Saturday, March 31, 2018

Image still hasn't done enough to apologize for the Perez debacle, and a site commenting on it goofs too

Bounding Into Comics looked at the case of Michelle Perez writing offensive comments on his Twitter account against Richard Meyer. Image did make this one comment:

It makes very little difference. Even if a creator is the one paying for Image to sponsor/market their wares, putting up with such nasty, repellent behavior is like a tacit approval of it. They shouldn't be taking Perez's dough, if that's how he's getting his GN published, and would do better to take fees from people with more common sense. They also shouldn't pay any residuals that hopefully won't be made when the book goes to press. Most other readers didn't buy Image's defense either. However, company manager Eric Stephenson, whom I thought would make a better choice for whom to confer with, had a response:

Be that as it may, they still have to disassociate themselves from Perez. Therefore, "The Pervert" should be the last book of his they have anything to do with.

With that said, the Bounding website, I was disturbed to discover, said something in very questionable taste:
And as I’ve previously stated, I believe Perez’s entire attack against Diversity & Comics was to promote her book. It would allow her to claim a victim status and state she was being “harassed.” By being a victim she would draw defenders to her cause that would support her by purchasing her book. We’ve seen this strategy employed quite often in the political world. Planned Parenthood and the National Rifle Association are prominent proponents of this strategy.
Excuse me? What's the big idea here dragging the NRA into this whole mess? Haven't they taken enough bad raps already from the left? Now BIC has to make things worse by drawing a moral equivalence between the NRA and the repellent PP, making it sound like the company Charlton Heston once worked for as a president/spokesperson is also terrible. As if that's not bad enough, I even found editor Trent posted these two ambiguous topics involving Identity Crisis, and it goes without saying that watering down the focus on a sick book - to say nothing of throwing away a big chance to shed light on how/why it's awful - is not doing any good. I don't think the NRA are saints, but this was still pretty low of the site to do that. (Update: Marv Wolfman's also screwing up badly by calling Brad Meltzer a "great" writer.)

Image's lenient approach to Perez is bad enough. It's a real pity BIC's undermining their own coverage with a subtle assault on a company that's usually been a supporter of self-defense, and the US military may have members working for to boot.

Labels: , , , ,

Friday, March 30, 2018

Fantastic Four's series returning...only to be scripted by Dan Slott

If it weren't for the assigned writers, the FF's return as an ongoing series would be wonderful in itself. But leave it to the pretentious operatives at Marvel to ruin everything with their choices:
A lot has happened in Marvel comics over the last few years. There was a second Civil War, major superheroes turned over their mantles to more diverse heroes (and then switched back), and Captain America even became a Nazi for a little bit. But there’s also been a keenly-felt absence in the Marvel universe of late, owing to the fact that the blockbuster 2015 event series Secret Wars (by Jonathan Hickman and Esad Ribic) ended by removing the Fantastic Four from the playing field. But after a few years away, Marvel announced Thursday that the Fantastic Four will be returning in a new ongoing comic series this August, written by Dan Slott and illustrated by Sara Pichelli.
Very interesting. If you're somebody familiar with Slott's trolling attitude towards fans over the years when he was writing Spider-Man, along with his ill-treatment of Mary Jane Watson, you know this is little more than a slap in the face to everybody who thought it unfair to cancel the FF, allegedly because of movie rights conflicts. And even then, writing was already bad enough, what with hack writers like James Robinson being one of the last before Slott gets the reins to the revived series. This is just why it would've been better if the FF had remained in limbo, and it's angering how C.B. Cebulski and company are setting up a divisive situation instead of looking for other writers whose resumes aren't as tainted to take up the reins instead.

I also find that part about Steve Rogers become a nazi for "a little bit" quite insulting. Even if it was just for a year, that's still way too much, served to alienate many people, and precipitate the closure of over 50 specialty stores. The sensationalism Entertainment Weekly's resorting to is just what's wrong with their coverage.
One possible reason for the Fantastic Four’s much-anticipated return is Disney’s purchase of Fox, which is set to bring the Fantastic Four back under the Marvel Studios umbrella alongside the Avengers and the rest of the big-screen MCU heroes. It had previously been reported and rumored that Marvel originally cancelled Fantastic Four (and scattered the characters to the winds) due to Fox’s hold on the movie rights.
And that's why they're relaunching it now? Whatever red tape the FF were stuck in did not have to be, and only made Marvel's publishing arm look all the more laughable. A series' publication should not depend on whether a movie is successful or not (and the last one certainly wasn't), who has the rights to filming, and the way they went about it was, to say the least, embarrassing.
Last year, Slott wrapped up a run with artist Michael Allred on Silver Surfer, a character who was originally introduced in the pages of Fantastic Four and carried on that book’s sensibility of mixing cosmic discovery with emotional human relationships. Pichelli’s role on art makes Fantastic Four one of only a few titles in Marvel’s new “Fresh Start” initiative to feature a woman on the creative team.
If it weren't for Slott, this would be fine, especially if the lady is talented. But Slott proved himself one of the worst writers and PR representatives in Marvel's employ, and is decidedly not somebody to support.

The dispute to be had now is who and which writers Marvel's employing, and whether they're willing to seek different scribes than those they've employed for several years now. I'd wanted to note before, that Chris Claremont, if you still consider him worthy, is returning to write a story for the X-Men Wedding Special, but Marc Guggenheim is still the main writer, and he hardly makes it something to look forward to, after the bad ideas he put into X-Men: Gold. It's another sign nothing's truly changed at Marvel, and now, fandom has to make clear that the assigned writers like Slott and Spencer are not scribes we're interested in supporting. They really know how to spoil it all for anybody let down by the prior misuse of the FF, and it's enough to wonder if they should've remained in limbo after all.

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Thursday, March 29, 2018

If Marvel's killing the Inhumans, that's another serious mistake

My my, I continue to find it hard to understand what's so "fresh" about this "start", if Marvel really intends to kill off the Inhumans in a new "event" book (via IGN):
It looks like the story is ending for Marvel’s Inhumans.

Marvel Comics today announced Death of the Inhumans, a new project from writer Donny Cates (Thanos, Doctor Strange) and artist Ariel Olivetti. [...]

While we can’t say for certain what this means for the future of the Inhumans in the Marvel Universe, Death of the Inhumans certainly sounds like a surprising change in direction for the Marvel franchise.
Whether or not they really intend to wipe out the Inhumans, this is not a good way to advertise a new book. Nor are the sites reporting it doing any better by not making the same point or complaining this mentality has to stop.

If killing the Inhuman is what they intend to do, you have to wonder if it's because the TV show was such a failure, even though an abortive adaptation is no excuse. Yet this may have precedent in a few other instances. For example, DC used the failure of the Supergirl movie in 1984 as an excuse to kill off the Maid of Might in Crisis on Infinite Earths, even as her male cousin was spared the same fate following the failure of Superman III a year prior. Certainly in a manner of speaking, because according to info I'd found once, they at least had second thoughts. But movie or no movie, it's a terrible shame in the end, they had to kill Kara Zor-El regardless, suggesting the writers involved weren't in the gig because they had faith in their ability to tell a decent story with any character they deemed expendable. At least some sense prevailed, and a few years later, they reincorporated Kara to the DCU, even if using a different approach, as with Matrix.

More recently, following the failure of the Green Lantern movie, Geoff Johns used that as an excuse to foist a Muslim character into the comics. Even earlier, following the Jonah Hex movie's failure, they used it as an excuse to change the series' title to All-Star Western, the title it originally began under in the Bronze Age. In a way, what Marvel's doing now with the Inhumans is the same thing, and it's pathetic. A movie/TV show's failure cannot be used as an excuse to get rid of characters because they're supposedly too much to deal with. Otherwise, even the most major will be next.

And above all, this is not a good approach C.B. Cebulski's taken to greenlight a project that irritates the senses with the notion characters could be killed off. They could've done far better by making it a self-contained adventure where Medusa and Black Bolt go on a justice-seeking mission. Instead, they're tossed into some idiocy with a poor idea for a title that does them more harm than good, and the title alone is reason enough to avoid buying it. It's a terrible shame Mark Gruenwald's argument about every character being somebody's favorite isn't being respected.

Labels: , , , ,

Wednesday, March 28, 2018

William Messner-Loebs is living homeless in Michigan

Messner-Loebs, the writer/artist known for having only one arm to write and draw with, and famous for his runs on the Flash and Wonder Woman, now lacks a permanent residence in his home state of Michigan, as does his wife Nadine. Which is a terrible shame, mainly when you think of how he could make the ideal candidate for hiring at many publishers today. Instead, he's shunned and ignored by today's gatekeepers.

The article does bring up one item from his Flash run that was downright questionable, however:
He said he works about 16-20 hours a week, which is good, but when you sprinkle in the inconvenience of being homeless, it doesn’t leave him much time to draw. That sucks because damn, Bill is good. He’s innovative: back in 1991 he introduced one of the first gay characters into the DC universe. Until he took the ‘Pied Piper’ and relaunched him as gay, the only homosexual comic book characters were flawed people who could be “fixed”. But in 1991 Bill took a chance, when that type of thing was a little harder to pull off.
Loebs may have been one of the better writers of his time, but tampering with an established character - even a former professional crook - may have set the stage early for subsequent examples of the same, not the least being Iceman's abuse under Axel Alonso as Marvel's EIC. And what's their point about homosexual characters being flawed? That they shouldn't have any? This is exactly what's undone many of Marvel's own SJW hack jobs - according to their vision, characters of different racial background or sexual orientation have to be perfect, and homosexuality apparently is not supposed to be changed or abandoned. Exactly what went wrong with Northstar too, and press sources covering the dreadful Scott Lobdell's Alpha Flight story in 1992 wouldn't pay any attention to how bad the tale actually was, one of the reasons it got cancelled less than 2 years later.

Still, like I said, Loebs was far better for a writer/artist of his time (and he introduced Linda Park as Wally West's developing girlfriend and later wife, one of the most plausibly introduced Asian protagonists in comicdom), and shouldn't have had to suffer his modern fate. In some ways, this is the result of social justice mentality that's led to even liberal thinkers getting thrown under the bus by ingrates who believe what leftist steps were already done isn't good enough for them. Not mentioned in the article is that at one point in Loebs' Flash run, Hartley Rathaway, the Pied Piper, was depicted helping squatters break into closed-down houses as part of aiding socialist causes (he even argued "property is theft"), and this actually was depicted as a flaw on Piper's part, contradicting the reporter's implication that homosexuals shouldn't be flawed.

I think Marvel should be the one to rehire Loebs for a job, and above all, allow him creative freedom without crossovers flooding everything. Yet C.B. Cebulski hasn't done that yet, and Joe Quesada's still reigning supreme behind the scenes, ensuring their continuity will remain a shambles.

The local Fox channel asks if anybody can offer Loebs assistance, and for now, he could certainly use some help finding a permanent residence again. DC and Marvel, among other publishers, should also be reprinting his work already, because most of the pre-Mark Waid Flash tales haven't been, and only one WW story Loebs wrote may have been reprinted to date.

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Michelle Perez is out of control again

The artist/writer working for Image who prides himself on being a transvestite was inciting against video filmer Richard Meyer again, even going so far as to post defamatory comments on Twitter:
The latest spat involved Perez wishing for Meyer’s death via IED, and then making libelous statements about Meyer’s personal life in hopes of defaming his character. A capture of the comments can be viewed on imgur, which were originally published on March 23rd, 2018.

On March 24th, 2018 Perez tweeted out corrections by adding “allegedly” to the defamatory comments, which consisted of accusing Meyer of domestic abuse and being dishonorably discharged from his military service.

In an exchange with Meyer on Twitter, Perez was requested to delete the libelous and defamatory tweets under threat of being sued. An archive of the tweets were also captured on imgur.
Perez's page was suspended by Twitter, but he appears to have set up a second account, where for all we know, he could be up to his antics again. Unfortunately, when Erik Larsen was confronted about this for the second time, he still refused to take any steps to get Perez to cut it out:

Well, he's obviously no help. When it comes to his own company, that's when he becomes jelly-kneed, and shows no ability to lead. But then, he never really did, despite commenting on challenging subjects at times.

Maybe what really needs to be done is contact another Image manager like Eric Stephenson and see if he's willing to give a straightforward address about the issue at hand. Perez's horrible comments are bound to cause them serious sales harm sooner or later, and somebody's bound to wonder if they deserve it for the hard-left lurch they've taken in the past several years, regardless of any better books they're selling.

The best thing to do for now is call the police/FBI and file a lawsuit against Perez for making threats  and defamatory comments against the law. Legal action can help send a message to an industry that needs some moral lessons if it's to keep going.

Labels: , , , ,

Tuesday, March 27, 2018

Which of these books do or don't belong in the classroom?

A writer for PBS News Hour made the argument why he thinks Black Panther's adventures and other comics make great material for study in classrooms. But he apparently supports the work of the awful Ta-Nehisi Coates as well, more on which anon. At the beginning, there's a line that glosses over a terrible story of recent from DC:
...In the recently released Supergirl #19, DC Comics tackles school bullying and a non-binary teen opening up to her parents.
Well at least they admit the teen is a girl. That's why the notion a boy would bully a girl over going into a ladies' bathroom is stupefyingly offensive (and she doesn't even verify she's a girl? That only makes it worse). Especially to men who want to defend women from male predators, and the writers were presumably thumbing their noses at gentlemen wishing to protect a woman's dignity and privacy, along with the women themselves.

The writer goes on to discuss the X-Men's leader and the main villain:
With the civil rights movement in mind, my juniors will consider how Xavier and Magneto correspond to the Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr. and Malcolm X, respectively. With this creative hook, students explore sources to further enhance their learning. I can’t take credit for this lesson, as other pop-savvy teachers also use it, and I’m uncertain where or from whom I borrowed the idea. What’s clear, though, is that comic books intensify student interest.
Whether this is college or grade school in focus, the problem is that today, Magneto would be considered the good guy and Xavier the villain. Malcolm X was a Muslim convert, and that would make him a positive example in the eyes of many modern leftists. And on that note, here's where the columnist turns to focus on a writer who's not worthy:
I also love that Ta-Nehisi Coates, one of the most influential African-American writers today, wrote two Black Panther series for Marvel and next will pen his own take on Captain America.
Yeah, because his politics align perfectly with PBS' own, right? With the politics he's already put on display, that's why his upcoming run on Cap can only be dreaded. Besides, how can he be influential if both his prior runs on BP were sales failures?

The following paragraph also has something fishy:
For other ideas on how to include comics in the classroom, I connected with Tim Smyth, a high school social studies teacher at Wissahickon High School in Ambler, Pennsylvania. Recently, after screening a trailer of “Black Panther,” his students discussed the film’s deeper historical significance. But Smyth didn’t stop here. He also showed a panel from “Rise of the Black Panther” #1, which takes place during World War II, to launch his unit on European imperialism.
Umm, I thought this was German imperialism we were talking about? Or National Socialist imperialism, if anything. Strange they're being so ambiguous about this, suggesting leftism was taken to horrific extremes in this piece.

Anyway, the Black Panther books I believe fit in the classroom include the Lee/Kirby introductions in Fantastic Four, the Don McGregor and Christopher Priest stories, but Reginald Hudlin's decidedly didn't work, and Coates was definitely a bad choice. Like much of the rest of Marvel's inventory, BP suffered after Joe Quesada took over as EIC. I also believe the older Supergirl stories up to 2002 and the older X-Men stories up to at least the early 90s are worthwhile for classrooms, but much of what's come since is a mess, and since the mid-2000s, have been flooded with leftism and other dreadfully handled elements. Too bad the PBS columnist's not willing to distinguish between the good and the bad.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, March 26, 2018

IDW's ending their Transformers comics, hinting at what could come of their own business

Fascinating news has just turned up, suggesting further that IDW's fortunes are...transforming:
The fate of all worlds are at stake, as the world-eating menace Unicron has set his sights on Cybertron, home of the TRANSFORMERS robots, and next in line… EARTH! A bi-weekly six issue event titled TRANSFORMERS: UNICRON arrives this July and will bring about the end of the TRANSFORMERS universe as we know it. As Optimus Prime gathers his defense against this monstrous threat, it might be too little too late.

Veteran TRANSFORMERS creators John Barber (Optimus Prime) and Alex Milne (More Than Meets The Eye) are joined by colorist Sebastian Cheng (Revolution) to tell the epic conclusion to the current TRANSFORMERS comic book universe.

[...] “TRANSFORMERS: UNICRON is a grand finale to the past 12 years of TRANSFORMERS comics at IDW and to really celebrate that and to celebrate the people who have made it such an amazing ride, we’re getting some amazing, beloved artists to contribute to what I'm sure will be our biggest—literally—TRANSFORMERS story ever,” said David Mariotte, Associate Editor. “This is an event years in the making and one that only works because of the years fans and creators have invested in the comic.”
But no longer, judging from recent sales and their own fortunes dwindling. If the TF-based comics are riding their last mileage, and Hasbro's not renewing their license, they may not renew it for the other comic adaptations either, based on GI Joe or even the Dungeons & Dragons comics (Wizards of the Coast is a subsidiary of theirs today). Mariotte himself made the situation worse with his virtue-signal attacks on the fanbases, so he'll certainly be out of a job in editing, deservedly so. Their fortunes do look like they could be transforming down to the size of a Renault Twizy, which is pretty tiny for an electric car.

It's very sad this all had to happen, of course, and it turned out Chris Ryall and Mariotte, if anybody, were such embarrassments, because some of the earlier content they put out looked pretty good, and then they had to ruin everything by taking a swerve to social justice, possibly in revenge for Trump's election. And now, we have to hope the industry will learn a lesson, take a good look at the mistakes IDW made and refrain from doing the same. If IDW does survive this mess, they'd do well to take the time concentrating on producing decent entertainment and not obsessing over politics, period. The industry can't afford it any longer.

Labels: , , ,

Oh, he thinks he's such a genius, doesn't he?

The Arkansas Times-Record published another of Andrew Smith's lowbrow columns, this one talking about Superman's history in preparation for Syfy's new Krypton series. It's what comes at the end that decidedly rings hollow, because of a certain gushing job he did at least 13 years ago I don't recall him ever apologizing for or disowning. He talks about a Superboy story from the late 1970s that was in questionable taste:
And for the finale, we present The Worst Krypton Story Of All Time. No lie. “Don’t Call Me Superboy!” came out in 1977, and is so ethically challenged one wonders how it ever made it past the Comics Code.

It involved the “Super-Teacher of Krypton,” a robot that had appeared in a 1959 story of the same name — a robot created by Jor-El (of course), who came to Earth to test Superboy’s mastery of his super-powers. Which was a harmless little story, if a bit hokey.

But then Super-Teacher returned in 1977 to test the now-older Teen of Steel’s moral paradigm. To do so, it kidnaps an Earth girl, brainwashes her to be the exact kind of girl Superboy can’t help but fall in love with, and sends her out to take his virginity. Afterward, he arranges a scenario where she appears to be killed by a Bigfoot. (I am not making this up.) An enraged Superboy restrains himself from killing the monster, thereby passing the Super-Teacher’s morality test. Afterward the girl is set free with no memory of her, um, experience.

Now, things may be different on Krypton, but here on Mama Earth we call that “rape.” Let’s hope that “Don’t Call Me Superboy!” is one of the many Krypton stories that have fallen down the memory hole, like Luthor dating Superman’s mom. I mean, some things are just too icky, even for comics.
First off, it does sound like a dreadful story. But this column was written by the same Smith who once fawned over the same publisher's Identity Crisis miniseries in 2004, with nary a word on how visually obnoxious it was, and worst of all, how it minimized a serious issue, preferring instead to make the Justice League out to look like the baddies, all because they had Zatanna give Dr. Light a "magic lobotomy", and made her look like a tool in the process. Just who is he to claim moral authority on these topics when he failed to be objective years ago, and acknowledge the story's 2nd issue had Sue Dibny molested on her rear before being subjected to anal rape, something I doubt took place in Golden/Silver/Bronze Age comics, and most publishers at the time usually knew better than to stuff vulgar content into their wares, lest they risk losing audiences in the long run. Smith's failure to apologize for sensationalizing a serious topic - especially in the era of Harvey Weinstein scandals - only makes this look like a pathetic attempt to pass himself off as responsible.

It's also odd he doesn't cite the exact location of this Superboy tale, which was published in DC Super-Stars #12, dated February 1977. Because how is anybody supposed to at least look it up and determine for themselves? Diversions of the Groovy Kind has some scans, and while it does look shoddy, it's far from the extreme approach Smith's hypocritical article makes it sound like. Nevertheless, the notion the robot would abduct and brainwash an innocent girl to use as a pawn in giving young Kal-El a "teachable moment" is offensive and insulting to the intellect, and it makes little difference if the story was supposed to be a dream sequence, and "Misty" based on the stewardess on the airplane Clark Kent and Jimmy Olson were riding on back from a trip to Europe. The story is certainly one of the most embarrassing of its time.

And if there was any rape in the story (the definition which may not be clear here), which character would be foremost responsible? IMHO, it would be the robot, because he was the one who snatched the girl from her hometown and brainwashed her, not Superboy, who had no way of knowing until the disgraceful bucket of bolts finally told him (and he's not outraged as he should be that this android would do something criminal). So can Superboy be faulted? If anyone has to be, it should be Cary Bates, who wrote it, and Paul Levitz, who was the story editor at the time.

While the story from DC Super-Stars #12 is certainly dreadful, Smith, alas, has no business playing moralist when he went gushing over a story that was much worse, and minimized the subject of sexual assault altogether for the sake of a stealth leftist agenda. It's obviously an attempt to win over the #MeToo nitwits despite how hypocritical and one-sided they're turning out to be, ignoring pressing issues taking place under the radar. I wouldn't even be shocked if years before, he didn't consider the tale a bad one, and is just another hypocrite who only came around to reconsidering after the Weinstein scandal made headlines. Or did he? Not if he can't own up and admit he was wrong to fluff-coat the miniseries in his earlier puff pieces. The Superboy story from 1977 may be one of the worst in the Superman lore, but Identity Crisis is one of the worst in the DC lore as a whole.

Labels: , , , ,

Sunday, March 25, 2018

Gerry Conway predictably opposes Comicsgate

This doesn't surprise me, recalling some of Conway's rabid leftism. He first pointed to the Buzzfeed smear, and then went on act as apologist for the social justice machine:

The prior management at Marvel under Axel Alonso (and even the management under Dan DiDio at DC in the mid-2000s) basically said specific whites can no longer be superheroes, much as their apologists pretend it wasn't the case. And no one's saying whites should comprise all the superheroes. I'm a fan of Black Panther, Black Lightning, Misty Knight, Storm, Sunfire, John Stewart of the GLC, Blade, Cyborg, Colleen Wing, Firebird, Vixen, Monica Rambeau/Capt. Marvel 2, Jim Rhodes, and I also want to note that Vibe, Conway's Latino creation for the Justice League Detroit era, shouldn't have been knocked off as he was at the end of the 1960-87 series' run. But, I get the strange feeling Conway doesn't care, ironically or not. Predictably, Gerry refuses to consider any and all examples where replacement of an established white protagonist with a POC or a woman was forced and contrived for the sake of it, or worse, for the sake of forcing bad ideologies into the Big Two's output (eg-the Muslim Ms. Marvel).

This from the same guy who once made offensive statements about Israel, and I don't know if he's ever apologized for it. Granted, he did condemn Ardian Syaf last year for stealthing anti-Judeo/Christian messages into the backgrounds of his illustrations for X-Men Gold, but he's still given suggestions he has a lenient view of Islam, and if he still does, then I can't take the above at face value. Though I'll have to admit it's a flattering idea to think of Hal Jordan as a metaphor for a Jewish protagonist. Maybe that's why Ron Marz and Dan Jurgens' transformation of Hal into a murderous tyrant called Parallax is so revolting.

As for Ben Grimm as a Jewish character, I know it was written into the Fantastic Four in 2001 (I have the back issue #56 in my collection somewhere), but I don't think it was ever mentioned decades prior, if at all. Though I will say that if Conway still holds views I find ghastly, that's why he has no business complaining about anti-semitism if he holds reprehensible views on Israel.

I don't understand why he thinks a black girl has to replace Tony Stark wholesale as Iron Man, and an Asian guy has to replace Bruce Banner as the Hulk (along with stereotypical comments like "totally awesome"), and a Muslim character has to replace Carol Danvers as Ms. Marvel. On which note, I also gotta wonder if he sees nothing wrong with Carol being illustrated as horrifically masculine. In a way, he's entirely rejected his development of Carol as Ms. Marvel in 1977 with John Buscema. And maybe that's because, while he co-developed the superheroine role, Carol wasn't his own creation - she was introduced as a civilian cast member in March 1968 in Marvel Super Heroes #13, co-created by Roy Thomas and Gene Colan. So in a way, he's insulting one of Thomas' creations, recalling he implied a negative stance today towards the guy because Thomas doesn't agree with the SJW notion Iron Fist's racial background should be changed to Asian in a TV show. Or, put another way, Conway doesn't respect past creations enough to recommend creating new characters in their very own roles. His ultra-leftist stance, alas, plays a part in this.

No kidding. You mean to say it's virtually impossible?!? Wow, now there's somebody who narrows his vision accordingly! Then, replying to a post about anybody harassing over comics being human garbage (an idea he must've gotten from Anita Sarkeesian when she attacked Carl Benjamin), he says:

Tsk tsk. I must seriously disagree. Being critical is one thing, but antagonizing is another. A clue how weak Conway's grasp of morale really is.

I think they actually stopped being diverse nearly 2 decades ago, when conservatives like Chuck Dixon were blacklisted (and this around the time Bush Jr. was elected, which could explain why Joe Quesada must've shunned him at the time).

Sorry, but it does, just as much as it does with white heroes too. A story featuring a diversity-pandering creation can also be quite boring, and pretty much all these recent stunts Marvel/DC pulled were, and found no sizable audience to justify their existence.

He's also got some more political tweets to offer:


Gee, I thought business improved the past year under Trump. More ungrateful attitudes from Conway, even though he probably didn't bother to vote for Clinton.

Nobody resisted change. They just objected to contrived, forced replacement of established heroes for the sake of publicity stunts. Say, is Conway apathetic to Marvel's poor treatment of Jane Foster after they exploited her for said stunts?

He's also got to realize he didn't create Carol Danvers herself; it's Thomas and Colan who did. And that his positions are insulting to them, after all the hard work they did to create her in the first place. Yes, seriously.


Some of Marvel's recent stunts could be accused of racism/sexism too, like Syaf's own propaganda. If anything, Conway shouldn't act like it's impossible for it to still happen.

Suppose they stop leading these transgender lifestyles and just be themselves? If anything, men shouldn't be doing it as an excuse to enter the ladies' room, and if that's why Trump's taking these steps to protect women's privacy, then Conway might want to respect it...lest he be considered sexist!

If he'd argue comics should turn to trades only and abandon monthly pamphlet formats, his argument would be more convincing. Or they could at least lower prices to less than even 3 dollars. I think Alterna's publishing some for only $1.50, which is certainly less by today's standards than what even IDW's charging for their pamphlets. Alas, Conway's uppity liberalism must be getting in the way of thinking creatively.

And again, it's a terrible shame this is what Conway's like today. He may not have always held such degrading visions, but his degenerations into such leftism - which I recall seeing in a handful of TV show episodes he wrote in the 1990s - certainly don't help his image from a modern perspective. I do think it's high time he stopped wasting so much time on Twitter and just got back to writing in books and TV, if that'd at least ensure he'll be more respectful than he's been in the past several years.

Labels: , , , , , ,

Saturday, March 24, 2018

If Black Lightning's daughters were brought back to DCU, it shouldn't be as daughters per se

CBR is making the argument that a contrived part of history Black Lightning creator Tony Isabella didn't approve of should be brought back just because the characters were used in the TV show:
Black Lightning and Batman have a storied history together as members of the superhero team known as the Outsiders. Though the prelude to Dark Nights: Metal alludes to their stint as teammates, this will be the first time in Rebirth history that we’ve seen the two of them working together. Judging by the arc’s title, it appears that this arc will bring the Outsiders back into the DC Universe in some capacity, and that’s all well and good. But this is also a great opportunity to bring back Jefferson Pierce’s daughters, Anissa and Jennifer, aka fellow superheroes Thunder and Lightning.

[...] After a brief appearance in the New 52’s Teen Titans series, the two heroes basically vanished off the face of the Earth. The last time the two of them were really acknowledged by DC before their live-action debut was in a pair of well-received animated shorts, so their return to comics would be both welcome and incredibly smart. Given how Marvel has gotten so many to fall in love with Black Panther‘s Nakia, the Dora Milaje and Shuri, it would behoove DC to follow suit now that audiences have grown to love Nafessa Williams and China Anne McClain’s performances as the two daughters on television.
Sidekicks are fine, but IIRC, Isabella once argued that the characters, either or both whom were introduced by Judd Winick, did not fit in plausibly with the premise as he originally developed it. In other words, he disapproved. Though I will say that, if Chuck Dixon treated Thunder with disrespect when he was writing Outsiders in the mid-2000s just because she was turned into a lesbian earlier, that was a decided mistake; it's not her fault for that, but Winick's.

And according to the comments section, there's inaccuracies in this article:
Thunder and Lignting didnt appear at all in any New 52 series, the characters youre referring to are completely different just with the same code names.
Figures CBR would be that sloppy at this point. And another says:
Jennifer and Anissa Pierce exist as Black Lightning's cousins in Tony Isabella's current "Black Lightning: Cold Dead Hands" mini-series.
So in other words, contrary to what the dopey CBR writer told everyone, they were reintroduced, just in a way more plausible with BL's origins. Personally, I'd think it even better to make them his nieces. But not as biological daughters, as it simply doesn't mesh well with the original premise from the Bronze Age. In fact, it shouldn't have to be done simply because of a TV show, but because co-stars in a comic could have potential for storytelling possibilities.

Labels: ,

SJWs throw Dan Jurgens under the bus after all the pandering he did for them

I've noted before some of Jurgens' pretensions - certainly in modern times - as a writer. How he wrote stuff that could be just what SJWs were delighted with. But now, that pandering personality of Jurgens has worn off with them, as one of Bleeding Cool's crummiest writers attacks Jurgens for being critical of overweight people taking up room on an airline. He apparently erased his comments from Twitter proper, which read as following:
Immense fat guy shoehorned into the seat next to me. Seriously, these folks need to buy two seats or first class.
And responding to others criticizing him:
When the belly fat pours over the armrest Jabba the Hutt style it gets ridiculous.
Nobody seems to realize obesity that bad can pose a problem in a tight space, and certainly not the clown who went after him on BC. His own statements are as follows:
Of course, a First Class plane ticket can cost 10 times as much as a regular ticket, and even buying two regular seats can be expensive depending on the flight. And the problem with airline seating seems to be one of the airlines’ making, as airline seats have continuously gotten smaller and smaller, even as the average size of Americans has gotten larger, part of a general trend to cut costs and pack more travellers onto a single plane. Even for an average-sized person, a trip on most modern airlines is far from comfortable. For a person of above average size, it can be a nightmare.

Given all of that, reactions to Jurgens’s tweet were negative, accusing the writer of fat-shaming, lacking empathy, and contradicting the principles he writes about, amongst other things. But Jurgens followed up by doubling down.

It looks like Jurgens hasn’t yet reconsidered, even though several followers have responded by telling him he’s lost them as a fan. Maybe he’ll have a change of heart by the time he lands? Perhaps he even talked with the “immense fat guy” who was unfortunately seated next to him and gained a new perspective on the issue? If this were a comic book, that would be the ending we’d expect to see.
So, they're accusing him of "fat shaming", are they? No matter how unfortunately wide it can make a person, to say nothing of unhealthy and at risk of cholesterol and cancer inside? Sigh.

One of the commenters defended Jurgens' criticism thus:
I'm a fat guy and I support Jurgens 100%. If someone is causing you discomfort in a tight, claustrophobic space, at the very least you should be able to vent about it on Twitter. He didn't give names or post a photo of the dude.

Many years ago, I tried to get on a coaster, but I couldn't fit in the seat. To make matters worse, several park hands tried to help me fit. They were respectful, but it didn't make it any less embarrassing. People in the line were upset, but I don't blame them. They waited an hour and a half, and I was holding everyone up. They had a right to be mad. Anyways, I used that as motivation and slimmed down. Two years later and 75 pounds lighter, I went back to the place of my shame and rode it 20 times (it was the winter. Best time to go to the boardwalk).
See, it's not like most fat men and women want to be that way. It has its unhealthiness, as noted, and there are fat people who've suffered heart attacks, including my own father in 1994; he was lucky to survive.

All this aside, as I'd noted before, Jurgens is anything but a conservative, and in the past year, he even wrote a story in Superman where illegal immigrants and and Islamists were made to look like victims of white supremacists. Even earlier, he may have been the first writer to abuse Obsidian from Infinity Inc by changing his sexual orientation; some way to respect the hard work by Roy and Dann Thomas alright! In other words, he was doing exactly what SJWs of today would like, and doesn't seem sorry about it.

Which makes this a case of those same SJWs deciding he's no longer useful to them and betraying him, as I'm sure Lenin betrayed some of his "useful idiots". I don't approve of what BC is doing with Jurgens, but at the same time, considering this is a guy who's been involved in projects that hurt the DCU more than helped - including the story in Superman where Cat Grant's son was killed by the Toyman in 1993 - that's why I can't just go out and support his modern work at all costs. I do own some of his work as an illustrator on Green Arrow when Mike Grell was the writer, and even some back issues of his runs on the original Booster Gold run from 1986-88, Captain America and Thor in the late 90s, but beyond that, I find it difficult to support the work of a man who aided and abetted the dumbing down of the DCU and/or MCU. Catering to bad SJWs who won't even read his books won't ensure they'll give him their eternal backing.

Update: it gets even worse. Jurgens just congratulated the scribe of Identity Crisis for a book ranking as a best-seller:

Wow, as if he couldn't make things galling enough, now he has to associate himself with Meltzer, while Orson Scott Card, presumably, isn't somebody Jurgens would converse with. This is truly sad.

Labels: , , , ,

Friday, March 23, 2018

Jane Foster's been sacrificed for no good reason

And the worst part is that Screen Rant, reviewing the Thor issue where it takes place, fawns over the whole mess:
At long last, the death of Marvel’s THOR has finally come. Way back in 2014, writer Jason Aaron introduced a brand new Thor – making headlines at first for making Thor a woman this time. It was hardly the first time Mjolnir had been wielded by someone other than the Odinson, but Aaron spun a clever tale, carefully holding back on the female Thor’s true identity for almost a year. Finally, he revealed that the new Thor was none other than Jane Foster, the Odinson’s classic love interest.

That revelation always meant Thor’s story had a time-limit imposed on it, and Marvel made no secret of Jane’s impending death. Jane Foster’s “worthiness” took the form of becoming Thor before dying of terminal cancer, sacrifice herself because she knew the world needed a god of thunder. Tragically, every time she transformed, the hammer’s magic negated the effect of her chemotherapy. Being a hero was literally killing her, but she continued to choose that path.
No mention of any political crap that found its way into the script, including a jab at the Gamergate campaign, and how strange that the same people who were upholding Jane as a female Thor a few years ago suddenly don't care anymore. Which just proves they were never fans of Stan Lee and Jack Kirby's rendition of the Norse Thunder God - let alone Jane - in the first place, and if Marvel hadn't gone out of their way, they wouldn't have cared about that either. It was never story merit that interested them, but rather, a chance to tear down cohesion in comicdom. And says who the story had a time limit imposed on it? If they wanted to and there was no disagreement, they'd keep on with it for years to come. Besides, these press sources originally gave it their full backing.

And why should knowledge or not of who the female Thor really is make it any good? It doesn't, and turning Jane into more than just a deity (which happened briefly in the late 60s), by shoving her into the role of her once-lover proper turns it all into more of a comedy-fest. Make her a deity, but it should be as her own agency, and they don't even have to give her a superhero codename to get the job done.

Next, wait'll you see what happens to the Uru hammer as much as Jane herself, as the site continues to fawn with such maddening treacle:
Thor #705 is a fitting end to Jane Foster’s story. It’s not possible to out-fight the Mangog, who was created to wreak vengeance upon the gods. Instead, Jane chooses to restrain the creature in a chain, which she fastens to Mjolnir. Then, bringing a final fateful end to the battle, she flings Mjolnir into the heart of the Sun itself – dragging the Mangog with it.

Thor must watch in horror as his enchanted hammer is destroyed, before realizing the enormity of what Jane has done: without Mjolnir in her hand, the female Thor will revert to human form once again. To defeat the gods, Jane destroyed her only chance at life.
Why is it a fitting end? Foster has no worthiness as a co-star? No less dumbfounding is that the magic hammer of Thor is destroyed, which would make it difficult to continue his own crimefighting career, if not for the fact the writers could conceive a new one. It gets more aggravating with the following justification:
The death of Jane Foster is a beautiful and poignant sacrifice; it’s also, in thematic terms, a death that turns the typical story upside-down. The Judaeo-Christian tradition stresses the sacrificial nature of God and his Son, and the Thor franchise has often toyed with a similar concept of “worthiness,” even on the big screen. In both Thor and Thor: The Dark World, it is Thor’s willingness to sacrifice himself that makes him worthy.

This time round, though, the Messianic story has been neatly inverted. It is the human who must give her life to save the gods; it is the capricious gods who must go on to prove themselves worthy of Jane Foster‘s sacrifice.
I'm sorry, but even this does not justify the notion of killing off Jane. But, they probably did it out of spite for fandom's rejection of Foster as a pawn in a diversity game. It gets no better with the following:
But Aaron has done more than just invert the Messianic tradition; the death of Jane Foster also continues the themes he’s been developing through his entire run. Back in 2013, Aaron introduced the character of Gorr, the God-Butcher (Marvel Studios adapted elements of the character for Hela’s powerset in Thor: Ragnarok). As a youth, Gorr had been brought up to believe in the gods – but they had never answered his prayers. Furious, he had launched a crusade against the gods, slaughtering them with the Necrosword. Even Thor was tempted to believe Gorr was right; “That gods were cruel and jealous creatures. That it was time for their age to pass.”
It sounds more like what we have here is a character who can't recognize why it helps to forge his own path without relying on pagan gods and prayers alone.
In 2014, a single whispered sentence from Nick Fury – who possessed the all-seeing knowledge of the Watchers – was enough to render Thor unworthy. Finally, in The Unworthy Thor #5, Aaron revealed what that sentence was; “Gorr was right.” That whispered truth seared itself into Thor’s heart, as he realized the gods of Asgard are unworthy; indeed, all the gods are. Mjolnir, too, acknowledged the truth.

The gods are not worthy; and yet Jane Foster is still willing to die on their behalf. [...]
So Thor's bunch on Asgard is unworthy in what way? Most likely as vessels for storytelling; is it any wonder they wasted years on meaningless nonsense? This all reeks of disdain for the very properties Aaron was given the keys to scripting. DC pulled similar stunts with the Amazons in Wonder Woman too, for that matter. It's truly ridiculous considering the deities in Thor were never depicted as utter saints, and neither were the Amazons.

The most sickening sight from this "finale" for Foster has to be the panel where she's shown dead in Thor's arms while her hair is gone from loss to cancer. As a fan of Jane Foster as much as the Marvel take on Thor, I find it most incredibly distasteful she's been sacrificed on the alter of PC, no thanks in part to the SJWs whose refusal to protest this terrible misuse only proves they never cared for her as a character, but rather, as a tool to exploit for undermining real, dedicated storytelling. Back in the Bronze Age, she'd already come into being a woman who could defend herself against violent maniacs, and that was enough; they didn't have to go to such lengths to make her into something so heavy-handed as a female Thor. This is all the result of increasing employment of hack writers who don't have a clue to what made past comicdom work far better, and who relied far too much on company wide crossovers to cover for their lack of talent. I realize reversing Jane's fate is entirely possible, but the PC advocates at Marvel, so long as they remain, are bound to make sure this weak storytelling status quo remains in place much like they've gone to such lengths to make sure Mary Jane Watson can never be Peter Parker's wife.

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Buzzfeed's written another smear against the Comicsgate campaign

There haven't been as many articles about Comicsgate as there have about Gamergate. I assume it's because some of the sources doing the smear tactics realize the "creators" who're against it include such alarming scum, they felt discouraged. But here's one more that's turned up on Buzzfeed, and no shock to anybody in-the-know, it's tilted more in favor of the anti-Comicsgate bunch than the pro-Comicsgate bunch:
An online harassment campaign and culture war called #Comicsgate is underway against people pushing to diversify the comic book industry, with trolls and their influential enablers targeting those calling for increased representation for women, different races, and the LGBT community.

Several comics superfans and creators are calling it a dark evolution of the Gamergate controversy that targeted women participating in video game culture with abuse.

Comicsgate trolls use racist, sexist, and sometimes threatening language to intimidate people they call “SJWs” — or “social justice warriors,” essentially anyone they believe is advocating for diversity in the industry. Some of the messages are overt, while most are cloaked in innuendo or make inside references to the comics world that outsiders would find confusing.
And where are all the thousands upon thousands of screencaps to make their point? Quit boring us into slumberland, please. All this proves is Buzzfeed is otherwise one of the shoddiest news sites around, and they're just repeating the same narrative used against the Gamergate campaign. Anybody familiar with the mainstream reaction to that subject will recognize the approach used here.

The difference of course, is that while there are video game designers who backed Gamergate, not everyone managing comics publishers does the same, because not only is the comics medium smaller as compared with the computer game medium, quite a few insiders are far too leftist to the point they make the gaming industry's own look tame by comparison. There's also the problem of freelancers who're afraid that openly siding with it will destroy their careers, so only a few like Jon Malin have made a serious effort to speak out.

They downplayed the seriousness of Aubrey Sitterson's nasty comments about 9-11, and smeared GI Joe fans in the process:
Comicsgate supporters have had some success affecting the industry. Artist Aubrey Sitterson told BuzzFeed News he was targeted by trolls when he drew a variant cover of GI Joe to celebrate LGBTQ Pride Month in June 2o17. Then, he said, Comicsgate trolls pounced on his poorly worded tweet about this past 9/11 anniversary.
Wouldn't you know it, they downplayed the seriousness of his sleazy comment, preferring to describe it as "poorly worded", even as they provided a screencap of the same. And they only provided one tweet and not the others, where he even resorted to the F-curse. It goes without saying the reporter even insulted many GI Joe fans who'd served in the army themselves (I also served in the IDF for a short time when I was 19 in the mid-90s). And whether Gay Pride Month matters, does that excuse the poor artwork and Sitterson's alarmingly hostile attacks on anybody who found it so? Also, notice they erroneously indicate he's an illustrator rather than a writer? They later offered a correction, but it's just too little, too late, given how lethargic their coverage was to start with.
BuzzFeed News has asked IDW Publishing if the trolls played a role in the comic’s cancellation, and has yet to hear back. IDW told other outlets that Sitterson “expressed opinions on his personal social media account that many find insensitive, divisive, and inflammatory. IDW in no way condones or supports these personal opinions whatsoever, and recognizes the pain they may cause our readers.”
Before that, they initially defended him until Hasbro thankfully caught on and demanded disciplinary action. The reporter evidently doesn't care how offensive Sitterson was being towards Americans devastated by the terrorist attack on 9-11.
Sitterson said he thinks the true reason he was on the radar in the first place was the content of his comic. “If you look at any of their actual critiques of me or the book, they always come down to Salvo” — a main GI Joe character who was traditionally a male, but who Sitterson drew as a lesbian “woman of color who isn't built like a fitness model.”
If he wants to conceive overweight lesbian protagonists, it would be perfectly okay if he did it in his own books, and not wasted time transforming established characters from famous franchises into his vision of what a comic book should be. Why, now that I think of it, when it comes to the diversity propaganda foisted on entertainment today, even Kendra Saunders, the mostly Latina Hawkgirl introduced by James Robinson and David Goyer in 1999, was an early example, made all the more invalid because it built on one of the worst crossovers in DC history - 1994's Zero Hour, where Shiera Sanders, the 1st Hawkgirl, was killed simply to advance PC narratives. And Saunders was depicted as a girl who'd tried to commit suicide, and from what Goyer/Geoff Johns established, it looks like she succeeded, and was revived by Shiera's spirit reincarnating in her body. Which actually made Kendra more of a shell than her own agency. And it got even absurder during the New 52, where Kendra was turned black. This was at least a few years before Marvel went diversity-pandering full force.

Anyway, it's clear Buzzfeed's writer sees nothing wrong with changing established characters into something far different at the expense of the original incarnations, which does a terrible disfavor to the veterans who went to such pains to create their characters in the first place, including Stan Lee.
Comicsgaters rejoiced last year when Marvel executive David Gabriel told a retailer summit that “people don’t want diversity” and blamed declining sales. “Everyone's mad at them for admitting it, but Marvel is correct that forced diversity & SJW crap has drove their sales into the ground,” tweeted one pro-Comicsgate account. “Marvel finally realises that forced diversity doesn't sell,” said another “anti-SJW” account.
Given that story merit still hasn't improved significantly, that's why we're not rejoicing in such a hurry. It's still not clear if Marvel's willing to restore the Spider-marriage, for example. Even DC hasn't restored Cyborg's full history as a Teen Titan yet. On which note, isn't it interesting how DC took a fine creation like Vic Stone and shoehorned him into the Justice League at the Martian Manhunter's expense, all for the sake of filling a diversity quota, as though aliens from different planets are suddenly not imaginative enough? By retconning Cyborg into a Justice Leaguer sans Titans history, they actually diminished his potential as a character more than built it. And it was all done for the sake of serving as a casting setup for a now abortive movie to build on, as though screenwriters couldn't take the liberties needed to do it themselves. How cheap. Yet this has been a problem for surely longer than we thought - DC changed Wonder Woman's focus to the Earth-2 incarnation circa the WW2 era in the Bronze Age for about a year to reflect the first season of the TV show from 1976-79, as if nobody could figure out WW had made her way into modern times long ago.
Comicsgaters recently turned to blacklists and hashtag campaigns in an attempt to show their power within the industry. [...]
Umm, I think that idea was called off rather quickly, because it was felt blacklisting was not the right way to go. A boycott is one thing, but a blacklist carries a far more negative connotation. Predictably, they even go on to target Ethan Van Sciver:
Van Sciver has worked in comics for decades, for both Marvel and DC, on prominent titles such as Green Lantern: Rebirth, New X-Men, and Wolverine. Industry insiders have called him out for playing a role in the harassment, specifically saying that his troll followers will swarm anyone he disagrees with on Twitter. Van Sciver told BuzzFeed News he is the victim in all this.
But no clear information about the obscenities the cartoonist Darryl Ayo was espousing, let alone the CBR/Polygon writer Kieran Shiach's own defamation/blacklisting campaign. The latter's own attitudes even discouraged me from reading some of his own articles. It gets even weirder with the following:
Van Sciver isn't one of the faceless accounts who lead the abuse. But he will often interact with men who advocate for diversity or who engage him, rather than women. From there, some of his followers attack. Van Sciver claims he’s trying to use his platform — which often leads to harassment —“to bring peace through conversation.” Ultimately, trying to separate what’s ironic, what’s genuine, and what’s merely a motif in Van Sciver’s art is emblematic of the ongoing chaos of Comicsgate.
Okay, what's the meaning of this? How odd they admit he's been on friendly terms with male PC diversity advocates, (including Dan Slott, unfortunately), but not women. Maybe because most women, whatever their politics, recognize why it's better to avoid causing a ruckus? Besides, it's entirely possible Sciver's spoken with vets like Ann Nocenti and Louise Simonson, who were good writers in the Bronze/Iron Age of comics, and there are women in comicdom today with decent personalities who're being passed over by many companies for jobs they might have what it takes to accomplish, all because their visions and politics may not coincide with what Joe Quesada and Dan DiDio see fit. Obviously, it's no different than what any men face.
Malin told BuzzFeed News, “Nazis are racist authoritarians, Social Justice Warriors are a loser group of racist and sexist authoritarians working its way further into positions of power and influence.”

Usually, a fight like this catches the eye of a bigger personality in the Comicsgate universe — like Van Sciver. Once it does, it’s like pouring gasoline on a fire. It doesn’t always take a public disagreement for the trolling to start – the announcement of a new comic by a blacklisted or disliked creator, or simply a regular target tweeting, can kick off an altercation.

When Ayo pushed back against Malin, Van Sciver tweeted to his followers, asking if they’d want to see Ayo and Malin debate each other on Van Sciver’s YouTube channel.

Then Van Sciver replied directly to Ayo’s tweet, inviting him to come on his show — ComicArtistPro Secrets — and “say what you have to say” to Malin.

Ayo declined his invite and instead posted a thread of tweets saying he believed Van Sciver was luring him into an “obvious set-up.” As soon as Van Sciver engaged Ayo, a wave of abuse from Comicsgate Twitter trolls began.
All claimed without any clear examples or context provided, I see. Ayo missed a big chance to boost himself and prove he was above such insanity, instead resorting to more mindless victimhood. The article's starting to get really boring at this point, and again, makes clear whose side they're not on:
As a harassment campaign builds steam, many of the Comicsgate accounts sending the abuse will try to paint themselves as the true victims of harassment. Van Sciver, for instance, started posting screenshots of various times Ayo had publicly accused him of being a Nazi.
So let's see if I have this right. It's not offensive to call somebody innocent a National Socialist? Next thing you know, they won't consider it offensive to call somebody innocent an Ottoman tyrant either, no matter how repulsive it is to liken somebody innocent to the Turkish Islamic empire and how it behaved in its last years during WW1 when 1.5 million Armenians were murdered by the Turkish jihadists. (Of course, what's preventing these SJWs at this point from doing something like that is that it doesn't fit in with their PC narrative.) Buzzfeed's article is getting disgusting at this point. And again, boring, so I'll address at least one more part:
There is, however, a growing backlash to Comicsgate among some women writers who have suffered through previous harassment campaigns. Speaking up like this is a rarity because doing so is widely seen in the comic book industry as an invitation for harassment. (Many people use abbreviations of Van Sciver’s name to slow him finding their posts.) A number of these figures spoke up after Ayo’s run-in with Van Sciver.

Rat Queens illustrator Tess Fowler, who has become known in the industry for attempting to protect victims of Comicsgate — by warning potential victims and collecting information on harassers — tweeted, “we're now dealing with a well known pro joining in because they're friends,” a reference to the friendship between Van Sciver and Meyer.
Good grief, they're quoting Fowler, who's said to have sided with a man accused of coming onto an underaged girl? Who's the real "rat queen" then? And if she never spoke out against Eddie Berganza publicly, then I don't see what her point was. Besides, they fail to consider Meyer's spoken positively about the past work of Ann Nocenti on Daredevil.

Anyway, I'll let some of these videos tell the rest about what a hack job this Buzzfeed article truly is (Update: Bounding Into Comics also took a look), because in the end, it rates as quite a snoozer to me. And this could sum up why, in contrast to the Gamergate campaign, there haven't been so many articles about Comicsgate - the SJWs in journalism and such have even less of a clue about the insides and outsides they can't even think how to write an item without looking hilariously cheap at this point. They parrot, they bias, and cannot look past it all to what matters most - that good writing/artwork was thrown out the window for the sake of aggravating leftist politics and sleazy storytelling, and only so many mistakes may not have been repaired yet. One of those really big mistakes was throwing the Spider-marriage out with bath water, and till this day, Marvel's been hell-bent on keeping it that way. Even at DC, they still haven't fully mended their mistakes. So long as ladies like Mary Jane Watson are marginalized, and even Buzzfeed won't offer Spider-fans their support on that issue, superhero comics will continue to be as awful as they've been for many years.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Thursday, March 22, 2018

L.A's Meltdown Comics is the latest store to close

The poor conduct of the industry has claimed another victim, this one a location used by Comedy Central for some of their broadcasts:
Meltdown Comics, an institution of Los Angeles geekdom and the home of Comedy Central’s “The Meltdown With Jonah and Kumail,” is closing its doors next month.

The shop, whose iconic alien mascot “Mel” graced Sunset Boulevard for more than two decades, is closing its doors forever on April 1. Meltdown Comics founder Gaston Dominguez-Letelier made the announcement Wednesday in a post to the shop’s official blog.

“As is the case with all good things, at some point they must come to an end,” Dominguez-Letelier wrote. “Meltdown Comics is no exception to this rule and so, after 25 years coveting every comic treasure we could lay our hands on, I’m sharing that on March 30th I’ll be closing our doors for the final time.”
But don't expect the publishers whose lurch to social justice discouraged consumers to admit they're at fault. Don't even expect them to admit that sticking with pamphlets already reaching 4 dollars an issue - and not switching to paperbacks - is another serious flaw. Yet those are some of the leading factors in the downfall of so many specialty stores today, and the SJWs running the show have to come to terms with that.

It's a terrible shame this Los Angeles business is forced to close, but that's what results from obsession with social justice pandering.

Labels: , , , ,

Wednesday, March 21, 2018

If Infinity Stones is a crossover, it's not what the MCU needs anymore

Not very long after C.B. Cebulski gets his job as Marvel's EIC, they appear to be in the process of launching another event/crossover in the form of Infinity Stones, which must be another variation on Jim Starlin's Infinity Gauntlet tale from 1991 (and he's already left their employ, no thanks to Tom Brevoort):
Marvel has been getting fans even more excited about the Infinity Stones by releasing a new trailer for the Infinity Countdown #1 comic.

The new event began with Adam Warlock returning to the Marvel universe, as he teamed up with Kang and went to 2018 to help stop the battle for the Infinity Gauntlet.

[...] Infinity Countdown will be "a five issue epic" and could feature anyone from the X-Men to Spider-Man to "maybe even an Avenger here or there", according to Cebulski.
It sounds like they added a bit of Secret Wars for good measure, because the X-Men and Spider-Man figured more prominently in that crossover. If this crosses over into other books, then it's basically that - a crossover of a potentially company-wide variety. And no matter the merit of Starlin's own story, these crossovers are something that have to be put to bed already. It certainly shouldn't be too difficult to write up a self-contained miniseries that doesn't require nearly every other ongoing series in their inventory tie in with it.

I will say that, if there's any advantage the early Marvel crossovers had, they didn't emphasize killing off notable cast members like some of DC's did. But it still doesn't make the crossover obsession justified, and it goes without saying they almost always had the effect of sabotaging creative freedom for writers who did want to tell an entertaining story without interference. If nobody calls them out on just how obsessive these crossovers are getting and why it's too expensive (and above all, avoid buying them), they'll never cease. If this is what Cebulski's going to resort to, it's the latest clue he's not thinking his business/artistic strategies through well. We didn't need DC's most recent, Dark Knights: Metal, and we don't need Infinity Stones if it's a company wide crossover either.

Labels: , , ,

A professor at CSUN advocates interdiscipline studies with comics

The CSUN paper spoke about a college professor who's promoting comics for interdisciplinary collaborations at the Northridge university.

Labels: ,

Tuesday, March 20, 2018

New Hampshire's comics and medicine conference

Vermont's Seven Days weekly wrote about the upcoming 9th International Comics and Medicine Conference, where health and the cartoon panels combine, hosted by the Center for Cartoon Studies and scheduled for August 16 later this year.

Labels: ,

Monday, March 19, 2018

Former IDW editor Chris Ryall proves why he spelled disaster for his onetime employer

IDW's now departed editor-in-chief gave a podcast interview, and in response to a tweet announcing it, he just signaled he has no respect for Transformers fans, indicating he considers LGBT ideology far more important than readership:

Wow...so homosexuality is such a big deal to him, he's perfectly fine with offending Transformers fans who find it objectionable. I am aware they injected some of that propaganda into the TF comics they were publishing, making it no better than the shoddy, overrated movies starring Shia LeBeouf. "More than Meets the Eye" indeed! I can only conclude he didn't get into this whole business to set a company on a path to stratospheric success, but to ram SJW ideology down everyone's throats, and afterwards take the money and run.

Ryall also gave an interview to Comics Beat where he looked back at his 14 years as the EIC, and downplayed at least one of the biggest controversies and PR disasters they experienced last year. The beginning is quite the apologia-fest:
Last week The Beat broke the news that IDW’s Editor-in-Chief (and for a time Chief Creative Officer) Chris Ryall was leaving that position. While it came as something of a bombshell to the industry, there was no dark story behind it, just a person leaving a position after 14 years to do other things. [...]
Oh, so nothing dark about the grave mistake of hiring a politically-motivated writer for GI Joe who made horrific comments about 9-11-2001 on his Twitter feed, attacked anybody who disliked the artwork as homophobic, practically attacked all opposition, right-wing or otherwise for getting him fired in the end, and never apologized for the PR fiasco he wound up causing? Stupefying. But it's just like The Beat to water down the whole mess and not admit lines were crossed in how to promote a book. The interview continues with:
THE BEAT: Let’s get right to it. You decided to leave. Why?

RYALL: It’s funny. After 14 years, when you have any job for as long as I’ve had that one–and I never had any job for anywhere near that amount of time – you know, you kick around other options here or there. You think, Is this the thing I want to keep doing or are there other things I would like to do? Well, I’ve got time to do that. I don’t know if it’s fear or inertia or just a general comfort with the job and the people and the circumstances that keep you in a place. It just reached a point where I thought, well, you know there’s not an infinite amount of time to do things and I’ve done this for as long as I have.

It just feels like it’s time to explore other things and move on from there. I’d taken the position about as far as I possibly could and I accomplished a great many things, probably more than I ever thought I would be able to, that were on my dream list of things to do. And so I thought, OK, let’s go find that new dream. Let’s go see what else what else there is to do in the world of comics or out of the world of comics.
Honestly, I'm not sure what other options he's got right now after the comments he made about Transformers fans. In the beginning, he obviously did make successful choices in publishing. But that all went downhill over a year ago, as they started associating with SJW types shortly after Donald Trump was elected, and chose to emulate Marvel's worst recent steps. This is precisely what's wrong with some smaller publishers today - they seem to literally follow what example Marvel's setting no matter how bad, not content with their own approach to win over a crowd. If they can't tell when Marvel's making a mistake, they're not doing a good job, and neither was Ryall in the end.
THE BEAT: I would think a lot of people would think that you’re a pretty brave person because being the editor in chief of a major comics company is pretty much the dream job for a lot of people. So it’s a bold move. How long did it take you to come to this decision?

RYALL: I mean it had been a thing in my head, back and forth, for months, if not a couple of years. But you’re right. But any time you’re at a job. it’s a job. So there’s going to be things that aren’t necessarily exactly the way you want them done. But I was also always conscious of how it’s a stupid thing to complain about petty little things that get to me. But if you want to work in comics, it’s certainly one of the few top jobs available to people in the comic business. We tried to keep that in mind too. I don’t take it for granted and also don’t walk away from something that would be really hard to attain. I started with my first official job in comics as the editor in chief of a major comic publisher and the publisher only got bigger and grew more from that. That’s how I broke in!
And within just a year, they lost all their gain, as they went around the bend and tried pandering to social justice mentality, reducing their profits by 91 percent. Furthermore, if he thinks it's stupid to complain about petty matters, then why did he want to anger paying customers for the Transformers? If he thinks nobody's allowed to object to terrible ideologies, then he's not fit for the job. I may have once thought he was at least halfway decent a fellow, but his comment reveals a very dark side of his personality telling that he certainly lost his moral compass just recently, and that doesn't reflect well on his career at IDW as a whole. He's practically got the personality of a Decepticon. The interview also has an eyebrow-raising revelation about interviewer Heidi MacDonald, and where Ryall previously worked:
THE BEAT: Well, let’s step back 14 years, because if I recall correctly, when you got the job you were working for Movie Poop Shoot [a one time pop culture news site run by Kevin Smith].

RYALL: Yes. That was a side job, though, I had done a lot of other things. At that point I was an advertising copywriter. I’ve been a corporate speechwriter. I’d worked for Dick Clark. But it was that website job through Kevin Smith that really opened the doors to transition to comics. It’s kind of funny that it was the side job that paid a fraction of my real job that was the thing that really led me to the greatest step in my career.

THE BEAT: Right. I think we probably crossed paths a little bit back then.

RYALL: Is it true that you were you were up for the EIC job?

THE BEAT: Ted wanted me to interview for it, but I was just back into the journalism game and I just didn’t want to move back to the West Coast. I knew that deep down, and that as awesome an opportunity as it would have been, I knew for me it wasn’t right. But I can really sympathize with your decision. Sometimes even though it might be the greatest thing on earth, there might be some circumstances or something personal where it’s not the right thing or it’s time to move on or something like that.

RYALL: It’s funny because at the time I got offered the job I think I’d also been offered a job running Kevin Smith’s comic shop in Westwood in California. It was literally in the same week. So I had to decide do I go be a comic publisher or do I go be a comics retailer. They both had their merits. But as a kid I’d always want to be on the publishing side of things and so it was it was too hard to pass up.
So Ryall once worked for the overrated filmmaker Smith, did he? Well I'm aware Smith is as much a leftist as he, and maybe even more (and let's remember the embarrassment he caused with the Black Cat miniseries in the early 2000s), so I guess this explains Ryall's thinking. And MacDonald was almost offered the job of EIC taken in the end by Ryall? It might've kept her out of the dishonest journalism she sank into since, but ultimately, I'm sure she would've been a bad choice and there's every chance she'd take to leftist pandering as Ryall did, and be a victimologist if anybody disagreed with whatever poor steps she'd take. The comics store Smith once owned has since closed, and maybe for the best, though if Ryall had chosen that career, at least we wouldn't have dreadful headcases like him littering up comicdom, as he did in the end. He also noted:
...when I started IDW was a horror publisher that dabbled in licensed things like CSI, and now it’s gone to my being instrumental in bringing in Transformers, which changes the entire scope and face of the company. So that certainly was a huge badge of honor. I’m sure I’m forgetting things after 14 years but getting John Byrne to work on so many different properties over the last decade. Certainly Locke and Key, which to me is probably the premier creator owned book that I’ve ever produced.
Imagine that. A company that once produced horror stories went on to produce more horror stories of a different kind! Namely, the Sitterson catastrophe, along with the Jem & the Holograms monstrosity. 2017 was certainly a most embarrassing year and it's cost them big. He also brought up ROM, which they licensed as well for new adaptations:
God, I don’t know. There’s so many. I mean certainly bringing Rom back was always a goal even when we first started with Transformers and Hasbro in 2005. My second question was “What about Rom?” It was a love of mine that had been out of comics for 30 years. To be able to bring that back is just a huge feat for me, just as the kid who grew up loving this stuff.
I've learned some SJW elements may have turned up in his rendition, so I can't see why he considers ROM a childhood favorite if he's going to cram propaganda down the readers' throats.

Next comes where MacDonald at least admits the controversy ignited by Sitterson existed, but sugarcoats it nevertheless:
THE BEAT: OK, I do have to bring up one of the low points however. A recent controversy that touches on a lot of how comics and social media interact is the Aubrey Sitterson situation.

RYALL: The story has gotten spun in such a way that makes us look like the bad guy and it kills me that that’s the case. Because that all came about because somebody said things that companies (that I don’t own) took exception to. But I and a of couple others really staked our jobs on not making a rash decision on having that person removed and keeping the book going and even rewarded that person with a new series. Ultimately that new series didn’t sell. I’m sure there’s all kinds of ideas of why it didn’t sell but the fact is it didn’t sell right from the start and so it had to go away. But somehow rewarding somebody with a new book and not giving in to these idiots who were trying to put pressure on things, got spun to being that we didn’t support this person. That I think is the thing that hurts, because we did. We supported him, kept his job, gave him a new book and it killed me that it didn’t work.

Also at times I was going to go out there and try to defend it, trying to say no, no you’re wrong. And keeping the conversation going and giving a forum for people to say more terrible things just felt like a losing battle. My entire time at IDW I’ve always approached things as the air is much fresher on the high road.
A confession he backed Sitterson's twisted political vision all along, and indeed, when the scandal first erupted, the staff's initial reaction was to defend him, before most fans and fansites must've surely contacted Hasbro about this, and since the toy company holds the license, IDW had to take responsibility and finally let him go. Sales receipts for the abortive Scarlett's Strike Force bore this out. I think the same has since happened with Wizards of the Coast, today a subsidiary of Hasbro's, after the scandal they caused with Magic the Gathering (which IDW wrote up a few comics based on 4-5 years ago, along with their Dungeons & Dragons adaptations). I even found this thread recorded from 4Chan where an anonymous source says Ryall violated a deal made with Hasbro not to promote the Scarlett's Strike Force title they originally didn't want published, by arranging with Bleeding Cool to give Sitterson a promotional interview. It'll surely have to be taken with a grain of salt, but some of the allegations do sound eerily possible.

So while IDW may have initially had some gems to offer in the past decade, they sure turned the gold into straw since Trump came into office. If Ryall was fired by IDW management for his alarming miscalculations, I can only conclude at this point he deserves it.

It remains to be seen where IDW will stand by the end of the year, if they're even still around at all. Ryall obviously caused them serious damage, and they may be set to lose the Hasbro license, which could lead to more dominoes falling with other licensees, and even creator-owned book writers may pull out. I'm sure if they go under, none of Ryall's apologists will blame him for the shambles the company has now. But, he is the main one guilty, and he'll have to come to terms with that, if he's willing to. All the same, he won't be missed.

Labels: , , , , ,

Flag Counter


track people
webpage logs
Flag Counter