Cunning Man

I am against the destruction of any artwork, except this photo.

I have decided to be cryogenically frozen for five years, after which I shall be revived to DC comics the quality of which thusfar has surpassed human capacity to desire. Fare well.

My bucket is in use.

my grandmother watched "Days of Our Lives" for years and years, and I remember seeing episodes in my youth, and insepid, totally lacking in human motivations and characterization seems apropos.

Dude Stefano had a base on an island -with automatic sliding metal doors- that he used to play headgames with the housewives of Salem. I'm sorry but that's badass, and completely believable.

I only joined this forum for reminders about when new issues were out.

That was a lot of nothing. Just breaking it down; there was some cop toruble, a lie-ornamented rose, rappin with the First, fun with grave-diggin', a ghost on the move, and some other stuff. Not the total or even a good representation of what makes Hellblazer in my thinking though. And, yes, it's been that way for a while.

Just a note on the soap opera thing- Having enjoyed unemployment in America for a few stretches, I know our soaps well. I don't know what they're like in England, but here they center with painful singlemindedness on some family as its members go through various dramas. Yes, I agree that writing something off as a soap can be intellectually lazy, but while I can't speak for anyone else: that's not the way I've done it. In fact I can take issue with my use of the term because soaps here are the opposite of

Paper-thin characters, clunky dialogue, uneven pacing, and a weird, inconsistent tone

I voted "mediocre" for this one, and I prefer such descriptors to numbers on a bland 1-10 scale, for whatever that's worth.

Time for this to come full circle; namely back to a suit that can be worn under business clothes. For the reboot, I'm hoping for a comic-book-science miracle fabric that looks and feels like cotton but deflects like kevlar. It can happen!

It does look like you could fight in it though, like you would have quite a lot of mobility still. Looks quite like the armor the Stockcar drivers wear.

It's well articulated but it looks like it would take an hour to put that on.

Does anyone know what's going on with Hellraiser? I read the first two volumes and the continuity is a complete clusterfuck. Tiffany, the mute girl from the second movie is a character, but Leviathan is in octahedron form, which he wasn't at the end of that film. The movie Cenobites are alive, and they were dead at the end of that film. Kirstie has become a member of The Harrowers, warriors with medieval weapons who fight for the Magna Mater, Leviathan's opposite and the plot device that ruined the original comics by changing their dynamic from horror to some kind of transdimensional order/chaos struggle. Clive Barker is writing it. It has plenty of mutilated corpses and dense verse but I have a suspicion he's doing it as a Fuck You to a fanbase that won't leave him alone. If anyone can just point out something I've missed that would make this mess appear excellent, that would be super, thanks. Really, I don't get it.

The beautiful art got me through two issues of that book, but the foreboding that every third issue or so will be a bubble vampire apocalypse with a special guest star caused me to drop it. So Batman's been in it, and now John will be? I don't know how it will stay fresh. On the bright side if its portrayal of John (and Animal Man's) are radically better than what we've been getting lately we might see some cross-fertilization of good ideas. It could be just what's needed.

It was really about pimping out the "New Coke DCU" hence they butchered McDuffie's script, force Rosenbaum to voice Sir Barry of Boring instead of Wally, chose Hal

Jordan over John Stewart (or Kyle since he was in the orginal story) including Cyborg while using JLU as a cloak for the New 52 bullshit.

You're right, but you're describing why it went wrong and I was describing how.

I choose willful ignorance where the inept machinations of suits are concerned. Try as they might executives can't attain to creativity, nor realize that they can't. They'll only ruin a set of intellectual properties to the degree that the stories yield a marginal profit, which technically meets their goal. These pods are as dangerous to art as they are to the environment, and for the same reasons. I can't deny their existence, but I hate to be reminded of it.

The moment the anounce Hal, Barry, Cyborg and Vandal Savage I wash my hands off buying any DC DTV ever again.

I assume you mean stories that are contaminated by marketing strategies, whereas something like TDKRe must be worth watching?

But wait, there may be more!

If you're replying to my comment about Superman and Luthor, it's a totally different scenario.

No, I didn't mean that. In the Hyde example I found an instance of both rape and murder indistinguishable as violence. It was in response to the distinction of rape and murder that you drew, and the conceivable consequences or lack thereof determining to some extent the nature of each. Just a technical point, and not extremely relevant, but a lead-in to my ideas about reader reaction.

I don't think this topic is an argument against the legitimate use of rape in a comic book. Regardless of what Morrison's drug-addled brain lets him remember, he obvioulsy has used rape as a plot point too.

If an author feels the need to use rape (or murder, or etc.) that's at their behest.

It's more of a question about Moore's over-using rape.

Legitimate use and over-use must be the same discussion, right? It's a question of degree: zero is right, or some, or a lot. Maybe it depends on the story's events and character motivations, but here we drift into moral relativism. I was just saying it's an opportunity to acknowledge that as we read we can consciously create our attitudes to what we're presented.

Hyde rapes the Invisible Man to death. So... I don't know what.

Hyde's an extreme, unhinged personality and Moore's been determined all along to make his characters sexually alive or active. Who would complain about that? I don't mean did Griffin have it coming for what he'd done. I mean, are we supposed to be upset when books don't tell us how to act, or don't omit behaviors we shouldn't adopt? Such an event be read as a warning toward moderation. What does it mean about us if we don't see it that way?

Animal Man's wife almost gets raped too, but I only mention that for the sake of completeness. Morrison is an interesting writer, but a bad bullshitter. He is wearing blinders about his own work in this case, I'd agree. I can't agree about having had enough Lovecraft pastiches. The way they're done, sure. I'd take another Evil Dead 2- a Necronomicon, reanimated corpses, spirit visitation, over the top gore, dimensional vortex, insanity, invocation, giant hair-whitening monster; whether you want to call these elements alone or combined Lovecraftian -over another Neonomicon any day. The latter was much more of a divergence from H.P.'s fiction. [ Spoiler : Cthulhu is not Rosemary's Baby and Leng is not the fucking fourth dimension! ] It might not deserve more readings, but it could sustain them, particularly in light of some of Kenneth Grant's writing.

Rape in Moore's work does not seem obsessive to me. Some reactions to it certainly are, and I could guess they're made for various reasons. This subject is maybe ironic on the heels of his most recent tirade about how he counts on the strong moral fiber of his fans to decide what to do where Watchmen prequels are concerned. I'll still read what he writes unless he seriously goes off the deep end because he's one of the most aware and intelligent artists working today. And he did address the rape in his work thoughtfully in that webchat I linked to in another thread.

Solicits ahoy.

It's of course too early to judge (ha ha try and stop me) but Silk Spectre's line about the world giving you reason to hate runs contrary to her determination to not let awful things happen to her daughter.

Actually, instead of meticulously picking out the flaws in these, I think I'll just drink my way through the whole event. Bottoms up.

 

Why do they still have capes.

 

To billow in the wind behind them as they radiate awesomeness.

 

One of the more eloquent euphemsisms for farting.

Up, up and away!

 

Why do they still have capes.

To billow in the wind behind them as they radiate awesomeness.

Since you brought up the Superfriends, Kevin Conroy, to me, is the worst Batman voice since Olan Soule, who is unfortunately the voice of Batman which imprinted on me, since his was the first cartoon Batman voice I ever heard and he was that voice for several years. He has such an old man's voice, and when I grew up and actually learned about Batman's true nature, the Super Friends really pissed me off, and Olan Soule's little old man voice was the turd on top of that shit sandwich. Then came Kevin Conroy-

Aw man, you're really on a rampage. Olan Soule? Gee wiz. All those shows are in a state of grace as far as I'm concerned. If I want to watch a cartoon where the Penguin is a jewel thief in Gotham and not a flipperhanded bookloving Danny Devito, Filmation's got me covered. And Superfriends will always be an inviolate time capsule of the era when Lex Luthor could steal the sun if the fancy struck him. Whenever in doubt, go back to basics; that's what I say, and you can't get more basic than some of those plots

New Action Comics was good. Looking forward to next issue where Supes kicks Brainiac's ass!

 

Also read all 7 issues of the Swamp Thing. This is some killer stuff!

I'm going to have read Action Comics after all it seems. Swamp Thing's not bad but I wish they'd drop the pace a gear or two. It is supposed to be a horror comic. ...Isn't it? I want a chance to be horrified.

Ouchie. I think the problem with this movie is that it's not really about anything or anyone. Some of the scenarios Batman devised to incapacitate the League are ridiculously overwrought even by comic book billionaire mastermind standards. Further the villains remind me of the JL animated characters that were trotted out by Timm and McDuffie because (they claim in the commentaries) DC gave them free access to the toy chest of obscure and forgotten heroes for that show. It's not even about Vandal Savage, who comes off as a bit of a doofus after his many stressful lifetimes, and in the wake of the JL episode "Hereafter" it's really hard to buy his portrayal, even though that shouldn't matter. It's not about Batman because they all know he's a paranoid loner and the decision to keep trusting him at the end of a standalone movie is a foregone conclusion. Trying to dangle that as a dramatic conflict is preposterous in light of all the discussions that have already been had about whether other versions of the character should keep kryptonite in his utility belt and whether it would be useful anyway. So I guess you can look at it as an unfulfilling set of vignettes about the League with a weak unifying plotline but there are still gaffes. I would rather see Hal wield the ring than John or Kyle (jury's out on Guy) but he's supposed to be a slice of white bread, and not Nathan Fillion. Claudia Black made a good Cheetah though.

I don't think you need to worry about any of the problems with this movie contaminating TDKRe. I happen to like Kevin Conroy but he's overrated by the nerd community and his run with the character is ending one way or another. I haven't been pleased with any animated portrayal of Superman since Superfriends. They don't inspire respect. Of the other movies you mentioned I think "Under the Red Hood" is sadly underrated and "Crisis on Two Earths" is the most passable despite its screwball alternate universes storyline. "All Star Superman" did no justice to the book and "Year One" was one of those stories that probably shouldn't have been translated to film in the first place, though I enjoyed it. "New Frontier" had me until the ending, but that battle is not the show-stopper that belonged at the end of that story. As for "Public Enemies" and "Apocalypse" I reserve for them the same level of contempt you have for JLDoom and I apologize to myself for having spent some of my time on Earth watching them.

I'd have to give Doom a 6/10. I didn't hate it, but meh.

I'd still rather have the Captain Picard.

... she's told them the greatest enemy they will have to face is themselves, and that to me does not inspire a lot of confidence in the line-up of villains in store.

Is there some sort of prize when a new forum member does this?

This post... IS my prize. :wink:

Oh GM's Batman gets cosmic, if that's what you're looking for. No doubt about that.

That's what bothers me, that Morrison tells that kind of story through Batman. For all of his brilliance and resources Batman works best at street level against psychologically and physically scarred individuals in a ruined gothic city. When he worked with the JLI in the 90s he was a crazyman who intimidated heroes that punched gods through skyscrapers. That was enjoyable for me because he was never elevated to their level. If somebody wants to do a story where Batman is a sort of Satan who imprisons the energies of man, I'm on board. I liked Morrison's occult references in "Arkham Asylum" but they stemmed from a couple of the characters and didn't turn the entire book into a stream-of-consciousness log of the ubermensch. Superman on the other hand is a perfect vehicle for what's great about Morrison. There seems to be endless potential for conflict between the character's almost hokey but likable morality and the twisted, cosmic, improbable feats he could accomplish. I don't want to rant, but I'm uncomfortable with something even as cool as a hovering Batmobile. Ah, I really should finish the books before I put my foot in my mouth.

Deadman's story is over. At least if you're talking about DCU Presents. That's an anthology book, and Deadman's story was just the first arc. It's moved on to DiDio doing Challengers of the Unknown...Which isn't good.

What the crap. I subscribed to Deadman. I thought that Challengers of the Unknown they sent me was a mistake. I should read the whole cover. OMAC's first two issues were good, but I have 3 and 4 and I haven't found the impetus to read them.

Yeah, it's amazing how quickly DC wore out their momentum with the "New 52". I was excited about DC again, for the first time in a number of years, and was looking forward to reading a number of the new books. Started out reading a ton of DC titles, and slowly dropped each one, until I'm reading (I think) five of them...and I'm just reading JLD because I'm a completist freak with JC, as I hate this book. DC's line just does seem all to be "by the numbers", all flash and no substance, like the logo of "The New 52" is enough.

And even the logo is flaccid.

Frankly, at this point, I'm willing to just say that Animal Man is the only true success of the relaunch, and they could have easily just launched a new Animal Man series without needing all the sensationalism.

Morrison on Superman is good, but it just feels like something is missing. It's not quite what you expect from Morrison.

Batman by Snyder has gotten a lot of praise, and I'm still reading it each month, but I'm very tired of this story-arc by now. It needs to go somewhere.

Frankenstein is decent, sometimes fun and zany, but there just doesn't seem to be a lot to the book.

I am excited for China Mieville writing Dial H for Hero, but that's just one more title.

It is amazing how badly wasted this whole oppotunity was by DC.

"We'd simply just like to be here, rather than actually try."-The New 52 motto

Morrison's Batman is another series I have but haven't finished. My complaint has been that he needs to do cosmic or at least metaphysical stores, play to his strengths (I sense again the heavy hand of DC editorial) so it's a real downer to hear his Superman is off. I've heard good things about Snyder's Batman but I rolled the dice and subscribed to Detective, about which I have nothing good to say. Two of my old favorites were Firestorm and Green Lantern Corps but their new runs are choppy and noisy. I doubt I'll renew anything, and I rarely visit my LCS anymore.

Um, spoilers.

Having read #6 I think the energy of THE NEW 52^TM has given way to a confusion about why DC is producing comics at all and a suspicion that it's just to see if they can. It's like... this isn't the most significant pop cultural event in recent history... but they said... the ads told me... I don't know......

Anyway, the team seems like it's really together now with Madame Xanadu playing Bosley to the mystical Charlie's Angels, but she's told them the greatest enemy they will have to face is themselves, and that to me does not inspire a lot of confidence in the line-up of villains in store. This was all illustrated before the proclamation by the team's horrible nightmares, reinforcing the "they're so broken" line repeated several times to date, and also plainly suggesting that none of them should be doing anything at all.

I find myself wondering, grace period over, how this much potential has been fucked up so badly.

Though it's a well worn comparison, I feel like an onlooker at a traffic accident: I am fascinated and can't look away, almost from ghoulish amusement.

One of the series I subscribed to before it began was Deadman and in it he's a lot more interesting than he's been in JLD up until this issue, but I saw a glimmer of actual character in his dialogue this time out. Even his own title has been rocky, though.

I have no summation.