hagren

thankyou :)

im scanning more right now :)

one more question (sorry). which book is "better" illustrated (i like mancos work the most)?

i cant thank you enough, mark!

Those issues are all by Ellis, yes. Haunted is a 6-part single story, Setting Sun is 5 stand-alone stories. Opinions on their quality vary (although most people, myself included, seem to rate them as very good), but if you've enjoyed Delano, Ennis and Carey, you should like Ellis' work - it definitely fits more neatly into the Hellblazer 'canon', style-wise, than Azzarello's stuff.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

thanks mark, i should order them i suppose :)

can you say something about the storys in these two tpbs, if its no trouble to you?

that would be cool :)

uh yeah, setting sun is also interesting for me because bradstreet illustrated one issue of that. are they also settled in america like azarellos run? have they anything in common? because what i read from azarello (hard time) was very unenjoayable for me.

from delano i read original sins 1 and 2.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Only one issue in Setting Sun is set in America, and that's the Bradstreet one. The rest are set in England.

 

They're all unconnected stories.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

thx!

and whos the writer? all of them by ellis?

are they as good as delano or ennis/carey?

Coupla things, Hagren: I think that spider was referring more to the fact that a non-poster on the forums made such a long-lasting thread (especially one of malice) rather than his dislike for Garth Ennis.

 

Second of all, I would assume that a lot of people don't like the way Ennis writes because he has a tendancy for over-the-top, gratuitous violence; at times, silly dialogue (every gratuitous use of "frig" is a glaring example); one-dimensional villains (evil Nazis, evil vampires, evil voodoo men, evil Satan, etc.); and sometimes redundant plotlines.

 

I must say, I agree that Dangerous Habits and Damnation's Flame was his best traded work though.

 

Finally, I would assume John "hates" God because he thinks God is just as bad as, if not worse than, Satan himself. Although it was prevalent in Delano's run, it was taken to an extreme in Ennis' as he seems to have a bit of an anti-authority jive going for him.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

yeah, i did not like the vampires and the nazis eather, like i mentioned that before. and yes, theyre really violent and obscene. but because i started with these thats natural for me. a good point though. altough i have no problem with that.

but now i understand, thanks grinning fellow! really reasonable. whats kinda like ennis hb-tpb? or whats also good after ennis, delano and carey?

what would you suggest me to read after i like these i mentioned the most?

(please just tpbs, thx :))

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Well, since we're going with TPBS here, I cannot recommend Ellis enough. Although only 10 issues long, his work is simply fantastic. Brutal, visceral stuff. Not in Ennis' extreme-gore style, but in the way he words things. It's very harsh to read (I still get shivers every time I read Watford's description of Isabelle's death). His work also does have quite a bit of emotional resonance (many people think me a sucker, but I absolutely loved his One Last Love Song story).

 

I highly recommend both the Haunted and Setting Sun trades.

 

However, I have to say, my favourite Hellblazer writer so far has been Delano. Although occasionally bounding into areas of tedium and new-agey pretention, he was, for the most part, brilliant. He had some absolutely cracking arcs, such as his Resurrection Crusade story, and the simply astonishing Family Man (and, lest we forget, Larger Than Life, the single greatest piece of anything ever).

 

Unfortunately, Delano's work is only traded up to the first nine issues, and judging from the way the DC suits work, that's all we're going to get.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

uh yeah, setting sun is also interesting for me because bradstreet illustrated one issue of that. are they also settled in america like azarellos run? have they anything in common? because what i read from azarello (hard time) was very unenjoayable for me.

from delano i read original sins 1 and 2.

Coupla things, Hagren: I think that spider was referring more to the fact that a non-poster on the forums made such a long-lasting thread (especially one of malice) rather than his dislike for Garth Ennis.

 

Second of all, I would assume that a lot of people don't like the way Ennis writes because he has a tendancy for over-the-top, gratuitous violence; at times, silly dialogue (every gratuitous use of "frig" is a glaring example); one-dimensional villains (evil Nazis, evil vampires, evil voodoo men, evil Satan, etc.); and sometimes redundant plotlines.

 

I must say, I agree that Dangerous Habits and Damnation's Flame was his best traded work though.

 

Finally, I would assume John "hates" God because he thinks God is just as bad as, if not worse than, Satan himself. Although it was prevalent in Delano's run, it was taken to an extreme in Ennis' as he seems to have a bit of an anti-authority jive going for him.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

yeah, i did not like the vampires and the nazis eather, like i mentioned that before. and yes, theyre really violent and obscene. but because i started with these thats natural for me. a good point though. altough i have no problem with that.

but now i understand, thanks grinning fellow! really reasonable. whats kinda like ennis hb-tpb? or whats also good after ennis, delano and carey?

what would you suggest me to read after i like these i mentioned the most?

(please just tpbs, thx :))

I'm somewhat dismayed that a post by someone who didn't bother to become a member and log in got so much mileage, seeing as it is a "hate" thread. Fie upon thee, Harry Houdini! You're just wrong!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

yep, dangerous habits and damnations flame are a fine piece of work, even a bit more than the other ennis or other tpbs. again, i cannot understand people who dislike it. for me, thats john. altough idont understand why he hates god but dont stands in his way, fighting more demons and stuff. and his friends better going to heaven and hell. why is this?

oh, i forgot royal blood :)

that was also okay, but a bit empty.

wow, even manco comes in here :)

welcome mr. manco, its really an honor that youre in here! i just want to say that youre the best hellblazer artist yet, i really like how you use colors, shadows, that every frame is detailed and professional (so perfect, no misdrawings in here) and that i love the tone of it. it really looks very realistic. after bradstreet you draw the best john :)

will check out the website soon :)

which tpbs are coming from you?

and from which day and until youre gonna stay with hb?

(sorry if im too offending or gentle(?!))

(oh, and which other graphic novels did you draw?)

i cant understand why some people dislike garth ennis hellblazer (so, why? im to lazy to read back :)) what i read from him (dangerous habits, fear and loathing, tainted love, damantions flame) where top-notch, dangerous habits, fear and loathing and tainted love because this showed jcs human touch and family/friends/background etc (like in delanos original sins 1/2)/(altough i didnt like the vampires and nazis in it), and damnations flame because its such a bizarre and morbid story. that story btw is what i would want to see in constantine 2 :)

(come on, kick my arse for that).

guys and dolls is ok too, but not my fav.

so i like them as much careys "all his engines", and a bit more than delanos (i like that too but in original sins 1 and 2 was maybe a bit too much from all that magic/demon/angel stuff, like in guys and dolls).

azarellos hard time was until yet the lamest story ive read, and also the most inconstantine for me. but maybe it was because the art, that really looked bad.

but i know there is another thread for that ranting :)

here in austria you cant buy the monthly titles, so we have to buy the tpb. and altough i didnt see any of the mt, i think that they must be worse than tpbs. the hardcover ones surely, but even the softcovers. htey look better nad are easier to keep.

the other problem is that there are just 8 tpbs translated, and not everyone reads english ones. so maybe if they put some money into marketing maybe they will be more successfull.

can we not have every thread descend into a discussion about Keanu Reeves, he's not even connected with V for Vendetta, thank fuck.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

thats exactly what im saying!

but still i dont know what means cracking lasses :)

Those who like Keanu ARE stupid.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You're joking, yes?

 

I remind you that we have several Keanuphiles on this forum, and they're all cracking lasses.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

what means cracking lasses? :huh:

i just think that it isnt a totally 0% hellblazer-movie.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

apart from using certain character names and minute plot details, it has NOTHING to do with Hellblazer. I still say Angel Heart is closer to Hellblazer than Constantine.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

after watching and reading i felt that jc in the film acted often to his enviroment (characters, landscape) like in the early comics (eg. he acted to his friends kindly, to new ones badass (you see that how he acts to angela in the beginning and in the end). the dialogue between jc and midnite, gabriel and lou was for me like in the comic, his friends died like in the comic, how he spoke about god in the library, the show-off constantine when he lights his cigarettes, how he goes around la and thinks is like in the comic, the visual tone reminded me manco etc.) but i think that everyone experiences jc and hellblazer otherwise. so i have no quarrel with you guys. please understand and agree my viewpoint. because i do understand you.

btw, are there any hellblazer fans who really liked the film like me?

or am i a lone guy?

You loved the film - that's fair enough. To each his own. What we're really saying here is that it was a failure as an adaptation of the comic, which I really don't see as a matter of opinion. It was a profoundly unfaithful adaptation of the source material. End of story.

 

That doesn't mean you can't/shouldn't still enjoy the film, or think it was a good, entertaining movie in it's own right. That's your opinion, it's perfectly reasonable, and I for one am not trying to take it away from you. I haven't actually seen the film, and have no intention of doing so, so I've deliberately avoided making any comments about the objective quality of the movie - but I've read the script, and received a few pretty full reports on the finished product, so I feel comfortable making judgements about how successful it was as an adaptation. That's all I'm discussing here.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

i do understand you all. but i still discovered things in the movie that reminded me strongly the comic (like i said, mostly how the characters acted to their enviroment, some desing elements). but thats just my impression. and i know of course that it isnt really a faithful adaptation. i just think that it isnt a totally 0% hellblazer-movie.

Keanu didn't cast himself, but he also thought he could carry that film, too. He had just enough confidence to put himself in a position to fail. He was never going to be JC, not in a million years. But Constanteen barely had anything in common with its comic predecessor, so why should have Keanu acted like the JC we know and love when the direction, production and script were subpar as well. Everyone involved with that film in a major role (on either side of the camera) sleepwalked through the production except for Tilda Swinton, who more than carried the weight of her character.

 

So, it was a combination failures. Keanu's was thinking he could carry this film. Pride. We all suffer from it eventually, so I don't begrudge that of him...except it's one of my favorite comics and now its chance to shine on the silver screen has been blown thanks to no one understanding or even trying to understand the source material, a wealth of tales that have permanently attached themselves to us. The film? A forgettable pity.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

thats your opinion, let me have mine. im not saying unreasonable things (do i?)

i for my part loved the visuals (color, sets, cgi, use of cameras), the characters described trough bodylanguage (mostly balthazar, lou, jc, midnite, gabriel), the twisting story, the music sometimes, the sarcasm, the beginning and the end, the coolness, the feel and the new ideas. that it wasnt just an action/horrorflick, that it said something without spitting it into our face. that there was no stupid lovestory. that they didnt lick the ass of christianity. i know its boring sometimes, that the music wasnt always good, that there where some cliched dialogue/happenings, i know that some acting wasnt good, i know it was a bit empty and at last, i know that there where things really in war with the real jc. but still i enjoyed it immensly, like i did when watching batman begins and spidy a bit. i just want that people understand this.

im not this keanulover or stupid that i think like this.

I don't remember anyone blaming Keanu for the failure of Matrix 2 & 3. That was down to the shitty scripts, pure and simple, and nearly every review/opinion I read/heard about those films said as much. Who do you know who blamed it on Keanu?

 

Most of us don't blame Keanu for the failings of Constanteen, either. He's not an actor I'm particularly fond of (although the frequent mentions of Bill and Ted whenever his name comes up may just indicate that a lot of us still think it's the best film he's appeared in), but by the time he was cast in Constanteen just about everything which ruined it as an adaptation was already in place. The casting of an actor whose appearance and mannerisms, whatever you may think of him generally, don't exactly scream "I AM JOHN CONSTANTINE", was just the icing on the cake. Anyone who primarily blames Keanu for whatever faults they find in Constanteen is being stupid and unfair, and you should feel free to ignore them.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

i read in many places about matrix 2 and 3 that keanus wooden and they should had replace him with a stick. and no one mentioned that the other actors where also to cool to be taken seriously. not that i read this on this forum. but these threads where reeves pukes and that stuff was not really fair for me. i just dont like it if someones bashed and hated, altough hes worths the same was we. and i cannot deny that i really liked him in constantine (not that i really liked him before, maybe in speed, matrix 1). hes not exactly john, but mostly how he reacted to his enviroment was like jc for me( you know, everyones experiencing things otherwise). what i didnt like was the use of the gun altough it wasnt really significant, but it wasnt shot interesting. and when he chewed the gum, and when he coughed. argh. these bits where horrible. but nevertheless i love the film and i love the comic. i hope some people share this with me and can understand me without thinking im crazy :)

the film just had mostly everything i want from this kind of movie. critizism, sparks for thinking/discussing, humour, interest, surprises, own, new ideas and beauty.

tough everybody thinks otherwise.

Up til now, I've avoided this thread because I hadn't read this most epic of comics. I read Watchmen and V for Vendetta back to back over the holiday weekend. I'm re-reading V because I thought it was so fucking cool! I even enjoyed it more than Watchmen which I still thought was extraordinarily cool. I have to admit that I had tried to read both comics before but never could get into them. I have NO FUCKING idea why, especially halfway through V for the second time since Sunday.

 

Now, I REALLLLLLY wish the Whorechowski Bros didn't have their greasy, deformed little mitts on this film. I can already feel another "Keaunusteen" fiasco bubbling up from the bowels up through their shared duodenum to spew like an artery has been severed.

 

Hollywood has a "vendetta" against Alan Moore, and I want it to stop. They are going to cheapen it worse than Punisher, Constanteenangel, and DareDevil combined. Alan Moore deserves the best Hollywood can give him, not its dregs.

 

No justice, No peace!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

do you know something from the film what i dont?

because i found not much information from the film and have no clue how it want be. theres even no trailer!

and yes, the wachowski brothers matrix was just half good in sum, but who knows? now they have base to write a script. maybe it will be good. altough i dont know the comic, but im sure i will find the answers on this forum if it isnt like the source :)

(btw, reeves has nothing to do with that i think. and i dont know why its him whos bashed everytime when somethings bad. in matrix 2 and 3 where just few actors doing a good job, but keanus the idiot. and constantine the film is not otherwise because him, but because the scriptwriters. so why this hate towards him? and why always the reminders to bill and ted? hes not a topnotch actor, but i liked him in constantine, and there are roles fitting him. and there are other actors doing the same or acting poorly)

If they were tempt fate and make a sequel to Keanusteen, they should pony up and retool the whole effort to bring it in line with the Hellblazer canon. Jon Constantines Excellent Adventure was a paint by numbers mess of how to NOT make a film. It failed on damn near every level.

 

Now, you get Paul Bettany (or any number of the 500 actors listed in the other thread who could do a better job), you write an original screenplay keeping aligned with the source material and its main character, not based halfassedly on elements from one of the trades. You call the sequel HELLBLAZER[/] and you put in a throwaway line about a time during a really bad dream when Constantine felt like that kid in River's Edge--"I poked her with a stick!" That way, it becomes the forgotten "Elseworlds Preleude" that it should become, and everyone would then remember John Constantine the way he has always been, not as Bill or Ted or the cop from SPEED.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

i have no problem with the keanusteen one, its the first time i liked reeves. i did enjoy the film immensly altough it is just half hellblazerish.

but nevertheless i have no problem making a franchise from it, because maybe it isnt what we want but it isnt bad. i for my part like it very much and i want to see more from it, with more mass in everything, altough the base is given with the first film (mood, visual style, film-style) and maybe one day they make a full jc movie. and then everyone is happy.

(oh, and its based on more than one trade. and has some little elements of others)