Comics

SPOILER ALERT! AICN COMICS/POPTARDS PODCAST: BEFORE WATCHMEN MINUTEMEN! EXTERMINATION! HARBINGER! EARTH 2! DARK AVENGERS! CREATOR OWNED COMICS!!!

Published at: June 12, 2012, 10:48 a.m. CST by ambush bug

@@@ AICN COMICS PODCAST @@@

Ambush Bug here. The below hour-plus long conversation took place between myself and my fellow @$$holes Optimous Douche, Matt Adler’s lovely wife Nutmeg, and our host Johnny Destructo of PoptardsGo.com as we talked about HARBINGER #1, EARTH 2 #2, DARK AVENGERS/THUNDERBOLTS #175, CREATOR OWNED COMICS #1, EXTERMINATION #1, BEFORE WATCHMEN: MINUTEMEN #1, and of course, more general jack@$$$ery!
 


Looks for more of the Holes rambling about comics on Poptards, follow us on Facebook here, and in future AICN COMICS columns!
 

Readers Talkback

comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • June 12, 2012, 10:54 a.m. CST

    Hollywood will ruin comics. Watchmen prequel. No thank you

    by LowDevil

  • June 12, 2012, 10:54 a.m. CST

    Poing!

    by 3774

    I knew that your reenactment last week was for Harbinger. And I thought the issue was well-written, well-drawn work. I just found the idea of trying to turn a rapist into some kind of sympathetic hero deeply disturbing and gross. So much so that I didn't even bother emailing the answer in. It surprised me that nobody pointed his act out in the podcast. I'm pretty sure it's Creator-Owned Heroes...Creator Owned Comics is an unaffiliated website. As I mentioned to JD, I loved the ethereal tone of the art in Trigger Girl 6, and *loved* how she eliminated her targets with the grace of a ballerina dancer, without killing anyone herself. The commentary essays at the end of COH were very interesting also. There was a quote from Justin Gray: 'I will almost never watch a PG-13 rated horror flick because I know the filmmaker is worried about making sure someone who was twelve not that long ago can watch it with me. I don't want to sit next to a 13 year old during a horror movie any more than she wants to sit next to me at a Justin Bieber concert.' Give a flip thru those indie-oriented thoughts. Some of them are great. Don't worry...I'll be here to bust your balls all week.

  • June 12, 2012, 11:10 a.m. CST

    Watchmen

    by dznutzforu

    I read the first issue of 'Minutemen' ...it was really good. Just because Alan Moore is a weirdo shouldn't mean we can't play in the world he created. How good would Spider-man be if the only stories we ever got were those told by Stan Lee? Answer. Not so Amazing.

  • June 12, 2012, 11:30 a.m. CST

    Minutemen #1... not impressed.

    by Steve

    Feels like a forced cash grab.

  • June 12, 2012, 11:47 a.m. CST

    Agreed Sevenkdr

    by optimous_douche

    The good news is that Silk Spectre coming out tomorrow is a whole bucket of awesome.

  • June 12, 2012, 12:04 p.m. CST

    Watchmen =/= Spiderman

    by KoolerThanJesus

    The comparison of Watchmen being written by someone other than Alan Moore to Spiderman and writers after Stan Lee is not even close to the same. Watchmen was written by Moore with a very definite beginning, middle and end. Spiderman was created by Lee to be a continuing series for Marvel. What will DC try next, having a crossover with Nite Owl and Batman?

  • June 12, 2012, 12:10 p.m. CST

    yes, of course, Hollywood will ruin comics.

    by sonnyhooper

    because, what DC is doing with Before Watchmen is SOOOOO much more terrible then when Alan Moore has Mina Harker and Alan Quatermain bumping uglies in a story he writes? or has Alice in Wonderland and Dorothy Gale and Wendy Darling going all Black Swan on one another? <p> oh yeah, i forgot Moore has the market cornered on doing sequels that no one asked for with classic characters that he did not create. silly me, i forgot that only Alan Moore gets to play in the sand box with borrowed toys and no one else is allowed to do the same. <p> sorry about the sarcasm being cranked to 11, i'm just sick to death of whiny, hypocritical fan boys. <p> i'm sure Hollywood is to blame for ruining the Avenger comics forever because a movie was made that raked in a ka-gillion dollars so far, right? yes, the purity and awesomeness of earth mightiest heroes must be forever tainted by the evil touch of Hollywood right? of course, i'm sure all the TRUE comic fans of the Avengers boycotted the movie because they know that in the long run Hollywood has a master plan to ruin all of your favorite comics? or maybe it's just any studio NOT named Disney or Marvel that is evil and ruining comics for everyone? must be, of course, right. <p> Hypocrisy thy name is fan-boy.

  • You heard it here first!

  • June 12, 2012, 12:28 p.m. CST

    SONNYHOOPER FOR THE WIN!

    by Poptard_JD

    Well, said, sir

  • June 12, 2012, 12:37 p.m. CST

    "Feels like a forced cash grab"

    by oaser

    Well, yeah. DC's decision for Before Watchmen was unbelievably transparent. They're in it for the money. That said, I thought Darwyn Cooke did a pretty good job of capturing a young Hollis Mason as the narrator. I'm interested enough to keep wanting to read the series. But I LOVED the art. I like the throwback to the Golden Age style of drawing with the blocky characters and retro styling was very cool. I'm also digging Earth-2. I was a bit disappointed with how Robinson wrote Alan Scott in this issue (like he tried TOO hard to make Scott's relationship feel genuine -- I thought it felt forced). I get that Scott's gay, but he doesn't do anything besides be gay. And I didn't like how Jay Garrick first appeared as kind of a loser (and the whole handing off the power thing seems stolen from Green Lantern), but I really enjoyed when he put on the costume and ran around as the Flash. Did not, however, read Harbinger or Extermination. Sounds like I should have, eh?

  • June 12, 2012, 12:38 p.m. CST

    I *thought

    by oaser

    Stupid grammatical errors.

  • June 12, 2012, 12:40 p.m. CST

    The Watchmen situation isn't remotely comparable...

    by MattAdler

    ...to public domain characters used by many people for decades.

  • His (and other creators involved with this) comments regarding Alan Moore have left a bad taste in my mouth. If you're going to ride his coattails, don't drag his name through the dirt in an interview printed in the very comic that wouldn't be in print if not for the success HE was responsible for. Regardless of your opinion on Moore, rubbishing him in the pages of a BW comic (Ozymandias #1- the interview was previewed in the Bleeding Cool #0 comic) shows a lack of class. Totally unnecessary. I picked up Minutemen #1. It was average. To be honest I'm not a huge fan of Cooke, but I was intending on picking up all the BW titles. After reading Wein's interview however, that's not happening.

  • June 12, 2012, 1:24 p.m. CST

    Hey no Asserpiece Theatre?

    by Wcwlkr

    Even though I suck and guessing it I always find them hilarious.

  • June 12, 2012, 1:50 p.m. CST

    How is Watchmen not the same as public domain

    by optimous_douche

    Not saying I agree or disagree or yet, want more data points.

  • June 12, 2012, 2 p.m. CST

    i suppose you got me there, it's true...

    by sonnyhooper

    ....no one owns the public domain characters Moore uses in LoEG or Lost Girls, and um......well...but...ah.... DC actually OWNS THE CHARACTERS IN WATCHMEN!!!! but, either way Alan Moore should have the final say on how ALL of those characters can and should be used forever and ever amen? <P> quite right, point taken. silly me. <p> if Moore doesn't have to ask anyone if it's ok for Wendy from Peter Pan to go down on Alice in wonderland then why does DC have to ask Moore if it's ok to do a Silk Specter book? especially considering that..... legally, DC owns the rights to the character to begin with? see to me, a double standard is a double standard, regardless of if i like the author trying to use it as an excuse or not. <p> and BTW do you know why Alan Moore has the time (and money) on his hands that he does to denounce anything DC does with the characters in Watchmen? because he made a SHIT TON of money off the sales of the book in the first place. that's why. and yeah i know Moore hasn't taken any money from DC in a long time, but Moore has made plenty of money off other things he has done since because he has a great reputation as a writer, a reputation he owes in no small part part to the success of Watchmen. <p> but see, this is where my bullshit detector goes off the charts and i start to remember why i try not to waste my time reading fan-boy ravings on the interwebs. when people insist on calling Before Watchmen a 'forced cash grab.', i have to wonder if those same people are buying the x-men vs avengers cross-over and i have to wonder if those people think its just a happy accident that movies came out this summers baised on both of those FRANCHISES. <P> note the word FRANCHISE in bold letters, because in reality, where the non-fan-boys live, thats all the watchmen, and avengers and x-men are.....they are property of the companies who own them and ALL of those companies want to grab your cash. <p> no really they do, honestly i'm telling you, believe it or not joss whedon and joe quasada would grab you and shake you up and down until all the loose change spilled out of your pocket and take it from you if they could. so this idea that one comic company is in it for the money and another is in it for pure intentions only is utter bullshit. and if you believe that let me know right now, i really don't want to waste another second of my life talking to you if that's what you believe. <p> this idea that ANYTHING is pure or untouchable in the world of comic books is quite frankly laughable. if Marvel thinks they can make a couple more bucks if they make Spider-man a black latino kid you can bet your ass they will do it. if DC thinks they can make a few extra bucks off of a prequel to Watchmen or a gay Green Lantern you can bet your ass they will do it. <P> the only thing i find unbelievable about any of these publicity stunt cash grabs is how some fan-boys will use any and all manner of mental gymnastics to justify one cash grab but then condemn another based purely on their own bias opinions. which is fine, everyone is entitled to their own opinion , just..... please, don't expect everyone else to drink your favorite flavor of kool-aid. some of us know better and that ALL of the kool-aid is nothing but sugar water and has no nutritional value what-so-ever.

  • June 12, 2012, 2:33 p.m. CST

    sonnyhopper

    by oaser

    I'm standing up and applauding you, good sir. Well said.

  • No one gets the reference? No one? This country, I swear.

  • June 12, 2012, 3:57 p.m. CST

    lol... naw, i get it Pink. love me some MST3K.

    by sonnyhooper

    but like i said, sorry it's cranked to 11, i just want some consistency out of the fan community every once in a while. if we are gonna get out the pitch forks and torches and 2 by 4's and nails and crucify a comic company when a cash grab publicity stunt comes along, lets do it EVERY TIME it happens, not just when it offends our personal sensibility. <p> or better yet..... lets not do it at all anymore. lets just grow up and admit that the only club either of the big 2 have left in the bag are cash grab publicity stunts. its just the nature of the beast at this point, time to either admit it or let it go imo. <P> BTW Pink did you ever get to the end of season 5 of Supernatural? Start season 6 yet? if so what did you think? just genuinely curious of your opinion on the show.

  • June 12, 2012, 4:13 p.m. CST

    Douche

    by MattAdler

    The reason the situations are not comparable is because Watchmen is a standalone work by a living author who had a contract that he reasonably believed would give him control over these characters by this point.... he specifically refused standard work-for-hire terms for that reason. We could argue all day long over legality, or what he should have known, or what's fair (although it's interesting to me that some seem SO anti-creator that they seem to take delight in all of this... not you Douche). But any way you look at it, it's a far cry from Moore using characters that have been used many times before by many other writers.

  • Let's take Peter Parker/Spider-Man. Wait, actually let's not. I don't buy any of his titles, but I have a vague childhood fondness for the character. Let's pick a character I've never cared about before, couldn't care about less at the moment, and won't care about in the foreseeable future. Let's take Wolverine. Or Batman. Or whoever. All of the titles are supposed to take place in continuity of each other, aren't they? How the hell does that work for a single character who is spread across several titles? I've never understood that. How are you supposed to literally cram all the events that take place, featuring said character, in every book they star in, into a single month, every month? Actually, yes, let's address Spider-Man on that also. Or any cash-cow character milked so fast-and-furiously hard that the nipples should be catching fire? How are readers even accepting it as plausible? It always seemed to me like it'd make more sense to have every title with the same character take place it a different universe.... What's going on with your Batman? Oh, Wayne Enterprises has undergone a hostile takeover, and Bruce is in a financial crisis an can't afford to replace or fix his toys. This Batman On A Budget thing is really interesting. How's your Batman and Robin title? Weird and cool, Bruce is going through some weird psychological breakdown, and with his acquisition of LexCorp, he's become a reclusive Howard Hughes nut-job, and Robin is pretending to *be* him so no one realizes it. How's the Dark Knight? Out of this world...he's gone on an extended space trip involving the Justice League. I just don't understand the point of insisting that all of it take place in the *same* place, other than to exploit massive crossover events. All it does is restrict writing possibilities.

  • June 12, 2012, 4:32 p.m. CST

    And...

    by 3774

    ...I am just about to the end of season 5. It is teh awsumz so far.

  • June 12, 2012, 5:16 p.m. CST

    sorry, hate to be the fanboy but moore

    by JAMF

    is operating on another level to these goons - i just about fell asleep reading minutemen. fuck... i better get out of this talkback before my head explodes. can't have any bad words against alan except that in real life the guys a fucking loon. i wouldn't wanna meet him, ever ever ever. pink, i have no problem with the multiple titles thing, yeah i suppose if you only read the main batman title and bruce mentioned something and it said "see detective comics #10" you'd be a bit miffed but i read them all so it doesn't bother me hehe. i think the trick is just to go with one character you really like. i only follow batman monthly so i get all the titles, but anything else i just get trades. there's no way i could get multiple titles of multiple characters every month.

  • June 12, 2012, 5:39 p.m. CST

    They were...

    by MattAdler

    ...but not at the time that Moore wrote his stories, by which point those characters and works had been revisited time and again by many different authors. And again, it's the combination of factors I listed, not just that one, that makes the two situations apples and oranges. It's just an easy club to bash Moore with for people who, for whatever reason, want to ignore the complicated questions this situation raises.

  • June 12, 2012, 5:48 p.m. CST

    Matt

    by Ambush Bug

    The reason why some aren't really bothered by all of this is mainly because Alan Moore has been such a grumpy prick through the years. If he were a nice guy getting screwed by the man, I'd feel worse about all of this but because of numerous interviews he's done which reek of sour grapes while promoting the hypocrasy of basically every one of his hits belonging to or derivative of something prior really does shoot his bitching and moaning in the birkinstock.

  • June 12, 2012, 5:55 p.m. CST

    Well said Bug. Personality goes a long way

    by Poptard_JD

  • June 12, 2012, 6:04 p.m. CST

    He's pissed...

    by MattAdler

    ...and I think justifiably so. I think his comments come across as shocking because we're used to creators playing nice and being diplomatic in the hopes of getting more work. But he doesn't care, and I say good for him. Where has being nice gotten all the other creators who've been screwed over the years? As for being derivative, when you come right down to it, every work is derivative to some extent... Kirby, the greatest creative genius in comic history, could be said to be derivative as well. What's the old saying? "There are no new stories" or something along those lines? But there are degrees of originality, and Kirby, Moore, and many other greats DID bring us innovative stuff, even if it was based on old stuff. The Big Two these days... not so much. So I think he has a valid point.

  • June 12, 2012, 6:06 p.m. CST

    by 3774

    http://www .comicsalliance. com/2012/04/11/alan-moore-bbc-interview-gangsters/ Don't forget to collapse the spaces.

  • June 12, 2012, 6:24 p.m. CST

    C'mon, Matt, there's derivative and then there's...

    by Ambush Bug

    Alan Moore's stuff. WATCHMEN = Charlton characters + rape LOST GIRLS = Fairy Tales + lesbianism LEAGUE OF EXTRAORDINARY GENTLEMEN = Literary characters + Hyde Invisible man rape FROM HELL = Well documented information about the Jack the Ripper Case NEONOMICON = Lovecraft Even TOM STRONG is pretty strongly influenced by the pulpy science adventures of DOC SAVAGE. He worked on BATMAN (created by Bob Kane), SWAMP THING (created by Len Wein) and SUPERMAN (created by Schuster/Siegel). Sure he wrote great stories with them, but they weren't his characters. SHould they have stopped making Batman stories after the Killing Joke? Should Swamp Thing have stayed in the bog after his run on the book? Should Superman have hung up his cape after Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow? Hell no. The guy writes great stories, there's no denying that. I think if anything the guy should just buck up and say, "I didn't read the fine print and that's my fault. I signed on the dotted line and that's that." Grumbling about it in public forums and interviews isn't going to win any sympathy. Moving on and writing something like the modern version of the Watchmen with the know how not to sign it all away would earn my respect much more.

  • June 12, 2012, 6:55 p.m. CST

    Bug,

    by oaser

  • June 12, 2012, 7:02 p.m. CST

    SHOOT -- try this again . . . Bug,

    by oaser

    I don't disagree with your comments. I also think Moore grumbles a lot about his situation, but he's also asked about it ALL THE TIME. In every interview he's given, he's asked about Watchmen. It must get tiresome. My cousin interviewed him for SLICE magazine, and he said he inevitably asked him about Watchmen (because he kind of had to), and he said the guy just sounds exhausted and defeated talking about it. If he's asked, he'll give his opinion. And he's not happy. If people don't want to hear him comment about it, they should stop asking him. I think what Moore's missing out on is that the people approaching his work -- no the producers, mind you, but the writers and artists -- are doing it with the UTMOST respect. Alan Moore is a hero to all of them. Whatever the brass at DC decided, Darwyn Cooke is trying SO HARD to do Moore's work justice. As will Azzarello and Straczynski. Len Wein, though? I think he's as pissed at Alan as Alan is at DC. Wein is in it for himself (which I can't really blame). I love the talkback generated by this -- you guys should have a live podcast centered around discussing talkbackers points and sharing your own thoughts on the WHOLE Before Watchmen situation. The few minutes in this podcast were definitely not enough.

  • June 12, 2012, 7:08 p.m. CST

    Kirby too

    by MattAdler

    Captain America = The Shield Hulk = Jekyll & Hyde + Frankenstein Iron Man = Howard Hughes + armor Thor = Thor I don't think Moore's ever argued that people should never use anyone else's characters. I think he simply feels screwed by DC, and it rubs salt in his wound that after screwing him, they continue to make money off of things he created. It's easy for us, who are not the people who got screwed, to say "Shut up and take it like a man." Personally, I think if that happened to me, my response would be pretty much the same anytime anyone asked me about the people who screwed me, or their company: "Fuck those guys."

  • June 12, 2012, 7:12 p.m. CST

    Pink - Tight Continuity

    by optimous_douche

    It's dead. Buried. Forgotten. Lost. As a newish reader of comics don't even try to find a cohesive universe out of the big 2. They have all but stated let it go. If continuity is your bag across titles, get into Valiant stat!

  • June 12, 2012, 7:15 p.m. CST

    I don't hate Moore - I don't hate any creator

    by optimous_douche

    But he should have made tighter contracts. He didn't understand the law and left himself open. Really, he just makes himself sound stupid in these arguments, which is what kills me the most. But I thought and I read it this way, shows a sign f reckless abandon NO adult should ever succumb to in a legal arrangement. For my book coming out, I could have muddled through the terms, but instead I got a lawyer. Why? C.Y.A. baby!

  • June 12, 2012, 7:18 p.m. CST

    Seriously,

    by oaser

    You guys need a podcast devoted specifically to Before Watchmen. These comments are almost too good for a one at a time posting on a talkback.

  • June 12, 2012, 7:19 p.m. CST

    I don't think he was stupid

    by MattAdler

    I think he was naive. And the mistakes he and his predecessors made are why creators today know to dot their i's and cross their t's.

  • June 12, 2012, 7:21 p.m. CST

    I also think...

    by MattAdler

    ...it may go a long way to explaining WHY there are so few really innovative and great ideas at the Big Two anymore. Who wants to be the next guy who gave away a billion dollar franchise?

  • If I'm inferring wrong, correct me.

  • June 12, 2012, 7:45 p.m. CST

    Definitely not

    by MattAdler

    He's actually turned down payments and directed they go to his co-creators instead. My comment about billion dollar franchises was more about the way today's creators conduct themselves. Jimmy Palmiotti was talking about this on Twitter a few days ago, in reference to saving your best stuff for your creator-owned work. Ergo, the Big Two may no longer be getting their creators' best efforts. I think Moore is a Ditko-esque man of principle who is royally pissed off when he perceives that people conduct themselves underhandedly. For him, legalese be damned, they broke their word.

  • ...and that ended up being about a rapist who fulfilled just about every misfit social loser's fantasy: unjustified sex and love, on demand. I know nothing about Valiant's titles, so I don't know where they're going with this. But if it's going to be an ongoing book revolving around the clown-pig in question and somehow casting him as 'sympathetic', or a 'hero', no thanks. I'm good. You were right about Minutemen. It was boring. Luckily I didn't buy it.

  • June 12, 2012, 9:26 p.m. CST

    Not that I condone rape, pink

    by Ambush Bug

    But succubus characters such as the Enchantress have been around in comics for eons. I think this definitely shows a flaw in Peter's character which makes him all the more interesting as a flawed hero on an arc of redemption.

  • http://www.poptardsgo.com/?p=3706

  • Seriously speaking tho, he raped her. And characters like Enchantress aren't reflecting a problematic, real-life epidemic. If he killed somebody, or molested a child, or any one of a dozen other things, I seriously doubt that it would be simply referred to as a 'flaw to overcome'. The very idea of conceptualizing it as such (it's 'only' rape) clearly shows the systemic problems that exist in modern attitudes, not to mention psychology. I thought the writing was very effective in setting up an antagonist. The problem for me was, I walked away with the queasy feeling that he's in fact going to be the 'hero' of the story, rather than any sort of villain. Now that you've confirmed it, I'll definitely pass. Seeing more vicarious sexual power-fantasies for maladjusted men played out just isn't my thing. I really liked the insides of your books. But I hated the outsides.

  • June 12, 2012, 9:56 p.m. CST

    I condone forcing myself on Bug.

    by Poptard_JD

  • ...because I'm up to about 30 titles a month now, and I keep adding more. I can't afford to keep doing this.

  • June 12, 2012, 10:14 p.m. CST

    Don't force yourself on the Bug! Respect the Bug!

    by 3774

    All right, I admit it. I *really* like saying 'Bug'. Italian Spider-Man taught you better then that, JD...

  • June 12, 2012, 10:28 p.m. CST

    @pink

    by Ambush Bug

    I'm all for challenging stories. This is an ongoing story. If the main character had done something like murder or molesting a child, I would be interested in seeing how someone with a moral conscience would deal with that. That to me is brave storytelling to put the hero in such a negative light and then try to convince me that he is worthy of redeeming himself. Again, I'm not condoning the action, but I do applaud the attempt to redeem someone for doing something so heinous. I would much rather read a story about someone wracked with guilt about a bad deed and trying to crawl from the abyss than read the same cardboard squeaky clean story about a Mr Clean hero or a murderous berserker. There's got to be an in between these two extremes. Something also tells me that this is not an issue that will not be addressed in latter issues. I'll be reading it because of the strong story and art along with the refreshing wave of nostalgia done well.

  • June 12, 2012, 10:47 p.m. CST

    Yes! But...

    by 3774

    ...what do you mean by 'not addressed in latter issues', exactly? Because that's *exactly* the problem I would have, if I followed it. Is she an actual character? Or was she a disposable 'thing' which he can do as he pleases, with no consequences, that will be forgotten and never mentioned again? Because if so, that's a tough sell. Not to mention disturbing. I guess I'm confused over your knowledge of him actually being a sympathetic hero, rather than some variation of a selfish-bastard villain. Are you sure? Is this a character a re-boot or something?

  • June 13, 2012, 1:20 a.m. CST

    I'm just going by the previous HARBINGER series

    by Ambush Bug

    In which the entire group of runaway Harbingers all had somewhat shady pasts, but compared to the evil of Harada, they were saints. As I said before, I doubt they are just going to gloss over the mind/actual rape. They set up the girl as someone Peter was in love with. I see it as Peter going down a dark path. Harada presents himself as his savior, but in truth he's worse than Peter. Under Harada's guidance, Peter would do the act without remose. To me, it's another detail in an ongoing story using sophisticated storytelling to describe the temptations of having a power like that. I have faith that it'll be addressed in this series and Peter will both pay for the act and be given a chance to redeem himself.

  • June 13, 2012, 3:39 a.m. CST

    Harbingers? Wow

    by aceldama

    I was a fan of the original Harbingers series (well, almost the whole Valiant universe, actually. Unity is/was so damn underrated), and didn't know that they were making a new one. That might be enough to drag me back into a comic store...

  • June 13, 2012, 6:23 a.m. CST

    Has anyone read Rising Stars? I remember there being a lot of..

    by Poptard_JD

    ..hub-bub about it when it started but then it kinda fell off the map for me..

  • Fucking heedless marketing victim fanboys.

  • Comics are a medium. Have you ever wanted to stop reading books because you read a bad book or didn't want to support that books publisher?! Feh.

  • June 13, 2012, 8:12 a.m. CST

    harbinger of rape

    by mark mackner

    Poptard forces himself on me every time I see him. If I walk into a room that contains both a couch and JD, it's guaranteed that he will bend me over said couch faster than you can say "No means NO!" Not that I really fight him, though...

  • June 13, 2012, 8:13 a.m. CST

    My Thoughts on the Harbinger connundrum

    by optimous_douche

    From my review last week: An interesting choice I’m not sure I agree with, but I’m certainly willing to roll with (for now), was how Pete uses his powers. Pete’s kind of a son-of-a-bitch, deciding to use his mind control to get his childhood sweetheart into bed while he and his buddy are squatting in an abandoned house outside of their home town. Again, if it’s addressed in a realistic manner, it pushes Pete into a moral quandary that will be nice to watch him try to twist his way out of. It will also be intriguing to see him redeem himself before he becomes the leader of an entire team. These masturbatory fantasies have permeated sci-fi for years. How is this worse than what Scott Baio did in Zapped? It's a bad thing to do, no question, but not worse. Men like boobies and like to get laid, it's how we are hard wired. We used to accept this as a society, now men are supposed to just forget all of our desires for civility. Pete is a bastard fro what he did, but it makes for a damn interesting story and if the writer has a brain they will ensure his lady love comes to and gives him the ass reaming of a lifetime. Let's not ignore the truths about men, let's instead have open dialogues. We might not ever agree with one another across the gender divide, but if we understand the world becomes a much better place.

  • June 13, 2012, 9:29 a.m. CST

    Double Feh!!

    by 3774

    Wait, so this is supposed to/going to be a team book of sorts? Like an anti-X-Men of sorts?

  • June 13, 2012, 10:22 a.m. CST

    It's hyperbole you moron

    by Autodidact

  • June 13, 2012, 10:26 a.m. CST

    ROTFLMAO. For realsies.

    by 3774

    I was waiting to see how that would be pointed out. You need to read things a little more carefully, JD. No worries, tho. I'm still a fan.

  • June 13, 2012, 11:27 a.m. CST

    Read things more carefully? Did I misread something?

    by Poptard_JD

    I read it perfectly. I got that it was hyperbole, and was pointing out that people need to relax.

  • Considering as far as your eyes are concerned, only Minutemen has come out unless u already hot ur LCS and read it this morning, so even if u read the ONE issue, it's still not worth shouting about how it makes you want to quit comics. But "I'm" the moron? Quad-Feh! ;)

  • Thankfully I don't actually have eyes, and pay a young Guatemalan boy to read the entirety of the internets to me. He's pretty good but his accent is kind of distracting when he's reading me Furry porn

  • June 13, 2012, 12:15 p.m. CST

    ok, heres the thing about Moore and Watchmen....

    by sonnyhooper

    ......and i feel i have to preface this by saying that i'm a HUGE fan of Watchmen. to me it's pretty much the high water mark for comic books. also a HUGE fan of Alan Moore, from early swamp thing, to big numbers, to LoEG, to tom strong, and everything inbetween. the guy is a comic god and has the right to be grumpy, pissy, happy or whatever. he earned the right to feel however he wants to about the modern comic business model. <p> but.....heres the thing......the fact that Watchmen never went out of print and the fact that the rights to the characters never reverted back to him didn't hurt his creative output (or his ability to make a decent living) in any way, shape, or form. in point of fact, the popularity of Watchmen has affored Moore great opportunity to do pretty much whatever the heck he wanted to do. so much so, that he makes a ton of money writing what basically comes down to slash fiction using classic characters from litature. <p> i CANNOT see where this has been a bad thing for Moore. i'm sorry, i just can't work up a lot of sympathy for a guy who has made a living off the reputation he gained by writing the finest piece of comic fiction ever writen. think about it, this is a guy that has made so much money that he can actually afford to tell DC comics to stuff the royalty checks they TRY to send him from Watchmen up their ass. <p> just think about that for a second, let it sink it. can you honestly imagine being so well off (in this economy) that you could TURN DOWN royalty checks, because you want to stand by some convoluted principal? i don't know about anyone else but i'd like to have that problem. thats good work if you can get it. <p> and i know, i know we could argue the value of art over commerce until the cows come home but come on...... if you ever get to the point in your life where you can turn down free money, then maybe you should just count yourself one very lucky bastard and move forward with your life. why on earth would you give a shit about what some company decides to do with characters you used as thinly disguised pastice to tell a 30 year old story that granted you the fame and fortune you now enjoy?

  • I'm Frankie Goes To F'ing Hollywood relaxed!!! Infinity Feh!

  • June 13, 2012, 3:47 p.m. CST

    oh man! you inFehnitied me!!

    by Poptard_JD

  • WATCHMEN should be allowed to stand on its own as the perfect thing that it is. The whole thing just shows what a crass jack-circle of fanboy wanks that most people involved in comics are.

  • But he wouldn't do that because the whole point of WATCHMEN was to start and end in those 12 issues. Not to go on forever like fodder for wrestling fans.

  • June 13, 2012, 5:42 p.m. CST

    Alan Moore = Prince (the artist formerly/currently unknown/know as)

    by sonnyhooper

    two artists i love and respect but DAMN!!!! they both seem to be suffering from grumpy old man disease. sometimes i think Prince would like to charge anyone who even hums one of his songs a dollar for the right to even do so. and apparently Alan Moore would be happier if everyone forgot that Watchmen ever existed. <p> that's kinda depressing to think about actually. <p> anyone else need me to bum them out more? i could tell you about the time i was 6 and my dog died..... my parents told me he went to a farm, but i found out later, that our neighbor, mr. armstrong, actually ran him over with his lincon continental. <p> and to this day....... the very existance of lincon continentals makes me wanna puke. i won't ever drive one. <p> ever.

  • GET IT!?

  • June 13, 2012, 6:22 p.m. CST

    actually, to me, it's more like...

    by sonnyhooper

    .....if Warner Brother decided to put together a tribute album to Prince, and had a bunch of current artist record a bunch of Prince songs. But when WB went to release the tribute album Prince shAt all over it and told people not to buy it. <P> but whatever, i guess. it takes all kinds.

  • June 14, 2012, 9:46 a.m. CST

    Moor/Prince

    by Poptard_JD

    that's pretty accurate for me, in that I like about 3 examples of each of their bodies of work