Saturday, January 19, 2019 

France's big love for comics

France 24 has a video about how comics (usually referred to in the French language as bande dessinee) are a huge part of their culture, and in contrast to the US, they seem to be building up or holding far more steady as the years have gone by.

Labels: , , ,

Friday, January 18, 2019 

Is Image switching to trades-only formats?

Or what's often called Original Graphic Novels? Well if this news tells something, they might be making a shift to a format Bob Layton argued in favor of as much I as do. Joe Casey's Sex series is being moved to this format, and it says that:
This is the latest in a series of Image ongoings switching to OGNs. Other titles to previously announce the switch are Motor Crush and Moonstruck.
Hmm, most fascinating, and I must admit, setting an ideal example, given how expensive pamphlets are getting, and it's bound to become worse as most companies, with the possible exception of Alterna, clearly aren't willing to lessen expenses. Besides, some people surely don't want to wait a whole month to see how the story turns out if it continues in the following issue, and turning to OGNs wouldn't change the concept of serial fiction at all. What it could do is ensure writers and artists will rely on better quality if they really, truly want to sell their work, and build an audience.

Plus, retail experts who really want to build a business can rework their stores for selling OGNs only, and not tons of pamphlets that may not even be returnable; Marvel's particularly notorious for this, making me wonder why most store managers still want to do business with them.

That's why I see Image's move, in itself, as a very admirable one, and something pundits who really love the medium could start advocating in favor of, if they're serious about bettering the industry.

Labels: ,

Thursday, January 17, 2019 

The Family Guy cartoon stops scripting homosexual jokes, but keeps all the revolting ones with sexual abuse

Seems that the Family Guy, a cartoon series even wore than what the Simpsons turned out to be, is turning to its own form of censorship to appease the social justice advocating left, yet they're willing to keep featuring horrific jokes involving sexual assault, presumably because Donald Trump is their main target in the latest episode (H/T: Breitbart):
Sunday’s Family Guy found Peter Griffin facing off against a fellow “fat idiot who once had a hit television show and who over time has worn out his welcome.” The episode chronicled Peter’s new life as President Trump’s latest press secretary, a gig he eventually quit when he walked in on his new boss sexually assaulting Meg, Jabba the Hutt-style.
I don't think Jabba committed sexual assault in Star Wars - back then, most pop culture filmmakers usually had the smarts to realize a popcorn-chuffing audience seeking enjoyable escapism had their limits - so that's pretty bizarre they'd describe it that way. In any event, what the animators are doing is pure vomit, and it makes no difference whether the culprit is a conservative or a liberal politician; that's offensive and unfunny. Sexual abuse is not something entertaining and shouldn't be joked about for moral reasons. Yet they think jokes about homosexuality, on the other hand, are worse and that's what they appear to be jettisoning:
TVLINE | Peter also told Trump that Family Guy has been “trying to phase out” gay jokes. Are you really?

SULKIN | Kind of, yes. If you look at a show from 2005 or 2006 and put it side by side with a show from 2018 or 2019, they’re going to have a few differences. Some of the things we felt comfortable saying and joking about back then, we now understand is not acceptable.

APPEL | It’s almost unique to Family Guy, though I can think of one other show that’s been on the air longer. But if a show has literally been on the air for 20 years, the culture changes. And it’s not us reacting and thinking, “They won’t let us [say certain things].” No, we’ve changed too. The climate is different, the culture is different and our views are different. They’ve been shaped by the reality around us, so I think the show has to shift and evolve in a lot of different ways.
Well it's not like it's in good taste to mock people for abnormalities, mental or otherwise, but still, I get the feeling they're not doing this because they believe the same, but rather, because the LGBT advocates they seek to please want to elevate their ideology to a sainthood that should be respected above all else. All that aside, what's ever shifted and evolved about a show that seems to consider rape jokes funny, and even terrorism? There's never been anything of value in this show, and their decision to call it quits with jokes about homosexuality is awfully cheap compared to the more jarring monstrosities they stooped to.

Plenty of conservative couch potatoes thought the episode was sick, and if the network really allowed it to get that bad, it just shows how far morale's fallen. What's really dumbfounding is that these leftists are the kind of people who'd complain about manga and anime with sexual scenes that look disturbing, but when it comes to their own concoctions, they suddenly seem comfortable, especially when depicting right-wingers doing evil things. In which case, it's obvious they're only pretending to be offended, and have no issues with ruining entertainment for the sake of political agendas in the most tasteless way possible.

Labels: , , , , ,

Wednesday, January 16, 2019 

Gail Simone turns against Mike Baron, unable to take a joke

Here's an example of SJWs throwing somebody they allegedly were fans of under the bus, because according to them, he supports Comicsgate without their permission. Gail Simone went out of her way to write an inciteful Facebook post against Nexus and Badger co-creator Mike Baron, leading to a whole threadful of vitriol by her horde of worshipers, including from at least a few leftist writers like Mark Waid, John Layman and Dan Slott. She said:
Here’s an interesting little thing. It’s obnoxious, and it would have been meaningless, but, well, read on.

So, there’s some gross, sad doofus comicsgater, I don’t even remember his handle, and he posted this mocked up photo below. Now, I don’t care about these idiots, the smartest of them is still a complete idiot. And yes, they are bigoted to their core.

So he posted the photo below, with this award-worth caption:
**BREAKING NEWS**

Gail Simone banned from all SEA WORLD theme parks after she broke into the fish storage center and ate all the Dolphin feed. When Gail was asked to comment, she replied, "those fucking dolphin are next!"

Now, no one ever said these idiots were funny. And the guy’s photo of himself, well, let’s just say there’s some irony here.

Big deal, I get this stuff every day from these people.

But it gets worse.

Another Dorothy Parker-level wit responded with, “You know who should write comics? Fat bitter cat ladies.”

Again, not even worth mentioning.

But then Michal Michael A. Baron decided to agree with them.

“They are!”

He adds.

Now, I’ve seen a lot of the comicsgaters. If personal attractiveness is the hill they want to die on, instead of making actual comics, fine. It’s ironic, but fine.

But Mike Baron was a writing hero of mine. A big, big deal to me.

I loved his work, I thought it was funny and to this day, his action scenes are a big influence on me.

I was never a huge Nexus fan, but his Badger and Flash and other works were huge influences. When I finally got to meet him we had a very pleasant chat despite me being a little star struck.
Hmm, let me take a moment to ponder her lack of fandom for Nexus. Is that implying she didn't find the anti-commie viewpoint appealing? Well I'm sure there's quite a few other leftists in comicdom today who'd not only shun his work because of that, they'd also shun Stan Lee's stories from the Silver Age that were anti-commie too. She continues:
But he threw in with the comicsgaters, fine, that’s his call. Last year, he asked to send a book to my house so I could blurb it. I don’t want comicsgaters sending stuff to my house, so I said no. Maybe that’s why.

But for a pro you really looked up to to endorse this behavior and participate in it...well, it’s gross. Despite what these geniuses say, it has not always been easy being female in comics. It’s been fifteen years of hate mail, and the occasional death threat, including one guy who showed up at a Dallas signing and left bullets at the store after promising a ‘comic book apocalypse.’

A simple, ‘that’s not cool,’ would seem to be the bare minimum, rather than jumping in. But apparently, that’s too much to ask of Mike.
As it so happens, and he said so in the comments section, he was only joking:
I was just being flip. I did not mean Gail.
And he also said:
You have my apology.
And he even argued:
I am not a comicsgater. I reject that term.
But alas, it meant zip to Gail's zombies, including Waid, who said:
Michael A. Baron Fuck off, Mike. I'm with Gail--you used to be someone I looked up to. She's doing you a huge favor by not additionally calling you out, deservedly, for far more. I feel genuinely sad for most comics creators who fall into obscurity, totally forgotten by the modern audience. Not you.
The biggest problem here is the sheer lacking of a sense of humor from Simone's side, and here she's somebody who made a name for herself with tongue-in-cheek storytelling. But when it comes down to leftists like her, she suddenly loses it, and lacks a thick skin. And if her refusal to offer a blurb for a book over a year ago says something, her rejection of Baron stretches back at least a bit. As for Waid, he's just demonstrated more lack of etiquette, and it's highly unlikely he ever felt sorry for Baron getting blacklisted by the Big Two after the turn of the century. In fact, I wouldn't be shocked if Waid never cared for Baron's past work, if he perceived it as right-wing. He also said:
I think some, maybe a lot, of Mike and his peers' turn to bitterness and hatred is attributable to refusing to come to terms with the unfortunate reality that every creator, still talented, eventually "ages out" as far as the audience is concerned. (I'm well aware I'm about a half-hour away.) They lash out and blame it on liberals or "diversity hiring" or whatever else is a convenient scapegoat and become cauldrons of hate. The good news is, you'll be remembered for your contributions by future generations of readers who haven't a clue why Mike Baron was once important.
And I think Waid's pretty bitter that he's now facing a lawsuit over tortious interference of a graphic novelist's work, to say nothing of how he may never work for the more major companies again at ease after what was discovered about him. That very bitterness compounds his downfall

Simone then updated, claiming she'd conversed with Baron in private, and:
Update: I had a discussion with Mike here on Facebook messenger. I wouldn’t say it was encouraging, but he says that he never complained about not being offered work, which may be true, that bit was more general because I hear it so often. So in fairness, I removed it.

He also says he ‘rejects’ the term comicsgate, but oddly, because he believes it was a term placed on the movement by outsiders, he was unaware that it comes from Gamergate, the tag created by a VERY conservative actor for that group.

He didn’t disavow what they do or say, just the name, as far as I can tell.

It’s a bit disappointing, I admit it, but the one superpower I have is putting this stuff in the rearview mirror. I don’t FORGET, but I don’t sit and dwell on it, either.
If Baron's not disavowing his joke, he's honestly doing the right thing. Nor should he worry about not being offered work today, all because hardcore leftists are getting worse in their conduct, and blacklisting conservatives. IMO, he needn't maintain ties with people like Simone either, if they're going to become that awful. Besides, if she doesn't sit or dwell on all this stuff, why'd she make such a stink about it in the first place? She later added a brief followup where she stated:
Part of the reason some pros get pushed around online is they feel ashamed or embarrassed, so they just try to move past it, and don’t respond, don’t illuminate what is being thrown at them by people who should know better.

I am not that person.

And I am going to blast you twice as hard if you are harassing marginalized creators as part of your dipshit hate group.

Just so it’s known.
Again, she shouldn't have opened her big mouth if she's not that kind of person. Nor would she even acknowledge Comicsgate's existence, if that's how she feels. And would she kindly tone down all that revolting profanity for a change? Even I don't use that much amount in my writings. Let's also not forget she supported allowing male transvestites into women's bathrooms at the expense of ladies' safety, and she even worked on at least one project the recently disgraced Eric Esquivel also contributed to, and conversed with him as far back as 2010. (Update: here's also a screencap I've added on the side.) So she'd do well not to lecture us either.

Sooner or later, Simone's bitter attitude is going to ensure the collapse of her career, seeing as Domino's a pretty low seller, with dismal interior art. Her tirade against Baron only makes me feel all the prouder to own some of his works like Nexus, Flash and Punisher stories. Someday, I'll see if I can find Badger too.

Labels: , ,

Tuesday, January 15, 2019 

Why would a university diversity advocate screen the Spider-Verse cartoon for his family if he thought it didn't suit his standards?

Here's a puzzling case of a writer at the NY Times (via Daily Caller) who thought the recent Into the Spider-Verse animated movie didn't live up to his PC expectations, yet wouldn't argue with his kids when they wound up loving the film more than he did:
I liked “Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse.” It is quite good, but I didn’t love it — and I feel bad about that.

Growing up, I did not see myself in popular culture. Cyclops, Wolverine, Captain America, Luke Skywalker, Spider-Man — these were my cultural heroes, the characters I wanted desperately to be. The truth is, I could never inhabit their lives. I knew it then, and, as a scholar of race, I know it now. My heroes were in bodies that were different from mine — they were white, I was black — and that ontological chasm was too much to cross.
I don't know just how old he is, but didn't he see Black Panther and Luke Cage in pop culture? Heck, didn't he even see Monica Rambeau, the 2nd character to take the Captain Marvel mantle, in pop culture, or anything Marvel-related? Oddly enough, he does mention BP further down in the article, but it's still bewildering how he couldn't possibly have noticed T'Challa in any medium back in the day. Unless maybe he didn't care then as much as he does now? I don't know.
“Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse” is a movie in love with comic books. It does not apologize for the source material nor feel the need to try to ground the story in “real life” as Marvel movies have often tried to do. Like comic books, it is full of colorful villains and brimming with one-liners. This film manages the delicate feat of embracing its source material while also satirizing it.
Depending on how you view the film, of course the filmmakers weren't going to do that, if their whole objective was to pander to the modern leftist diversity propaganda machine. For the original white Peter Parker's been all but marginalized thanks to these bizarre "experiments", which adapt material penned by the awful Brian Bendis, who's already wasted no time harming Superman following his move to DC over a year ago.

And isn't that funny how this kind of SJW has no issue with a movie like this refraining from grounding the story in "real life"? Because these people will use every excuse they can to say anything they dislike should, science-fiction genre and surrealism be damned.
Miles Morales, the first Afro-Latino Spider-Man, was the focus for the first half of the film, but, thereafter, he became a Spider-Man among Spider-Men. He was no longer the focus, and that puts me in a tough place as a father of young children.
So he wanted Morales to be the foremost focus on this cartoon, not just one of the several variations written up in Marvel's recent attempts to pander to everyone who believes in being "woke". If that's all he cared about, not the entertainment value, why even bother seeing the film? It's either one or the other, and he's having it both ways.
“Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen,” with its racially indelicate portrayals of black people in the form of the Skids and Mudflap characters, was an easy fix: I took away the film. They have not watched “Pocahontas” yet because the movie’s whitewashing of American history is too much for me — and, thankfully, the movie has not been requested. We’ve discussed why films like “Revenge of the Fallen” and “Pocahontas” are a problem, and when we talk about the kind of racial stereotypes those films present (the ghettoized machines of the former, and the noble Indians vs. the violent savage dichotomy of the latter) they usually shrug their shoulders and move on to the next toy.

But I could not imagine having a similar conversation with them about “Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse.” They loved it too much.
So he was let down because it didn't meet his social justice standards, yet he took his family to see it and doesn't want to argue about it? I don't understand this at all. What I do know is that Spider-Verse is the kind of product that drew from directions taken too far for the sake of politically correct narratives on race and gender, as only Bendis could possibly perform. And the man who set the Avengers - along with the rest of the MCU - on the path to destruction is not somebody I can admire for having his concepts based on pandering adapted to other mediums.
“Spider-Verse,” more than any other movie we’ve seen together, puts me in a precarious position. My sons loved this movie. They have taken to listening to the music from it. They told all their friends to watch it. They deem it the best Marvel movie to date (and it is). They have not stopped talking about the film, and this is all because they saw themselves in the characters that looked like them on the screen.

Miles spoke to them in a unique way, and while I want them to see the world clearly and learn to critique the pop culture they consume, I am going to let them enjoy this imperfect superhero movie. For LJ and Quinn to identify so deeply with black characters onscreen is important. I have decided to lay aside analysis and allow them to love this movie … in spite of its flaws.
By that logic, any following movie they see built on similar grounds they end up loving is free of analysis too. And honestly, one shouldn't have to identify with a fictional character simply based on skin color and gender, let alone a particular ideology. I don't base my "identification" with most casts of characters solely on whether they're of Jewish/Israeli background, so why must this guy either? If that's what he cares about, it's all he'll care about.

This kind of identity politics is exactly what's ruining entertainment, because politically correct advocate like these with their selective positions can't look past whether specific characters get the amount of prominence they expect and simply enjoy the film without making such a fuss over whether the film caters to their personal wishes. Simultaneously, it's strange how a guy who's that fussy suddenly decides to give what he perceives as flaws a pass just because his kids thought it was awesome. Will he end up discussing any of this a decade later, and will perceptions change then? Only time will tell, but even now, he's being pretty silly to make an exception just because his children decided they loved this cartoon featuring characters who were probably created as springboards for merchandise in other mediums, an idea that may date back as far as the original Batgirl's creation in 1967, the difference being that most successive writers actually made an effort to build entertaining stories around Barbara Gordon, something later generations didn't always do a good job at when they dealt with characters like Gambit in X-Men.

And why does he say it's "good" if he "didn't love it"?

Labels: , , , ,

Monday, January 14, 2019 

Both Marvel and Star Wars products see considerable sales declines

Cosmic Book News found some info that's no surprise for anyone keeping track of what Kathleen Kennedy did to the Star Wars franchise any more than for those who know what Marvel did to their products:
Sales for Star Wars and Marvel Comics-related products are down for Disney's fiscal year ending September 29, 2018 compared to the previous year and even more so compared to two years ago.

As part of an SEC filing, Disney released its "Fiscal Year 2018 Annual Financial Report" offering numbers and insights for their Consumer Products & Interactive Media division, which also includes Publishing.

Revenue for the division is down 4% from 2018 to 2017, and down almost 16% from 2018 to 2016. Profits for the two year period are also down nearly 17%. Disney's Consumer Products division is also the only division at Disney to have lost revenue in 2018.
I'm sure the comic adaptations for SW have suffered in their own way too, even more so after Chuck Wendig's awful behavior. The report does note that the Marvel movies aren't that affected in comparison to the comics:
What should also be noted in the report is Disney is placing blame specifically on Star Wars for the numbers dropping for their Consumer Products division, but you will note in 2018, Disney stated losses were partially offset by Marvel (Avengers) that had an increase.

It's pretty obvious fans are shunning Star Wars in favor of other popular Disney brands, especially Marvel, which isn't seeing a drop (and continues to make movies).
Well if all the negative buzz about the Captain Marvel movie is any suggestion, that could all change in time. Who knows, some fans might decide attending the movies is having an unwanted effect on the comics, emboldening the head honchos to abuse the comics under the confidence moviegoers won't have a care in the world. And as for Star Wars, if it matters, does anybody find it weird that for a movie overseen by a woman with social justice positions, she's made no attempt so far to hire lady directors?

And if reality says anything, the worst part is the people in charge will never do serious housecleaning, never relinquish the properties and allow people with better ideas and more responsibility to oversee them, and will bearhug them till the bitter end when all the comics are cancelled and all the Star Wars projects are scrapped altogether, to just lay sprawled on the ground like dying embers in the wind. That's how low today's entertainment medium's fallen.

Labels: , , , , ,

Saturday, January 12, 2019 

Some Marvel movie projects may have been cancelled

But there's good reason to estimate at least two of them wouldn't work anyway. We Got This Covered brings word of rumors some film adaptation projects were canned as Disney works on a buyout of the Fox film studio:
...the various spinoff movies planned for Gambit, Doctor Doom, Silver Surfer, Kitty Pryde and Multiple Man have all been shelved. And while this report has yet to be confirmed, it would genuinely surprise us if any of these projects saw the light of day at this stage, at least in the forms that Fox intended.

Out of all those movies, the only one with a release date set is Gambit, which was said to be headed for cinemas on March 13th, 2020. Nonetheless, the fans have long had their doubts that the film would actually make that deadline, especially in light of the various delays that the project has already faced. Back in October, producer Simon Kinberg even felt the need to address the public’s skepticism towards the project, telling the doubters via Collider, “I share your cynicism generally, but in this particular case we’re working very hard to get the movie going.”
Well considering how much attention gets lavished upon villains like Doom in this day and age, that's why it'd be better there be no movie starring the Fantastic Four's prime adversary. I hesitate to think of what if a villain like Annihilus got a film. And as for Gambit, while it's obviously not a fictional character's fault he was badly developed nearly 3 decades ago when he first debuted, I don't think a film project spotlighting him would work out well in light of the dreadful stories he was swamped in back in the day. The mid-90s "revelation" he played a part in the Morlock massacre was an abomination that should never have been. If that's still kept canon, and hasn't been jettisoned, no wonder a movie wouldn't work well when you have something awful like that hanging overhead.

As for a Silver Surfer movie, I know it may have been planned for over a dozen years, but it's clear at this point it's gotten nowhere, and they probably don't know what to do with the material. Films starring Kitty and Madrox sound on paper like great ideas, but chances are they'd be royally screwed up too.

And with the comics medium in such decline already, that's one more reason why it's hard to look forward to even the more inspired projects. It's best these characters all be left alone.

Labels: , , ,

 

Hal Jordan is being turned into a killer again

And in this story written by Grant Morrison, what are the chances it's depicted as more negative than one might think, even if Hal kills a villain? What's worst is how CBR makes it all out to sound bad in the same way the Parallax era was:
The Green Lanterns have always been depicted as a peacekeeping force, but in Grant Morrison and Liam Sharp's The Green Lantern, they are now space cops. There is protocol to follow and decorum to keep in mind, but everything goes wrong in Issue #3, when Hal Jordan straight up murders a criminal.

Sometimes even the most experienced and skilled veterans see more than they can handle. After witnessing horrific acts across the universe, and even withstanding his own time as a maniacal space tyrant, it's hard to believe that anything could ever be too much for Hal Jordan. Still, it would seem that even one of the most decorated Green Lanterns of all time has his breaking point.
And just to show how lame CBR's grip on history is, the GL Corps have always been depicted as space cops, or at least the interpretation was already enabled long before. As for the premise of this yarn, sounds pretty bad already, doesn't it? I wouldn't be shocked if the Parallax/Zero Hour era is still kept canon, recalling Morrison wrote at least 2 of the first years of the 1997-2006 JLA volume, and had no issues using Kyle Rayner as the resident GL, and may have even written a scene where Batman told Kyle he liked him more than Hal because unlike the 2nd GL, Kyle knows the meaning of fear. As if it weren't bad enough that political correctness post-1988 sent GL downhill, all because they thought it was such a big deal an aviation pilot would be seemingly fearless in any instance. The article goes on to give additional description of the tale:
After hearing what Vulgar Zo had to say about what he had done, Jordan did what he though in that moment to be just and right. He didn't arrest him, or read him his rights, or do anything an officer of the law should do. Hal Jordan murdered this villain in cold blood, right in front of his fellow Green Lanterns. Then, he lied about it and said he had attacked in self defense.
If the villain didn't actually murder anybody himself, this story is made all the more abominable as a result. And even if he did, that's why I take issue with the description of Hal's actions as "murder". Maybe he blew him away without arrest and trial, but it's still ludicrous they'd describe this as murder, and worse if they believe this nasty little yarn should remain canon. Also bad is that Hal would lie about his actions and not have the courage to justify them, if the villain did murder innocents.
An officer of the law has now committed an act of murder, and every sense of justice demands that he pay for his crimes. After all, the Green Lantern comics just dealt with a similar situation, where ex-Green Lantern Tomar-Tu led the Darkstars on a crusade to kill every criminal in the universe and finally make the universe a safer place. Jordan condemned that method then, so if everything is as it appears to be, expect resistance to it now.
Umm, I believe it's the audience that should resist the whole monstrosity (and pan the stupid CBR article), and not pay a cent for such a dogpile.
But what does it mean for a superhero to turn his back on justice and know only revenge? Punisher is an unhinged murderer, but at the end of the day, he does what the heroes of the Marvel Universe are incapable of doing -- making the world a safer place. Killing may not be the answer, but a permanent solution to the evils of man can be a satisfying alternative. After all, who out there doesn't think Batman should just kill the Joker at this point?
Well at least here they're offering a valid viewpoint. Time and again the Joker slays busloads of people, both innocent and guilty, in cold blood, yet all that's been done by successive writers and editors is to send the Clown Prince of Crime through the revolving prison door instead of conceiving another villain with an elusive past who could fill the shoes of the Joker as we know him.

And look how they reiterate the liberal claim Frank Castle's an "unhinged murderer", despite the fact he goes after criminals, not innocents, and usually defends the innocents too, recalling a 1993 Annual story where he served as bodyguard to a young heiress being targeted by a robot assassin. What they're saying is even worse than what Gerry Conway thinks of his own co-creation, making you wonder why anyone sees the Punisher as perfect fodder for TV and film adaptations if they despise what he stands for - vigilante justice.
What makes this a different case for Hal Jordan is his history as a villain. We have seen him lose faith in his mission before and turn into the mass-murdering Parallax as a result. At the end of the day, he still wanted to save the world then too, but his methods had turned him into a monster. If Hal is going down that road again, how can the Green Lantern Corps hope to stop him? How can he hope to stop himself? If he's willing to murder one slave trader, where will he fall to next?
I've read arguments that whatever Grant Morrison writes shouldn't be taken at face value, but it doesn't make what he's writing now any less distasteful. I do know that, if Guy Gardner had done this and that would be viewed as acceptable, that would definitely be dumbfounding. Why is it okay for Guy to "commit murder", but not Hal Jordan? Because Guy was developed in the mid-to-late 80s as an allusion to a "jingoist"? Gee whiz.

No less dumbfounding is how this tale seems like an atheist's idea of how to spite the religious, and Hal gets booed as a "fascist" at one point, as seen in the following panel:
The article says:
I think this is the first time that a Green Lantern has arrested God. And despite having a plot that would never have been signed off fifty years ago, maintains a kind of narrative madness from those days, with more modern sensibilities. It’s a heady balance to tread and Liam Sharp’s readiness to portray the most insane demands while still being a superhero story is utterly admirable. He stands somewhere between a Neal Adams and a Jack Kirby and also holds both demands simultaneously. [...]

That’s right, the Green Lantern goes from arresting God to arresting the entire population of Earth. Oh and surrounding it in police tape as a crime scene. And this is not a parody, and it never comes off as one. Even when…

Even when he punches God with a green boxing glove. Not even Savage Dragon went so peculiar. And that really really tried.
Oh, I see. So now Morrison is aping Erik Larsen's revolting directions ever since the mid-2000s, and possibly in another metaphor for drug culture? At this point, it's just so sad this is what superhero comics have been reduced to, right down to a leftist's notion of comparing the Green Lanterns and other superheroes to fascists, which only hints at what they really think of the whole genre.

Labels: , , , , , ,

About me

  • I'm Avi Green
  • From Jerusalem, Israel
  • I was born in Pennsylvania in 1974, and moved to Israel in 1983. I also enjoyed reading a lot of comics when I was young, the first being Fantastic Four. I maintain a strong belief in the public's right to knowledge and accuracy in facts. I like to think of myself as a conservative-style version of Clark Kent. I don't expect to be perfect at the job, but I do my best.
My profile

Archives

Links

  • avigreen2002@yahoo.com
  • Fansites I Created

  • Hawkfan
  • The Greatest Thing on Earth!
  • The Outer Observatory
  • Earth's Mightiest Heroines
  • The Co-Stars Primer
  • Comic book websites (open menu)

    Comic book weblogs (open menu)

    Writers and Artists (open menu)

    Miscellanous links (open menu)

  • GoStats charts
  • W3 Counter stats
  • Click here to see website statistics
  • blog directory Bloggeries Blog Directory Entertainment Blogs
    Entertainment blog TopOfBlogs
    View My Stats Blog Directory & Search engine blog directory eXTReMe Tracker Locations of visitors to this page Find out where your visitors come from with GoStats.  
    AmazingCounters.com

    This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

    make money online blogger templates

Older Posts Newer Posts

The Four Color Media Monitor is powered by Blogspot and Gecko & Fly.
No part of the content or the blog may be reproduced without prior written permission.
Join the Google Adsense program and learn how to make money online.