP is definitely one of those yarns my mom would have called ghoulish. It is essentially a ghost story where a group of travelers happen upon a house where a serial killer once resided. Thirty years ago, Edgar Dill was left for dead after local sheriffs found a slaughterhouse in his attic and recovered one lone survivor. What makes BUMP stand out from your typical generic serial killer tale is the originality of the methodology of Dill's actions. The character expresses his sexual repression by hacking out the sexual organs of his female victims and padlocking them away in little drawers built into the bodies of wooden mannequins. When the police uncovered Dill's craftsmanship, instead of taking him in, they decided to leave him for dead and brick him into his secluded home in the woods. Thirty years pass--enough time for Dill to become a vengeful spirit with an army of hideous wooden mannequins at his beck and call. Doesn't sound like your typical serial killer yarn, right? The art of this book by Mark Kidwell (who also wrote it) is pretty damn good. It's highly detailed and vividly paneled. Horror comics are a dime a dozen and most are not worth half that. BUMP is definitely top tier horror in graphic form. Ghoulish, yes--but good. - Ambush Bug
VINCENT PRICE PRESENTS #5
Bluewater Productions
Another fun done-in-one, TWILIGHT ZONE-ish issue of VINCENT PRICE PRESENTS. This comic is made all the better by the covers and intros and outros by painter Joel Robinson’s eerily beautiful renditions of Vincent Price. The interior art by Ray Armenteros can only be categorized as expressionistic chalk drawings (although I’m sure he didn’t use chalk). But the artist seems to whittle figures and shapes down to their bare essence, with the results looking pretty darn creepy. The story of a cab driver who used to be a promising writer by writer Scott Davis is a fun tale that ends ominously yet all too quickly. This is a truly fun series that offers some fantastic art and nice inventive scares. - Ambush BugAnd a pair from Ryan…
EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT IRIS #0
Aspen Comics
Having just fallen in love with Aspen Studios I ventured out to see what else I could find by the studio and smacked right into EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT IRIS #0. Set at a great introductory price I delved right into a kung-fu revenge film come right to life as told by David Wohl and Eduardo Francisco. Iris’s boss is a very trusting fellow and when you break that trust Iris is sent out to make you sure you never break his trust again. Looking like a hottie female version of Snake-Eyes, Iris springs into action. She slices and dices the bad guys and keeps my peepers stuck to the page. You know that no bad guy will even hurt a hair on Iris’ beautiful head but all the fun in this book is seeing how Iris strikes next. An outstanding introductory issue! – Ryan McLelland
BLACK DAWN #1
Scare Tactix Graphix
I’ve grown tired of the whole monster genre lately, probably because it’s being overdone. I really do expect a Disney zombie film by 2011. You really need to bring something new to the genre for me to even muster the littlest excitement, so I’m lucky that BLACK DAWN breaks that mold a bit. I’m not sure if the book is about zombies, vampires, or the apocalypse because writer John O’Connor decides to have a small character driven story happening in this large universe. It’s a fight for survival for a father and his two children by some scary assailants and you would think only the smart will survive. But did being smart help the tens of thousands of carcasses loitering the roadways? By not telling us what is going on and focusing on these characters BLACK DAWN achieves what most others don’t: a suspenseful comic book. A very well done indie book that deserves a look. – Ryan McLelland
AMAZING SPIDER-MAN #588
Marvel Comics
A pretty keen ending to this “Character Assassination” arc. Guggenheim proved himself in this mini focusing on the political election of the mayor of NYC with Spidey, Menace, and Norman Osborn caught in the middle. A ton of answers were given in this arc: who is the Spider-Tracer killer? Who is Menace? What’s up with Norman? And all of them done so in a pretty competent and fun manner. Sure there will be those who will poo poo this title for mistakes editorial has done in the past, but the last year of AMAZING SPIDER-MAN has been better than the previous ten, so those of you knocking this series may want to reconsider and give it a chance. - - Bug
AZRAEL: DEATH’S DARK KNIGHT #1
DC Comics
I have mixed feelings about Azrael. To me, it brings back memories of the series that wouldn’t die by Denny O’Neil which coasted along for about 100 issues solely on Bat-crossovers alone. But then again, Az is a cool character, just one that doesn’t really need a series of his own. Now, a miniseries introducing a new character in the Az suit--especially one done by Fabian Nicieza--is worth checking out. And I did. And I liked it. There’s a whole new person in the suit of holy armor this time around, but he’s no less bloodthirsty than the first Angel of Vengeance. Fabs constructs a nice intro issue that fleshes out the sword-bearing vigilante. Not necessarily good or bad, this Azrael gets a few chances to shine in this issue, showing how much of a bad@$$ he really is. Top it off with spectacular art by Frazer Irving, and you’ve got a winner of a first issue. Irving’s art alone makes this worth peeking at, but if you stick around to read the story, you’ll find a welcome return to a character who would work best as an adversary for Batman and hopefully not the star of another endless series of crossovers. - Bug
GUARDIANS THE GALAXY #11
Marvel Comics
The cast of this book keeps getting bigger and bigger. Soon we’re going to have a JSA situation if Lanning and Abnett aren’t careful, but if it means more kick-@$$ storylines like this one, then I don’t care how big the cast is. I mean, Jack Flag is hanging around this book. Just damn cool. And now it looks like Moondragon may be returning, which means more hot interstellar lesbian dragon action! Looks like the book has finally settled on Wes Craig as an artist, which offers a stable foundation for Lanning and Abnett to continue doing cosmic right. - Bug
BLACK LIGHTNING: YEAR ONE #6
DC Comics
This ended up being a pretty good miniseries, and even though I wasn’t a fan of the narrative caption-heavy text, I like how Jen Van Meter focused on Black Lightning’s civilian identity as much as (or even more than) his costumed persona. Fighting crime and despair in the inner city keeps Lightning in line with his character’s original intention as an urban crimefighter, even if the crime and despair just happen to be caused by an immortal wizard. Kudos also to Cully Hamner for providing some great art, especially his simple-yet-effective update of Black Lightning’s original embarrassing costume. Hey, it was the ‘70s. Too bad this design won’t be seen again in favor of the bland spandex he sports now, but what can you do? -- Imp
X-FACTOR #41
Marvel Comics
Although not as jaw-dropping as the last two issues from Peter David’s new revitalized series about our favorite multiplying mutant and his homo superior detective agency, this is yet another indicator that David is bringing back his A-game to the title. Time jumping always makes my head hurt a bit, but so far, it looks like the story is going to be pretty well grounded with Madrox around to crack wise. The reappearance of one of the most unlikelyt of cool characters, Layla Miller, makes this another must read for those who stuck through this series’ hard times AND those who left because of them. - BugProofs, co-edits & common sense provided by Sleazy G
Remember, if you have a comic book you’d like one of the @$$holes to take a look at, click on your favorite reviewer’s link and drop us an email.
Check out the @$$oles’ ComicSpace AICN Comics page here for an archive and more @$$y goodness.
-
+ Expand All
-
It's better than First!
-
is so awesome it makes my dick hard. Robert Kirkman is God.
-
Um, sorry, uh, no...fuck JJ Abrams if he thinks I'm leaving the universe of TOS, TNG and DS9 behind.
-
Mar 25, 2009 8:51:48 AM CDT
"I have finally fallen under the spell of Brian Michael Bendis."
by mrsensitive
Isn't that considered blasphemy around these parts? Looks like one @$$hole will be losing their comic ghetto pass...or at the very least, won't be getting IMs from Ambush Bug in the foreseeable future.
-
The plot hinges on a supernova big enough to destroy the Romulan Empire.
The Empire is thousands of light years across...wouldn't they have millennia to evacuate? NO natural event can exceed the speed of light! -
...despite the fact that all the best minds of the planet say it won't but right before it does, Nero places his infant sun in a small spacecraft and launches him towards Earth.
-
How did Jack Flagg get in Guardians? I don't read the book and last I saw him, the Thunderbolts had beat the crap out of him, so what happened?
-
Given that that ended up being the universe of Voyager, Enterprise and Nemesis I'm quite glad to.Those series still exist you know. Abrams' Star Trek won't be deleting the DVDs out of existence any more than the crap series and films that followed them in the same continuity did.
-
This to continue yesterday's discussion. I don't think you can point to sales as a real indicator of quality. If that were the case, then according to sales, Rob Leifeld has produced some of the most beautiful comic art in the history of the medium. And someone mentioned all the twists and ideas Bendis has implemented, but I'm not sure what those were. Outing Matt Murdock? Killing the Wasp? Making the Scarlet Witch's mutant power be that she's basically God? Putting Norman Osborne in charge of American security? I actually don't mind any of those ideas, and I'd grant that, yes, he has these ideas. Typically, though, Bendis cannot effectively dramatize any of these ideas-- at least in my reading experience. I mean, twisty ideas are easy: Osborne is really Peter Parker's father. The person we've known as Tony Stark has for several years been a machine construct. Kill Spider-Man. Dr. Erskine is still alive, juiced on super-soldier serum in a secret lair where he's been secretly manipulating the Marvel Universe. It's not hard at all to come up with 'status-quo-changing' ideas. The thing is, ideas aren't worth a crap in storytelling if they can't be effective structured. Bendis' stories always start strong with an idea, then spend four or five issues treading water, characters discuss their feelings (always the same character, always the same feelings and articulation), then they wrap up quickly with an event that is usually underwhelming in its relation to the rest of the story. Ultimate Spider-Man has been repeating this formula for years.I think Bendis' popularity has had more to do with the novelty of his style than his skill as a storyteller. Like a writerly Leifeld, he presents things in a new way, a way that might catch the attention of blockhead teenagers, but which is actually short on fundamental skills-- a story structure that creates the surface effects of tension, suspense, excitement, momentum, etc., coupled with characterization that layers deeper effects like emotional involvement.The best thing I can say about Bendis is that good writers are often able to do great things with his ideas, but he doesn't offer much else. I think, in 10 years or so, people will look back on him as a fad, like a Leifeld or McFarlane-- who were at the forefront of the time when artists became the stars of the show, even though neither qualifies as a good artist, really. It's fan art. Bendis is at the forefront of the time when writers are the stars of the show, and it's fan writing. As an example of all the things Bendis can't do, you can look at Ed Brubaker, at the way he structures stories and delivers characterization.I don't think you can even compare Morrison and Bendis. Morrison has been writing great, groundbreaking comics since the early-80s. He still writes the best dialogue in comics, without any self-consciousness, and he's often more successful than anybody at welding the 'big idea' to effective drama. Does it always work? No. But the guy's lifetime batting average has got to be one of the all-time greats.
-
Don't worry, they'll just adjust their main sensor array to emit a sustained tachyeon burst and everything will just fall into place after that...
-
Best series finale ever, you filthy savage
-
Sales isn't an indicator of anyone's PERSONAL sense of quality... it IS an indicator of being successful at your job AND as an indicator for future financial decisions... which is the main drive when it comes to comics (money)
-
He was in that Reed Richards negative zone prison thing, Star-Lord gets sent to the negative zone, the prison is under attack by Blasstar (sp?), and Jack Flag rolls around and kicks ass. Time to jump in with Guardians, they have a talking raccoon and a talking dog. It's all comic book all the time.
-
All had major problems because they bucked the established continuity...NEMESIS the worst, and thus, it had the least support.
Not a good idea to fuck with the big picture, but I'm repeating myself. -
I'll never not find it funny when people misspell Khan as Kahn. THIS IS CETI ALPHA FIVE, YOU SCHMENDRICK!!!
-
I'm just talking value.Nothing else to discuss this week.
-
Really, really, really felt bad for the dude after the opening arc of Ellis' Thunderbolts. I always hoped some writer would remember poor 'ol Jack Flag in the Negative Zone.
-
I hope he brought his missile launching boom box.... It just sounds like it would fit in really nicely.
-
made Jack Flagg worth remembering, proving once again, that maintaining a superheroes status quo over the course of decades only increases how lame they are and only by "breaking" them every few years can you keep them vital.
-
was your value response to the bendis thing, I couldn't tell.But you are right, there is practically nothing to talk about this week, although its funny that despite how little value his detractors claim he has when it comes to the industry, we always seem to be able to easily discuss whatever it is Bendis is doing in comics... hmmm... funny...
-
In a wheelchair. Can't remember if he had his missile launching boom box... that thing is pretty awesome.
-
I see what you're saying... value story-wise... well... I can't argue with you there. Personally, I think Bendis is usually a good story-teller with a ditinctive style and if some of his stories don't pan out to their perceived full potential, well, shit happens sometimes. Value, as far as the worth of a particular run is first, last and always in the eye of the beholder.
-
And I forgot about that missile-launching boom-box. Maybe I don't feel sorry for Jack Flag after all.
-
Now some people might ask: Where does he keep all the extra missiles in an outfit with no pockets? Or even, why not just have a rocket launcher? But to me, the real question is: What kind of mix tape does he have in that thing? I'm betting 80s hair metal, although the idea of a greatest hits mix of the Bell Biv Devo and Tony Toni Tone and early Salt n Pepa could also be a possibility...
-
is desperatly trying to make Youngblood relevant again by including Obama. One thing I will say about Ol' Rob: That guy was a 'Blood team making machine. He put out like 80 titles in the first two years, all kind of the same, but slight variations of the x-men and their villians.
-
I think that before Jack goes out on "patrol" he spends a few hours making the perfect mix. He also always has at least one song that he can really get down too- that way if a fight is getting long between him and say Batroc, they can always decide to stop punching and just dance it out.
-
I havent bought #60 yet, but the idea of Pitt or any of these other guys taking out any version of Invincible seems a bit of a stretch. The evil alternate ones are probably more focused on developing their power level than "our" Invincible is. So, I find it hard that all the world's heroes could stand up to more than 5 or 6 Invincibles, if that. How many evil alternates are there anyway? I guess I need to go pick it up.
-
Is it too much to ask, that people get the fucking words right?
That's like saying, I was about to throw a molotov cocktail, which would incinerate the planet.
Only worse.
So it should read "The Romulan Empire’s sun is about to go nova and decimate their solar system"
To which I would say, so fucking what? If Washington DC disappeared it wouldn't mean the end of the USA. -
I bet he holds the boom box up to the stereo and makes his Mixes that way, occasionally getting upset with the wife for making too much noise in the back ground."Damn it! You know I'm making my fight mix! Come on! ...Now I have to call the station and request Eye of the Tiger again..."
-
There's seven Invincible variants.... so yeah... its completely implausible.
-
It might get me kicked out of the @$$hole Treehouse, but I do.
Ult. Spider-Man, Alias and Powers (when it comes out) have been some of favorite titles over the years.
I view him as a Wheedon light. Do the characters sometimes get involved in a little too much snark, sure they do. But if it’s good snark I’ll let it pass.
Would I want every comic written in this style, hell no. But do I enjoy it for what it is? Absolutely.
-
You mean like PREACHER, STARMAN, HITMAN, the Amalgam Age, and Batman comics written by Chuck Dixon and Alan Grant? You mean GUNSMITH CATS and Tim Truman's JONAH HEX? You mean Elseworlds, which admittedly run into the ground, gave us SUPERMAN: METROPOLIS and KINGDOM COME?
You mean those "crappy" comics?
Oh, no, you mean Image and the Marvel Reborn and the clone saga, of course, and "The Death of Superman" and "Knightquest" the kind of re-boot, re-envisionist crap that has disappeared from the comics stands today.
That's what you mean, right? -
expensive? In fact everything from that company is. They can keep their fancy paper, or whatever excuse is being used, just cut at least a dollar off the price. Fuckers.
-
I couldn't be spending a fortune first off, and second, the art is shit. I also noticed Hawk looked the way he does in the movie. That was enough reason for me to not bother.
-
ACME NOVELTY LIBRARY, SIN CITY, HELLBOY, THRILLKILLERS
I see, now, 90s comics sucked. -
Bjornegar--that was an awesome post! Right On! Also Sandman and Sandman Mystery Theater, Vertigo in general rocked the 90's.
Dark Avengers: Really? You enjoyed a multi-page conversation between Osborne and Sentry? Really? Well, diff'rent strokes...
The latest X-Factor was pretty underwhelming, IMO. I find myself quite bored with this book, contrary to popular opinion. It is just full of itself and I have grown weary of Madrox.
The listed events of Bendis are mostly reasons I stopped liking him as much as I used to. While Scarlet Witch did need some freshening up, I really don't like what happened to her. The Wasp's death was equally underwhelming. And Daredevil...he made me drop that book. I was cool with the "outing" of Murdock, but then he seemed to backtrack and it all became very tiresome. I have found New Avengers to be consistently entertaining, though, despite my initial refusal to buy it due to the presence of Wolverine, Marvel's most over-exposed character.
I shall pick up Invincible due to this review when I hit the LCS later today.
Last week I basically just got a bunch of X-books (x-Factor, X-Men, Wolverine Origins, X-Force). I was disappointed by all four of them. Origins had the characters behaving idiotically in order to advance the plot, X-Men continued to make Colossus boring. X-Force was the best one, and it wasn't all that great. I am getting X-ed out, I think. -
I was struggling to get through that last Uncanny -- Shame really becasue the last issues since 500 have been pretty good.
-
Mar 25, 2009 11:24:54 AM CDT
you forgot about Brandon Jerwa's take on Chuckles, Ambush Bug
by sirwadie
from about five or six years ago I think...now that was a great take on a minor character
-
Aside from the fact that he's waaaaaaaaaaaaaay late with his JJ fanboy review of Star Trek: Countdown #3, I like the fact that he knows he's a douche. He knows it so well, he feels it so deeply in his soul, that he subconsciously created an internet moniker for himself that reflects his inner douchbaggery. Transform, Optimous Douche, and squirt out!
-
So, it's not the verb, it's the object. OK, that's fair
With the week I was having at work though, I'm just glad spell check didn't give me desecrate as an option.
“Have you been a bad little Romulus? You have, haven’t you? Take that you dirty filthy naught planet. Yeeeeeaahhhhh….
-
After such a great crossover to just return to the unknown mutant of the month threatening the world formula was the final straw.Although Old Man Logan is rocking the house.Also, what happened to Ellis's X-men?Also, also, anyone read Fantastic Four Dark Reign? I have a lot of hope for something cool. I really enjoyed its initial tone.
-
I know I've said it before, but it is the only book I find interesting anymore. And it is easy to follow. Pick up the TPBs friends. Do it bitches.
-
I'm surprised this is coming to light now.
My zenith of Douchosity comes out when I really hate a book. -
Sign this petition to make a "Sandman" motion comic!!
http://tinyurl.com/crp6vh
-
I don't think that it's too much to ask that people get the words right. I haven't read the comic in question yet, but the analogy with the molotov cocktail is incorrect. I think that the word that you guys are looking for is "obliterate" or something like that, because technically the word "decimate" means to reduce by a tenth. So if a 10 story building is completely destroyed then it hasn't really been decimated, but if the top floor of a 10 story building has been destroyed then it has been decimated. It's a common misunderstanding of the meaning of the word, and often causes catachresis. The douche is right about the finale of BSG totally stinkin' up the joint, though.
-
on a website without an edit function for the talkbacks... There's also something to be said for colloquialisms and split hairs as well, but then... I guess we're argueing comics where anal retentiveness isn't just excused, its encouraged.
-
Remember that HORRENDOUSLY written story with a TOTALLY AWESOME premise about a Venom bomb hitting New York and turning everyone into symbiotes in a manner not unlike that which occurred in the video game Spider-Man: Web Of Shadows? Whatever happened to that? Oh, I know, Bendis crippled it by telling the story as if it had already happened, thereby ripping everyone right out of the story, killing the tension, and giving us no reason to care one way or another. So, right before the Skrull invasion, a totally awesome symbiote apocalypse occurred, only there is no reason to care because it was told as if it had already happened and was already resolved. Zzz. Too bad too, because it could have been, SHOULD have been really fuckin' cool.
Bendis does come up with really cool ideas (although I think Activision came up with the idea for the game first, and he ripped it off), but he has slim to no idea how to execute them. Also, his dialogue is TERRIBLE, and he has no sense of character voice -- every single character speaks exactly the same. Its like listening to a guy talking to himself. In short, I think Bendis is reasonably imaginative, but his hackery gets in the way of his ideas being interesting.Finally, sales do not equal quality. If that were the case, then that would mean that Titanic is the greatest movie ever made and Blade Runner was one of the worst. -
Then I put them back down.
Never understood all the love for what I found to be generic teenager-in-tights.
Gave the books to my little brother. He didn't like 'em either.
To each, his or her own. -
sale equates quality. It DOES equate success though and thats all that matters as far as employment goes, especially in a dying market. You not liking his work doesn't matter since A. You obviously buy it, or at the very least, pay attention to it and then chat it up on the internet and B. Everyone else buys it regardless of your opinion.Like I said man, as far as comics are concerned: Bendis is the shit, take a whiff.
-
What a great way to discover that series, with the collections already out there. I completely cracked-out on it. A GREAT reading experience. All I knew of Kirkman was his stuff for Marvel and Walking Dead, and never cared for any of it. But between this and Astounding Wolf-Man, I think the guy's probably some type of prodigy.
-
Some folks find the first trade slow, but become hooked afterwards.
Personally I liked it from page 1, but that's just me.
-
"Used to" being the operative phrase.
I've only returned to reading mainstream comics about 3 or 4 years ago (around when Civil War started) after having boycotted them since around early 90s when they started to SUCK. Since then I've read a bunch of Bendis books. At first I enjoyed them, but then, as I continued to read, the Diminishing Returns monster began to rear its head, and I've been dropping them. I dropped New Avengers after Secret Invasion and am about to drop Dark Avengers making me, thankfully, Bendis free. Like I said, he can come up with good premises, but has no ability to execute them. The premises kept me interested at first, now, not so much.
But you are right that in this dying capitalist society that money = success. It does not necessarily equal quality, however. -
How is this not a fucking cartoon??????
I watch, but I just don't get it. -
But there are many ways to define success, and the only true test is time. How good does your stuff look in 10 or 15 years? This is why we say William Faulkner is a better writer than, say, Harold Robbins. Trends come and go and earn money doing so. Quality lasts generation after generation, and on a long enough timeline, it wins the money battle too.
-
No lie, it is the best book I picked up in a while.
Anyone not reading it is missing out on some of the best storytelling around. Check it out! -
Not according to the O.E.D.
-
PeriodYou can't make the arguement that time will find Bendis lacking in talent because ultimately his shitty quality will outweigh his monetary return, because there are (obviously judging by the sales) just as many, if not more, people out there who do NOT think Bendis is shitty. So with that particular opinion up for grabs, the only true measuring stick is bankability, return of investment, and by that measure Bendis is where it is at. Thats why he is navigating the current MArvel status quo, thats why he's creating, shepparding and writing so many projects and ultimately, that is why his legacy is assured. This is the Bendis era, no one else (except maybe Morrison at DC) figures as large in current comics, so whether you like him or not is irrelevant to anything except your personal collection and bank account.Personally, I'm up and down, depending on how "Bugs Bunny/Oh no he didn't" he gets in any particular issue. Plus, Alias and Powers and Ultimate Spidey are amazing.
-
You accidentally put a "the" in there.
-
I hated them thirty years ago when it was just the shitty way they made cartoons and I hate them now that they're back and repackaged as something good. Fucking terrible. Why don't Marvel and DC just invest in an animation studio that turns out stuff made for their main demographic, instead of kiddifying everything? Why not get in on the anime market, the adult swim market? Instead of shoving shitty motion comics at us. I'd like to find the asshole who first thought of this and kick that retard in the balls.
-
Oh, Sector... you cad...
-
The reason your argument doesn't work is because at one time Vanilla Ice and New Kids on the Block were the most bankable recording artists in the world. Today, not so much. Monetary success? Sure. Artistic success? Sustainability? Nope. Grant Morrison will always be around because his quality and sales will eventually win out over Bendis' quantity and sales, but Bendis will only be remembered for his stand-out stuff. Nobody's going to give a shit about Alias in 50 years. But everyone will still be reading everything by Morrison and discussing the brilliance of Final Crisis. Sorry to the fanboys that don't understand it. Bendis, much like Vanilla Ice and NKOTB before him, will not age well with the readers as they mature, just as NKOTB did not age well with their listeners.
-
that, if at the time, you would have stood up and said: New Kids suck, you would have been horribly out numbered by their rabid fans and since it all subjective, both personal opinions would have been mute and that fact would have remained that they were extremely successful at the time, with quality being ultimately irrelevant...especially considering that their stupid reunion tour sold out all over last summer.Bankability, baby.
-
If people don't care about Alias, thats because they're idiots.
-
uh... I don't want to disillusion you, but I'm pretty sure everyone here is well past "matured", as are most comic fans these days.
-
No, the point is that history will be the decider, and it will decide in favor of Morrison rather than Bendis. Not to mention that the New Kids are currently working on a cruise ship, which doesn't help your "bankability" argument in regards to them. What's Vanilla Ice doing right now? Other than beating his wife, I mean? I did, at the time, say that the New Kids sucked, and I was outnumbered. But I was not wrong. Just as I am not wrong right now. I do agree that if you judge artistic success by the money that is currently being made then Bendis wins, hands down. I do not view quality as being irrelevant though. But I can see how a big fan of Bendis would take that position.
-
I think that we have a "funniest line of the talkback" here. Thanks, I needed a good laugh.
-
It certainly does mean to kill one in every ten or to destroy a tenth, but it also means to destroy, period. It's in the dictionary. You don't see me getting into fights because people write kidnaped as "kidnapped."
-
Soo, after the Final Crisis ended, I decided to re-read something I recalled as being quite good: Seven Soldiers 0, 1 and the tie-ins. So far I have re-read Morrison's Mister Miracle, Bulleteer, Klarion and Zatanna. All four of them are just outstanding. Even better than I remembered.
I do wonder how Bendis will hold up. My feeling is Morrison holds up better, but that is because I like Seven Soldiers and Animal Man considerably more than Powers, going back and re-reading these works.
I can't imagine Bendis will ever become a Rob Liefeld (or Fred Durst in music) type of Pariah that no one will ever admit having liked, but I don't think his stuff will be sought out either. I think he'll be, say, a Claremont. -
I gotta get me some o' that good stuff!!!!Joe Staton I love you!!!!!
-
I'm just judging success, there's a difference.
-
I'm beginning to suspect that this is the fate of all of them. Somehow, they all start to lose touch, they all cease to explore and push boundaries. Maybe its the subject matter, maybe its just a natural by-product of the creators aging, but it seems to be spreading with every year.
-
I love debating you man, but every week your argument against anyone who criticizes one of your favs is the same: that you can’t judge that person because anyone’s criticism is based on their personal feelings towards someone or based on a subjective view point; and that sales is the ultimate indicator of skill and talent.
You have created an impregnable shield against any criticism or difference in opinion. If I don’t like Bendis or Millar because of their storylines, plotting, dialogue, etc., but that makes my opinion invalid because that is based on personal opinions (as if there is some sort of mathematical formula to determine what is good or bad, and not subjective view point); and if sales is the sole indicator of success, than does McDonald’s have the most delicious food in the world, or just the best marketed and have the best business model? And for the amount of time people talk about him, hell, Uwe Boll most be Martin Scorsese considering the amount of discussion going on about him on this site. But I have to admire your strategy: no one can criticize your favorites because it is only because of personal reasons they don't like your favs, and sales proves that you are right (even if they too are a nebulous thing).
-
How FINAL CRISIS was "brilliant" as claimed in an earlier Talkback!
We can debate endlessly who will stand the test of time, but we won't know for awhile will we?
However, here and now I want to know why some consider FINAL CRISIS brilliant.
I really wnat to know. All I hear from the fans to the detractors is "you're too stupid to understand." Then please enlighten the masses. -
Well, then money would only be one factor in success. Just as the quality of the art itself would be a factor.
-
Normally, I would sit back and twiddle my moustache while cackling with glee, BUT this week, the debate isn't about whether or not Bendis is good (at least, not for me) its about whether or not he deserves his job (at least, this is how it started yesterday). All I'm saying is that the guy moves books and in a dying industry that is the only thing that matters when it comes to employement. Also, Bendis Uber Alles!
-
true, but see respons above.
-
I even enjoyed Final Crisis and I'm a big Morrison backer, but when compared to his other works... FC is toward the bottom, below Sea Guy and Sebastian O.
-
I never said sales was an indicator of talent. I would never say that. I said: "Sales is an indicator of success." There's a difference.
-
They tell me he's not bald, but actually shaves his head.
-
Well then, what do you know about form in relation to content? How it applies to creating a complex and layered work of art? We could start there. Final Crisis could be the most perfect example of this to ever exist in comics. If you want me to explain Final Crisis fans, then... We like to read a lot? I can't really speak for anyone else, so I don't really know. All I know is that Final Crisis is easily one of the greatest contemporary comics and that there is nothing at all "confusing" or "indecipherable" about it. I could counter your question with another question: What's bad about Final Crisis? I consider the burden of proof to be on the one casting the aspersions at the great art, not the person who simply realizes that the great art is great. Please keep in mind that "I didn't understand it" isn't a criticism of the art itself, but merely an explanation as to your impediment to enjoying it.
-
Are both great as well. But probably not as great as Final Crisis.
-
well played, my friend... well played...
-
Sea Guy was funny,.I'll give you that, but Sebastian O was not great, come on now.
-
You keep changing what you're talking about. So, which is it now, success or employment? I've never said that he doesn't deserve his job. He's obviously making a lot of mediocre comic-lovers very happy.
-
I thought FC was interesting, but not "brilliant" by any means. I am not even sure how much I liked it, but it kept my interest because there were so many characters and so much going on. I tend to like that sort of thing, but I can see how others would not.
It was very ambitious, trying to re-invent the whole New Gods. I don't think it was a success (I prefer the old New Gods to the new New Gods) but it was an interesting attempt.
And I don't see how anyone can deny that FC was kind of a mess. But I've read it twice, unlike Secret Invasion, which I initially loved but then grew bored with.
One big defense of Bendis is that two of his favorites are also my two favorite MU characters: Spider-Woman and Luke Cage. I actually quite like his dialogue, but there is nothing I can point to and say "this is awesome" that he has written. Whereas, even with Claremont, I can point out the Dark Phoenix Saga and say "this rocks! Even today!" -
True. It is ONE indicator of success. Unfortunately, it's the only indicator of success in your argument and that is where your argument fails.
-
My arguement has always been: whether you like him or not is irrelevant, his sales make him successful and that is why he deserves his job. Thats how the debate started... and finished.
-
Alias, Powers, Ultimate spider-man
-
I deny that FC was a mess. Quite the opposite. Brilliant, really. Everything you should want in a giant company-wide, multiverse-spanning crossover. It's certainly the best one ever done. I like Spider-Woman and Luke Cage quite a bit as well. Let's see what happens with "real" Spider-Woman now that she's back. I think that Bendis' most awesome idea was Secret Invasion.
-
except where we disagree.
-
Sea Guy reeked! Ugh! I had forgotten who wrote Sebastian O, but I can still remember that mini, so it had something going for it.
I also did not like the Invisibles, so I think when GM gets too "out there," he loses me.
Sector, I wouldn't say it is "undecipherable" but I would say all the parts don't really come together. The easiest example is the very last page of the whole series. I consider myself bright and am definitely well educated. But I don't know WHY Batman was there in the cave. This doesn't bother me that much, though. I don't feel like I have to fully understand every single thing that happens as long as I get the gist of it. -
I would argue that whether I "like him or not" is not irrelevant on a board intended for the discussion of comics, but that, in fact, whether I like him or not is the only thing that is actually of relevance. Again, I never said he didn't deserve his job. So once again it seems like you're trying to derail discussion by talking in circles. I await your comments on sales being *one* indicator of success rather than the *only* indicator of success.
-
You DIDN'T like Invisibles? How... Thats fucked up, dude. Thats something you should re-read. Soon.
-
Well, Powers holds up as a decent read, but not something I would ever use to try and show someone how awesome comics can be (I do this sort of thing often).
Spider-Man is a character I simply can't get into. But I did love GM's Superman, and Supes was another character I never thought I'd find interesting.
I will give Alias a try. -
you joined the debate late, baby. The debate started with Laserpants (I think, maybe it was Laserhead, I get you two mixed up, all you Lasers look alike...) wondering aloud why Joe Q and Bendis have jobs and I said its because they're successful at what they do and it all went down hill from there until now when you wandered in blind as shit and not even knowing it, all flailing around and declaring and not understanding what was going on, so there hopefully now you know, because knowin is half the battle. Sidebar: I don't believe Chuckles could ever be cool, I will have to check that issue out.
-
I feel the same way about Spider-man as you do, so I was shocked to discover how much I actually enjoyed the Ultimate title over the years because I never really felt that way about the regular continuity title.
-
Give Seaguy (and Invisibles) another try. You're a different person now than you were the first time that you read them. You can't step in the same stream twice, you know. Plus your attitude of not hating something simply because you don't completely understand it is refreshing and leads me to believe that you have the potential to understand them. More experimental modes of writing can sometimes be difficult to understand, be it in comic books, poetry, the work of W.S. Burroughs, etc., etc., but that doesn't mean that they aren't worthwhile. Sometimes you learn things in your attempts to understand and that's what turns out to make them have value. We don't know *exactly* why Batman was in the cave (except that Batman wouldn't die), but we can figure out quite a bit through what we already know. For instance, that it probably wasn't Batman's corpse that Superman was holding in his arms, and that Batman didn't fire the gun at Darkseid on a suicide mission. I would say that it's more likely that one of the large number of Batman clones (that were created in Command-D by Simyan and Mokkari) was Batman for the death that we witnessed. There are other clues as well. Maybe a third read-through will illuminate them for you.
-
That it could have all been in Batman's mind
-
I understand fully what is going on. What's going on is: you're an abrasive asshole that can't participate in a debate by actually participating in it. The only way you feel that your arguments can "win" is if you ignore what someone is saying, talk about what someone else said, and then change your terms, semantics, and discussion points to create a smokescreen which you hope will cover up that fact that you've painted yourself into a corner of stupidity.
-
Thats totally NOT what we were debating... You should really go back abd read the previous posts...
-
I read the previous posts. What about what *we're* debating? What about you saying that sales is the only factor in regards to success? Or do you just wanna continue to ignore that and anything else that dismantles your infantile, shallow arguments?
-
you didn't read the post... I never said it was the ONLY factor, in fact, I agreed with you when you pointed out that it wasn't the only one. What I originally said was: Sales is not an indicator of quality, but it is an indicator of success. "AN" as in: One of. Kind of like Mephisto is A Devil, not THE Devil Aren't I a stinker?
-
Sales aren't indicators of success, the truly talented writer is the person no one's ever heard of, and aren't talking about. Or something...
-
What about right there?
-
This one: "[Sales] DOES equate success though and thats [sic] all that matters".
-
What does that prove? Where do I say that its the only factor? And regardless, doesn't making a lot of money at your job make you successful?
-
hmmm... incomplete quote...interesting... very telling....
-
comics...
-
Apparently you *don't* agree with me, and not only that, but you didn't even understand my plainly written posts on the subject. I said nothing that resembles your position. In fact, I said that sales are an indicator of success. Just not the only one. Hope that clears things up for you. Maybe you could give my posts another read, just like Homer should do with The Invisibles?
-
What do you find to be incomplete about either quote? What words should be added to make them complete? Please advise. Your non-responsive-response is very telling. Enjoying your corner?
-
Basically, you proving my point for me that you talk in circles and say more than one thing. Either "Sales DOES equate success" or "Sales are AN indicator of success". You're constantly contradicting yourself and talking in circles, and that's not my deficiency as a reader of your posts, it's your deficiency as the writer. Pretty much the opposite of what's going on with fanboys and Final Crisis.
-
I think you have blinded yourself with rage. Perhaps if you took a break, maybe went for a walk for a bit and cooled down and then came back, you'd be better able to understand. I don't know, in the end, I'm not responsible for you having misconstrued my plainly worded posts. I mean, if me directly telling you that I believe Sales to be an indicator of success but not the only one, fails to connect... its beyond me.
-
In the two quotes that I just gave you above. On to: "...doesn't making a lot of money at your job make you successful?" If making a lot of money is your only measure of success, then yes. If there are other factors, then not necessarily. For you, yes. For me, no. Your thinking is simple and reductive. Mine is not. Are you pretending to be dense as a joke or something?
-
Oh, I see... split hairs so that you can identify yourself as a rebel on a comic book message board. Well, I am impressed, senor anti-society with your bohemian ways...
-
Sector_11374265 is too blinded by rage to know when people agree with him...or when hhe's been mocked.
-
I think that you give yourself far too much credit. There's nothing you could type on your computer that would be able to get me angry. That is a great way to attempt to change the course of the conversation though... away from your self-contradiction and shallow, reductive arguments. But alas, it will not work. While I agree that your posts are "plainly worded" I would like to point out that that's not what I was taking issue with in regards to them. Maybe you're getting confused as to whether or not you're signed on as MrSensitive or Joenathan? I understand that *right now* you are telling me that you believe sales to be AN indicator of success but not the only one. The problem is that your "plainly worded" posts have consistently contradicted one another to the point that I'm not sure that you even know what you're saying anymore. I also realize that it is "beyond you" and that you don't realize that you contradict yourself and that you probably don't even know what many of the words that you are typing mean. Because of this I see little hope in you ever understanding what's going on here. Old Man Logan does rock the hizzy, though. So, I guess even a blind squirrel finds a nut now and then. When you like something good is it always by accident?
-
He always strangely attuned to such things...
-
Split hairs? Well, I'm glad you think that you've figured something out. But I think that posting again as MrSensitive right after your last post and using the "blinded by rage" thing is pretty pathetic. I guess that's really all you can do at this point.
-
I didn't read your post, as I got bored partway in, but I assume its more of the same. From here on out, please randomly revisit one of my above responses, except when you re-read them please do so aloud in a bored voice, sighing occasionally and rolling your eyes for the correct effect. Thank you.
-
I read your whole post, but then, reading and understanding has always come easy for me. Therefore I do not have to assume anything... I can *know* that you're a moron. But I guess it's the whole knowing thing that really distinguishes me from a clueless jerk like yourself... and you're welcome.
-
that Joenathan is done with the hissy-fit, can we get back to talking about comics?
-
was Steverodgers being facetious? I couldn't tell. I used to really like Bendis. Now i can't stand him, because his flaws seem to just dominate his narative. See his take on magic. It's really awfull. Yet he's in charge of Dr. Strange and this upcoming new sorcerer supreme storyline. But i can stand it in small doses, which is why, since bendis seems to be in charge of the main marvel U, i only collect satelite titles like Thor, and the cosmic stuff.
-
Mar 25, 2009 4:29:50 PM CDT
I missed the whole talkbalk, but have we already pointed out tha
by rock-me amodeo
Sector_11374265 is the troll formerly known as Jeff Albertson and many other names? It only took me reading two of his silly and predictable ad hominems to figure it out.
-
Nope. I really liked it. It's the first Bendis I have read in awhile, so maybe his style will start to grate after a few more issues, but right now with the way he is writing Osborn I am just loving it.
-
I assure you that I am not this person of which you speak. What was it that I said that led you to believe that I was? If it was that I called Joenathan a "clueless jerk" I only did so because he starting the insulting language first. Also, if I were a "troll" then why would I be so engaged in comic book discussion? That's what I'm here for. Granted, it was a bit derailed by Joenathan, but why aren't you accusing him of being the troll? It sounds like you're on the lookout for a specific person and that I'm the victim of... I don't know, paranoia or something? I don't see how I could have given you any offense, since we have not yet interacted.
-
It's a pretty good comic. Maybe not quite as good as the Ellis/Deodato Thunderbolts issues, but still entertaining. I like that Osborn has put villains into the hero roles of Wolverine, Hawkeye, Spider-Man, and Ms. Marvel. That's my favorite part and I'm waiting to see what comes out of it.
-
Sorry guys, but the whole do sales=success debate is beneath all of you. You are all smart and well read. We all know monetary success does not an artist make (sorry needed a Yoda moment).
Is a blockbuster film a better story than indie films? No, but they appeal to the bubblegum part of our brain versus the caviar connoisseur portion. Sometimes entertainment should make you think and sometimes it’s a lot of fun to just go into coma mode.
OK back to FC.
Sector, I appreciate that you consider the piece art. Now let me throw a fancy college term back at you – Freytag’s Pyramid, the formation of a story.
Call me a purist, but I need it. I want the exposition (which I think was actually a strong point of the series), but then it was all just rising action to the abrupt, confusing and lackluster denouement.
The New Gods and the Monitors are not the centers of the DC universe. There are three people that are and they were sidelined.
Again, I totally appreciate where you are coming and as I’ve always said I never hated the series. But to call it CRISIS was a sham and a “head-fake” by DC to suck nostalgia dollars from our wallets. It was not a CRISIS, it was a series of interesting moments strung very loosely together.
Look at other posts in this TalkBack -- we are speculating as to the meaning and reality of the events even still. I’ll save my art for the canvas, please just keep giving me stories in my comics.
-
Even if you go by "decimate" as a literal usage, a GALAXY is just so much bigger than a nova, or supernova could impact. The molotov cocktail analogy stands.
-
true, but it will make the guy rich
-
Two things:
1) You ever seen the website hot chicks with douchebags? Just curious.
2) If you are looking at FC as a dramatic work, it qualifies as a tragedy: it ended in catastrophe for the readers. -
not only a lack of editorial support across the board, but a general lack of editorial control when it came to Morrison.Discuss.
-
Just finished reading the latest Cap storyline. Was it me, or was the artwork this time around so muddled that it was difficult to tell a couple of issues back exactly what the "big reveal" in Chin's lab was? I dunno, something about the art the last several issues just threw me off. Still love Brubaker, though.
-
So will selling smack and coke and being a hedge fund manager. Doesn't make it good.
-
He was kind of muddy last issue...
-
Reality... fantasy... reality... fantasy...
-
I prefer living in my fantasy land of morals and personal codes. Same reason I don't work in porn - I believe in an idea called art. Just making something to get a buck doesn't appeal to me.
Of course, I freely admit, that I believe even art should have some appeal to the masses (why make something if the only one who is going to enjoy it is you). But I prefer to make something I personally look at as good, instead of trying to turn out crap. If I wanted to do that, I would have gotten a job working on Tool Academy or Rock of Love or some crappy reality show. They pay good but the money doesn't offset the crappiness of the product. And even if some people do like watching it (which ratings have proven people do) doesn't mean I have to be a party to it. I prefer to take my money and my brain cells somewhere else. -
I think about blockbuster films too. It's a curse. I think about all of it. Everything. I'm not entirely sure what you're attempting to say about Freytag's Pyramid in your post. Are you saying that it was absent from Final Crisis or that Final Crisis was unsatisfying because it did not follow the rules closely enough, or what? Please clarify. Also, I would appreciate if you addressed the discussion which you started to which I attempted to respond. What is your position on the relationship of form and content in FC? You seem to have ignored my reply post to you. Here's another question for you: Do you NOT consider Final Crisis to be art? If so, is that an extension of not considering comic books to be art in general? Just asking. It's something I need to know to understand where you're coming from. In regards to your comments on exposition, I'm having a hard time understanding what you mean there as well. Do you see Final Crisis as not having enough exposition, and that's one of your reasons for not liking it? I would say that we all go into the comic knowing who Superman and Batman are in advance, etc. Are you saying that the series lacked a climax? I would also argue that the denouement was not confusing, and I would ask what you were confused by so that we may alleviate your confusion and allow you a greater enjoyment of a brilliant comic. I would also like to point out, again, that claiming confusion only speaks to your understanding of the art and not to the art itself. Also, Final Crisis was never intended to be about "the centers of the DC universe", but rather about the entire DC multiverse. Hence the name Final Crisis being perfectly applicable, since both previous crises were about the entire multiverse as well. I'm not counting Identity Crisis, which was a piece of shit, and actually the comic that shouldn't have used "crisis" in the title. The monitors have *always* been a part of the previous crises, it's why they exist. Since the purpose of Final Crisis was to show the death of The Fourth World and the birth of The Fifth World, The New Gods are obviously the characters around which the book would be built. I'm glad that you don't hate the series. Maybe reading it again would sway you to the side of the angels. When you say that Final Crisis was "a series of interesting moments strung very loosely together" it makes me think that maybe you didn't really pay all that much attention the first time through, because by its very nature Final Crisis had to be meticulously planned out. What is it that makes you think that it was "stung very loosely together"? What would you present as your evidence for this? Because it seems pretty evident that it is a meticulously plotted comic. Your closing statement of "I’ll save my art for the canvas" makes me think that you only view paintings as art, but I would say that comic books, as well as all other types of literature (and music, and dance, and cinema, etc. etc.) are considered to be art by most educated people. Also, is your closing statement meant to imply that there was no *story* in FC? Because that would border on ridiculous. How do I add the line breaks like you do in your posts? It makes large posts easier to read. Thanks for wanting to talk about comics, even if we disagree.
-
Agreed. I understand what you're saying. You're right that a supernova couldn't take out an entire galaxy.
-
So, when you say "I even enjoyed Final Crisis", then that means that you really enjoy a good catastrophe? Or is that just your usual m.o. of saying one thing and then saying another? Or are you MrSensitive right now posting as Joenathan? Or maybe you're posting as one of the many other personalities in your schizo head? Fail. I'll discuss FC with anyone who has the ability to discuss it. Apparently that's not you.
-
I have mixed feelings about this. On the positive, it was a great little experiment and a big fuck you to DC and Marvel. The plot has definatly changed the Invincible world and it was great fun seeing it all fit into one issue. To whoever asked how the heroes could defeat so many invincibles, not to reveal too much, but basically it works, without seeming unconvincing. And doesn't necessarily end in "defeating" them as you're thinking.
On the negative, the IMAGE universe isn't really one in the same way marvel and DC is. Many of the characters just do not work in the same universe (witchblade/the darkness work together, but in the same universe as invincible? Just no) which left many of the cameos rather jarring.
Also the comic just ended up feeling far too compressed. I know he wanted to show you could do this epic story in one issue, but it ended up feeling like a summary of a longer event. Now it could be argued that's all you need with these big events because they're only there to set up the new status quo hence you might as well just read a summary, there just spread out to make money blah blah blah.
But I feel like his "screw you guys I can do all that in one issue!" reaction is too much, and is detrimental to the story. I know giving it two or three issues would have been against what he wanted to do, but I think it would have worked far better. And still had the impact he wanted imo. 2 or 3 issues is just as impressive compared to the DC/Marvel ridiculously long events and million spin offs.
Nonetheless I comend Kirkman for being willing to fuck up the status quo of his comic series and let it stick, rather than marvel/DCs resets after a year of the "change". -
Porn can't be art? Have you met optimous_douche yet? Have you read Lost Girls? etc. etc.
-
But without the spaces. Don't ask me on bold and I still haven't cracked the Harry Code yet.
Sorry for the confusion before, I actually thought the exposition was well thought out. The Green Lantern archeological dig, the entrapment of Turpin, I was there. Right up until when Barry Allen returns. Sorry, I just wanted more epic.
I'll fully admit, I was never a New Gods fan, so that's probably where a part of my apathy comes from. If I never saw Orion again it would be too soon.
Yes, the Monitor was part of the last Crises, but again he WAS the Last Crises. Here we had two Hallmark moments to book-end the piece.
Consequences, I guess. The universe was not drastically shooken up until almost book six.
And I will admit I hold editorial responsible for not getting the reset-quake that's happening right now through all of the other titles. Yes, I'm going to sound like an old bastard, but with the first Crises, the resets in the other titles happened along with each Crises release. They did it this time but three months afterward.
I know that's my context, as for Grant Morrison, I don't know -- I'm not him. -
seriously, you giver EVERY comic a good review every week. i don't even need to read the review, just skip to the last line - POSITIVE, POSITIVE, POSITIVE, POSITIVE... grow some testes or read some bad comics. i recommend tarot: curse of the black rose (or whatever the frick it's called).
-
Excellent. I'm gonna try that in this post starting now.
We'll see if it works when I hit "post."
From reading your last post it seems that your reasons for FC being bad do not have to do with the writing or the comic itself. You don't like The New Gods. That's a personal bias. You don't like the comics that have come out after FC and you don't like DC editorial. Well, O.K., but you have to realize that you haven't said much about the comic itself, except that Barry's return should have been "more epic". I would say that this is a case of you critiquing what you wanted to be there rather than what is actually there. Again, this says more about what you want than it does about the work of art itself.
But, is it even art? I also notice that you're ignoring many of my legitimate questions from my previous posts regarding form in relation to content in FC, what you consider to be art, and your accusation that FC was "strung very loosely together". I'd really like to hear what you have to say on those subjects, as I feel that they will help me understand where you're coming from.
I hope that you're not just ignoring them because answering them would make your position an uncomfortable one. That would be disappointing. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt here, though. This is how we learn and grow. Not just by thinking about something, but by thinking about *why* we think what we do about something, and by questioning our own assumptions and their relevancy.
Your last line where you say "I know that's my context" I don't really understand what you mean. What is it that you mean by "context" exactly? Because I'm not sure that you're going by the traditional definition.
That's what my questions to you are designed to do. Provide context. But when you don't answer, then there is no context and understanding has been impeded. What you gave me may be considered "personal feelings and/or observations", but not context.
I also don't understand the "I'm not Grant Morrison" thing. We all know you're not. What are you getting at? Without getting too far off the FC subject, of course. -
Thanks.
-
(Just went and looked it up...)On the next-to-last page... In the flashback the Winter Soldier busted into Chin's big warehouse, and there were what I can only assume were tanks filled with blue goo and human bodies. I blew past that panel, and it wasn't until reading the book for the third time that it hit me that we were supposed to be shocked by a "big reveal" in that panel. And then I spent the last couple of books playing mental catch-up when I realized Chin was experimenting on people. But the story/dialog left the art to explain that, and it didn't do it clearly. At least, not for me.
-
1. The problem with Bendis is this: he simply has too much power. If he was just another writer writing just another book, no one would care. Like Whedon writing Astonishing, fans could enjoy him and detractors could just move along. The problem arises with Bendis not in his lack of talent, but his domination of Marvel overall. His style doesnt lend itself to universe-wide exposure. Thats not his fault, but it is what it is. 2. Sales indicate nothing. Creed sold 10 million albums, nuff said. 90% of America is stupid and uninformed, being able to convince them to waste money on something means zip in regards to quality. 3. Nothing better then that disco-lookin kid's death in Khan, the most unintentionally gay death in movies: "Yours........is.....SUPERIOR!!"
-
"PREACHER, STARMAN, HITMAN, KINGDOM COME".......I think I just achieved full mast.
-
my hypocrisy does know its bounds, I consistently read nothing the man writes, never have, doubt I ever will. So for the record, I;m not a hater sitting back throwing bombs while reading everything he prints. Me and Joe already had this conversation, but to address a comment made above, Brubaker clearly is lights years better then Bendis by any measure you choose to use. Theres more awesomeness in 2 issues of Incognito then all of Secret Invasion combined.
-
Mar 25, 2009 7:10:12 PM CDT
Another similarity between Nero and a past Star Trek item is...
by qweruiop
...Dr. Soran from Star Trek Generations. Both were humble men who probably just wanted to live life without doing anything evil, but it takes the death of their families to change them into sympathetic villains.
-
You dont like Walking Dead? Really? Thats a bold statement,bro....I could see beng frustrated at times with it, but straight up not liking it?
-
was awesome for one page: when Bats pulls out the gun and blows Darkseid away. I said it when that issue came out, and Ill say it again, that scene was legend. As evidenced by the fact that its generally the first thing that comes up when FC arrives in the conversation. However, here's something to really blow your mind: now that its all said and done, I think the truth can be told: Identity Crisis was better then FC. Brad Meltzer out-wrote Grant Morrison. Everyone's head just collectively exploded/.
-
Hey, I think that we've found that troll you were looking for. Nobody could say something that ridiculous and actually mean it! What else? Judd Winick out-wrote Alan Moore? Rob Liefeld out-drew Frank Frazetta? Try again.
-
But will me be talking about it ten years from now. Will it be like Green Goblin throwing Gwen Stacy off the bridge or when the Joker crippled Barbara Gordon; or will it be more like Wonder Woman killing Max Lord or Superman dying at the hands of Doomsday? A big event when it happened but later forgotten and only rarely brought up. The problem with the shooting of Darksied is it had to happen during a forgettable storyline. Final Crisis will be like Marvel's Secret Wars II - an apparently mega-event that left people disappointed and will probably be soon pretty much ignored and forgotten save for an occasional mention.
-
Damn typos. Just wanted to clarify what I wrote.
-
Identity Crisis was a better series. In that particular case, in fact Meltzer put out a better story. Sorry man, but its true, it surprises me as much as anyone. And as far as me being a troll, ask everyone else, they can offer their opinions on that (shrugs)
-
late March and early April, has this been mentioned? I haven't been around, but to read the reviews the past few weeks, so I'm curious.
I've defended Millar's FF, but it's not even fucking winter any longer.
Just wanted to bitch about that. -
(shrugs)
-
It happened in 1992. It's now 2009. Looks like that's about 17 years later. We're talking about it. It's also hardly been forgotten. They just made an animated movie of it about a year ago. Before that Doomsday was on the Justice League cartoon. His popularity endures. I'd say it gets talked about consistently, at least as much and probably more than the death of Gwen or Joker crippling Barbara. In fact, if you talk to a non-fan about comics, most of them will say "I remember that Death of Superman in the early nineties" because they actually know about it, whereas none of them probably even know who the characters of Gwen Stacey or Barbara Gordon even are. Not that the amount of conversation generated by a comic book determines its artistic value. Artistic value is why people will always talk about Morrison's comics. Again, something that won't be talked about in the future is Alias.
-
Because while, yes, I did enjoy it, it would seem to me that the majority of the comic reading public did not. In fact, it seems like most of them out right hated it. This was not DC's intention, after all the money, the advertising, the build up, the big sell, to have what looks like most of the comic reading community hate your product seems like an Epic Fail.
-
Large sales means large appeal, it means you're catching the most demographics. True, it has nothing to do with art, but in the case of Titanic say, the studios could give two shits about art while rolling in their billions and billions of dollars. Its not a good thing, its not a bad thing, its reality.Like McDonalds, its shit, right? But sells worldwide and because it sells like crazy worldwide, McDonalds isn't going to change what they do, because it works. They're just going to do more of the same. Thats how Marvel is. You may think Joe Q and Bendis are shit, but as long as that opinion doesn't affect their sales, Marvel is going to keep things just how they are, because they are successful. Artists? Hmmm... maybe not, but thats not really important to Corporations
-
But enjoyment shouldn't be an issue, according to your own logic, because all that matters are the sales. What would the Joenathan or MrSensitive of a few hours ago say? He's say "your enjoyment is irrelevant." He'd say "all that matters are sales."
While a vocal minority on the internet complain about how they find FC confusing, the fact remains that it was a big seller for DC, which must mean that children around the world understood it just fine (if not middle-aged talkbackers on AICN).
So, you trust sales numbers more than your own judgement, huh? In your case that may be a good idea, but probably not.
As far as anyone "out right [hating] it" goes, nobody in this talkback seems to be taking that position... so where did you come across that information? All I see are people like you, Homer, optimous, et al. saying that it sucked but you liked it anyway. Sounds kind of pathetic. If you liked it, why does it matter that someone else may not have? Doesn't sound like you have very much confidence in your own beliefs, or any strength in your convictions. "I liked it, but since I hear that others didn't, it sucked." You really do allow faceless market forces to define your own aesthetics, don't you? How is it an epic fail if you enjoyed it? I assure you that the sales were quite good, so it's O.K. for you to like it. Should I be saying this to MrSensitive instead? Or maybe one of the other imaginary people in your head? Do you ever get confused about what those people are supposed to think from one minute to the next? It seems you do.
As far as Joe Q. and Bendis are concerned, it's my opinion that they're artists. Joe Q. is a decent editor who used to be a mediocre illustrator and Bendis is a hack that's come up with a couple of decent concepts. Are they the best creative talents that comics have to offer? No, far from it. But nobody ever said that all art was good, or that something has to be good to qualify as art.
Nobody believes that corporations are concerned with art. That's why it's up to those that are concerned with art to express their opinions on the subject. But they'll need to be thoughtful, honest opinions and not just mirror what a corporation may think, such as "all that matters are sales." You need to get over that, because it's shallow and childish, and because it keeps you in a state of arrested development where you are unable to discuss the matter like the mature adult which you claim to be. I agree with optimous that it should be beneath us, but unfortunately, it appears that it is not. I think that future discussion should be directed toward making relevant statements about the comic(s) being discussed, rather than the juvenile "it sells so it wins" tactic that you've been using. It's a non-issue for those of us who do give a shit about art and who are cogitating on a higher level.
Maybe through using discussion to educate someone who doesn't know what constitutes a great work of art (like FC), the newly educated person will begin to demand more from the art that they consume, opting for something great (like FC) as opposed to something crappy and disposable (like most Bendis comics). -
Mar 26, 2009 12:22:37 AM CDT
I can honestly say that Identity Crisis was a better written ser
by ambush bug
Mainly because at least Meltzer would thread numerous panels together cohesively. Not once during IC was a scratching my head and saying, what the fuck or who the hell is that or why is this happening?
While reading FC I did that numerous times.
Now, if you want to go the low road and claim that I'm ignorant because I wasn't able to follow Morrison's acid trip, that's your perogative. But I've read thousands of books and reviewed hundreds here on AICN and I can safely say that only during FINAL CRISIS and maybe a few indie books done by people who clearly don't know how to tell a story in a comic book format have I been left with this feeling.
Do I hate FINAL CRISIS? No. It's a story. An inanimate object. I save my hate for idiots. But is it a story I thought was deeply flawed? Why yes. Yes it was.
Editorial: It was flawed on an editorial level because the writer was allowed to write and rewrite the story until his keyboard was worn down. It was flawed because editorial hyped it up to be the culmination of Crisis on Infinite Earths, Identity Crisis, Infinite Crisis, 52, and Countdown, when it clearly was not. It was flawed because deadlines were ignored and delays were rampant. FINAL CRISIS could have been made of bacon tasting tits and it still wouldn't have lived up to the hype. It was flawed because instead of doing an experimental story that could have been enjoyed (and probably been more successful) on a smaller level, it was sold as the end all be all to everything, tying into everything, and causing ramifications felt in your unborn great grandson's pampers. It was flawed because major things happened to major players, but none of it was referenced in any of the characters books and worse yet, they all were stuck in a boring holding pattern waiting for Morrison to come out of his smoking hut.
On the writing side: It was flawed because Morrison as usual had too many ideas and too little attention and space the execute them. Flitting around from one thing to another does not a story make. And two pages dedicated to the death of the biggest character in Hollywood and the DCU is not enough. Plus null and voiding said death in the next issue didn't make it any more memorable. Writing one good scene with Talky Tawny doesn't make for a good miniseries. Plus FUCK Morrison for not talking with the rest of DC's writers about the characters they were writing in thier own books. One conference with all of the writers to keep everyone up to speed would have made for a much more enjoyable experience by all. But Morrison's second guessing himself and rewriting himself and egotistically locking himself off from others covered this series with the stank of arrogance.
Finally, the comment about remembering FC for Batman shooting Darkseid is hilarious. If anything, FC will be remembered as a mess. Not one uncohesive page of the book outshines the massive fuck up editorial made.
IDENTITY CRISIS is completely flawed, but it was at least cohesive and it had moments that people still talk about. Sure they disagree, but at least people are complaining about stuff that happened in the story rather than editorial fuck ups surrounding it. -
God does DC suck ass right now.
-
are Bad Dog and Bang Tango. Je Kelly rules. All you assholes yapping on and on about some moronic nonsense like Final Crisis and Bendis' dialogue need to shut up and read some good comics. Anything Ed Brubaker is a good place to start too.
-
And all that above being said, I am STILL looking forward to the Morrison and Quitely Batman and Robin. If you're not excited too, read All Star Superman, and shut your trap.
-
...I think both qualify as disasters for different reasons. I found IDENTITY CRISIS to just be a tasteless piece of sensationalism made by a hack, while I found FC to be an indecipherable, in-cohesive mess made by sometimes infuriating incomprehensible artist. In movie terms, one was I Spit On Your Grave and the other is Jean Luc Godard's King Lear. As for Bendis, I also find him overrated. Other's might like his style, but to me he is to obvious. I can see the artifice. I prefer Brubaker and Slott (although his current run on Mighty Avengers is just awful so far).
-
but is it blasphemy on this site to question whether his dark noirish style really fits with Captain America? I've never really followed Cap even though i'm a fan (if that makes sense) but does the darker tone work with him or Bucky or the Winter Soldier or whoever?
-
Personally I love what he's done with Cap, dark tone and all. The Nomad issue of Cap a few years ago was one of the single darkest issues of Cap ever published and was incredible. Heres the thing about Bru: you cant say he's the best writer in comics today overall because he cant write comedy. Everything hes ever written is a bit lacking in the sense of humor department. HOWEVER, he does what he does far far better then anyone else out there, and despite him not being #1, hes gotta be top 3 overall, if only for his rock solid consistency (has Bru ever wrtten a bad title? Ever?. Let me also reiterate, I actually dont believe Bendis is bad, hes just best taken in small doses. I will defend Whedon's Astonishing X to the death (and oddly enough, the second he leaves the title goes right down the shitter, funny how that works), but I wouldnt want Whedon writing the entire MArvel U. Hes best taken in small doses, one or two titles at most....of course, those one or two titles are going to be awesome, hes extremely talented.
-
Continental, I respect your right to disagree on Identity Crisis, but heres my point: that series took tons of heat for the rape scene, lets be honest. Here was the argument: "this title has great moments, but it doesnt belong in the DCU. Rape? Heroes mind wiping each other? Lets get back to the REAL DCU." Heres the thing: that title WAS the real DCU!!! Its just the first you saw of the new DCU, so it was more shocking. Think about it: Batman shooting people, implied gang rape of Supergirl, Superboy Prime ripping people limb from limb, Wonder Woman killing people. Identity Crisis was just the start of a complete tonal shift for DC. Given what everyone knows about what direction the DCU was going to take (and which IC announced), go back and read it again. I think youll find a story with a terrible last issue, completely weak reveal of the villain......but chock full of awesome, iconic moments and great, well written scenes. The race to reach Robin's dad? I mean, come on now, that was fantastic.
-
in case anyone think I'm a Morrison hater, or being unfair, I stand by what I've always thought, which is Morrison is the best dialogue writer in comics today, bar none. 50% of the time that dialogue is encased in a completely self indulgent incomprehensible story, but I will give credit where its due: the man can write dialogue like few in history. Since I feel like stirring things up a bit, I'll throw another question out there: Morrison's X men run was his absolute peak as a writer? Or All Star Superman? FC represents Morrison at his self indulgent worst, what represents him at his all time best?
-
Animal Man is still collected and in-print 20 YEARS after its initial run.Likewise, his entire run of Doom Patrol. In fact, everything the guy has ever done is still in print.
-
Just saying.Alright, alright. I was here at the beginning yesterday but then missed everything.
-
It is interesting to think of the comics that you revisit and that hold up and get even get better as you read them over and over. Identify Crisis, even with its flaws (the rape scene really does bother me) I find to be a tight comic book mystery where the stakes feel high. The DKR isn't as good as when I first read it, but I still cheer when Batman takes down the mutant leader ("this is an operating table and I’m the doctor") - Watchmen of course... Preacher still holds up for awhile for me then sort of loses its way towards the end - the Master of Evil Avengers story line gets better and better - and one that I just can't seem to read again is the Sandman - which just might be a time issue - but I don't know if I will ever read them again, and when I first read them I thought it was the best thing ever. Starman is up there... I have a feeling that Y will be a revisit, All Star Superman, Local… and an old one that never gets boring is Kamandi – by far my favorite Kirby. Civil War, Final Crisis (except that Tawny Tiger scene), would not be on that list, but Millar’s Ultimates I think will be a keeper. Fun to think about anyway.
-
Especially as I've turned thirty and find myself buying new editions of stuff I liked when it first came out. Doom Patrol and Animal Man hold up for me. DKR not so much. Same with 'The Killing Joke', which I really kind of don't like now. Swamp Thing is still good. IC doesn't work for me; not because of the rape, but because the 'solution' to the mystery was done in the most hackneyed, hacky-hack way possible. Seven Soldiers is one of my favorites, when read in order in the collected editions.I'm expecting to get some substantial mileage out of Final Crisis once it's fully collected, with the Superman Beyond Interludes, and the way it was mis-marketed and falsely promoted is long behind us. I have a feeling I'll have a new fondness for it as 'Cracked-Out-Superhero-Opera-Bugaboo'.
-
I definitely need to get those, they seem to get a lot of love here. What is the order in which to read them? I am with you on Killing Joke, I have no desire to read that again.
-
So I read Seven Soldiers vol.1-4 in that order. Works great. Lots of fun, and lots of layers to look at and consider.
-
Ugh, I am with you on Mighty, what a piece of garbage.
-
Ha! Thanks Laser... wildly dumb question apparently. I will check them out.
-
Is really disappointing. Maybe Slott isn't who we thought he was. The art doesn’t help either.
-
That was a great read. I still think about Vigilante's failed team occasionally. Althouh, ultimately, I think his bookend end issue might hurt its status amongst those of us not already devoted to it.I agree with Goose, in general, but specifically about Ultimates and Brubaker's lack of comedy.But as for Morrison's peak. I'd be tempted to go for his early JLA through Rock of Ages, or maybe We3 or All-Star or that kids revolt or Wolverine and Cyclops on an adventure run from Astonishing, but really.... Its the Invisibles. Hands down.
-
The art definitely does not help, its that weird, puffy balloon people art, but even a great artist couldn't disguise the turd-ball dialogue. The Iron Man/Hulk fight was especially bad.
-
just not in everything. His earliest arc of Iron Fist had quite a good deal of comedy I thought. I get what you're saying though.
-
Seaguy Didn't stink, true, but whenever the sequel is announced, do you even get a little bit excited?
-
I think it still holds up, which is funny, because just about everything else that Miller has done now looks like a slobbering retard parody of noir to me.
-
Seven Soldiers is totally worth it, but its a "more tasty while eating then afterwards" type of book.
-
I'm excited for the whole trilogy. The third and last is Seaguy Eternal. Morrison talked about it on CBR or something last week-- that each volume takes Seaguy through a different point in his development. The first series is very childlike (and disturbing in the ways childhood is disturbing), and this new one is adolescence. How to be a hero in a world that doesn't want heroes? I'm there.
-
Maybe it's all the excrement that followed from Miller's pen after DK, but when I try re-reading it, I just find all the faux-hardboiled dialogue laughable (though not as laughable as his Sin City stuff). This kind of fascist power-fantasy as dreamed by a thirteen-year-old. It's okay for what it is, I guess. I really, really don't like the 'crazy-obsessive-psycho' version of Bats, though.
-
Yeah that kind of complaint sort of falls apart when you think about how Bruce Wayne runs around all night beating the shit out of people because he thinks it's his purpose in life. Bats acting slightly crazier doesn't really bother me. Makes sense really.
-
I like Invisibles a lot too, but it was such a fluid book that it's quality and aims change from collection to collection. My all-time favorite Morrison is probably, I gotta say, the entire Doom Patrol run-- enough stuff in there to fuel four or five entire universes worth of comics. Cliff Steele's journey as a hero is still one of the most touching pieces of characterization Morrison has done.I also really, really, really love The Filth. That series doesn't get enough love, but read it closely in collected form. Great art. Lots of action. Big ideas, and one hell of a cathartic emotional payoff.
-
Yes, Bruce Wayne runs around as a bat fighting crime. Many, many, many people in his universe do very similar things with their time. We don't expect them to all be psychotic fascists who speak in hackneyed, sub-Mickey Spillane dialogue, do we? Should Daredevil act like that?It just isn't Batman's character, it's Miller's fantasy of his character, which speaks more to Miller's personal issues than any issues inherent in the character itself.I prefer my Batman as Sherlock Holmes+a ninja+James Bond. To that end, I've really enjoyed the characterization provided by Dini and Morrison over the last couple years.
-
What sets Batman apart is he's the only guy that just decided he wanted to be that same thing, and had the will power to push himself so he could do that. And considering the era that Batman was first developed in, I see no reason why a noirish touch wouldn't follow.
-
Joen, I'm not exactly sure what that means, but I am sold!
-
I found IDENTITY CRISIS to just be a tasteless piece of sensationalism made by a hack,
I couldn't have put it better myself. The ending was the crap cherry on the Sh!t sundae that was the series. I will never, ever read anything by Meltzer in my life.
I actually liked Infinite Crisis, though. Again, that's just me. It had some corn and some violence, and was entertaining (but not art).
I am ordering the first GN of Invisibles today, since so many people have convinced me to do so. Also going to see if I can order a TP of Alias.
But I looove Mighty Avengers so far, although the art is merely ok. It is my kind of thing. -
When does Batman tell Blue Beetle, "I never thought you were second string" - that is one of my favorite all time comic book moments. Does it happen in the main series or one of the off shoots?
-
I'm not talking about a 'noirish-touch'. I'm talking about Frank Miller's twitching psycho-fascist.The others have powers? Not all of them. And a great number of heroes didn't have powers who were created at the same time as Batman. That's why I used Daredevil as an example. Yeah, he might have 'radar sense', but we all know Daredevil's power is that he's an ace ninja. You don't have to be a twitching psycho-fascist to will yourself to a standard of human perfection-- at least not in fiction. So, I say there's a world of difference between 'noirish touches' and 'Miller's Batman'. Miller is a very unhealthy, troubled little man.
-
I missed that. I've always assumed the Seaguy sequels were just something that he talks about, but will never, ever do... hmmm... if they're actually going to happen, I'll get them, otherwise.... BOO!
-
I'm with you on the laughable dialogue, the Sin City movie was uncomfortablly embarassing to sit through, it was so bad.But here's why DKR gets a pass from me... It was the first and while I hated the idiot children it spawned, I can't blame them on DKR and Miller's attempt to re-capture that flavor. On its own and in that particular context of Batman, it still works for me, despite the now retrospective taint of the crap that came after
-
I think the interview's on CBR.
-
I mean that within the book, it cooks. It is awesome, but then something happened behind the scenes, there was a delay for the final issue and I don't know, it read like it was rushed and that there were hurt feelings involved... so.... what I meant was, try not to be too let down right at the end, because it really is awesome... just a heads up.
-
I loved Alias from the start and Invisibles too, but the first Volume of the Invisibles is very British Vertigo in flavor and Art. I don't know your personal taste tolerances (except that you like Mighty - sheesh!) but you might want to give it a little bit more leeway at the start. Let it get its feet. The Invisibles is definitely a "big picture" kind of book.
-
Mar 26, 2009 11:12:42 AM CDT
Dr. Light raped Sue Dibny without taking off any clothes.
by leafar the lost
Yes, the Dr. Light rape scene in Idetity Crisis was shocking, but somehow he was able to rape Sue Dibny (from behind) without taking off his pants. I guess he used his "light powers", but it made the scene seem less realistic. If you were going to do it that way, then the rape should have been off panel. However, overall Identity Crisis was a million times better than Final Crisis. Fuck Grant Morrison! He shouldn't be allowed to write for anyone ever again. I hope FC's failure ended his career.
-
is more grounded in our reality, so it's not the same thing. Manhattan, Hell's Kitchen, etc, and in his case, there are LOTS of people that did the same thing as him. Anyway, Daredvil was invented in what, like the 70s? that's a good 30 years after Batman right?But it's all subjective. Complaining about a vigilante taking the law into his own hands as a psychotic fascist is just as valid as complaining about the believability of a blind man fighting crime. Rant, rant, rant, blah blah blah.
-
To be fair, while DD ninja skills are formitable, it IS his super-senses that make him more than then the average man. Batman is just pure bad-ass and that level of commitment demands a certain level of crazy.
-
This whole argument is kind of stupid considering we are arguing about the rationality of comic book scenarios. So I guess complaining that a vigilante who takes the law into his own hands is a fascist is just as valid of a complaint as pointing out the lack of realism in a blind man fighting crime. It's all subjective, and a matter of taste, so I guess there was really no point in arguing anyway. I love comics precisely for their element of escapism, so I'm not gonna let something like a man in a bat suit actually acting like a loon bother me.
-
He's visually challenged... with radar sense.
-
I have been dying to get the new Daredevil.
-
You don't seem to really get what I'm complaining about. My only complaint has been that Miller's Batman was a jibbering fruit-cake. It has nothing to do with noir, powers-or-no-powers, or the time period Batman was invented. Nothing to do with any of that. Lots of non-powered heroes aren't jibbering fruit-cakes. That's my point. Is the Lone Ranger a jibbering fruit-cake? Is Sherlock Holmes? Is James Bond? Nyet. Having resolve and being driven isn't the same thing as being a jibbering fruit-cake.
-
Miller's Batman reads more to me like a man so driven by his goals, he has lost most of his humanity and/or sanity. I can't seem to recall a single panel of the comic where he was "jibbering" let alone a fruit cake.I'm going to work now. Have fun being unhappy about something completely inconsequential to anything else in life, or even serving as a valid complaint for anything.More like LOSERHEAD. Tee hee. ;)
-
I just thought I'd throw that out there.
-
I've VERY happy with the trajectory Miller's career has taken.Have fun at work. I make a nice living writing books.
-
"I am the night. You are a punk. Mother... Father... Scream for me, punk. All those years... Babble-babble-babble."
-
I already ordered volume 1, and I bet the British Vertigo tone is what put me off to it way back when. I almost ordered volume 2 of Invisibles, but then I thought "what if I don't like Volume 1" I don't know that I can take the leap to buy volume 2 if I am not feeling it by the end of volume 1. But I will keep you posted.
-
How much is he just throwing away everyday on silver bullets? It must cost him a fortune, not too mention that a silver bullet would never actually fire accuately to begin with. And light blue buckskins with a red neckerchief? Crazy as a loon!
-
Well, we can say he's a spendthrift, and has a weird sense of fashion, but when has he ever jibbered?
-
just looking at my old ones, I can see where someone just jumping on might struggle at first, but I think its worth it. And the Second Volume, (Were you referring to the trades?) of the entire run (its split into three "acts", I guess you'd say...) Anyway, the second Act is almost all Phil Jimeniz artwork and much more "american" in tone. The Second Act started the same time Morrison was doing his JLA run too, so its interesting to compare the two and notice the occasional bleed over in topic and theme.
-
You might prefer vol. 4 'Bloody Hell in America'-- it's The Invisibles as roller-coaster-American-action-movie. Much less Britishy than the early volumes.
-
How many years? Since that night.Since I died.The bullet is silver in the moonlight, like the spangled garter-belts of pre-pubescent Japanese girls.Jocko Boy is running the Cavendish gang now. Got something special for him.I'll use my hands. Silver is my horse. My mother. My lover.
-
I don't know if anyone here still HASN'T read either Planetary or Nextwave, but if so... since we're all recommending and buying and what not... those two titles:PlanetaryNextwaveI highly, highly recommend, both are fantastic reads and the pinnacle of their particular type of comic story. One awesome post-superhero world, the other is plain hilarious.
-
It taunts us all. Is it when you do the paragraphs?
-
Is awesome.
-
I kind of figured it wouldn't be the best one, but I probably need the background to know more or less what is going on. Then I can jump ahead and read the later ones...unless the whole first volume doesn't work for me. We shall see.
Good job with the bold text, btw. -
the secret of the bold is contained somewhere within a mistyped double line space Somewhere in there is the secret, the secret of the BOLD...
-
Morrison also does a time loop thing where stuff from future issues happens in past issues and vice versa.
-
but hes dead on about Dark Knight Returns. As tempting as it is to hold that book responsible for the utterly horrendous tripe that has followed it (both in general and from Miller himself), it has to be judged on its own merits. I know that can be tough, but in and of itself its a cool little book. It just that DKR is really the only trick that Miller had in his bag. Once he showed his hand, that was pretty much it for him as a truly relevant artist, although no one knew it at the time. One thing you can say for Morrison, that dude has a million tricks in the bag.
-
How was the finale for BSG in any way lackluster?
That show is the greatest thing to happen to science fiction since the original Star Trek, and frankly I think this new movie will probably ruin science fiction as well as the Trek franchise. JJ Abrams is an over glorified hack. -
I got distracted. what books do you write?
-
The problem isn't that Slott's a bad writer - in fact he is one of Marvel's best - but that his style and sensibilities are all wrong for this title. Sport's strengths lie in being whimsical and funny. He can do wonders with comical titles such as GLA and She-Hulk, or pure adventurous fun like Thing or Spider-Man. A comic like the Avengers needs someone with more serious style. I'm not saying they should be written like the Punisher, but I expect a team of elite, professional heroes to be treated with a little gravitas and not be so silly.
-
And like it.
-
Why was it so shocking? Or exploitative. Miller's ASBAR is 572 times more exploitative then IC could ever be. It featured one truly shocking scene, the rape. And you know what? THAT SCENE WORKED! People STILL are talking about it today, it accomplished EXACTLY what it was intended to do: to shock people. ITs SUPPOSED to be shocking, thats the point. However, I dont feel there was anything "exploitative" about the series other then that. If you want to say you cant get past that scene, so therefore dont like the series, thats totally valid and understandable. However, if you want to say it sucked because it was come lurid exploitaitive sex and violence fest, it just aint so.
-
I'm saying your in the neighborhood of right 73% of the time!! Geez what more do you want from me?!?! Heh Heh.
-
Also, personally, I hate that talky-talky-describe-what-I'm-doing-and-my-reactions-in-the-most-exposition-heavy-way-possible-while-in-the-middle-of-a-fight type of comic writing. Plus, and I can't believe I'm saying this, but where does this huge world changing event fit in with the rest of the marvel U? It lacks, power, punch, character... I was so disappointed. I was hoping for a Busiek type Avengers Forever stuff.
-
The rest of me was quite moved.
-
Every hardboiled street hero is a quasi-Rorschack for the past 25 years.
-
because I don't read DC really and the rape is a good illustration why and not because of the act itself, moreso, its because Dr. Light never took off his pants. DC characters never take off their pants. They always wear their costumes. The DC Universe is a big West Coast Avengers at all times.
-
no edit button
-
It pains me to write those 3 words. The Awesome Andy-centric issue of She Hulk is in my top 10 all time favorite issues of any comic ever. However....I cant rip that other dude farther up the talkback for being blind to Morrison's faults and not be honest myself. She Hulk went in the shitter at the tail end of Slott's run, Mighty Avengers is terrible, and Avengers:The Initiative is fucking hideous due solely to Slott's terrible writing. The writing on Initiative is some of the worst I've come across in years, I feel like I'm only reading 70% of the comic and each issue is missing like 6 critical pages. Slott is capable of greatness, obviously, but recently my faith has been sorely tested.
-
Its pretty bad ass, the reveal at the end is one of the most idiotic in history, but the first 6 issues are killer. You dont need to have read mainstream DC to pick it right up and dive right in (yet another reason it is better then Final Crisis). And thats coming from a guy who reads DC sporadically if at all, basically checkng in on GL and the Secret Six from time to time.
-
There is a comic that did not do what I was hoping. Kind of in the same way Mighty failed for me. Maybe I should just add Slott to my list pre-emptively and be done with it.Liefeld, Waid, Claremont, Byrne, Loeb, JMS... Slott?
-
I think I'm gonna swing by the LCS tonight. Is it in trades? I'll check it out
-
Did you decide to give up on the FC discussion? Or have you sent Ambush Bug in as your proxy to simply restate similar irrelevancies and talk about how confused he was by the whole thing?
There's really no point in replying to Bug's post, because he could just read my responses to you. He said virtually the same thing, going on about DC editorial and other crap that has nothing to do with anything.
I think it's funny when people claim that FC is "incomprehensible" because they must not realize that they're slighting their own intelligence and capacity for understanding. It's the same as saying "I do not possess the capacity to understand this COMIC BOOK written for adolescents." It's not like it's W.S. Burroughs or Nabokov or something. But then, I understand them as well, so I suppose it's hard for me to see things from a perspective of not understanding. Children's literature doesn't really give me any problems.
I understood the entire run of Final Crisis just fine. Was never dizzy or confused for even a moment. Therefore, I'm willing to explain what happened at any given point in the comic to anyone who is able to state what it was that they were confused by. Nobody's been able to do that yet, except maybe Homer. Tell me, then I'll explain it, and then you won't be confused anyone. I will remove your impediment to enjoying what is most certainly the greatest company-wide crossover comic ever.
Or, you could continue to post that "it sucks because I can't comprehend it" and "DC editorial sucks" and all that. Which is probably why you don't understand things. Because when you have someone willing to explain things you don't take the opportunity to learn.
As far as Morrison's greatest comic, The Invisibles is the easy answer, but personally I gotta go with Flex Mentallo.
Lefar the Lost: You're hilarious. FC was a financial and artistic success and Morrison will continue to write comics for as long as he wants to... just like you will continue to seethe with hate and be the type of creepy, personally abusive internet-poster that is worthy of mockery. -
ITs not that no one understands, or is put off, or Optimus or Joe are hiding somewhere or something. ITs just that they apparently dont want to discuss it with you, and I mean you as a person specifically, because you seem kind of like a douchey troll. Besides the fact that here have been plenty of in depth discussons of FC on these boards over the last few months, isnt it kind of yesterday's news at this point? Its just that no one really wants to engage you in particular because it doesnt seem like you really WANT to have a discussion, as oppose to simply lecturing people over how stupid you percieve them to be. I dont percieve the slightest iota of ability on your part to credit anyone with having a good opinion or point of view that contradicts yours. This, at the risk of tooting our own horn, is a fairly sophisticated board, actually. The douchey fanboy stuff doesnt really fly in here, most people just decide to ignore you if they feel like they are being antagonized (for example, the weak "shrug shrug" atempt to draw me into some e-cred turf war). Sorry man, try benig a little less condescending next time.
-
Like two issues ago. And I quite enjoy it, I get off on offbeat characters like Thor Girl. (Passed on the 3.99 Reptil special though). I guess I prefer a different, less heavy kind of Avengers (LOVED Avengers Forever, btw).
But I am not a Slott apologist. Much of his second run on She-Hulk was inferior. The Thing was also just too dorky and cornball. I knew that one would be quickly cancelled, and even his Spider-Man tended toward the overly-retro. GLA, now that was awesome but not for everyone's taste.
Sector, I do have an FC Question: It regards the Female Furies. What was the deal with them? I was actually confused all along if it was supposed to be the actual WW, Catwoman, etc, or some evil doppelgangers. I know it was revealed that it was indeed the actual heroes, but where did that come from? Also, the art was for sure messed up since the mask of FF WW was inconsistent.
This is not a question, just an observation: The new Forever People were an interesting group but they never developed much and all of a sudden it was like "I'll save you Lola Canary" and we never really knew much about her. Not that it bothered me, but I think that is the sort of thing people bitch about. -
I love the disparate teams thrown together storyline, plus Kang was great. That was the first time I appreciated him as a villian and a real threat.
-
I don't think that I was the first person to utilize the "douchey shrug" technique. Maybe we could look back into the previous posts and see who that was? I think that I was merely imitating an already existing douche. A bit of dismissive, rhetorical judo, which I used because I didn't care to converse with that particular poster.
So, I'm a troll because I understand something and want to help others understand it as well? Because I disagree with you?
It seems like everyone *does* want to talk about FC though, because that's what's been going on. What they don't want to do is support what they have to say, or answer any questions that may cause them to think about what they've said. This is an easy way to keep your opinions and assumptions unchallenged, and unfortunately keep yourself in ignorance. It is the opposite of a productive, sophisticated discussion.
"I dont percieve the slightest iota of ability on your part to credit anyone with having a good opinion or point of view that contradicts yours."
Maybe that's the same perceptual problem that keeps you from understanding FC?
I desire no e-cred turf war with you, and there's no reason for you to be sorry. I'm a big boy and I feel that I can hold my own in any discussion, no matter how sophisticated it may or may not be. But I'm afraid that this board hasn't evidenced its sophistication when discussing Final Crisis, since "it confused me" and that sort of thing doesn't really equal sophistication.
What I've been trying to do on the other hand, is actually promote a sophisticated discussion. One that isn't just "here's my opinion... it sucked" but rather a discussion that examines the opinions at hand using traditional methods for rational thinking and discussion. Have you heard of Socratic method? Hit that shit up on wikipedia. I guess that's viewed as radical around here, and for that I apologize. I will not apologize for having an opinion that is contrary to the majority though, and I can't apologize for your faulty perceptions of myself. Nor do I believe that I should have to.
Feel free to ignore me then, and continue to exist in a myopic little world where nobody ever disagrees with you and your opinions are facts. That seems to be the tactic of choice for those not sophisticated enough to have a real discussion. -
It's probably my favorite contemporary Avengers comic. You don't just get all the Avengers from one time period, but different versions of characters from different time periods mixed together. Yellowjacket and Giant-Man coexisting and that sort of thing. Great stuff.
-
How can Quesada et al totally negate the premise of OMD/BND by now having Spidey reveal his identity to the Avengers? I'm sure Osborne will find out eventually, and it will make that turd retcon even more pointless
-
I think he did it to upset you... that Quesada... He's the Devil, I mean A Devil.
-
The Female Furies are characters from Kirby's Fourth World. Apokoliptian warriors trained by Granny Goodness. I believe they first appeared in Mister Miracle #6. You should check it out.
Yes, that was the real Wonder Woman. The Anti-Life Equation was creating new Furies and she was one of them.
The mask inconsistencies weren't the only art problem. In one issue, Shilo Norman (Mr. Miracle's assistant who became the new Mr. Miracle) was colored as a white guy (and he's a black guy in case you didn't know). That sort of production problem can hardly be blamed on Morrison, and doesn't really affect the greatness of Morrison's story. For instance, future generations that read the reprints will see a black Shilo. Most people probably didn't even notice that it happened.
I don't think that you were supposed to know anything about Lolita Canary, other than that she was a member of a team, and her team-mate wanted to save her. What's there to bitch about? I guess that some people will bitch about anything because they're unhappy with their lives, or something.
I'd like to thank you for your honest interactions with me, and for raising legitimate points to talk about, rather than just throwing out insults or being angry that I hold an unpopular opinion on a comic book. -
In the Mister Miracle arc of Seven Soldiers, the new ones were first introduced, and the original Lashina was way better (but the new Bernadeth is pretty cool).
I was just thrown by the new heroines corrupted version, it seemed to come out of nowhere. And I use the Lolita Canary thing just because the Forever People were tossed out there and didn't really go anywhere. In fact, I am kind of hoping there will be a mini of them, or something. I actually love the Fourth World and would love to see the Fifth World developed. I am still pissed that Barda (and Knockout) are gone. -
It's called "Final Crisis Aftermath: Dance" and it comes out pretty soon.
The new Forever People (as I'm sure you know) are called The Super Young Team. I loved the way Morrison tied-in Sonny Sumo with a new Japanese team of Forever People!
I love the Fourth World too. I've been saying for... oh... DECADES that they need to do the death of the Fourth World and the birth of the Fifth World. It took Grant Morrison to finally do it. Nobody could really do those characters justice but Kirby, so it's good to see a fresh start with the Fifth World and those fresh interpretations being guided by the best writer in mainstream comics.
I think it's possible that Barda and Knockout could come back as well, so don't be too pissed. It is comics, after all. -
Mar 26, 2009 5:09:40 PM CDT
I don't think I said it was confusing and left it at that...
by ambush bug
I think you're reading what you want to read. You may have explanations for the holes in Morrison's story, but that doesn't mean that they aren't there.
And that's the thing. Morrison fans are totally willing to "educate" us on what we "didn't get" about FINAL CRISIS. But they aren't willing to admit that if you are following basic storytelling rules which make for stories that can be comprehended by a mass audience, none of these questions would have to be asked.
It's not that I don't understand that yes it probably was Wonder WOman in that mask. It's just that she showed up with it on with no explanation. It's not that I didn't know the guy showing up at the end of issue 4 or 5 was a Monitor. It's that he didn't really make an appearance since issue one or two and I had totally forgotten who the hell he was and why I should care in the time between both the normal amount of time waiting for another issue and the massive delays between them.
And those of you wanting to keep the blame off of Morrison's shoulders for the delays, blaming the artists should understand that numerous folks have told me that artists and other writers were literally waiting for Morrison to stop writing and rewriting issues of FC. No one knew where it was going, including Morrison. Ultimately it's up to editorial for making sure this doesn't happen, but it's also the indecisive writer's fault here.
Want more specific examples of problems? How about the slugfest between Supergirl and Mary Marvel? It's not that I didn't comprehend the two fighting, it's that I'm asking myself why it's taking three issues to get through it.
You can No-Prize FINAL CRISIS up all you want, but still you are only acting like a road crew, piling steaming tar over dips in the road left by Morrison.
I'm not asking for everything to be spelled out. What I do expect is for some scenes to occur. Scenes that allow me to invest in the story. Scenes that fill the gaps and not just have them happen. In UMBRELLA ACADEMY, this often occurs, but even that comic has a clear narrative and the stuff that you just don't question occurs more as a sidenote that doesn't distract from the story. Morrison did the same thing that Way does with UA, but has stuff happen with litter or no explanation, then doesn't explain why or how, and expects us to plow through the story and just be satsfied with not knowing. But when it's going on with the main narrative of the story, it leaves the reader left scanning wiki and other sites looking for explanations and calling it a richer reading experience.
Personally, I don't want a story to be force fed to me, but if it requires deep internet searching and No-Prizing my own explanation into entire scenes that the writer was too erratic to write himself, it completely turns me off from the story. -
I really don't won't to dwell on these two series too much; they have already drained precious time away from a more important debate - is Batman nuts or not. But I do have one final comment about them:
While I think both series where over-hyped and horrible, I will grant that Identity Crisis is more cohesive and makes more sense. Each series suffered it’s own, radically different problem. A scene in a story involves two elements – content and context. Final Crisis was all about content – what the scene is about and what is it’s underlining meaning, without having giving the audience any real sense of relationship and reference. Identity Crisis was all about context – what is actually happening physically and where is it happening – without giving the audience any real sense of what it is about thematically.
Sure Identity Crisis made sense and you could follow the story, but it felt unreal and out of place, like watching characters being forced to march through a plot instead of watching people actually living a real story. They were mannequins, not people, being used as props in a salacious story.
FC characters at least felt alive and real – but God or Morrison only knows what the hell was happening. It felt like I was channel surfing and catching snipplets of what looked like a great movie on TMC: sure it has all the elements of greatness – acting, direction, cinematography, dialogue – but I have absolutely no clue what is going on so I can’t invest anything into it.
While I don’t think Melzer out wrote Morrison, but I don’t have a problem with those who do. Martin Scorsese is a vastly superior filmmaker than Kevin Smith, but I can say with a straight face that Clerks is better than Bringing Out the Dead. Every dog has his day.
As for gooseud comments about IC, I have no problem that you liked it but for me it was juvenile, and I don’t just mean the idiotic ending. Yes, the rush to save Robin’s dad was well done, but the overall plot and story was just ridiculously stupid and soap operatic. And the use of Dr. Light to rape Sue Dibney was just the writer’s attempt to be intentionally offensive and shocking.
You can try to ret-con it all you want, but Dr. Light has never been displayed as any sort of sexual predator. He has always been the classic power hungry super-villain. His transformation into serial rapist was just a bad attempt at being shocking. If you wanted a villain to sexual assault a character and have it be believable to me, you might as well make it the Joker. He has a long track record of disregarding any sort of social norms and being psychotic. But of course, they could never have an a-list villain do something so cruel or evil (but they can have him murder people every month in grisly detail without him ever paying a higher price).
-
LOSERHEAD had a typo in the post where he claims to write books. "Nag nag fruitcake-like jibberish."I was playing Devil's Advocate more than anything. I can totally see the argument against Miller's Bat, but at the same time, a similar formula works in things like Batman: Year One. And taken in the context of the story and all, it just never really bugged me.
-
I agree on alot of your points. I dont think overall Meltzer is a better writer then Morrison, thats obviously an absurd idea. But on THOSE TWO SERIES specifically, that dog had his day. I didnt find IC ridiculous and soap operatic, but thats a matter of taste (something Sector hasnt learned, but I'll get to that in a minute). I will say, Dr. Light was a miscalculation as a story device. It would be like the Riddler doing the deed, it certainly isn't IMPOSSIBLE, but likely? Mehhhh.....Joker, maybe Bane, any mad dog villain would have been a better choice (although Meltzer DID try to address this in saying Dr. Light WAS a mad dog villain, we just havent seen that side of him in years due to the mind wipe. Whether that explanation works for you is a matter of taste, I suppose). Personally, I found the entire first issue front to back one of the best issue #1's of a miniseries I've read in ages, the Deathstroke battle, the investigation with Supes standing like a statue in the middle of the room X-raying it inch by inch, all of that was compelling stuff in my book. Just my opinion, but take away Dr. Light and insert someone else, and have a better villain reveal at the end (understatement of the century), and you have a truly bad ass great book.
-
When you use phrases like "keep yourself in ignorance", "keeps you from understanding FC", "not sophisticated enough", that kind of shows where your coming from. Heres an idea: maybe everyone pretty much got the book and just didnt like it. Maybe its possible to read FC, its various spinoffs, etc., and to get to the last page of issue #7, have a full understanding of its elements and plot threads, and say "Hmmm that sucked". It seems your theory is "Well, if you didn't like it, you must not have gotten it, because the story is clearly so amazing that anyone who gets it HAS to like it". I've never claimed not to understand the story, nor am I looking for any explanation. I just didnt like it. It had fantastic money shot moments (I'm the prime defender on this board of the Batman Gun moment), but it didnt work for me cohesively as a story. It is possible, believe it or not, to read it, understand it, and not like it. I cant speak for anyone else on here, but I've been reading comics since I was 5, for 25+ years. Comprehension or knowledge of lore is not a problem, nor is it for Joe, Homer, Bug, Optimus, Psynapse whenever he decides to pop his head in, etc. Continental knows his shit inside and out and he and I almost never agree LOL I simply didnt like the book. Oh, and if you had been coming here more then a week or so, you would know people disagree with me ALLLLL the time, Bug practically threw me off the boards for my Green Lantern comments!! Disagreement is my stock in trade.
-
I've only had to do it a handfull of times. Even though we didn't agree on something, I'd never toss someone off of here for their opinions. If someone is banned, there's more than a reason than just differing opinions.
-
I get it. You understood it and you didn't like it. It's everyone else that have been claiming confusion, not you. When you read my posts in the future, all references to "confusion" are only meant for those that have claimed it... and there are many.
I've simply asked the confused parties what they were confused about. Not a single person (maybe-sorta Homer) claiming confusion has been able to come up with an answer to that very simple question yet. "Give an example of something confusing," I say. "Let's see if there's not an easy answer within the text." Nothing.
It kind of shows where they're coming from. They want to make statements as to the quality of Final Crisis with nothing to support or back up their statements.
Let me state very clearly that I do not care that you don't like FC. I don't care that you don't like me, or that you don't like that I like FC.
My point stands that the people on this board have not evidenced the "sophistication" in their thinking that you wish to claim for them. I've already spelled out the reasons why quite clearly in all my previous posts.
I will again state that I desire no "e-cred turf war" with you, and that you can "feel free to ignore me."
If you ever decide that you have something of substance to say about *why* you don't like FC, then maybe we could have a discussion. Until then, please continue to insultingly trumpet your hollow, unsupported opinions.
"Disagreement is my stock in trade."
I can tell.
Backing up what I say is my stock in trade.
For instance, I don't like Bendis all that much, but I've read (and continue to read) Bendis comics, and therefore I actually *know* what I'm talking about. As opposed to, say, someone who talks shit on a writer but hasn't actually read anything by them. That person wouldn't actually know what they were talking about, making them nothing but a clueless blowhard. -
You love me!! Who doesnt love the Goose?!?! And Sector, round we go back to my original point: the reason no one has taken you up on your offer to "explain" what they are confused about is that you seem kinda douchey. If for example, Bug WERE confused on a particular plot point (or 29), I feel pretty safe in speculating that you are #5,275 on the list of people he would ask for clarification, no matter how many times you offer. He would probably ask someone else. Anyone else. Joe The Homeless Guy for example. Or JarJar4Prez (only a few people are going to get that one). The only reason anyone would take you up on your offer is if they felt they somehow needed to justify their dislike of FC to you. Far be it from me to speak for anyone, but it certainly seems that no one really cares what your opinion of their opinion is. Keep in mind, we have been debating this title for MONTHS on this board, literally. I just no one has anything left to say, its all been said and no one really cared that much to start with. Thats just my take on it, and with that, I officially have nothing else to offer on this topic, my reservoir of giving a shit about some miniseries that ended 2 months ago just ran dry, and I'm adding myself to that list of people who dont give enough of a shit to talk about it anymore.
-
The funny thing is Joe that wasn’t always the case. If you look back at the history of comics, you’ll see that DC comics really relished in using the secret identity and having the characters have a life outside of being a guy in a spandex suit. The most obvious example of this being Superman, where the comics would spend almost as much time dealing with him being Clark Kent as it would with him being Superman. Just look at the number of supporting characters that Supes has had that he has met in his Kent identity to see how much his non-superhero side of him was just as important: Lois Lane, Lana Lang, Perry White, Jimmy Olsen, Steve Lombardo, Cat Grant, Lucy Lane, Morgan Edge, Ma & Pa Kent, Pete Ross, etc. In comparison, Marvel introduced a group of people at the start of the Marvel-age who were in their uniforms basically full-time, the FF.
I thinks things started to change in the early 80’s when Marvel had characters like Thor and the Hulk get rid of their mortal personas (at least for awhile); characters like the Punisher who didn’t need a secret identity; and groups like the X-Men pretty much only hanged around with themselves, being very reclusive and secluded from the rest of the Marvel universe (at least in terms of dealing with normal people). Fans started saying secret identities were not realistic, and DC believed it. I mean, as much as I like a lot of the things Perez did with Wonder Woman post-Crisis, I think getting rid of her Diana Prince identity was a huge blunder. Without that other persona, she is unable to interact and meet normal people like Steve Trevor or Etta Candy or General Phil Darnell, but instead has a rotating cast of supporting characters because it becomes unbelievable for a superhero to want to hang around normal people. Instead she now only interacts with other members of the superhero “community”, just like pretty much every other hero out there.
In fact, it is this idea of “superhero community” that has robbed much of the fun out of comics for me. Sure secret identities were not realistic, but at least the made sure heroes interacted with the normal people like us, so we could relate to them. Now heroes are just an annoying clique of good-looking and popular kids in High School who hang out together and don’t have time of day for any of the other students; and no clique is more annoying than the DC heroes, because they also always are wearing their club jackets to rub your nose in the fact you can never join their group. It is no surprise that Spider-Man and Superman still are two of my favorite heroes (although not two of my favorite comics) because they have at least retained their secret identities and have made their personal lives just as important as their costumed hero lives (although I will admit, I like Batman for opposite reasons, because I imagine to become good enough to be an actual costumed vigilante would mean having to give up any sort of social life).
-
"I don't think I said it was confusing and left it at that..."
I don't think I said that you did.
You say a lot of things other than that you were confused.
You say that you don't like DC editorial because they're fuck-ups who don't ship their comics on time, somehow causing failures in your memory.
You say that you like your art to follow "rules" so that it can be easily "comprehended by a mass audience."
You say that you scratched your head in confusion while reading FC.
You say that you thought that the marketing for FC was a bunch of hype.
You say that you don't like other books that came out at the same time as, and after, Final Crisis (?).
You say that you think that Grant Morrison is egotistical and arrogant.
You say that your magical powers of omniscience allow you to know what Grant Morrison and the entire DC staff are thinking at all times.
Of course, none of those things have anything at all to do with the comic Final Crisis itself, or even what may have been "confusing" about it.
You do mention a couple of things that actually pertain to the comic in your posts.
The first one is that "...two pages dedicated to the death of [Batman] is not enough. Plus null and voiding said death in the next issue didn't make it any more memorable."
The second thing that you said that pertained to the comic was "...the slugfest between Supergirl and Mary Marvel... I'm asking myself why it's taking three issues to get through it."
Let's examine the two points that you've made one at a time, shall we?
The first, regarding "Batman's" "death":
The first thing I need to say is that, as anyone who's read comics for any length of time knows, Batman doesn't die. He finds a way to *not* die and to continue fighting crime. It's just what he does.
Just let that one sink in. Yup, Batman's not *really* dead. I know, mind-blowing right? If you read one of my earlier posts to Homer Sexual, you'll see a potential explanation for who died in Batman's stead.
Batman has "died" many times. In fact, I think that recently DC just issued a trade paperback of "The Many Deaths of Batman."
It's *never* permanent. You even point out yourself that he's back at the end of the comic.
Now let's address Batman showing up at the end of Final Crisis.
The reason that's brilliant is because Grant Morrison knows (and knows that *you* know, or at least that you *should* know) that Batman is not really permanently dead. Rather than pretend that he's gone forever, he addresses it immediately in the work itself. He essentially says "OF COURSE Batman isn't dead. You know that and I know that. So what I'll do is show you that Batman isn't dead right away, but leave it a mystery as to exactly how he escaped, etc." I prefer this cheeky, self-aware tactic to the more clunky "No, Batman is obviously gone forever" tactic. Maybe it's just because I've read a lot of comics and I know where he's coming from. Schmuckbait never sits well with me.
Your second point seems to be that a super-powered cat-fight in a comic book went on for too long. It's your prerogative to think so. But at the same time, I feel that fight-length can be a very subjective thing and this is hardly a reason for the entire comic being bad or a failure. It also does nothing to address what you may have found "confusing" about the comic... which is something that you've still never addressed.
"It was flawed because Morrison as usual had too many ideas and too little attention and space the execute them."
I would disagree that there is a such thing as "too many ideas" and I would say that ideas are a writer's (creative's!) stock-in-trade, and that the more ideas a writer has, the better they'll probably be. What particular ideas were the in the comic that you felt needed more space, or extra explanation? It all seemed pretty simple to me.
I thought that his ideas were perfectly executed, and I understood everything in the comic (without using the internets), so my question is sincere and legitimate.
You refer to Final Crisis as being "uncohesive", but you give not one single example to illustrate in what way you mean.
But, I think I can take a guess, and it goes back to my post to optimous about form and content.
Now, I'm not gonna teach an undergraduate English class, or an art appreciation class, or anything like that here. But I'll try to give a succinct explanation that you'll be able to understand. You can always wikipedia some shit up if you want to.
It goes something like this:
The content of Final Crisis involves all of spacetime breaking apart, crumbling, and deteriorating. Universes are being smushed together and linear time has gone screwy. That's the content.
The form of FC mirrors it's content, enhancing the artistic effect. Because spacetime is breaking, the way the comic is written and the way that the illustrators have laid out the action on the pages is all designed to show the reader that this is happening. Rather than the writer just *saying* "spacetime is crumbing", the writer (and artist) *show* you this through their work.
So that's the extremely short version of the "form and content in Final Crisis" lesson.
You can look for this in a lot of great art out there. This shit's been going on for a while. There are numerous examples.
I would say that if Final Crisis followed all the "rules" of a completely linear (and pedestrian) narrative, then it would not have been the incredible success that it is. The times when you thought that things were "incohesive" you may have been right... and they were probably *supposed* to be incohesive. At the same time, Final Crisis does follow that pyramid that optimous is so fond of, making it the best of both worlds. Experimental and easy to understand at the same time.
You say that you're "not asking for everything to be spelled out" and that you "don't want a story to be force fed [to you]" but then you turn around and demand an "explanation" for everything. Where did Wonder Woman come from? Well, she fell prey to The Anti-Life Equation and became a Female Fury. It's not rocket science, it's a comic book. From the looks of it, Grant Morrison's biggest deficiency as a writer appears to be giving his readers too much credit and not spoon-feeding them enough.
I don't have to "No-Prize" Final Crisis to explain anything that happened in it. I don't have to use the interwebs to look things up. I just pay attention while I'm reading my comic book, and I remember the Monitor when he shows up later. That's just my style.
As far as "you were told" that Morrison was the reason for the delays... well, I suspect you got some bogus informants there. Not to mention the fact that the schedule at which art is created shouldn't have much to do with the quality of the end result. It's neither here nor there. Try to stick to critiquing the comic itself (the art) rather than the industry that surrounds it (the business) and you'll probably better off.
Nobody cares how long Michelangelo took to paint the Cistine Chapel ceiling. Just that he painted it.
It doesn't matter whether Lucas took 3 days to make Star Wars or 3 years. What matters is that it's a great movie.
... and I don't think that we should hold art to arbitrary time constraints that in reality mean nothing when judging the quality of the art itself.
Think about it this way: In a hundred years the people reading Final Crisis won't care that the last issue came out late or about the advertising hype that surrounded it when it did... they'll just think that it's a great comic book.
"Plus FUCK Morrison..."
I guess that's where you kind of show your true colors. Well, that and calling Morrison egotistical and arrogant. You just seem like a irascible child, who just got his first hate-boner for a celebrity he doesn't even know. It makes it seem as if you're mad at Morrison for writing something over your head, and now you want to zing him with insults for it. Like a bully who picks on the smart kid in class to make himself feel better or something like that. It makes me think that you have some irrational vendetta against the man, who's someone who's never done anything to you except create great art for you to enjoy.
Or, in your case, someone who's created great art for you to hate on without good reason. -
Methinks thou dost protest too much.
Yeah, it's really obvious that you don't care and that you're over it. That's why you're like a dog with a bone.
Keep calling me names and saying nothing at all of substance. You're much better at that than defending your views on Final Crisis anyway. -
Mar 26, 2009 10:11:32 PM CDT
Bug you might not have used the banhammer for awhile...
by continentalop
...but I have a feeling that you are dusting it off.
-
Are you saying that Bug should do away with gooseud for being a jerk to me and calling me names?
Because I'd like to support not banning him. I'm fine with people not agreeing with me, even when they're insulting like gooseud. As I said before, I'm a big boy and I can take it.
So, really, it's O.K. Let him stay. I'm not bothered by it at all. I can hold my own. -
My post was meant as a joke, and I won’t go into whom it was directed at. But I will say that one of my biggest pet peeves is when someone defense of a work of art is just “you just don’t understand it.” It is condescending and a bad argument.
An artist’s job is to express an idea or a feeling. When the audience fails to recognize or see those ideas, the fault might lie with the artist more than the audience. Certainly, some forms of art are more challenging than others and require the audience and viewer to spend more time understanding it; and some pieces of art require extensive knowledge about a subject for an audience to truly appreciate it. But guess what? Those usually are not pieces of art aimed at a mass audience but only a small crowd of aficionados. FC was advertised as the comic event of the year.
So should Morrison have “dummied it down” for the masses? No, but that also doesn’t mean he has to create something indecipherable and inaccessible. I am a huge film fan and work in the movie business, but my friends are always surprised when I tell them I don’t like Wender’s “Wings of Desire.” “You just don’t get it” they tell me, as if by explaining it will make me appreciate it more. Damn right I don’t get it! Art is a subjective medium, and there is nothing in my background or personal experience to make me relate to that story. It is pure pretentious drivel in my opinion. But to others it touches a nerve and is very profound.
You say that the content of FC mirrors its story, about how time is falling upon itself. Great idea, but completely useless if a large number of the audience don’t recognize that. Does that make those people dumber than those who do recognize it? No, that just means they are people who grew up reading comics and art in a different way than others. Even highly intelligent and talented people can have different taste and opinions. The great director Ingmar Bergman considers Citizen Kane to be an overrated piece of trash – I disagree with him but it doesn’t make his opinion wrong, just his opinion.
Plus, just because Morrison wrote it doesn’t make it great or mean that all of his ideas work. Sometimes an interesting idea is lost somewhere in translation. Going back to the theme of how time is shattering and how some people didn’t recognize that, I once told a director friend how I loved how Sydney Lumet uses the camera to tell his stories thematically: the camera going lower and tighter in 12 Angry Men to show how the jury is trapped; how in the Prince of the City the picture gets darker and darker as Treat Williams sells more and more of his soul; and in Network how the film’s lighting changes to appear more like a tv commercial as the film progresses to show how TV has corrupted everything. Well, my friend loved that idea and he shot a movie influenced by what I said, then showed it to me: as the movie progresses, the film gets more and more out of focus. My friend said this way to show how his protagonist was becoming more and more confused; I told him the audience is just going to think you had a shitty cameraman and this is all an accident. Well, needless to say, the film was not picked up or accepted by any festivals.
My point is simply this – that everyone perceives the world differently, so saying someone doesn’t get something is an obvious and pointless argument.
-
strong
b
test -
Mar 27, 2009 1:15:54 AM CDT
What the hell kind of markup does this board run, Harry?
by excommunicated
doesn't work and neither does for bold.
I am using a tag, test test -
God you're awesome.
-
And you respond with the same song. "I got it. I think it's awesome. You are obviously wrong because you don't think so."
Can't believe I'm still continuing this, but it's a slow night.
Let's focus on one specific thing. The Wonder Woman Female Fury thing. Now, as much as I don't want something force fed to me, it would be nice to have, say, a scene play out that shows maybe not Wonder Woman, but someone being turned over to the Dark Side. Is it too much to ask to have a major plot point come from somewhere other than out of the blue? Darkseid says he unleashes the Anti-Life formula and presto, Wonder Woman looks fugly and is riding a giant demon dog. There were many folks wondering if it was Wonder Woman and the fact that you "know" it was Wonder Woman without it being said in the comic at all has me baffled. Sure at the very end of the book, there's a panel of Diana holding the mask, but a simple panel of her or Catwoman putting on the mask would have filled the hole.
I know it's comics and those things happen, but still, working within the parameters of story, connecting the two scenes with some type of transition may make for a more cohesive read.
Again, you're filling in holes left by Morrison here. It's not like Womder Woman says, "I'm going to the park." and I'm wanting Morrison to show her walking out of the Wonderdome, close the door, walk to the car, get in the car, start the car, drive the car, get to the park, get out of the car, and then say, "I'm in the park. Shit, forgot the frisbee." No one wants to read that.
What I am saying is that if Wonder Woman shows up to the park wearing a strap on and a flashlight taped to her head without a mention that she was going on a lesbian mining expedition before or after she shows up, you're going to leave a lot of people wondering what's up with the narrative.
Morrison didn't want to fill in those holes becuase he knew his apoligist fans would rush in to spackle the plot holes while singing, "You just don't get it, idiots."
I do want to note that in this post I chose neither to put down your intelligence or hype my own awesome-isity. I'm just trying to explain a point. You may want to try that, Secto.
By the way, I know about Morrison's rewrites because I know people in the industry who have talked to me in confidence about the situation. It was a mess. A clusterfuck documented on many sites, including here. Plus it was obvious the rest of the stories in the DCU were waiting around for FC to happen. Simple communication and teamwork skills on morrison's part would have made FC vastly superior to the crap that it turned out to be.
I've said it before, if you read the original CRISIS, it flits around just as much as FC did. Problem is that FC did it in a bubble while the original CRISIS touched on points that were elaborated on in crossovers with titles. Because that didn't happen here, the across the universe feel of this one fell flat. Had an issue of WONDER WOMAN dealt with Diana's mask-wearing, dog riding phase, I wouldn't have been so annoyed by the exclusion of the transitional scene. Since FC played out in a bubble, scenes that would have made for some good comics were lost. And that's the real tragedy.
But this dog is beaten flat. How about I just bow down to your awesomeness and stop typing...? -
The Initiative suffers from the same problem. Suddenly, The Gauntlet is fighting alongside....lets say "Dog Boy", and you look back over the comic going "Who is Dog Boy? Was he ever introduced? Did I miss something? Why should I care?". Or the infamous issues where everyone is klled by KIA, and suddenly returns. Yup, theres Thor Girl. What happened? She was dead. Now she isnt. Explanation not required. Or Gyrich talking about a key plot development, and I'm thinking it happened in one of the past issues and I just forgot. Nope, it didnt, and I didnt. Slott just never showed it. IT literally feels like Slott forgot to send 6 pages of dialogue to the printer. I never would have thought I would say this, given the talent of the creative teams involved, but The Order blows Initiative out of the water. I only read The Order up until around issue 10, right around after the Namor storyline, but I didnt stop because of any lack of quality. Screw it, give me Walking Dead which never has any of these problems. IF theres one thing Kirkman is NEVER guilty of, its not giving you enough information!!!
-
What with thinking that it sucked and all.
-
Ronin was great. So Miller is not a one trick pony. Maybe a three or four trick pony. ASBAR is just not for me. Once Vicki Vail is portrayed in her underwear I signed off. Just plain stupid (for me).
-
Stop calling me Loserhead. Don't you know that hurts?
-
he lost em a longggggggg time ago. No offense Blue, but Miller has been the textbook definition of a one trick pony for 20+ years at least. Having said that, Ronin was great.
-
You're right, DC DID used to be the King of secret identities, I'd forgotten. In fact, now that I think about it, it seems like it used to be their favorite set-up for a story: "How will I get away to become Fancy-Pants Man without revealing to my new girlfriend, Rita Ravishing, that I, Chuck Trousers, is that famous Hero's secret indentity? (bites knuckle in anguish). At some point they did move away from it and now their costumes seem painted on. Like I said: Its all West Coast BBQ, all the time over there.To me, that just seems lazy, like the artist is drawing a template and not a character. Green Arrow eating Pizza looks basically the same as Green Arrow eating Canary or fighting crime.As for the clique metaphor, I think thats apt, especially since TB dominant Grant Morrison explored those very themes in his run of Astonishing.
-
Hmmm... do I want boring or would I prefer crappy? What to do, what to do....
-
Not that I disagree with you about Miller, but I find it interesting that it was specifically Vicki Vale being shown in her underwear that broke your camel's back. Why is that? I can't recall Vicki being portrayed as particularly chaste ever, but I'm not a hundred percent on that or did you always feel that she was more of a commando girl?
-
How do you screw up the Avengers? How can there be 37 Avengers related titles and all of them suck? Are the Avengers the n?ew X-family?
-
I expect that New could have some good stuff coming up... Mighty blows.
-
I just don't like the tone of the book. It's cynical and exploitative. I felt the same way about 'the Dark Knight Strikes Again.' I realize that is probably Miller's point, but it is just not for me. I like hot chicks, and I occasionally like them in comics. When you put the whole package together, it is just not for me. As for Miller, I was not defending him. I too believe he is a washed up, over-exposed pale mockery of his old self. However, it's revisionist history to say he hasn't produced some interesting comics over the years. '300' was visually interesting, and I like some of the Sin City work. He's no more a one trick pony than Bendis, for example.
-
Dark Avengers is cheeky and fun. I like the many of the interpersonal reactions, and once the Sentry scene was over, the talky-talk of Bendis made way for some cool scenes. I'm giving it a chance, though I'm not sure how the series will last once the inevitable Dark Reign is ended. I agree about 'Mighty,' it is blowing chunks so far. There is too much going on and as I noted earlier, the return of the Scarlett Witch with so little explanation is just clunky. New Avengers needs some stability at this point. Too many changing members, no sense of what their purpose is or why they work together. The talky-talk is OK at times, but the book has lost focus except for a playground for Bendis to masturbate to his favorite characters. Last, I would like a petition to start for Bendis to stop writing Spider-Man is such a fucking pussy. that is all.
-
I don't like it either, I was just curious because you specifically mentioned Vicki Vale in her underwear, so I was just asking what it was about that scene that drove you over the edge. And while it may be revisionist history, it doesn't change the fact that I just can't read Sin City at all anymore. PPPPPPPPPP. UUUUUUUUU.! Stinky!
-
I kind of like that model for comics. Make a new title, write your story, close up shop and start a new title. To me, nothing kills my willingness to jump on then a three digit issue number.
-
If you are still reading it, did the finale and explanation of Scarlet Witch's return make you feel any better?
-
Is it revisionist to look back on Miller's work negatively? Absolutely. I try not to fall into that trap and judge it on its own merits (ESPECIALLY DKR, you cant overstate the impact that comic had when it came out) but its hard to look at something like 300 in hindisight fairly, knowing that artistic style and uber-macho "I live by a code"-ism is really all Miller has. Is that fair? probably not.
-
I just read the three collections and thought it was pretty outstanding-- particularly for a book where I didn't give a shit about any of the established characters. Ant-Man hiding from the fight and accidentally being the hero was golden.
-
Goose-- I agree with you, BUT- how much revisionism is simply based on the readers becoming older and more worldly than your average thirteen-year-old? I mean, that's what it is for me. It's not, Hey, Miller's become crap. It's, Hey, I'm not an adolescent fuck-tard anymore, and I realize this crap is soulless bullshit.It's revisionism, sure, but revisionism based not on an author's later work, but based on the advent (finally) of the audience's maturity.
-
The Miller work that I come back to is Batman Year One and DD Born Again. As a giant Cap fan, to this day I think that the few pages he appears in Born Again, are the best he has ever been written. Both have David Mazzucchelli drawing completely out of his mind. I do think that Miller has flamed out to me, but I imagine that if I were 13 that 300 and Sin City would be much more enjoyable. The Sin City ninja chick on roller skates is admittedly still pretty awesome.
-
Miller's bimbo-chiaroscuro "warrior-whores" aren't awesome, be they Asians on rollerskates, ex-secretaries on heroin shooting porn movies, or S&M cat-burglars. Cap's been written better, pletny of times, particularly by Mark Waid and Ed Brubaker.
-
I got to agree with steverodgers, Miller's DD Born Again and Batman Year One still work and stand out (although his depiction of Catwoman in year one has seriously tainted and hampered the character, even up to today). His DD runs especially deserve to be acknowledged: while he didn't write the character, his work on the character is without a doubt the most influential and the one that every DD writer looks to for inspiration. I think only Alan Moore on Swamp Thing and Jim Starlin on Captain Marvel/Adam Warlock have had a big of impact on creating a new tone and style for an already established hero (although Grant Morrison deserves honorable mention for Animal Man and Doom Patrol, and John Byrne for She-Hulk).
I mean, during his tenure on DD not only did he change Matt Murdock from perennial B-list hero into major A-lister, but also took a second tier Spider-Man foe, the Kingpin, and transform him into one of Marvel’s major villains and a living embodiment of the evils of organized crime (why someone can’t do a similar thing with the Penguin is beyond me).
And while I agree, Captain America has been written better (Stern’s work Cap’s own title and the Avengers stand out as the best depiction of him for me); Miller did write some of the best examples of another hero reacting to the greatness of Cap. And I don’t mean the Busiek style of having some young hero stare eye-struck at Cap like he was his favorite movie star. No, I mean we actually saw why Captain America is held in such reverence in the Marvel universe. When Captain America orders Thor to create a storm to put out a fire, Miller writes (and I am paraphrasing),“He hears a voice that could command a god…and it does.” That spells out Captain America’s natural leadership and presence better than any other comic I have read (although Thing mentioning in Secret Wars how when Cap orders you to do something, you just feel like you can’t let him down gets an honorable mention).
And when Captain America figures out Matt Murdock’s secret identity, follows him into the church (without DD noticing until than), and than races by DD wearing “40lbs of chainmail and carrying a shield” without even changing his breathing rate or heart rate, we realize the same thing that DD does – that despite both of them are considered part of the “non-powered” class of heroes (along with heroes like Moon Knight, Punisher and the Black Widow), Cap completely outclasses him. It must be what it was like when a NBA All-Star like Chris Mullen of Reggie Miller finally met Jordan during his prime– they thought they were pretty damn good and hot stuff until they experienced what he could do. And Miller did all this without having DD & Cap fight in a stereotypical superhero fight.
But I will go on the record as saying the ninja hooker on the roller skates is as dumb as they come. That is just damn childish. -
Ronin was a beautiful comic and still is today. I reread it every five years or so and I still love it. I don't find its themes childish. It's about recognition of souls, love, separation/merger of machine and man. It is still great for me. JoeN, the scene with Vicki Vail was just the most eggregious of the books offenses for me. I just don't want Batman to be that character, I don't like Robin being such a punk. It's just an ugly book for me. What is interesting is that I do like anti-heroes at times, and I do like gritty books (Walking Dead, The Authority to name a few), but something about the total package of ASBAR just made me drop it after issue 2.
-
"...I will say that one of my biggest pet peeves is when someone defense of a work of art is just 'you just don’t understand it.' It is condescending and a bad argument."
I agree completely. That's why I would never do that.
Here was the chain of events:
1. Numerous people claim that Final Crisis is confusing, which means that there were things in it that they didn't understand.
2. I kindly respond with the offer to explain anything that these people may have been confused by. I never once tell anyone that "they just don't get it" as my defense for FC's greatness.
Going back and reading the previous posts will bear this out.
"An artist’s job is to express an idea or a feeling. When the audience fails to recognize or see those ideas, the fault might lie with the artist more than the audience."
It might... and it might lie more with the audience than the author.
"Certainly, some forms of art are more challenging than others and require the audience and viewer to spend more time understanding it; and some pieces of art require extensive knowledge about a subject for an audience to truly appreciate it."
Yes, this is certainly true.
"But guess what?"
What?
"Those usually are not pieces of art aimed at a mass audience but only a small crowd of aficionados."
You mean a small crowd of afficionados like the people who read superhero comic books? You seem to have created an arbitrary rule here that the universe doesn't necessarily follow. Movies are created for a mass audience (one that is far bigger than the audience that reads comic books), and there are movies out there that are incredibly intellectually challenging that *most* people probably don't understand. Memento pops to mind. We can all probably think of our own list of examples here.
"FC was advertised as the comic event of the year."
Again, this has nothing to do with Final Crisis itself, but rather the business surrounding the art. I'm sure that you've read and understood all my previous posts.
"So should Morrison have 'dummied it down' for the masses? No, but that also doesn’t mean he has to create something indecipherable and inaccessible."
I guess that it's a good thing that he didn't create something "indecipherable and inaccessable" then. You said that you understood it perfectly and just didn't like it. So which is it? Is it "indecipherable" which literally means "impossible to decipher" or did you understand it completely? Now you're doing the Joenathan talking-in-circles thing. You need to be consistent about what you think or else you become indecipherable to someone trying to read your posts. I'm noticing a little bit of irony seeping into our discussion here.
"...my friends are always surprised when I tell them I don’t like Wender’s 'Wings of Desire.' 'You just don’t get it' they tell me, as if by explaining it will make me appreciate it more."
It seems like you are projecting a problem that you've had with your friends in the past onto me. I'm not them and I haven't told you that. Had you told your friends that you thought that this movie was "confusing" and "indecipherable" though, I wouldn't think that it was outrageous if you had a friend that wanted to discuss it with you and possibly explain certain aspects of it to you.
"Damn right I don’t get it!"
I would ask "So which is it? Do you get it or not?" You're definitely pulling a Joenathan here.
"Art is a subjective medium..."
It is.
"...and there is nothing in my background or personal experience to make me relate to that story."
Well, O.K., but it seems like you're setting up "background" and "personal experience" and "relatability" as more arbitrary rules for art that don't really exist. None of those things are in fact required. A lot of the time, art is for experiencing things *outside* of your own background and personal experience. It's a way that art can *broaden* a person's worldview and allow them a window into experiences that they will probably never have. Trust me. It's a pretty widely-held and accepted viewpoint. It's why your 7th grade English teacher had you read "The Diary of Anne Frank" even though you've never had to hide in an attic from the nazis.
Final Crisis totally speaks to my personal experiences though, because I've traveled through all dimensions of spacetime to save a crumbling multiverse more times than I can fuckin' count.
"It is pure pretentious drivel in my opinion."
If you mean by "pretentious" that it "puts on a make-believe show" or that it's "making an exaggerated show" then I'd say that you are correct, and that most things designed as entertainment could be considered "pretentious." But, I don't think that's what you mean. I'm not entirely sure what you mean by it.
You really gotta watch out for words like "pretentious" in a discussion about art (or any intellectual discussion), because it can make you come off sounding anti-intellectual. I know that you are not, but it is very often a "red-flag" word.
I'm gonna have to see that movie now.
"...to others it touches a nerve and is very profound."
It sounds like you totally accept my views on Final Crisis as valid and I appreciate that.
"You say that the content of FC mirrors its story..."
No, I said that the content *is* the story and that the *form* mirrors the content. Big difference.
"Great idea, but completely useless if a large number of the audience don’t recognize that."
It is a great idea and that's why so much great art (like FC) uses said technique. As far as a "large number of the audience [not recognizing it]" goes, well, I'm not sure that's true. I don't think that half a dozen people on this internet message board accurately represents the entire audience. It represents a small minority within a minority. Vocal? Sure. Very. But not necessarily representative. This is, in fact, the only site I've read negative things about Final Crisis on. I regularly visit newsarama, cbr, etc. etc.
"Does that make those people dumber than those who do recognize it?"
No. But it does mean that in this one particular instance they missed an obvious feature of what they were reading.
"...that just means they are people who grew up reading comics and art in a different way than others."
Reading, say, more passively than actively? I agree. The thing is, one way of reading is a bit better than the other when it comes to comprhension.
"Even highly intelligent and talented people can have different taste and opinions."
This seems to be true.
"The great director Ingmar Bergman considers Citizen Kane to be an overrated piece of trash – I disagree with him but it doesn’t make his opinion wrong, just his opinion."
Exactly. So then the "sophisticated" part of the discussion comes when we examine what is behind those opinions. Maybe this Bergman fellow could explain some of his reasons for thinking what he thinks? Maybe he can't? This helps determine the validity of his opinions, when we examine *why* we think what we think and try to explicate the thought process *behind* our opinions. How did we arrive at that opinion? That sort of thing. That's all I've really asked anyone here. It seems to be a hard thing for people who don't like Final Crisis to do though.
What would make this Bergman fellow's opinion wrong would be if the thought process used to arrive at his opinion was flawed in some way, such as him saying "most of the movie is out-of-focus" when it clearly is not, or possibly saying "I didn't like the way that the studio marketed the movie." Then, his opinion may be less valid than one arrived at through a non-flawed thought process. Follow me there?
"Plus, just because Morrison wrote it doesn’t make it great or mean that all of his ideas work."
True. Just because all of his ideas have worked so far doesn't mean that they will all continue to work in the future. Anything could happen. Grant Morrison isn't a flawless god, he's just a mortal man who writes about them.
"I once told a director friend how I loved how Sydney Lumet uses the camera to tell his stories thematically: the camera going lower and tighter in 12 Angry Men to show how the jury is trapped; how in the Prince of the City the picture gets darker and darker as Treat Williams sells more and more of his soul; and in Network how the film’s lighting changes to appear more like a tv commercial as the film progresses to show how TV has corrupted everything."
It's obvious to me that you understand the spirit of form and its relationship to content, if not the letter.
"My point is simply this – that everyone perceives the world differently, so saying someone doesn’t get something is an obvious and pointless argument."
Again, I agree. Which is why I wouldn't say that. Instead, I've tried to elevate the discussion using the previous mentioned Socratic method to try and figure out why people don't like it.
You don't like Final Crisis, and I respect your right to hold your own opinion on the matter, even if I do think that it was arrived at trough flawed premises.
Peace! -
Meaning "Wings of Desire". Sorry if that wasn't clear.
-
"Continue to self destruct Sector..."
I'm not entirely sure that's what's going on, and I wonder what would compel you to say such a thing. Eloquently and politely defending my position is self-destruction? Does not compute.
"God you're awesome."
This is obviously sarcasm and meant to offend. Why are you so threatened by my differing opinion on a comic book? Is this a board for thoughtful discussion of comic books, or for insulting and ostracizing anyone who doesn't agree with the prevailing attitude?
We just elected Obama, people! We have to learn to extend our hand across the isle! -
Unfortunately, the dog still completely retains its original three-dimensional shape.
It's kind of sad, really. -
Just tried to add it to my Netflix and they don't have it. Lame. Oh well, at least it's terrible, right? My local movie rental store probably has it, so I'll check it out next time I'm there.
-
Netflix has got a lot of those available though. I'm gonna check a few of them out as well.
Citizen Kane I've seen. -
Yes. We have a case, right here in this talkback.
-
Dr. Light ripped Sue's spandex pants to rape her. You douche.
-
...when any of these guys get too much glory, they fizzle. Some flame like Liefield, some fizzle so badly that many never remember they great work they once did (like Byrne), and some fizzle forever and still get a directing gig, like Miller. I bought DKR an issue at a time. It was stunning, innovative, original...but it didn't take long to see that Batman portrayed that way monthly would be a ponderous, joyless read. And right away, the rest of the comic industry started imitating the "darkness", "grit" and "violence" of DKR and WATCHMEN, leaving out the care, craftsmanship and innovation. The comics came out more adolescent than ever and not in a good way. It's been a real temptation to let some of that reflect badly on the benchmark works, but I have to keep reminding myself that Miller, Moore, and Gibbons weren't responsible to the first year of Image, etc.
-
I have to say, Sector, your continual personal attacks against me and your attempts to goad me into a fight say more about you then they do about my supposed lack of comic book knowledge or deficiencies. In fact, I am beginning to question your sanity and mental health, considering how bitter and petty you are in these talkbacks. We started this “debate” last week and since then you’ve still haven’t let it dropped or been able to move on. It is obvious that they only reason you are on this site is to somehow get into verbal spats with people – I guess someone wasn’t love enough as a child.
That is why I wrote this response in advance because I am pretty sure I know how you’ll reply. Despite the fact that I laid out a well thought out argument why I think Stan Lee is not a thief, I am sure you’ll skip over the logic and reasoning and instead make ad hominem arguments, personal attacks and use character assassination. You’ll say that I am stupid and uneducated about the subject or comics, and despite the fact that I was polite and respectful in my reply, you’ll constantly throw out personal insults and childish remarks supposedly “destroying” whatever argument I make by avoiding confronting it or blatantly misinterpret what I said. At the same time you’ll boast about your own knowledge and superiority in the subject, and question how anyone could think differently on a subject as you.
But you know what you won’t do? You won’t actually back up anything you say with evidence or an explanation how you reached that conclusion. No, everything will be treated as if it is common knowledge or that you’re not required to supply evidence to support your argument. Sector is obviously one of the great comic book experts in the world and his word is all that matter: Stan Lee is a thief and a huckster, and the fact that you say so is evidence enough - at least in your delusional world.
But the truth is Sector that even “experts” are required to supply evidence and explanations why they believe what they do. I don’t claim to be an expert but just a fan, and I could very well be wrong about something and don’t mind be corrected. If you truly have any useful insight into a subject, present it in a logical manner and supply evidence or statements that back it up.
But the truth is you are not an expert. You are just tiny, pathetic dick, a douchebag, a loser. The real sad thing is that you probably get a kick out of this, as if you somehow have some sort of power or standing on this site. “Look at me everybody!” That is why you constantly cry out, demanding that people have to reply to your circular “arguments.” Just pathetic.
I get no pleasure in these "debates" with you, Sector. While I might throw out a joking barb once in awhile, I am a firm believer in trying to be amicable and polite. And hopefully the rest of the people on this site have found me fair and somewhat pleasant, something I am sure few people here can say about you (Buzz, Ambush, JoeNathan, Homer, Psynapse, Goose, who haven't you annoyed?)
The truth is, Sector, I could give a shit less about you or what you think. I can easily ignore you and your comments, and forget about you as soon as I look away from the site. You are like a pile of shit I accidentally stepped in; annoying when it happens, but you just scrap off your shoes and move on without ever thinking back on it.
And I don’t care what you say about me, or even another TBer. You are rude and obnoxious and slightly unhinged, but I can just use a little willpower to ignore you are your insignificant attacks. But the baseless attacks on Stan Lee are just disgusting. To quote Joseph N. Welch when he was talking to another person you loved to label and demonize people without any evidence, “Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?"
But we know the answer to that is no, don’t we Sector? Prick.
-
TestBRRBBBRBRRRB BBRBRBRBRBRBRBRBRBR<BR
-
TESTBGBRBRBRRBBRBRBRBRBRBRBRBRBRBRRGBBRBR>BRBR>BRBRBRBR
-
TESTRBRBRBRRBBRRBBRBRBRBRBRBRBBRBBRRBBR>RBBBB<B
-
TESTBRRBBRBBRRBBRRBRBBBRBBRBBRRBRBRRRBBRBRRGBRR>BBRBRRGRBVBRBRRBRBR>BBRRBRBRBRBRRB
-
TESTBRBRBBRBRBRBRBRBRRBBBRBRBRBRRBBR BRRBRBRRB RB BRRR RRB>B BR B R BRBRBR BR BRB RB RB<R
-
BBRBR
-
RB RB BR
-
RB RB BRRR RRB>B BR B R BRBRBR BR BRB RB RB<R
-
BRBRRBBR BRRBRBRRB RB BRRR RRB>B BR B R BRBRBR BR BRB RB RB<R
-
BRBRBBRBRBRBRBRBRRBBBRBRBR
-
TESTBRBRBBRBRBRBRBRBRRBBBRBRBR
-
testBRBRBRBR
-
TESTBRBRBBRBRBRBRBRBRRBBBRBRBRBR<
-
TESTBRBRBRBR<
-
TESTR>BRBRRBBBRBRBRBR
-
TESTYO!!!
-
TESTYO!!!
-
MEN CALL HIM THE CHOPPAH!!!
-
MEN CALL HIM THE CHOPPAH!!!
-
MEN CALL HIM THE CHOPPAH!!!
-
It's not pretty, but
-
It's not pretty, but
-
MEN CALL HIM THE CHOPPAH!!!
-
IN BOLD!
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 273 total posts 271 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 92 total posts 92 posts
- AVENGERS enemy revealed as pink boardgame pieces... You might suffer some form of elation... SPOILERS!!! -- 160 total posts 69 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 151 total posts 63 posts
- Does ‘SNL’ Rhyme With ‘Deschanel’?? Learn Which SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE Vet Hosts After Sexy Zooey!! -- 67 total posts 59 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 60 total posts 57 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 484 total posts 49 posts
- Here's The Red Band Trailer For Drafthouse Films' THE FP! -- 69 total posts 42 posts
- Friday Brings SWEEPS DAY NINE!! Gab Here About Tonight’s FRINGE!! Plus Einstein on TIM, Wiig On PORTLANDIA, MAHER, CLONE, GIFTED, GRIMM, SPARTACUS, SUPERNATURAL, GOLD RUSH And More!! -- 120 total posts 32 posts
- SPACE 2099!! -- 183 total posts 24 posts