| Author |
|
Glenn Greenberg
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 6746
|
| Posted: 25 November 2005 at 10:18am | IP Logged | 1
|
|
|
Victor R. Rodgers wrote:
To Glenn Greenberg
I read Goblins at the Gate last night. I really loved it You and Roger Stern did a great job. I loved the interaction with Norman and Roderick Kingsley.
********************************************************
Thanks! Nice to still be getting a good response to that story so many years after working on it.
And having Roger as my writing partner was both a blast and a privilege.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Glenn Moane
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 19 August 2004
Posts: 207
|
| Posted: 25 November 2005 at 10:26am | IP Logged | 2
|
|
|
I have to say, to me, the Spider-Man period after the clone saga was the worst ever, and when JMS took over the title, it was a welcome relief. Not to pit down any of the creators involved, as I'm sure the book's misdirection came from the editorial input, as Mackie stated above.
Some of the worst desiscions I felt was made, was the resurrection of Aunt May, which was done in a way that even a avid comic book reader like myself didn't believe in it. I mean, an actress believing herself to be May?!? It just sounded foolish, and it took away the emotional impact of AMSM#400.
The clone saga was a riot to me, but I wasn't to thrilled about the ending. But I have nothing but the utmost respect of Howard Mackie, Gleen Greenberg, and alle the creators involved during this period, who managed to make compelling Spider-Man stories during this turbulent era of the character. But the things after the saga stunk without comparision, and I think no creator could have made good stories of the ridiculios concepts the forces that be put upon them.
(sorry for bad grammar)
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Joe Mayer
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 24 January 2005
Posts: 1398
|
| Posted: 25 November 2005 at 11:07am | IP Logged | 3
|
|
|
OK, now here's my question....are their message boards (and other gathering spots) where people priase MARVEL and think all this crap is totally "kewl"? There MUST be or MARVEL would be out of business. Other than the seemingly 1 or 2% of people here in the JBF that try to defend this stuff I never hear anything remotely positive about MARVEL.*
*****
I have a feeling that there are a great number of people out there who simply want to enjoy their comic books and not have to defend every little thing that goes on. The can simply take their books home, read them, and enjoy them.
Those are the luky ones as they don't have to listen to all these people tell them the things they enjoy is "crap" and "kewl" (in the mocking way) and so on.
There has to be quite a few regular folks out there who like this stuff since Marvel's publishing numbers are up again from last year. Either that, or fan boys have found a way to breed.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Thanos Kollias
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 19 June 2004
Location: Greece
Posts: 5009
|
| Posted: 25 November 2005 at 11:11am | IP Logged | 4
|
|
|
.....and I think no creator could have made good stories of the ridiculios concepts the forces that be put upon them
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I am afraid this is what will happen with the next wave of creators/editors to replace the current ones. A lot of bs has been laid down and it will be a gargantuan task to undo the , imo, damage done.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
e-mail
|
| |
Mig Da Silva
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: Portugal
Posts: 900
|
| Posted: 25 November 2005 at 11:29am | IP Logged | 5
|
|
|
The reason there's people "out there" - and not a great number of them - is two fold:
a) Direct Market. It has put comics in the hand of an elite, and i don't mean an intelectual elite. I mean the guys with Deadpool and Wolverine avatars.
Leftovers of the 90's shitefest, than never got cleansed way. And definitely not the cream of the readership, that, by the time Marvel was bankrupt, had been away for years - i, personally, a whole decade.
So the current small sales of Amazing Spider-Man are gotten by these people 1), JMS fans 2), and completists (3, who'll buy it no matter how bad it is, even if they don't read it.
b) Half a century ago, the USA produced Sinatras, Dean Martins, Jack Nicholsons, Al Pacinos and Robert De Niros. Now, it produces Christinas, Snoop Doggies, 50 Cents, Pinks and Jessica Albas.
Stupidity reigns supreme.
And increases it's rule by the minute.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Glenn Moane
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 19 August 2004
Posts: 207
|
| Posted: 25 November 2005 at 11:30am | IP Logged | 6
|
|
|
Thanos: Well the bs-term is of personal opinion, but I really hope that they just leave it alone. The origin of Spider-Man is somewhat altered, but it's not like he isn't the same person. He's still the insecure but funny crimefighter.
I don't read every Marvel title, but I'm one of those who find them more enjoyable than ten years ago. And although I haven't agreed with every move Joe Q has made during his tenure, I think has made Marvel comics a better buy now than before. That's just my opinion though. The "worst" that has come out of the Joe Q era is nothing like the cream of the crap that is Spider-Man post-clone saga, or Hulk post-Peter David (sorry JB).
And the focus is more on creators now, which I think is a good thing. I'm still hoping that JB will pitch something cool to Marvel one day, and that it will see print. Joe Q has stated several times that no creator is black-listed at Marvel, so JB, what's stopping ya?
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Glenn Moane
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 19 August 2004
Posts: 207
|
| Posted: 25 November 2005 at 11:33am | IP Logged | 7
|
|
|
Mig da Salva: Your "math" is absolutely untrue, at least when it comes to me. I read JMS Spider-Man sometimes, and I do not consider myself neither a longtime fan of his, nor a completist.
And tell me, who are you to deicide who the "cream of the readership" is?
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Thomas Mets
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 05 September 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 898
|
| Posted: 25 November 2005 at 12:06pm | IP Logged | 8
|
|
|
500 Posts!
b) Half a century ago, the USA produced Sinatras, Dean Martins,
Jack Nicholsons, Al Pacinos and Robert De Niros. Now, it produces
Christinas, Snoop Doggies, 50 Cents, Pinks and Jessica Albas.
Stupidity reigns supreme.
And increases it's rule by the minute.
********************************************************** ***************************
Keep in mind that you're comparing the best of the last 50 years to the
worst of the last few years. The only fair comparison would be
comparing the best of both time periods (ie- Alfred Hitchcock VS Steven
Spielberg, The Honeymooners VS Arrested Development) or the worst (ie-
50 Cent & Christina Aguilera VS then semi-successful and now
forgotten singers.)
I have a great idea, there's the being called the anti-monitor and he's
destroying all the universes in marvel, the ultimate, knights and
regular universe and when he's done all the history will be started
over again.
********************************************************** **************************
I don't think Marvel's "Universes" have gotten confusing in the same
way the DC universe did more than twenty years ago. After more than
five years, there are still only a handful of Ultimate books which A)
are clearly defined as existing in the Ultimate Universe, and B) have
never crossed over in the regular Marvel Universe. The other alternate
universes all occur in single books (Spidergirl, Supreme Power) with
clearly defined spinoffs. And Marvel Knights is not an alternate
universe. It's simply a line of books meant to be more daring
than the 616 books.
The eyeball gouge is not even original. SPOILERS for Kill
Bill: The writer must have been watching Kill Bill Vol. 2 on late
night and gotten the idea from Quentin Tarrantino's script.
By the way, there's a kewl monologue about comic books in the end of Kill Bill Vol. 2.
********************************************************** ***************************
The eyeball gouge in Kill Bill 2 was not original, and had been done
before. The best recent example I can come up with is what happened to
Xander in the last season of Buffy, although I'm sure it's been done in
fiction before that. Threats to the eyes have been around even longer
(there's the famous EC Comics cover, and the ancient war crimes which
led to the saying "Blind leading the blind.") It's a common motif
simply because it's so powerful.
Does it matter if the eyeball gouge is original? Every work of fiction
will have some elements that are derived from something else. And I
honestly don't remember this type of injury happening to any character
as "big" as Spider-Man (Neo from the Matrix doesn't count, as the
Spider-Man movie grosses as proved he is the more popular character.)
OK, now here's my question....are their message boards (and other
gathering spots) where people priase MARVEL and think all this crap is
totally "kewl"? There MUST be or MARVEL would be out of business.
Other than the seemingly 1 or 2% of people here in the JBF that try to
defend this stuff I never hear anything remotely positive about MARVEL.*
*Unless you count Stan Lee's occassional gushing fan letter which honestly makes me feel sick to my stomach.
********************************************************** ***********************
Yea, there are many. Jinxworld. Millarworld. Comic Book Resources.
bkv.tv Pretty muh any comic book review site I've seen (fourth rail,
Aint It Cool News, Silver Bullet Comics, Spiderfan.org, etc ) has
positve things to say about some current Marvel books, and negative
things to say about others.
Speaking of Stan lee's gushing fan letters, I really enjoyed reading
his letter in New Avengers #3 & the introduction to the Marvel
Knights Spider-Man TPB. It is funny how people take changes to his characters/concepts a lot more seriosuly than he does.
And keep in mind, the companies don't care about what people say on message boards. If five hundred people on
the internet repeatedly express their outrage, and sales improve/ stay
the same, the people at Marvel should have no problem upsetting the 500.
One last note- We've only gotten through half the storyline, so all
the complaints about the eye could be about something the writers have
already fixed.
Edited by Thomas Mets on 25 November 2005 at 12:11pm
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Joe Hollon
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 08 May 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 13699
|
| Posted: 25 November 2005 at 12:17pm | IP Logged | 9
|
|
|
One last note- We've only gotten through half the storyline, so all the complaints about the eye could be about something the writers have already fixed.
That's what I kept saying to myself through the "Sins Past" storyline....
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
e-mail
|
| |
Jay Matthews
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 11 October 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 2468
|
| Posted: 25 November 2005 at 12:20pm | IP Logged | 10
|
|
|
Thomas Mets wrote:
The eyeball gouge in Kill Bill 2 was not original, and had been done
before. The best recent example I can come up with is what happened to
Xander in the last season of Buffy, although I'm sure it's been done in
fiction before that. Threats to the eyes have been around even longer
(there's the famous EC Comics cover, and the ancient war crimes which
led to the saying "Blind leading the blind.") It's a common motif
simply because it's so powerful.
|
|
|
I didn't say Kill Bill invented it, I pointed out the gouge seems
derivative. You've sort of broadened it "threats to the eyes,"
you could go broader with "threats of bodily harm." Kill Bill had
hand to hand combat, where one combatant snatches a single eye from the
other. In Kill Bill, she shows it to her and then stomps it.
Here, he eats it. That's a little closer to being derivative than
just he concept of eye injury.
Thomas Mets wrote:
Does it matter if the eyeball gouge is original? Every work of fiction
will have some elements that are derived from something else. And I
honestly don't remember this type of injury happening to any character
as "big" as Spider-Man (Neo from the Matrix doesn't count, as the
Spider-Man movie grosses as proved he is the more popular character.)
|
|
|
Don't know the extent to which it "matters," but it's a shame for such
a poor choice by the writer to also be unoriginal. And by your
definition of "big" character (box office of Spider-Man), the only
thing that could possibly top it is if Kate Winslett ate Billy Zane's eye in
Titanic.
[edited for clearer grammar]
Edited by Jay Matthews on 25 November 2005 at 12:22pm
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 133334
|
| Posted: 25 November 2005 at 12:35pm | IP Logged | 11
|
|
|
Unless you count Stan Lee's occassional gushing
fan letter which honestly makes me feel sick to my
stomach.
*****
Wow. Sucks to be you.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Joe Zhang
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 12857
|
| Posted: 25 November 2005 at 12:38pm | IP Logged | 12
|
|
|
"Speaking of Stan lee's gushing fan letters, I really enjoyed reading
his letter in New Avengers #3 & the introduction to the Marvel
Knights Spider-Man TPB."
Stan Lee still works for Marvel. It's his job to help sell the books.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
|
|
Topic Closed)
