| Author |
|
Brad Danson
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 02 May 2007
Posts: 1440
|
| Posted: 22 January 2008 at 10:37am | IP Logged | 1
|
|
|
LOST... I guess this helps keep an audience but it might be hard to attract new viewers.
I think the producers have admitted that they have trouble getting new viewers and that DVDs are their only hope.
Another show you need to watch from the beginning: Arrested Development. I tried watching it twice randomly and just couldn't figure out what was going on. (I assumed that I was missing a lot of joke references) A friend recently insisted that I watch his DVDs of the first season. Whaddaya know? A great show.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Martin Redmond
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 27 June 2006
Posts: 3882
|
| Posted: 22 January 2008 at 11:27am | IP Logged | 2
|
|
|
QUOTE:
| I think the producers have admitted that they have trouble getting new viewers |
|
|
That's cause they killed off all the cool characters. All that's left are the alpha males, w/e. As awesome as Sawyer is, I won't even watch season 4.
Season 2 was my favorite, but it would've been ALOT better if it concluded there somehow. The show drags on for way too long. It should've been 3 seasons at most.
All the actors are fantastic though. I don't think there's a bad actor in the bunch. The acting makes the show. But then, they just kill off so many characters: Libby, Shannon, Anna Lucia, Mr Ecko, Micheal might as well be dead. And the white guy alpha males just keep coming back from the dead no matter how mutilated, it's ridiculous.
Sayid is still there for variety but he might as well not be there, all they give him to do is moan about his past as a torturer. "I'm Sayid, I tortured people, that's all the writers can do with meh." *repeat every episode* The korean couple is just so cliched, I didn't even watch most of their flashbacks. rant rant rant
Heroes is a pos, it's got nails on chalkboard acting: "Oh noooo YoURR pAINTings are prediiictinggg the fuuutuUUrreee."
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Martin Redmond
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 27 June 2006
Posts: 3882
|
| Posted: 22 January 2008 at 11:30am | IP Logged | 3
|
|
|
So they're still publishing Spider-Man huh? Well, what do you know! I was at the restaurant the other day and this mother kept asking her son how much he enjoyed his Spider-Man hand held game, and she was all Spider-ManSpider-ManSpider-ManSpider-Man. I looked at the handheld and it was a Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles hand held game.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Brad Danson
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 02 May 2007
Posts: 1440
|
| Posted: 22 January 2008 at 11:47am | IP Logged | 4
|
|
|
Season 2 was my favorite, but it would've been ALOT better if it
concluded there somehow. The show drags on for way too long. It
should've been 3 seasons at most.
You're preaching to the wrong person. I worship at the altar of Damon Lindelof.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 134885
|
| Posted: 22 January 2008 at 11:55am | IP Logged | 5
|
|
|
Take it to the TV section, guys!
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
James Revilla
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 03 May 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 2266
|
| Posted: 22 January 2008 at 12:00pm | IP Logged | 6
|
|
|
A lof of shows, that have found popularity in DVD, were never given a chance on TV, Firefly and Wonderfzalls come to mind, HUGE DVD sales, which meant if the network would have promoted and allowed the show to find an auidence, we might be in season 4 and 5 of those shows right now. I see the same thing with comic books. How many people FOUND Next Men after the fact ? How many issues of Next Men would we have if those people, bought the comic when it came out instead of waiting to see how it turns out ?
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Troy Nunis
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 4598
|
| Posted: 22 January 2008 at 1:00pm | IP Logged | 7
|
|
|
Hmmm . . didn't Mary Tyler Moore once make a deal with the Devil so that her mariage to Dick Van Dyke never happened and instead she was on the fast track of a successful carrer as a newswriter? What? Oh -- comics, right . .
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Greg Kirkman
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 12 May 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 15772
|
| Posted: 23 January 2008 at 11:30am | IP Logged | 8
|
|
|
Peter Sanderson's thoughts on the dissolution of the marriage:
http://www.quickstopentertainment.com/2008/01/21/comics-in-c ontext-210-divorce-marvel-style/
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 134885
|
| Posted: 23 January 2008 at 11:58am | IP Logged | 9
|
|
|
"How can a reader continue to suspend disbelief when the stories make it all too clear that the characters are merely puppets, and we are all too aware of the puppeteers pulling their strings?"In this single sentence, Peter sums up something about which I have been griping for years. When I was a kid, there were no credits in comics. Or almost none. Gardner Fox became my "favorite writer" largely because he included on the splash page of stories he wrote a little open book, with his name and the artist's inscribed on the pages. In this way I also learned the names of Gil Kane and Joe Kubert. But in other comics, aside from a stylized "Bob Kane" that accompanied a wide range of artistic styles, it was not until Stan Lee made credits and ongoing part of the page, in the mid-Sixties, that I began associating names with styles. Before that, the style was all I had. The Guy Who Drew WONDER WOMAN was the Guy Who Drew METAL MEN. I had no idea his name was Ross Andru (or that I would one day work with him!) Some Marvel comics said S. Lee & J. Kirby or S. Lee & S. Ditko in the splash, but this didn't tell me who they were, or who did what. Came credits, and also came people who followed artists by name, not just style. With the plethora of inkers, and the fact that much of what passed for full pencils back in the day would now be considered breakdowns, this was handy. Sometimes you could not entirely be sure that was the same guy drawing this story who had drawn that story a few months back. By the time I got into the business, awareness of who the "puppeteers" were, to use Peter's word, had reached an odd point. Based on the letters that poured or trickled in every week, it was plain that many of the readers looked upon the characters as something very close to real people. (Some crossed the line, and really looked at them as real people, but that's a whole 'nother thread.) They worried about the characters. They shared in the character's triumphs. They thrilled when the characters got a "happy ending" from time to time. But -- and here was the curious twist -- when something bad happened, they knew who to blame. Good things, it seemed, were just part of the great tapestry that was unfolding before their eyes. Bad things, tho, were the result of direct intervention by the people writing and drawing the stories. Several times I found myself at Conventions, trying with little success to explain to irate fans that they could not have it both ways. The characters were "real", and what happened to them was "real" -- or they weren't. If they accepted the good stuff without thinking of the "puppeteers", they must likewise accept the bad stuff. They were simply not allowed to slice up the stories and portion out blame based on what they didn't like, versus what they did. All or nothing. Much of this ties into the parallel bit of fanthink -- or perhaps it is even the same bit of fanthink -- that has readers assuming they know the craft better than those who are hired to do the job. In some cases, maybe they do! But they are not the "puppeteers", and if they are going to pay attention to the puppeteer, rather than the puppets, then they must accept what the puppeteers make the puppets do. They don't have to like it, but they must accept it, or the great game of Let's Pretend falls apart.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Dave Phelps
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 4188
|
| Posted: 23 January 2008 at 12:24pm | IP Logged | 10
|
|
|
QUOTE:
| But they are not the "puppeteers", and if they are going to pay attention to the puppeteer, rather than the puppets, then they must accept what the puppeteers make the puppets do. They don't have to like it, but they must accept it, or the great game of Let's Pretend falls apart. |
|
|
Agreed, but it works both ways - the puppeteers need to do their part as well. When "something bad" happens, it still needs to be done in a way that is true to the characters as established.
Even if I may not like what happens to a particular character or actions they take, I should at least be able to understand how it could have happened or, if the "out of character" behavior is a story beat, that should be acknowledged at some point in the story.
A problem I've been having lately is that a lot of "bad somethings" stem from character actions that have no logical explanation OTHER than "puppeteers pulling strings."
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Gregg Halecki
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 03 June 2005
Posts: 759
|
| Posted: 23 January 2008 at 12:31pm | IP Logged | 11
|
|
|
I would like to express sincere thanks for the best wishes and prayers from those on this board that have offered them. If there is anything that my mother Anne liked, it was prayers.
I also have not read any maliciousness in the more negatively posed posts that came in response. I certainly don't get the feeling that JB or anyone else had any particular intention to hurt my feelings in some way, mostly because I simply have to assume that they must have better things to do with their time than sit there thinking "Let me REALLY say something to hurt this guy!" I am certainly not important enough to any of you to make that worth your time.
Having said that, I would like to take this oppertunity to clarify a few things that I think may have been misinterpreted or misrepresented here about me, for my own piece of mind more than anything else.
I had not considered the anonymity of the internet as something that someone might use to bolster up false sympathy or support in an arguement. Of course, being the cynical prick that I am, I should have considered that my statement could be taken as that. As much as I wish it were true, I did NOT in fact make up the death of my mother. http://www.nj.com/obituaries/jjournal/index.ssf?/base/obits- 12/1200722712168890.xml&coll=3
In response to those that questioned why I chose to vent myself here on this thread the way I did, all I can say is that I wasn't really thinking a lot of stuff through that day. It just seemed like a convenient place. I actually don't remember much about even doing it, as that whole day was more or less me running on "auto pilot". I got up in the morning, got the call, and went about my day as I normally would, as least as best as I was able. It really didn't hit me until that night. So sue me. There were a few posts that I thought I remembered where people stating opinions on how much they disagreed with the thought of Peter making any sort of deal with the devil. It seemed to me at the time a good place for me to state that sometimes people WILL do, or at least wish to do, things that they normally would not consider. I had those feelings and thought that it would offer food for thought in the discussion. Instead it turned into fuel for the fire. I noticed JB pointing out that it seems that I have no qualms about starting new threads in relation to topics already under discussion. That is correct. I do this when I feel that I have something to add to a topic that will take the converstaion down another path and detract from the discussion already underway. If we are here (just to generate a fictional example) discussing Iron Man and how the charachter has progressed over the years and our diferent favorite stories, and we get to talking about the charachter's alchoholism, I might discuss that for a few posts and then break out into a new thread if I wanted to discuss this in more depth, or if I wanted to discuss other similar cases of substance abuse in comics, or in other types of media. Since the original topic might have been about Iron Man in general, I would start a new thread instead of run the risk of A) hijacking the thread away from it's course or B) having an interesting tangent lost and overlooked in a larger thread. I am sorry if this is not proper message board protocall, but it makes sense to me. In this particular case of speaking about my mother's death, I certainly didn't want to turn it into some sort of specticle, I just wanted to express myself in what I thought was a relatively friendly outlet in a way that would actually but the somewhat heated arguement kind of in perspective. I guess I was wrong in my estimation of the "friendliness" and I did a poor job of relating the message I wanted to send.
Next, I never had any intention to use the event of my mother's death to make any point whatsoever about comic books. I will chalk JB's comment as a response based on what he thought I was (or might have been) saying, as opposed to what I was actually trying to express. Taken in that context, his comments were perfectly reasonable. While I often disagree vehemently with his thoughts on topic matter, he has generally come accross as a decent enough guy. I don't imagine that if he read my comment and took it as I intended, he would have replied in the same way. I was simply expressing the feeling that (I thought) others could relate to. This being that sometimes you wish that you could do something, ANYTHING to change the world, regardless of the consequences. Certainly I would have done anything to have kept my mother from dying. I would gladly have given up anything, including my own life. I WOULD have made a deal with the devil. If he showed up today, I would. My mother would absolutely not want me thinking like that, perticularly being as religious as she is. Wishing that I was somehow able to trade places with her wouldn't be the "right" thing to do. But that is how I felt, and still do. I found that I had a change in perspective on a lot of things based on what hapened that morning. I had a lot of feelings all bubbling up and was looking for an outlet to vent them. I happened to choose this forum to do so, and probably was not a concise in my writing as I should have been. I thought that someone out there might benefit from the idea that somewhere someone else was feeling that sometimes you just feel the way you do, and "right, logical, smart" just goes out the window. This feeling that I was expressing certainly was not designed to bolster my opinions expressed in this particular arguement. In fact in some ways in runs counter to it. I simply was using something pertinant in this thread (Peter making the deal with the devil) as something of a metaphor for something I was feeling, in a way that others might relate to.
I DO take issue STRONGLY with the comments make suggestion that I was trying to score some sort of points in my arguement with my post. Not because I was accused of being insencere, but because there was nothing anywhere to support that. If you are going to accuse me of that, at least go back at my posts and read them to see if there was any basis for the accusation. The only opinion that I recall posting here at all that could have been misconstrued in relation to this was when I said that in the storyline discussed in this thread the use of Mephisto was the least problem that I had with the story. To clarify, I said that because I though the premise of the stary was bad on many levels, the least offensive to me as a fan was taking liberty with the charachter's abilities. The comments made are not offensive to me based on their rude and frankly insensitive nature. That is really no big deal, as I am a rude and insensitive kind of guy. They are offensive because they were made without any real basis. I will not say JB (and others with similar postings) is some sort of mean horrible person blah blah blah. I will say that in this case, like many of us, these posts came without fully considering what they were saying. They seemed like a jump to an erronious conclusion about what I was trying to do with my post. While I may not have expressed what I wanted to express properly, reading my post and making the leap from what I said to claiming that I was trying to score points in the arguement just has no basis. As I stated above, JB reacted to what he tought I was doing, and that was fine, however how he got to that assumption shows a failing in logic on his end. We are all a little quick on the trigger sometimes. It could be that these folks are just bastards, or they just made a mistake. I just hope that a little more thought might go into it before the next guy gets unfairly hammered. Then again, it could just as easily be me who sticks his foot in his mouth next time.
As a recap....
I posted something in a way that some understood in the spirit that it was ment, some misunderstood due to a lack of elequence on my part, and possibly some may have decided it was an opening to rip into me because they felt like it. Thank you to the first group, my apologies to the second, and FU to anyone who might be in the third.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Greg Kirkman
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 12 May 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 15772
|
| Posted: 23 January 2008 at 12:48pm | IP Logged | 12
|
|
|
I had not considered the anonymity of the internet as something that someone might use to bolster up false sympathy or support in an arguement. Of course, being the cynical prick that I am, I should have considered that my statement could be taken as that.
++++++++++
I apologize for any misinterpretation on my part. The fact of the matter is that I get more than a little paranoid about these sorts of things, because I've been strung along--and, yes, hurt--by people using the anonymity that the InterNet provides as a shield which allows them to cause trouble or to create feelings of mistrust and paranoia (as has happened here before at the JBF).
So, I ask forgiveness for jumping to paranoid conclusions and being insensitive. Having reviewed the thread, I've since seen that I came to the mistaken conclusion that you were trying to make some sort of point to bolster an argument.
And, as I said before, I do genuinely offer my condolences.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
|
|
Topic Closed)
