The Four Color Media Monitor

CNET joined the crowd of apologists for SJWs in entertainment with a puff piece about the SDCC that's just another in a long line of junky articles that don't consider any dissent valid:

In the midst of the Saturday hubbub at San Diego Comic-Con 2018, a small group of attendees gathered outside the Hilton San Diego Bayfront Hotel to hold a rally in honor of Rose Tico, a character from Star Wars: The Last Jedi.

The group included Tico cosplayers, and folks wearing shirts with her face on them, illustrated in the style of Shepard Fairey's iconic "Hope" image of President Barack Obama.

One of the saddest things for starters is the takeover of leftism, drawing from what the news site calls "iconic". Which is a lot of baloney that ignores all the harm Obama caused during his undeserved 2 terms of office. If this is what's de riguerre at the convention now, it won't improve their now farcical image.

In the time since The Last Jedi came out, Tico has drawn the ire of a group of Star Wars fans, and last month the resulting vitriol drove the actor who plays her, Kelly Marie Tran, to delete her Instagram account.

"No one should be bullied off social media," the organizer of the Tico rally, Keith Chow, told CNET via email. "And this was our attempt to win the argument, not by fighting what we hate but by saving what we love, to quote Rose's line from the movie."

Of course nobody should be bullied off social media, but then, how come they're only interested in the left-wing side of the affair, and not the right-wing side? Besides, it's already pretty clear Disney has damaged the recent Star Wars entries irrepairably. If they're denying any of that, CNET's made themselves look laughable, and they're even insulting their fellow news outlets, liberal and conservative alike, who also acknowledged the SW franchise has collapsed under Disney's oversight. No doubt, these propagandists would also cover for the bad characterization of Jar Jar Binks over 15 years ago. Let's see what else the article has to say:

Fandom can generate a lot of fun and good vibes. Comic-Con is a four-day celebration of all things pop culture that takes over the San Diego Convention Center and the surrounding areas. Cosplayers toting bags, poster tubes and boxes with exclusive merchandise spill out onto every available inch of hallway and sidewalk. It's an event for fans who love to love everything from Wonder Woman and Aquaman to Funko figures. People pose for pictures, trade compliments, debate fan theories and wait for exclusive merch -- the enthusiasm is unending.

But an event like the rally is a reminder that despite all the harmless (super)hero worship, there's also a corrosive element to contend with.

There're a few names for it. Toxic fandom. Protective fandom. When we talk about either, we're talking about behavior that includes hating on creators, celebrities, other fans or on creative decisions we disagree with. It's something that demarcates a right and wrong way to approach a piece of pop culture. Sometimes it's a matter of angry sputtering on social media. Sometimes it's death threats, rape threats and publishing personal information online for the sake of harassing someone.

Umm, any clear proof of that? Again, I don't see why they haven't provided screencaps, the best way to make a case about threats being made, which is illegal, and anybody who's fallen victim to it should go to the police. And isn't that nice how they boil it all down to mere "hating on", effectively obscuring whether it's a case of constructive criticism, and whether said creators/celebs have turned out poor work, which isn't immune to criticism. If the writing/acting effort is poor, we have a right to say so. If they don't think so, then virtually every critique written by notable film writers like Roger Ebert and Leonard Maltin were illegitimate to begin with. But then, what can you expect from the kind of people who've long served as apologists even for terrible comics "scribes" like Dan Slott and Brian Bendis? Not much, I guess.

At a place like Comic-Con, on one level you get the idea that people don't want to spend much time talking about the nasty side of fandom. But the fact is that many of the fandoms represented at Comic-Con -- everything from Star Wars to adult cartoons -- have had notable online blowups.

If there is a nasty side, what if it happened to be ultra-leftists worshiping the bad writers like Slott and Geoff Johns? Assuming they've ever spewed offensive drivel on their part, wouldn't that be troubling? But nothing's clear in this dreary piece, which doesn't consider that folks at the Comicon would probably rather focus on the good sides, because the bad can be quite depressing. Much like this whole article!

One of the most prominent examples of this fandom in-fighting is the public back-and-forth between Star Wars fans voicing disdain for elements of The Last Jedi and those wondering what the big deal is. From sending death threats to director Rian Johnson to trying to remake the film to better suit their preferences, cliques within the world of Star Wars fandom have gone way beyond swamping message boards with complaints.

And you don't have to go too far before you start seeing a backlash that becomes more extreme than a mere quibble with the Casino subplot or how Luke's character was handled. Videos titled "Women Are Ruining Star Wars" and "Why Feminism Is Ruining Movies" can quickly take over your recommendations in YouTube. Subreddits focused on the Men's Rights movement or GamerGate remain outraged by perceived slights.

So let's see, we're told to be concerned about advocates of "men's rights", but not wish to help advocates of women's rights; just be worried about the oh-so important "feelings" of left-wing feminists. What's a problem is not whether a gal can kick butt effectively, but whether it's done at the expense of the menfolk in the story, who could be reduced to all but incapable of combat. The way Luke was depicted in the Last Jedi was quite disappointing, and if they think that's above criticism, then they shouldn't be writing about pop culture fandom.

The rapid escalation of these fan backlashes isn't limited to the Star Wars franchise. The most recent Tomb Raider film was railed against because of fan expectations regarding Lara Croft's body. Pockets of Marvel Comics fans have spent years outraged over the company elevating heroes like Riri Johnson, Jane Foster and Sam Wilson over the established (white male) heroes Tony Stark, Thor and Steve Rogers in their respective superhero roles.

Further proof that, if the characters in question are POC/homosexual/female, they're automatically above criticism for how they're written, and Stan Lee/Jack Kirby and company committed a huge boo-boo to create the white heroes in the first place. Oddly enough, I can't recall any SJWs slamming Infinity Countdown Champions #2 for depicting Riri getting beaten down by Thanos:

And getting 90 percent of her Iron Maiden armor disintegrated. In addition, the story makes the "heroes" look like fascists/supremacists, and nobody's disturbed, are they?

As for Alicia Vikander's body, I don't expect much of anything when it comes to a real life actress. I just find it galling how Crystal Dynamics devastated the Tomb Raider franchise for the sake of social justice crap that's actually hurtful and insulting to women, to say nothing of draining any optimistic vision along with entertainment value.

Even something seemingly innocuous, like a new art style applied to the Thundercats reboot, can attract untold amounts of rage.

Ah, so here's another example of opposition to even the most innocuous criticism of dismal, uninspired artwork. Guess they're not fans of the Mona Lisa either, huh? And what's so wrong with fandom being protective of how the creation was first developed? Evidently, the writer of the article has nothing to fight for.

"Those two tensions collide when fans become so insular that they think their way is the only way," Booth said.

The tensions collide when people like CNET's who have no investment in the pop culture creations they speak of think theirs is the only way, and that fandom cannot argue.

In a Reddit AMA in 2016, Weldon described it as "eating our own," talking about the trouble with saying "you don't love the thing I love precisely in the same way, to the same extent and for precisely the same reasons that I do, therefore you are doing it wrong."

It's hard to say exactly how big a problem toxic fandom is. Booth tends to think it involves a minority of fans.

Correction: it involves a minority of "journalists" who aren't fans and don't read/watch/play any of the products they speak of on any kind of a regular basis. And who should kindly make a grand exit from pop culture, and not lie about us any further.

One YouTube video called "SJW's Have Taken Over Comic-Con #SDCC," mocks the five "wokest" panels of the event, including ones on Afrofuturism (a movement that goes back decades, even before the term was coined in the early '90s) and on queer comics for queer kids.

Those "kids" they speak of could easily be adults, and if they think it's such a big deal there be LGBT stories, so be it, but quit normalizing the abnormal, and implying that homosexuality is a positive role model in every aspect for kids.

If you follow Tom King, who writes Batman for DC, you might've seen that he's attending Comic-Con with a bodyguard in tow, after receiving death threats over the 50th anniversary issue.

Again, all told without any proof displayed. I know that when Frank Miller and Marv Wolfman were writing Daredevil and New Teen Titans in the early to mid-80s, they reportedly received death threat letters, which were forwarded to the police for investigation. But a lot of what's been claimed since - in an era when it's easier to offer proof of the pudding - has sounded more and more contrived, like a desperate bid for more audience who could just as well conclude the work of modern scribes for the Big Two is simply not worth the paper it's printed on, and wonder if this was a thin-skinned ploy by the writers to take up victim culture. It may be dismaying Bat and Cat wouldn't get married, but it's still nothing to get worked up about to the extent they claim. Besides, it doesn't sound like any of the same occurred with the X-Men wedding issue, and Kitty Pryde/Colossus' non-marriage.

Granted, King might be the only writer here with a bodyguard, but such threats could give a bad name to nerds everywhere, Booth said. He even referenced how he's come across folks who don't want to admit to liking Cartoon Network's Rick and Morty because of public fiascos involving everything from its creator's treatment of women in the writer's room to how fans respond to female characters on the show.

"That's a step backwards, that's putting fans back where they were in the '70s and '80s, where it was embarrassing to be a fan," Booth said.

But no question whether poor relations between selfish, entitled writers and the audience they're supposedly writing for, gives scriptwriters and artists a bad name? Are they also trying to imply the audience has no issue with any negative depiction of women on R&M? Personally, I have no interest in most of these crummy cartoons, and I honestly couldn't care less that its creator has just had his rep soiled.

He sees some hope, though. If you scan the Comic-Con schedule, you'll see a variety of panels covering or highlighting topics like entitlement, gatekeeping, body positivity, and the women of Star Wars.

It's not just panels either. Prominent companies, like DC, are trying to make sure that, at least within their own walled gardens, toxicity doesn't take root.

Too late, toxic effects already flooded their output since Dan DiDio got his foot in the door at the editor's office. And he never sacked Eddie Berganza when it mattered 15 years ago, so what's their point?

Craig Hunegs, Warner Bros. Television's president of business and strategy, said simply that "we're not going to tolerate" the kinds of negative conversations that can occur on Facebook, Twitter and Discord, three platforms mentioned specifically by either Hunegs or DC Chief Creative Officer and Publisher Jim Lee.

Who may have watered down the proportions on the ladies he draws, including Starfire, so what are they complaining about? Anybody who finds this sad? They sure don't seem to have a problem with the SJWs who attacked and villified their artwork, and worst of all, don't even read the products they're damaging. A terrible disfavor's been done lately to women's sexuality, and they're not helping by caving to demands for such censorship.

In much the same way, Doctor Who showrunner Chris Chibnall and executive producer Matt Strevens wanted to make it clear that the long-running BBC show is for everyone, regardless of the Doctor's gender. (For the first time, the Doctor will be played by a woman, Jodie Whittaker.)

Well duh, if it's for everybody, then it shouldn't matter one bit that the protagonist was originally a man! Does that mean nobody can relate to a show with a male star? Ridiculous.

At a panel on geek life as a woman, writer Danika Stone said she thinks some of the spikes in anger will die out as we evolve our notions of what it means to be a fan.

Until then, though, she says, when it comes to advocating for inclusion and dealing with blowback, "We have to hold the line."

No, what she means is being ignorant of valid complaints, that's all. Besides, her idea of "inclusion" is just a codeword for replacing established white characters with POC/homosexual ones, instead of creating new characters with their own specific roles. As was the case with an Asian Hulk and a Latina/lesbian Miss America [Chavez]. I think there's another "panelist" who has no business wasting time in pop culture if that's her position.

And the writers of the article for CNET have no business talking about these topics if they were biased towards a victim angle to begin with.

Labels: animation, conventions, dc comics, dreadful artists, dreadful writers, indie publishers, marvel comics, msm propaganda, politics, technology

ComicBook reveals that the Flash who's said to die during Tom King's publicity stunt miniseries, Heroes in Crisis, may be Wally West:

In the wake of "Flash War," Wally West is committed to never stop running -- which of course is not something that one can do long-term.

"Number 51 is the immediate epilogue of Wally trying to find his family, and he's just running," writer Joshua Williamson told ComicBook.com. "He said at the end of #50, 'I'll never stop running,' but you know that's not real. You can't do that; eventually he'll have to stop running. So #51 is a lot about that, of him running and Barry and Iris both saying that he has to stop running at some point. It's an emotional, character-driven issue...it's an emotional issue for Wally and Barry and Iris's relationships, and it will definitely tease some of the other stories that we're doing at DC in the fall." [...]

Near the end of The Flash #51, Wally is convinced to stop running by Barry, along with an assist from Superman and Wonder Woman. Superman and Wonder Woman offer to get him help, and promise that some time at Sanctuary will help him.

It makes no difference whether it's Wally, or Jay Garrick, Barry himself, the recently returned Impulse or even the black Wally introduced a few years ago, when DC was continuing with their own social justice and diversity alterations. What matters is that, if they're really killing off a hero in the context of a murder, it's disgusting, and we could do without that kind of trash for a change. This premise - and it was already reported earlier that a Flash would be the victim - has been run into the ground for a long time. But then, I suppose, with DC circling the sales drain as they still insist on sticking with political correctness, it's no surprise they could continue it here.

If they really, truly have to kill off a superhero, it should be by natural causes or vehicular accidents, not by murder. All that aside, it's been clear for a decade that Barry's return hasn't drawn back older readers, and isn't drawing interest of newer ones either, one more reason why Geoff Johns' Rebirth miniseries from 2009 is a sick joke. And it's honestly insulting how Wally's being turned into a grieving ex-father/husband, all because his children have been technically erased along with Linda Park's memory of him, and that Williamson brought back Johns' cardboard modern take on the Reverse-Flash (Hunter Zolomon), is also a disgrace. The way Johns handled it during 2003 rendered Zolomon a lugubrious caricature of the original (Eobard Thawne), and the way the violence kept getting hammered over the readers' heads was irritating. It's something that should've been dropped down the memory hole long ago. Instead, Williamson and company just had to dredge it all up for the umpteenth time, prolonging some of the worst elements that ruined comicdom at the turn of the century.

And whatever they have in store for the Heroes in Crisis "event", the audience shouldn't fall for it again. What they've been doing for 3 decades already is by this point joyless and pessimistic, all the directions that have effectively damaged the adventure genre. We can't let ourselves be fooled anymore.

Labels: dc comics, dreadful writers, Flash, golden calf of death, msm propaganda, violence

Here's an article in The Japan News talking about sports manga stories spotlighting the soccer genre, mainly a new book called "Aoashi".

Labels: Europe and Asia, manga and anime

Spencer spoke with the Washington Post's Comic Riffs section about his new run on Spider-Man, and is speaking in place of notorious former EIC Joe Quesada, telling something quite different from what Quesada's position was in the past:

Spencer and Quesada met to talk all things Spider-Man as he prepared to take on the noticeable task of being the writer to come aboard “The Amazing Spider-Man” after Dan Slott’s decade-long writing run, which recently came to an end with the title’s 801st issue (the series was renumbered for Spencer’s debut with artist Ryan Ottley illustrating).

The relationship between Spider-Man/Peter Parker and Mary Jane Watson came up. They were once an all-time comic book couple, but were not known as an item anymore. Slott even said during his time writing Spider-Man that fans shouldn’t expect a rekindling of any spider-flames.

Spencer, like many fans, assumed rules were in place to keep Peter Parker and Mary Jane apart. Quesada told him that was never Marvel’s intention when they decided to erase Spider-Man’s marriage to Mary Jane from continuity years ago, during the Spider-Man “One More Day” story.

“Once I had that piece of the puzzle in place, everything else came together and improved massively,” Spencer told The Washington Post’s Comic Riffs.

Suddenly, knowing Mary Jane could be a romantic part of the story made Spencer’s plans for the series “one thousand times better.”

Certainly, having MJ back as Peter's lady fair is better in itself, though it still doesn't guarantee better story merit beyond that. But would you believe it - now, we're supposed to think Quesada never had any intention of parting the couple till the end of time, which I'm sure he would've loved to enforce if fandom hadn't spoken out. I'm sure Spencer was aware of the mandate long before he began his own writing for Marvel. From what I can figure, with sales for comics slumping all over the place, and stores closing down, they decided they needed a booster, and so, Quesada too finally backed off his rock bottom mandate, which Axel Alonso kept in place after Quesada ascended to "chief creative officer".

And how come Spencer's doing all the talking here, and not Quesada himself? IMO, Quesada owes an apology for wasting over a decade of time since One More Day just to force his twisted visions on everybody's favorite wall-crawler, irritate Spider-fans with spiteful moments where they made it look like MJ would be restored, but wasn't, and then wasted our time even more with an idiotic tale of Doctor Octopus switching minds with Peter Parker, just to become the "Superior" Spidey. It's Quesada who should be addressing this subject, not some flunkie in his name.

And since Slott came up, look what they say about Spencer's plans going forward:

That’s not to say Spencer plans to abandon the decade of work Slott put into the Spider-Man comic book universe. One of Slott’s biggest and most controversial Spider-Man moments was when villain Doctor Octopus took over Spider-Man’s mind, becoming the Superior Spider-Man (with a series of the same name). During that series, Doc Ock finished a college degree that Peter Parker never had time to complete. In Spencer’s run, it is determined that the work that led to that degree was plagiarized, giving Peter Parker just one more problem in a life filled with many.

“I have enormous respect for Dan and what he accomplished on this book,” Spencer said. “Thankfully Dan liked the idea of us picking up [with the degree scandal] and running with that.”

He accomplished nothing but trolling the audience he didn't even want buying the books. If Spencer intends to honor all the worst ideas Slott had, then MJ's return alone won't salvage Spidey, and we shouldn't be shocked if partisan politics will turn up again. Why, look what's referenced next:

After recently writing two more serious series for Marvel — one that dealt with Captain America secretly being a spy for Marvel bad guy factory Hydra (“Secret Empire”), and another featuring African American superhero the Falcon replacing Cap (“Captain America: Sam Wilson”) — Spencer welcomed the chance to dust off his joke writing. (Still, he said he tried to fit humor in his more intense Marvel works as well, and he’s also got a laugh-filled “Ant-Man” series to his credit.)

I'm not sure what's so funny when the guy turned Steve Rogers into a nazi-like villain, and exploited Falcon-as-Cap's book for leftist agendas on illegal immigration. That kind of work is so awful, it makes it pretty difficult to overlook Spencer's attitude prior to this moment. I'd like to think this time, it could be better, but if he's following up on Slott's elements, then he's accomplished nothing. It's regrettable when successive writers tie themselves, however unwillingly, to the worst storylines the industry has to offer, and again, we shouldn't be surprised if soon enough, whatever quality this new volume has, it'll all go down the drain quickly. And Quesada, no matter what he thinks now, doesn't belong at the Big Two.

Labels: bad editors, marvel comics, misogyny and racism, moonbat writers, msm propaganda, Spider-Man, women of marvel

I think the Guardians of the Galaxy movie franchise is on its way to being seriously tainted, by one of its own stars, and by a writer whom I wanted to think was a decent man, and is now shattering that image. First, the GoTG star David Bautista opened his big mouth by launching a tirade against his own employer for "succumbing" to what he calls "cybernazis":

Marvel star Dave Bautista went on the attack against his own employer over the weekend by claiming Disney caved to “cyber-Nazis” with the decision to fire Guardians of the Galaxy director James Gunn.

Disney, the company that owns Marvel, fired Gunn late last week after a countless number of old tweets resurfaced in which Gunn “joked” about raping children. He also mocked Mexicans, AIDS, the Holocaust, and rape.

[...] Bautista is aware of Gunn’s tweets, the “Pubescent Girls” video, and Gunn’s apparent connection to [Huston] Huddleston, but is still defending Gunn as a victim of cyber-Nazis out to destroy Gunn over nothing more than “old tweets.”

Almost immediately after Disney fired Gunn, Bautista tweeted:

“I will have more to say but for right now all I will say is this..@JamesGunn is one of the most loving,caring,good natured people I have ever met. He’s gentle and kind and cares deeply for people and animals. He’s made mistakes. We all have. Im NOT ok with what’s happening to him.”

But he is okay with Gunn associating with a criminal like Huston Huddleston? I think Bautista's just become a liability to Disney/Marvel's movie division, and no matter what costume and makeup/special effects he disguises himself with now, future moviegoers are bound to cringe at the sight of him in his films, if they bother to see them at all. The GotG franchise has just been jeopardized by one of its own stars.

And then, in the comics industry itself, Thanos creator Jim Starlin, devastatingly enough, has just unmasked himself as a hardcore leftist in the worst way possible, with his own apologia on Facebook where he even drags in some conservative commentators into the mess:

After giving it a couple days to think over this James Gunn/Disney controversy, I've come to the conclusion that the Mouse got played. Yes, Gunn's decade-old tweets were distasteful and stupid, but clearly meant to be foolishly provocative rather than taken as advocacy. The whole uproar over them was plainly ginned up by two Breitbart hatchet men, John Nolte and Mike Cernovich, in response to Rosanne Barr's firing for her repeated hate-filled and racist tweets. I have to agree with Dave Bautisa on this one. Disney accepted a ridiculous apple and oranges argument and made one hell of a bad call.

I was recently thinking of buying a paperback of his work on Dreadstar from the mid-80s. I guess now I'll have to hold out a little longer, as he's really crossed the line, acting as though comments from the past have no weight as compared to what the present does. Can we be clear here? Even what you say in the past can be a valid concern in the present, and future, especially if the perpetrator hasn't apologized. Such is the case in France with Jean-Marie Le Pen and Dieudonne M'Bala M'Bala, neither of whom have apologized for all their antisemitic/racist rhetoric of the past, nor all the McCarthy-ish trouble they caused, which undoubtably made it difficult to oppose Islamofascism effectively. The former shares a bit in common with Senator Joe McCarthy, whom you could say made it difficult to oppose communism effectively in his time, seeing how both were so crude in their own ways of commentary, it had the effect of giving people the wrong impression in certain ways, and intimidating the French into fearing they'd be accused of being like Le Pen if they dared speak against Islam.

The apologists haven't even addressed that filmmaker Lexi Alexander erased her Twitter account, presumably because she came under attack by the establishment for calling out the screwballs who wouldn't defend Roseanne Barr by contrast. All that aside, this is a very sad day when an artist/writer with such a notable resume as Starlin's turns out to be as morally bankrupt as he sounds here, and what's this about Barr's "repeated" tweets? She did say other stupid stuff in the past, but as far as I know, she was only booted by ABC over one mere tweet. As for Cernovich, I'm not sure how prominent his role may be in calling out Gunn, although some respondents to Starlin showed that Cernovich appears to have some filthy crap in his own past record, and if so, then let me assure them I disapprove and think he should be shunned. I've never even read Cernovich columns so I don't care for him anyway. But Nolte, who's been commenting on the subject more, has no serious offenses by contrast, to my best of knowledge, even if he has said things I disagree with. Heck, I don't think I've ever seen Cernovich writing for Breitbart, which means Starlin's ill-informed on that matter too. He got some negative responses, such as this one:

Has Jim actually read the tweets and blog posts in question here? My first inclination was also to say "hey, they were just some edgy jokes from years ago!" ...until I actually saw what the dude wrote.

The tweets and blogs posts are real--they are not part of some right-wing conspiracy. Between this and the stuff revolving around Bryan Singer and Jared Leto, are we now to conclude that the comics industry is cool with pederasty and statutory rape?

This post is beyond disappointing Jim, and crosses into the territory of apologetics for guys going after little boys. I expected a lot more.

This guy's message echoes how I feel. It's a very sad, dark day when a scribe with a reputation as big as Starlin had in the past stoops this low, and it won't be easy to clean up the mess he's brewed so easily. There's a very valid point here: Starlin's stupidity risks casting a dark cloud on what industry insiders think of serious issues, and as recent developments have revealed, there are indeed scumbags who were lurking around.

Not only has Starlin dampened his own reputation with this garbage post of his, people could start viewing some elements in his past resume differently. For example, comics stories dealing with deaths:

• The Death of Captain Marvel, where Mar-Vell of the Kree was put to rest
• Batman's A Death in the Family, which saw 2nd Robin Jason Todd murdered by the Joker
• The Infinity Gauntlet, which has themes of death involved, including the Angel of Death whom Thanos gets involved with
• DC's Death of the New Gods miniseries, which began with Big Barda just dying without any kind of a fight at the beginning (which I'm sure wouldn't please Jack Kirby, since he'd dedicated Barda to his wife)

In addition, if he has an obsessive love for villainous characters like Thanos (and less so for heroes, the real bunch who deserve the spotlight), people could end up wondering if he's either mentally deteriorated, or if he's become a broken old man desensitized to violence in real life and channeled his lenient views into his past work. They'll also begin to lose sympathy for a guy who complained Tom Brevoort mistreated him. As galling as Brevoort is, Starlin's ill-informed reaction to this whole mess is truly awful. Say, I just remembered: one of the series with a connection to the Infinity War crossover from 1992 was Wonder Man (issues #13-14), written by Gerard Jones, who's now facing a jail sentence for child porn trafficking. Does Starlin think Jones' crimes should go without consequence? That would be very ill-advised, and will only soil his reputation even more. Jones has tainted Infinity War as well as Simon Williams' early 90s solo book because of his offensive crime.

There were more negative responses, such as:

jesus christ liberals wont take responsibility for anything will they? if trump had tweeted this shit 10 years ago people would be calling for his head never mind sacking him. but its hollyweird moneymaker (((james gunn))) of course we have to rise up in his defense. for the record, this whole "sack people for offensive tweets" schtick was started by the liberal crybabies on twitter and tumblr in the first place.

As Roseanne Barr stated, she was blacklisted by the same people now defending Gunn. I honestly don't find Barr's humor appealing (and I'm honestly skeptical of her "conservative" credentials), and she did do crude stupidity in the past - especially her doxxing George Zimmerman's address, which was wrong, and she got sued for it - but if she really has to lose her revived sitcom, than Gunn will have to lose his writing and directing gig to boot, period. As another said:

No sir, if you making rules and principles, you MUST stick to them without any tribalism, till the very end. Otherwise it's blatant hypocrisy and I have no sympathy nor respect for hypocrites. Earth will literally make a giant leap as a population in just one single day if all people will utilize what they preach themselves.

Exactly. Lesson for Starlin to learn from - don't follow insular customs. It's practically what's dragging down the comics medium with a code of silence to accompany it. Furthermore, if Disney caved and rehired Gunn at this point, there's every chance they'd pay a heavy price in public relations. The public's memories aren't always as short as some might think. Somebody else stated:

Jim, let this go. The Mouse didn't get played as you put it. James dishonored himself and the brand. I understand it was 8 years ago but this was a 44 year old man glorifying pedophilia. These aren't jokes. There is no humor in Child Rape. Wake up please. Don't talk about it. He was an employer that was fired. He can make other movies. But the mouse didn't get played we did thinking he is a decent man. He feels remorse now but only after it surfaced did we realize how disgusting he is. You should take the high road and STAY CLEAR OF PEDOPHILIA. Nothing good will ever come from it.

I would just disagree with the part about Gunn being able to continue making movies. It won't be that simple. A man with a mind that vile has no place in entertainment, and I'm skeptical he's really sorry for what he said.

If Starlin's smart, he'll quietly drop the subject, though considering the subject matter is so repulsive, I think it'd be far better if he publicly apologize, especially to all the victims of rape and child abuse whom his words could end up denigrating. What he said was stunningly irresponsible, and now whatever I read from his past resume will have to be taken with a grain of salt, and I'll have to separate the artist from the art. No matter how you look at it, it's very, very sad when guys like Starlin damage their reputations by defending scummy people whom no sane person would let anywhere near their families. Such approaches do no favors for comicdom at all.

Update: I just found this Infinity Gauntlet panel posted on Instagram where it looks like the Trump hotel in New Jersey is one of the structures devastated. Which gives us a clue what Starlin might've thought of Trump back then, and could take on a whole new meaning now.

Labels: dc comics, Europe and Asia, marvel comics, misogyny and racism, moonbat artists, moonbat writers, politics, violence

In a not unexpected move, the Fort Smith Times-Record's paid lip service to DC assigning some of the worst, most overrated writers to work on Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman:

But are Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman better for all these changes? The Magic 8-Ball says “Ask Again Later,” as it always does. But the preliminary news is mostly good.

I see no use in this statement, because no matter the merit to come or lack thereof, they'll always be ready to fawn. Just like they did over the New 52 era.

The biggest changes have hit the Man of Steel. In DC’s 2011 “New 52” publishing initiative, the character was rebooted in ways both major and minor. But even that didn’t last, as the 2016 “Rebirth” initiative upended things again, combining both the New 52 Superman and Lois Lane with the pre-2011 versions.

Despite the head-spinning impact of these updates, most fans were pretty pleased. Both the pre-2011 and Rebirth versions of Superman held aspects that worked well for the character — so the combo version gave different generations of Super-readers something to like. The stories launching from these vertiginous shifts were genuinely suspenseful, since readers had no idea what the Last Son of Krypton would look like at the end.

Judging from Bendis' recent Man of Steel miniseries, it looks more like he wanted to get rid of Lois and the recent son named Jonathan just so he could turn Superman into all but single again for the sake of it, in a way that suits social justice mores. Based on how things are going now, I'm not sure fans will remain pleased for long.

One thing that returned with the merger is the marriage of Superman and Lois Lane, who had been returned to a pre-marriage state in 2011. That’s a welcome development, as the marriage eliminates all that nonsense about Lois being unable to recognize Superman when he puts on a pair of glasses. Instead, she’s part of the game, helping her mate hide his biggest secret, while carving an impressive journalism career on her own. That checks a lot of boxes for a lot fans.

*Ahem* This in itself is not a bad thing, and it was part of superhero comics for many years. Besides, does that mean, by contrast, it wasn't wrong Colonel Steve Trevor didn't recognize Wonder Woman when she wore glasses and fastened her hair in a ponytail? You could make a similar argument about how co-stars can't seem to recognize the voices of the heroes while they're in disguise, depending on what kind of mask they wear.

Furthermore, Mary Jane Watson's return as Spider-Man's wife may check plenty of boxes for Spider-fans, but that doesn't guarantee the stories going forward will be any good, not even for Superman. Superficial modifications alone do not a story make.

In addition, Clark and Lois have a son, Jonathan, with super-powers of his own. The pre-2011 couple had a son, too, but he was an adopted Kryptonian kid from the Phantom Zone, one with no blood ties to either parent. The current version is a true son of the House of El, as well as a true son of, um, the House of Lane? Well, he’s a son of Earth for sure. That resonates nicely, as well as giving DC writers a true Superboy to play with — resulting in the delightful “Super-Sons” series, that teamed the wholesome, somewhat naïve Jonathan with Batman’s ultra-cynical bad boy, Damian “Robin” Wayne.

Again, let's note the direction Brian Bendis recently took in his MOS miniseries...with Lois Lane joining Jonathan in a departure? Bendis may have defended his steps by claiming Supes is going to be searching for them, but it's still very lethargic. No less dumbfounding is the apparent resurrection of Jor-El, who persuades the super-grandson to join him on a journey, with Lois joining, just another demonstration of how laughable today's DCU has become by diminishing Superman's motivations for being a dedicated superhero.

That was then. Because now comes writer Brian Michael Bendis.

Bendis has been, for the last 18 years, “Mr. Marvel Comics.” His achievements at the House of Ideas are legendary, ranging from rebooting the Avengers franchise (prior to the movies) to co-creating Jessica Jones. His recent move to DC Comics sent shock waves through comics fandom, and even caused some ripples in the mainstream entertainment media.

Including this dumb news column. If it sent shock waves through fandom, it was for all the wrong reasons for plenty. Bendis was the writer who dumbed down the Avengers, turned Scarlet Witch one-dimensionally crazy for the sake of writing her out of the series for several years, was an engineer in several crossovers like House of M and Civil War, turned Iceman gay (and made Jean Grey look bad in the process), all under the confidence the MSM wouldn't say a word of negativity, because he's as leftist as they are, and a SJW-caterer to boot. Some "legend" that is.

Bendis chose as his first project the biggest gun of all: Superman. The “Superman” series went on hiatus for a Bendis-written, six-issue miniseries titled “Man of Steel,” which introduced the concepts and themes he meant to pursue. Then “Superman” re-launched with a new first issue, written by Bendis. The writer also took over the other main Super-book, “Action Comics,” when it reached the magic number 1000.

Those themes include tearing down the American Way to suit Bendis' liberal belief what it should really be. Naturally, there'll be no admittal of that here.

And so far it’s been up, up and away.

A previous writer had un-deaded Superman’s pop, Jor-El, who is now scarred, traumatized and kinda scary. Bendis is using that character to complicate Superman’s life; Super-grandpa wants to teach Jonathan how to be a proper Kryptonian with a tour of the galaxy, and the boy wants to go. Since the Kents couldn’t stop their super-powered son if they tried, Lois went along as chaperone.

Whether or not it's the real deal, the way Bendis is handling things is not impressive so far, and based on his Marvel "method", unlikely to change later either. He may not have been the writer who brought back Jor-El (I assume Dan Jurgens was?), but unless it turns out this is clone, it'll only diminish Superman's origins. And even if it is a clone, Bendis is not a writer to inspire confidence.

This sets up two storylines going forward: Lois and Jonathan on their magical mystery tour, and Clark Kent dealing with their unexplained absence at the Daily Planet — plus the emotional void it leaves in his own life.

Complicating matters further is a new character named Rogal Zaar, who claims to have destroyed Krypton and has come to Earth to finish his genocide. He promptly gets most of the way to his goal by destroying the Bottle City of Kandor, leaving only Superman, Supergirl and the Phantom Zone prisoners to finish what he calls his “cleansing.”

This isn’t the most original idea in the world. A number of stories over the decades have pinned the destruction of Krypton on a person or group rather than a natural disaster, only to be proven false in the end. One such person or group is Black Zero — it’s been both — currently on display on Syfy’s “Krypton.”

But the good news is that this character is more powerful than Superman and Supergirl put together, which makes his claim plausible. Also, what little we know of his background ties him to a number of major powers in the DC Universe, which means we should see those connections bear fruit in future stories — connections which include the Green Lanterns, the New Gods, Wonder Woman’s Greco-Roman gods, and the original Shazam.

Yawn. There have been plenty of titanic aliens in the past, Darkseid included, who could be written as formidable to both ex-Kryptonians together, so this boast isn't so original either. Nor does it make the idea Zaar could've destroyed Krypton plausible. If Darkseid hadn't done it, why should Zaar have?

Bendis is not without his critics, but so far none of the usual barbs will stick to his Super-project.

Bendis is known for his overlapping, cynical dialogue — but that is absent in his Super-characters, who deal with each other in a much more wholesome, straightforward way. Bendis is often criticized for ignoring past stories (called “continuity”) when picking up a new character — but he has clearly done his homework on Superman, writing knowledgeably about Fortress of Solitude history and Supergirl’s current status quo.

If he's done his "homework", it's only to look up what ideas/elements suit him, like the remake of the Black Zero tale from Superman #205 in 1967. Still, how odd the pretentious columnist first called Bendis a "legend", and then admits he's taken his share of critical flak, though he doesn't state exactly why (surprise, surprise). Plus, for an article claiming Bendis understands anything about Superman's notable laboratory, it goes on to say:

Speaking of the Fortress: It’s been destroyed, and Superman has created a new one in the Bermuda Triangle. Speaking of Supergirl: Her dormant title will be revived for her pursuit of Rogal Zaar.

Yes, the Kandorians are dead (at least for now), Jonathan and Lois are missing and Kal-El has to rebuild his life in both identities. But what’s misery for the Action Ace is turning into good reading for Super-fans.

Nope, I don't think so, and judging from some of the recent sales receipts on ICV2, not many others cared either. These hacks may know how to fool people at the start, but soon it becomes apparent they're just pulling the wool over everyone's eyes. The column goes on to Batman, after the wedding with Catwoman turned out not to be:

King took over the Gotham Guardian during Rebirth, with “Batman” No. 1. His take started out with excellent insights on all the major players, and just got better — amazingly, the series continued to build toward “Batman” No. 50 without showing its cards. Eventually he got to what may be the best Superman/Batman team-up in DC’s long history: Lois and Clark and Selina and Bruce on a double date at Smallville’s county fair (“Batman” No. 37). Honestly, these characters have never been written so well.

And, despite the seeming climax of “Batman” No. 50, King says he’s got a lot more to say. As he told Entertainment Weekly, he’s “halfway through what I hope to be an epic story of the Batman’s heart being broken and perhaps rebuilt and perhaps broken again.”

Stay tuned, Bat-fans, for the next 50 issues. Same Bat-writer, same Bat-title.

No, we won't. If that's all they can do with the Masked Manhunter, then I don't think there's much else they got to say at all. Not with these kind of people running the store today. The article finally turns to Wonder Woman, and surely has the worst sugarcoating of all:

Finally we get to the Amazing Amazon, who will get a new writer in November. That’s months away, but it already has Wonder Woman fans excited.

That writer is G. Willow Wilson, who might be a little familiar to DC readers from stints on some of their superheroes. Or from her two mature-readers series, “Cairo” and “Air,” the former involving Middle Eastern mythology, the latter involving the spirit of Amelia Earhart.

But what Wilson is most famous for — and what has fans excited — is that she is the co-creator of Kamala “Ms. Marvel” Khan at Marvel Comics, and has been writing that successful character since its inception. “Ms. Marvel” is a charming, light-hearted book about a teenage Muslim girl from New Jersey who suddenly develops super-powers — and whose big heart proves up to the task every month.

The millionth fluff-coating of the propaganda book, it's one of the most disgusting by far. No mention of the election issue either, I see. Not even her attempt to whitewash the Religion of Peace with taqqiya after Ardian Syaf proved what it's really like. Not even mention of how the Muslim Ms. Marvel title has plummeted in sales since, reduced to dismal numbers.

“Heart” is a pretty important part of Wonder Woman’s appeal as well. Big things are expected come November.

As noted at the beginning of this column, SDCC is nigh, with all of its big-time announcements. In the case of Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman, no news will be good news: the “Big Three” are already in good hands.

And what's the meaning of this mind-boggler? Not only is there no good news, they're not in good hands either. What a total insult to the intellect.

Labels: Batman, dc comics, dreadful writers, islam and jihad, marvel comics, moonbat writers, msm propaganda, Superman, Wonder Woman

Warner Todd Huston reported on Breitbart that the performer chosen to play a specific role on the ultra-leftist Supergirl TV show is a transgender activist from the northeast:

The CW network’s Supergirl has announced the casting of transgender rights activist Nicole Maines to play a super-powered hero in the series upcoming fourth season.

Reports of the search for an actor to portray a transgender character broke in May, but now word has emerged that Maines has been cast as Nia Nal, a hero named “The Dreamer.” Nal will have the power to sense the future, according to The Hollywood Reporter.

The casting is notable for the fact that Maines recently made news of another sort after suing to force the state of Maine to allow transgenders the use of any public bathroom they wish to use at any given time.

The activist’s case went all the way to the Maine Supreme Court in 2013 when the court ruled that transgenders can use the bathroom of their choice. Maines was also the subject of the book Becoming Nicole and appeared in the HBO documentary The Trans List. Maines’s previous acting credit was on the USA network series Royal Pains.

If that's their choice of actor, it's clear they're not very interested in women's rights to privacy and safety, which makes this atrocious show all the more unworthy of the source material it's based upon. A most truly awful disfavor was done to Otto Binder and Al Plastino, Kara Zor-El's original co-creators, by producers who totally disrespect the comics.

Labels: dc comics, msm propaganda, politics, Supergirl

Marvel's movie division, if any part of their business, has just suffered a serious blow as it turns out James Gunn, the writer/director of the Guardians of the Galaxy movies, posted obscene jokes on Twitter, and now he's been fired from their services for it:

James Gunn has been removed as director of the Guardians Of The Galaxy series after a batch of old social media dispatches were unearthed that touched on areas like pedophilia and rape. In the latest shocking #metoo development in the entertainment industry, Gunn was severed from the Marvel Comics Universe after a slew of social media posts he wrote before getting Guardians of the Galaxy surfaced. According to Fox News, they were posted because Gunn is an outspoken critic of President Donald Trump and the effort was to knock him down a few pegs.

...There were others that made satirical comments about the 9/11 attack, AIDS and the Holocaust. Yet another described a monkey masturbating on a young child, and his commentary that it made him “extremely happy.” These missives were not funny and entirely disturbing, given a preoccupation with fetishing underage boys. That left him a sitting duck for his retroactive social media commentary.

Disney responded quickly and decisively: “The offensive attitudes and statements discovered on James’ Twitter feed are indefensible and inconsistent with our studio’s values, and we have severed our business relationship with him,” said Alan Horn, Walt Disney Studios chairman, in a statement just released.

Yikes...this man is the product of the worst education in savagery possible to find. But given what kind of climate was fostered for many years in the entertainment medium, that's why this is just no surprise he could've gotten away with it until now. It should also be noted Gunn hypocritically attacked Roseanne Barr for making racist cracks, but apparently, he thinks if he's the one writing the obscenities, it's okay. What a creep Gunn is.

One of the worst things about this scandal is that Gunn tragically has his share of apologists, his brother included. Which leads to the following question:

What do you make of Sean Gunn’s comments? Will you “continue to watch and appreciate the Guardians movies?”

Let's be clear: if Disney and the Marvel film division cave and allow this horrific man back, then at this point, they'll have tainted their reputations so badly it won't make much difference if this is a case of simply verbal - not physical - obscenities; the audience is bound to grow uneasy, and it could jeopardize future box office receipts. Why, even those stars and cast members defending Gunn could taint their screen images, even with costumes and makeup/special effects on, if they keep doing it. If it weren't for that, it'd probably be easier to separate art from Gunn, since he's behind the camera, but the cast members apologizing for his mindset who don't want him to voluntarily relinquish writing and directing duties now risk tainting the 2 films so far with their worthless defenses. Already, they're jeopardizing the chances the 3rd planned film could have at the box office, leading to a chance of declining receipts and the likelihood future Marvel films could tank, reversing their fortunes pretty quickly.

Forbes has more commentary to offer about the new scandal, and towards the end says:

Gunn, unfortunately, had to be fired; Disney would be risking too much to keep the man on the payroll. But without him, what does the future of Marvel’s space operas look like? [...]

Probably as dim as their comics sales, but hey, considering they only care about the movie prospects, maybe this is the chickens coming home to roost for their ignorance. After all, they've been sending out telling signs that sooner or later, fortunes could be reversed, depending on where they go next. They sure don't seem to know how to market "Captain" Marvel, which should really have been about Mar-Vell of the Kree for starters, then Ms. Marvel next. I guess they just don't want to look for a wellspring in the Cold War metaphors Marvel's Captain first seen in 1967 was built on. Maybe they should've tried out a Scarlet Witch or a She-Hulk movie first.

Labels: marvel comics, misogyny and racism, politics, violence

Busiek's biases are getting the better of him again, as evidenced by the following:

They’re not YOUR intelligence people, shiteyes. They’re OUR intelligence people. You work for us...or at least, you’re supposed to. https://t.co/ENUgmPro3u

— Kurt Busiek Resists (@KurtBusiek) July 17, 2018

Maybe so, but Trump still hired many of them, so quit complaining, Kurt. It does no good. Neither, in fact, does cursing so vilely.

But apparently one of the comicsgators must have seen my post noting that the comicsgators were in full throat about me, and decided that I must have been talking about him personally.

Sorry, dude, but if you were part of the throng I missed it.

— Kurt Busiek Resists (@KurtBusiek) July 17, 2018

It's assumed he's talking about graphic novelist Richard Meyer's videos? I'm not sure, but he certainly doesn't have much respect for critics, does he?

We’ve known this for a long time, but the folks who got elected via those machines somehow have no enthusiasm for addressing the matter. One cannot think why. https://t.co/RlndEWoFKC

— Kurt Busiek Resists (@KurtBusiek) July 17, 2018

And if he's taking Vice's reporting on the topic at face value...yawn. Breitbart's coverage of the electoral fraud case is better:

The number of convictions against voter fraud continues to rise, with now nearly 940 criminal convictions on the books across the U.S., according to the latest data from the Heritage Foundation.

Likewise, the number of cases of voter fraud has risen. Heritage’s Voter Fraud Database now features 1,071 cases of voter fraud that spans across 47 states.

Needless to say if Busiek only sees the GOP as a scapegoat, then he's not altruistic.

Opinion | Why do Republicans hate consumers? https://t.co/c5N2zQE2gR

— Kurt Busiek Resists (@KurtBusiek) July 18, 2018

A better query would be why the leftists in comicdom do? To the point where they'd selfishly hijack characters they didn't create. Did that ever occur to him? Nah, of course not.

"Like so many others, he had joined the late-Obama-era culture wars through Gamergate, the often radical online campaign that claimed to be concerned with ethics in gaming journalism…" https://t.co/fG58qms1vQ

— Kurt Busiek Resists (@KurtBusiek) July 18, 2018

Here we go again with the Gamergate scapegoating. I've seen some propagandists blame such sources for everything that frustrates them, and it doesn't impress me one bit.

Since I got tagged in this, I’ll say that “how it’s done,” as far as I’m concerned, isn’t by trying to chase Lee Weeks out of the industry because you think he likes someone you think is a bully.

I like Lee Weeks. I’d work with him in a heartbeat. https://t.co/bZidIPuaIa

— Kurt Busiek Resists (@KurtBusiek) July 18, 2018

Here we go. Now he takes the time to write more anti-Comicsgate swipes, and it's probably inevitable at this point we have to wonder if he's still proud of his work on Avengers, Iron Man and even Thunderbolts.

I’m like a Woody Allen fan when it comes to CEREBUS — I like the early, funny ones.

The one with “Ram it straight through Cerebus’s brain” is my favorite issue. https://t.co/UTvh6Z3Spo

— Kurt Busiek Resists (@KurtBusiek) July 18, 2018

Wait a minute. Does he mean the comic by Canadian cartoonist Dave Sim? The guy who wrote disturbing screeds offensive to women? Sigh. Having once found excerpts from the early story Sim wrote featuring Red Sophia, apparently an insult to Red Sonja, I can only say it's pretty apparent his prejudices turned up early on, and I think Cerebus is best forgotten.

I think he’s a bigot too.

I think Lee Weeks is a nice guy and a terrific comics artist.

Trying to treat Lee like you want Richard Meyer treated is where you lose me. I don’t follow Meyer, but I won’t march in any kick-out-the-talent parade. https://t.co/ohWXpCcXJq

— Kurt Busiek Resists (@KurtBusiek) July 19, 2018

In this case, though, you apparently want someone shunned because they follow the account of someone you find toxic.

Not "people who hold those beliefs," but people who you think are standing nearby people who hold those beliefs. https://t.co/cQNDHk4ZrB

— Kurt Busiek Resists (@KurtBusiek) July 19, 2018

You’re going to have to ask someone other than me. I’m not the guy who asked DC Comics to take a stand against Meyer by shunning Lee Weeks. https://t.co/kN9zPU96wH

— Kurt Busiek Resists (@KurtBusiek) July 19, 2018

Now he's certainly attacking Meyer, despite the fact Meyer once spoke positively of his Avengers run. I guess it's because that same run featured a few elements predicting what the future would hold in real life. What it didn't predict, however, was that Busiek would basically disown his best work, and today clearly lacks faith or confidence in his past resume. It's always a terrible shame when folks who turned out great writing in the past bewilderingly disown it years later.

I don’t think anyone has ever thought I was pro-Comicsgate. They were fulminating about me just yesterday.

But it’s possible to be against Comicsgators calling POC creators diversity hires and wanting to chase Lee Weeks out of comics for his Twitter follows. https://t.co/LTzSTnQ6bV

— Kurt Busiek Resists (@KurtBusiek) July 19, 2018

We never thought he was in favor of Comicsgate, and he's long proven it, in effect disowning a lot of his previous work, IMO. In addition, it's very sad he clearly doesn't give a damn Carol Danvers was one of the biggest victims of Marvel's social justice mangling. The denigration of her character design is simply horrifying.

So apparently various gators are now being belligerent at some of the folks I was differing with more temperately earlier today. Sorry, folks!

— Kurt Busiek Resists (@KurtBusiek) July 19, 2018

Now he's trying to play victimologist again, and come up with straw-man arguments to boot. He then goes on to attack the government over the meeting with Russia's premier, Vladimir Putin:

So the US gov’t doesn’t know what was agreed to in the Trump-Putin meeting, because we had only one person from the gov’t in that meeting — the President of the United States — and no one can trust him to tell the truth about what was said.

That’s reassuring, isn’t it?

— Kurt Busiek Resists (@KurtBusiek) July 19, 2018

They do know, but it's often classified, so look for a better topic to whine about, please. And if you really, truly have such a problem with somebody like Meyer, then remain oblivious to him. Mark Waid already unwittingly ended up helping him more than hurting, and Kurt would do well to learn from that huge mistake. He'd also do well to let go of politics and just concentrate on writing comics, because he's only dampened his reputation already. But alas, it doesn't look like he'll do so, and recalling that he's done little or no work at the Big Two for several years already, if at all, I think his inability to defend his past work there just demonstrates why his career there may be washed up. I certainly don't think, with this kind of attitude, he'd be suited to write their comics again.

Labels: Europe and Asia, indie publishers, misogyny and racism, moonbat writers, politics

Wired wrote a pretty biased item about the state of comicdom today, asking if comics culture has inferiority complexes, and it's predictably biased against fandom, to say nothing of wearing rose-colored lens:

Here's the truth: Comic book publishing—yes, just the business of selling printed comics—is a billion-dollar industry. This month, 1,194 new comic books and 391 new graphic novels and collections will hit shelves. That's a lot of titles for a single month, and those aren't uncommon numbers. Comics are everywhere; even your grandma knows who Thanos is. If anything, comics are a bigger deal now than they've ever been.

Sigh. No, they're not "everywhere". At least, not as monthly pamphlets, and stores have been closing because of poor conduct within the medium.

And yet, many people who care about comics seem to live in perpetual fear of the industry's demise.

No matter how many metrics and how much anecdotal evidence shows that things are looking up, there's a persistent undercurrent in comics fandom that seems to want things to go down. Every new storyline is lambasted. ("It's just a gimmick!") Every new publishing initiative is criticized. ("You're disrespecting the real fans!") Every single store closing is met with a strange schadenfreude. ("See? I told you it was all going to hell!") And it's been this way for years.

Does that mean it's impossible for the industry to collapse? Realistically, it's not impossible, just as it wasn't impossible for story merit to collapse as it did. Besides, most smaller publishers, unlike Marvel and DC, don't get the exact kind of criticism they do. What concerns fandom is abuse of the superheroes by the corporations who own them. And to say stores closing isn't a big deal is also dismaying. 50-plus stores closing in a whole year tells quite a bit about how badly the medium is going now.

And, here's where the article really begins to fall apart:

To quote a well-known comic villain, why so serious? And more to the point, why so sad? Does comics have an inferiority complex?

"We shouldn't, but sometimes I fear we do," says Joe Quesada, chief creative officer for Marvel Comics. "This kind of doom-and-gloom thinking started with Dr. Fredric Wertham [and his 1954 book, Seduction of the Innocent], which then trickled down into American society in general. For decades, comics were labeled a dumbed-down kids medium. Of course, nothing could be further from the truth."

No kidding, because Quesada couldn't be any further himself. He was one of the early proponents of censorship in the early 2000s after he banned depictions of smoking cigarettes in a lot of Marvel's comics, and he may have extended some of that censorship to reprints of 70s horror thrillers they published as well featuring nudity. He even objected to the idea of Peter Parker and Gwen Stacy having sex, implied or otherwise, yet he had no qualms about Ultimate Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver being an incestuous pair of siblings in the Ultimates? It's hypocritical of him to complain about Wertham when he was more or less a precursor to Axel Alonso's own censorship and SJW pandering of recent.

Back in the 1950s, Wertham's book caused a panic over comics. Parents freaked out that the books were warping children's minds. Eventually publishers, fearing the worst, formed the Comics Code Authority, which for years regulated anything even remotely edgy to within an inch of its life. The industry took a big hit, creatively and financially, and ever since worries persist that the business isn't bulletproof. Fans stress that comics are struggling, an (untrue) notion that leads people to believe their beloved medium is shifting focus to save itself, being coopted by Hollywood, or just not what it used to be.

Well today it's the leftists who're freaking out, often selectively, whether over female sexuality or even conservative viewpoints, which are almost entirely banned in today's medium. Even positive views towards America are almost wholly taboo in Captain America, if the hiring of Ta-Nehisi Coates says anything.

A lot of these apocryphal narratives stem from perceptions of Comic-Con International, which starts this week in San Diego. Generally considered a snapshot of the industry as a whole, it's increasingly become a festival of pop culture—not comics. Tenderfoots, who call it Comic-Con, show up looking to grab the latest Mattel toy. Hardcores, who go to multiple small-c cons each year, call it "San Diego." The former group seems to grow every year, while the latter becomes harder to find.

One of those hardcores is Bud Plant, an exhibitor who was at the very first San Diego con and who has managed a booth on the main convention floor for 48 years running. Now, Plant has pulled up stakes, saying that while more and more people go to the con, fewer and fewer are buying his books.

"Expenses kept going up, and the revenue kept going down," Plant says. "I used to be one of the main exhibitors, before Marvel, DC, and all the movie companies started setting up giant booths. Now I've become a tiny player. Unfortunately, the people who are putting on the show don't seem to be too worried about keeping people like me."

Many in the Little Village of comics, Quesada included, were saddened and shocked to hear that Plant wouldn't be back this year. Nor is he the only one to let the con go; Mile High Comics pulled out last year after nearly five decades on the show floor.

I honestly doubt Quesada's "sad" the Comicon's lost dealers attending, considering he's one of the biggest SJWs of all, and since he relinquished his role as Marvel's EIC to Axel Alonso, he's been able to maintain his influence from the shadows, which has all but allowed him to get away with a lot of the worst steps he took. And he never did anything on his part to shed the pamphlet approach to publishing comics, so he's certainly no innovator.

But the handwringing around those departures is in many ways a funhouse mirror reflection of what's actually going on in comics shops, where books of all varieties are gobbled up as soon as they hit the shelves on Wednesdays. "The fact that fans may occasionally say, 'This is the death of Marvel! This is the death of DC! Not another crossover! This is the worst thing ever!' I've been hearing that as long as I've been in comics," says Quesada. "It's part of fandom, and believe it or not, I think it's part of the fun of fandom. It's a fandom built on conflict."

I think that's an open signal he still upholds company wide crossovers too, and they all but ignore the closure of dozens of stores over the past year or so. What he refuses to admit is that their stories have become so poor, right down the universe-wide crossovers, that people have finally had enough, and depending on the merit, readers are turning more to smaller publishers with creator-owned books to offer. But it's no surprise he'll keep whistling in the dark, as he's done it for years, and practically forced that very darkness upon the products he sadly got his mitts on.

They quote a store owner who says:

"If you look at what happened with videogame fandom, Star Wars fandom, you can apply the same to comic books," Higgins says. "There are fights within the community that boil down to 'There's only one right way.' People don't seem to realize that there need to be many different styles, different groups of people all working together. Different groups within fandom just can't see how other people could think they're right."

I don't think there's only one right way, but I do think that when you forcibly shove elements like heavy-handed darkness and politics into the stories at the full expense of entertainment and escapism, you in effect ruin everything. It should also be noted that video game companies that took up politicized maneuvers in the past few years, all because they wanted to appease Anita Sarkeesian's bunch, have been suffering in sales and reputations as they made themselves look jelly-spined, and it's a similar story already with Star Wars.

And I do think the so-called Spider-fans who say Mary Jane Watson is unfit for Peter Parker simply because she worked as a model/actress, and even think Peter has to remain firmly a pauper, are ruining everything because they're either unable and unwilling to appreciate surrealism and overlook what they think is farfetched to enjoy the entertainment value, or, they won't respect that Peter's saga can reflect realism in the sense that there are people who learn how to overcome potential poverty to become more successful. Why, Stan Lee's late wife Joan Lee was a model, so you could say that the developments in Spider-Man in the past reflected elements from his own life. Which suggests these aren't really Spider-fans who lambasted the directions over petty issues. You'd think they believed Stan was allowed to choose his soul mate, but was not allowed to apply similar ideas to his own fictional creations. Except that, seeing how rotten they all actually were towards Stan all these years, it's clear they don't like any of the successes in his life and career.

Here's another part where the article becomes troubling:

Comics writer Joshua Dysart is jazzed about what he sees. "I think we're heading into this massive content gold rush," he says. "We're seeing comics like Infidel, an Islamic horror story, being optioned for six figures. We just need the big companies, when they're releasing a comic book movie that doesn't fit the mold of a comic book movie, to tell the world that it is. I mean, no one knows that A History of Violence was a comic book first. Ghost World—no one equates that with a 'comic book movie.'"

Oh, so he thinks apparent Islamic propaganda is such a big deal, does he? And all because, at least according to him, there's movie deals in the cards. But if that's all comics have come to stand for, then it only demonstrates why they're failing.

Quesada thinks the industry is at a creative high point as well. "I've been working as a comic professional since 1990, and even then people were already talking about the wide variety of comics being sold," he says. "Now it's way wider. The direct market is a boon to creativity. It allows someone with the right idea and a great story to find an audience. And the ability to publish for newcomers is easier than it's ever been. Printing costs are much lower. You can crowdfund your book. There's no excuse."

He's right about one thing: there's no excuse...for desecrating mainstream superhero products at the expense of what they were created for, and fandom. He doesn't belong at the Big Two, and it's time for him to retire already. The industry may be at creative highs, but not if they make leftism the only direction you can take, politically or otherwise. Marvel and DC haven't been very creative for a long time.

And the audience for those books exists. Former readers are replaced by new ones. Yes, stores go out of business, but they too are replaced by new ones. According to Diamond Comic Distributors, which distributes comics for most of the industry's heavyweights, the number of stores with active monthly accounts has increased slightly for three years in a row. And that doesn't take into account the fact that fans can now access comics on an array of digital platforms.

The query is: are the replacements enough? I notice again, they've failed to provide even that kind of sales figure. So how do we know this is true? They don't give names of stores, I don't see what they're getting at.

This article is just another example of countless apologists who won't question artistic merit employed these days, nor whether it played any part in bringing down the reputation of a once fine medium.

Labels: bad editors, crossoverloading, dc comics, indie publishers, islam and jihad, marvel comics, moonbat writers, msm propaganda, politics, technology

Novelist Cain, whom the comics press manufactured controversy about even as she admitted it was far from the calamity they were making it out to be, now has a new comic in store from Image with feminist components:

In 2016, crime novelist Chelsea Cain dove into superhero comics for the first time with the Marvel series Mockingbird. Focused on lesser-known Avengers member Bobbi Morse, Mockingbird was prematurely canceled after only eight issues, but Cain and artist Kate Niemczyk used those chapters to craft one of the most entertaining and unabashedly feminist superhero comics of the decade. Unfortunately, not everyone greeted it with enthusiasm. After the final issue’s cover featured the protagonist sporting an “Ask Me About My Feminist Agenda” shirt, the Male Nerd Internet went into a meltdown. Cain was bombarded by social media abuse until she left Twitter, swearing off a comics fandom that had become toxic.

Yup, predictably, they take the side of the victimology angle, and no consideration of the fact her story in Mockingbird was very poor. So much that it wasn't even a feminist agenda. Furthermore, she's long returned, last time I looked, so I don't understand what they're getting at. And they wasted no time writing off all fandom as toxic...but not the writers/artists/editors brewing up these awful tales.

But now she’s back, and her agenda is more feminist than ever. Cain’s newest comic, Man-Eaters, reunites the Mockingbird creative team to tell the story of a world in which hormonal fluctuations cause young girls to transform into violent, monstrous cats when they menstruate — and face severe government repression as a result.

“What is scarier to our culture right now than women? Adolescent girls are particularly scary because we don’t know how we’re supposed to feel about them,” Cain says. “This whole monster allegory felt like a very apt way to explore our fear of female sexuality and women in general.”

Now isn't this an odd premise. Of recent, it's more like the leftists became hostile to female sexuality, and they're the ones who've lead to the whole description of "social justice warriors". But if the part about government suggests anything, it could just as well be a metaphorical attack on the Trump administration, because it's just so easy to scapegoat the right instead of the left for the harm that's been done to women's sexuality of late, in entertainment and in general.

In recent years, there has been an uptick in calls for more diverse representation across pop culture. Cain emphasizes, however, that the best way to tell new stories that reflect the real world is not just to emphasize female and/or non-white characters, but to have diverse creators behind the scenes as well. Cain, for instance, has a young adolescent daughter who has recently become aware of how male-focused the comics industry can be. Cain has channeled the rage of that realization into Man-Eaters, and her daughter has had quite an influence on Maude, the book’s teenaged girl protagonist.

And when they get to this part, it becomes more telling this isn't exactly panning SJWs for the damage they caused, although what if the anti-sex left does come to assume that? You could easily wonder if the same crowd that smeared fandom will turn against her next if they think she's produced something unsuited for their visions.

“As a comic geek family, we’ve raised our kid going in to the store every week to get comics, and then there’s this terrible moment where she’s started to go through puberty and suddenly she became aware of all the misogyny in the comic store,” Cain says. “Seeing her start to see how women are portrayed on all those comic covers on the wall, seeing her see that all of the store picks that focus on particular creators are all pictures and names of men. Seeing her see that makes it very real. I really wanted there to be something for her, that might reflect her rage. Man-Eaters is a very funny comic, and I hope it’s an exciting comic, but it’s also a very angry comic, because there’s a lot to be angry about.”

Ah, and when they get around to stating this, it becomes apparent they're not complaining about the nasty sexism that prevailed in the mid-2000s (eg-Identity Crisis, Avengers: Disassembled, One More Day, and the story where Wonder Woman snapped Max Lord's neck and was villified circa Infinite Crisis), but rather, about alleged lack of promotion and attention for women in writing and artwork, even though there's been more than a modicum over the past decades, like Ann Nocenti, and Gail Simone was noted during the mid-2000s when she was assigned to Birds of Prey, and crummy as Kelly Sue deConnick's work on Carol Danvers was, she's also a more recent female writer. From the above, it sounds like Cain's new comics is a metaphor for jealousy, and little else.

Cain continues, “When we talk about representation in comics, we require more than seeing people like us in the comics. We want to see through the lens of that experience. That means the art and the writing. Choosing what pictures appear in what panels is incredibly powerful; it shows what that character thinks is important and therefore what is important. A big mission for me is to show a world that resonates for people who maybe don’t see their world reflected, show them things they can relate to. I think everybody should experience other points of view, but in comics we have this industry where one point of view is much more dominant than any other.”

Unfortunately, it's already apparent she doesn't mean left-liberal, and she clearly has no interest in challenging the fact the industry is virtually dominated by leftists. If we can't see decent portrayals of right-conservatives in comicdom, then what's the point here?

Though she’s “scared to f—ing death” of another harassment campaign — one reason it took her almost two years to write another comic — Cain said the Mockingbird experience instilled her with a sense of responsibility, “as someone who had the opportunity as a female to tell a female-perspective story.” To that end, Cain and Lia Miternique founded a production company called Ministry of Trouble, which developed Man-Eaters for Image Comics and may develop even more comics down the road. On top of that, Cain is already working with Kelly Sue DeConnick (Bitch Planet, Captain Marvel) to develop Man-Eaters for television as well.

Oh please. As if there haven't ever been stories with female perspectives! Besides Wonder Woman, how about a lot of the stories spotlighting Black Canary? How about Spider-Woman's series from 1978-83, and Dazzler's series from 1981-86? IIRC, Jo Duffy was the writer who launched the Catwoman solo in the mid-90s. That doesn't count? Some "responsibility" Cain's showing there.

“With Mockingbird, I was accused of having a feminist agenda,” Cain says. “I was always like, ‘Yeah! Of course I have a feminist agenda.’ I’ll see your outrage and raise you a Tampon Woman. What do you got, internet?”

Let's put it this way. The problem wasn't necessarily feminism, so much as it was the bad characterization and retconning of a notable moment in Mockingbird's story history that made her look bad. But since she's asked, I will say that when it's told from the kind of leftist perspective she holds dear, that's when it really tanks, and she has quite a nerve to act like nothing's wrong with it. She doesn't even defend her ideology or explain why she thinks dissenters with feminism in its modern forms are mistaken. That's just the problem, though you can't expect a similarly leftist magazine like Entertainment Weekly to challenge her about it.

Anyway, seeing what some of the premise for her new Image product is like, it'll at least be intriguing to see how SJW leftists react when the story setup could just as easily conflict with their own sex-negative viewpoints. We can only wonder, will they have a problem with that?

Labels: indie publishers, misogyny and racism, moonbat writers, msm propaganda, politics

The Gamespot website is the latest video games site that's doing a very bad job covering comic books, writing up a sugary take on the Muslim Ms. Marvel that includes such trash as:

Since her debut, Kamala has become virtually synonymous with the Ms. Marvel identity and one of Marvel's most popular heroes for new comic book readers. She tends to specialize in a mix of high-flying superheroic action adventure and slice of life, coming of age stories focused on her home life and high school career. Unlike Carol, her powers don't come from Kree genetics, but the complicated relationship between the Inhumans, the humans, and the newly mutated "New Inhumans" or "Numans" puts her in a similar brand of conflict: Both Carol and Kamala exist in the overlapping areas between two different worlds, and they both struggle with finding where their responsibilities actually lie.

Their insistence on calling Khan "popular" despite all the financial receipts proving contrary just demonstrates why, if there's any video game sites unqualified for this, it's them. But in a way, this does prove something: unlike most other failed character introductions who were allowed to just be quietly dropped due to lack of popularity or interest, Kamala Khan's given considerable exceptions simply because she's a Muslim adherent. It's pretty much the same case with the Islamic Green Lantern, Simon Baz, over at DC. Such forced diversity has only damaged brands and made the Big Two look like a joke who don't have the courage to let go of a badly developed idea with political overtones like these have.

And even Entertainment Weekly's going all sugary as they report that the Khan character's being used as part of "Marvel Rising", a project with animated cartoons also featuring some of their more recent creations too:

Later this summer, Marvel will launch a series of animated shorts titled Marvel Rising: Initiation. These shorts will build up to an animated film, Marvel Rising: Secret Warriors, that will premiere on Disney Channel in the fall. The story centers on teenage superhero Ghost-Spider (a version of Gwen Stacy who has acquired spider powers), who is on the run from the law after being framed for her friend’s murder. Ms. Marvel, Squirrel Girl, Quake, and Patriot are dispatched to bring her in, before they all find themselves teaming up to fight a threat no one had expected. This group of heroes is younger and more inclusive (in terms of both gender and ethnicity) than the mostly white male heroes who dominate the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

“Marvel Rising is a big storytelling celebration of the next generation of Marvel heroes, for the next generation of Marvel fans,” says Marvel editor Sana Amanat, a co-executive producer on Marvel Rising who also co-created the Kamala Khan incarnation of Ms. Marvel in 2014. “Over the last few years at Marvel, we’ve seen this huge growth in new types of characters, a younger generation of heroes that has brought in a new cast of Marvel fans. These characters are true to what the Marvel Universe is about, while also being truly reflective of the world outside your window.”

Sounds to me like somebody's robbing Stan Lee of his own phrases and not coming up with her own. All the while not even showing him gratitude. It's surprising though, that this, of all cartoons on the market, is the one involving themes like death, which Saturday morning cartoons of the past usually avoided, because what wasn't an issue even in Silver Age comics is considered too terrifying for children watching motion pictures on TV.

“We’re very interested in their opinions and they had a lot to say,” Lane says. “One thing many girls were asking for was different body types. In animation, characters all sort of look the same, there are similar body types based on model sheets, but here every female character has a different body from the other characters. They were also very open to the ethnic and religious diversity of the cast.”

The different body types also lend themselves to different ways of approaching heroism. Ms. Marvel does not, as Amanat says, have “pretty powers.” Instead, Kamala’s shapeshifting abilities often explode her body to ridiculous proportions, “embiggen-ing” her fists to punch bad guys or stretching her arms to traverse great distances. It’s a relatable dynamic for young fans who are themselves going through some big bodily changes, as are Kamala’s burgeoning friendships with other Marvel Rising superheroes like Squirrel Girl, a.k.a Doreen Green. Kamala and Doreen’s friendship will feature heavily in the animated Marvel Rising stories, as well as tie-in comics like Marvel Rising: Ms. Marvel & Squirrel Girl (the first issue of which hits stores Aug. 1).

Often when I've read claims like these about what girls allegedly want, I get the feeling it's all phony, or they cherry picked the audience they'd appeal to, making it mainly leftists they were catering to. They also fail to elucidate whether the audience they were questioning wanted entertaining action and well conveyed dramatics. Body types alone don't a compelling cartoon make. It's also pretty apparent this'll end up being another Islamic propaganda machine, and that's not bound to make many sensible parents happy.

If this is what Marvel's come down to, then it's just Marvel sinking, into SJW propaganda.

Labels: animation, bad editors, islam and jihad, marvel comics, msm propaganda, politics

The LA Times published a weak article about the plummet in sales comic books have taken, and predictably, won't explore any challenging answers why movies aren't saving the industry at all, nor do they offer any suggestions:

There is one sector, however, where Marvel heroes are not soaring to new heights, one in which they struggle to find new fans — and in a wry twist, it's in their original medium, in the pages of Marvel Comics.

Marvel comic books, which introduced the world to such characters as the Avengers, Spider-Man, the X-Men, Deadpool and Venom, is still the brand to beat in its sector — over the past decade, Marvel has locked down the No. 1 spot in its annual market share competition with rivals including DC Comics, Image and Dark Horse.

But the picture is less rosy when Marvel competes with its own past. Today's comics sell one-tenth the numbers Marvel expected in the 1960s and 1970s glory days when comic books were cheaper than candy bars and just as easy to find at the nation's newsstands, corner markets and drugstores.

Now, a new comic book costs $4-$6 and the only shelves they reach are at the 2,500 comic book specialty shops doing business in the U.S. and Canada — and even that number is in decline as stores (among them Meltdown Comics, the Sunset Boulevard landmark of 25 years) lose their leases or downsize to online merchants.

Well that's partly because Marvel/DC pulled out of bookstores a second time in the past few years, and the prices obviously didn't help (no doubt, many bookstore patrons were discouraged). Some trade paperbacks cost less than the single pamphlets, one more reason why I consider it better to read a whole story that way, just as I would a textual novel.

There's an even steeper challenge: For young consumers, could any comic book ever stack up against video games, smartphones and Pixar films?

If they were better written, they could. Why else do they think sales plummeted after the early 90s as prices rose? People were becoming more disillusioned with the storytelling quality. X-Men was one of the biggest victims of crummy writing, including that atrocious excuse for a crossover called Age of Apocalypse.

All monthly comics by Marvel, DC and other leading publishers reach readers through Maryland-based Diamond Comics Distributors, which reported that in 2017 single-issue sales were down more than 10%, while graphic novels (which reprint the most popular multiple-issue storylines into the "trade paperback" format sold at bookstores) were down more than 9%.

And that's because, if the story's bad, even overly political, then why should a paperback do any better? If people know the story was horrible as a pamphlet, there's no point in waiting for paperbacks/hardcovers either. On which note, why are they claiming the stories now reprinted are the most popular? Secret Empire certainly wasn't.

The monthly comics are written to appeal to longtime fans, which means they often have very little in common with the current storylines of films such as Disney's just-released "Ant-Man and the Wasp" or television shows such as "Legion," "Daredevil," "Punisher" or "Jessica Jones."

Must they have anything in common? That's not what matters, and the new garbage isn't written for longtime fans either. They're written solely to please the writers hired and their leftist politics. What should matter is that the stories entertain, plain and simple, yet that's not what they're doing. They're only being exploited for left-wing social justice propaganda, so blatant in tone it alienates even the leftists themselves, if they even read them at all. Regarding this year's SDCC, the article reveals yet another eyebrow raiser:

Curious fans of the screen heroes that manage to find a comic book store might not recognize the heroes they find in their namesake comics. (In the case of Netflix's "Luke Cage," the same character that merits his own television series wasn't popular enough to hold to his own monthly comic book.) At Comic-Con, the Marvel television shows will be packing fans in to panel presentations with stars, but they will be separate and unconnected to the panels for comics readers. (The cinematic Marvel stars and filmmakers will not attend this year's expo in San Diego at all, a testament to their secured spot as a commercial dynamo that no longer needs the promotional opportunities of Comic-Con.)

Are they so sure the movies don't need the convention? Personally, I see the sudden absence of the filmmakers as peculiar, because there's far more moviedom at the SDCC now, and you'd think it would serve their cause well for promotion. So it's a surprise that this year's convention may not even see the filmmakers this time. On the other hand, it may not be a surprise that a most unworthy commentator was quoted for this article:

It adds up to a frustrating disconnect, according to Heidi MacDonald, editor in chief of the Beat, a comics industry blog.

"With Marvel Comics, they're definitely down from where they were five years ago even as the movies have gotten huge," MacDonald said. "But over that time, they have also been No. 1 in the direct market for something like 99% of the time. So their point of view is, 'If it ain't broke, don't fix it.'

“The movies and, to a lesser extent, the television shows have made Marvel a household brand name and when you have a film that is tied closely to a specific storyline — like [the Fox film] 'Logan,' which was based on the graphic novel 'Old Man Logan' — there is definitely interest in that title. But when you see the brand power outside of comics the question people ask is 'Are they doing as much as they could with that?'"

So they turned to one of the Big Two's worst apologists, MacDonald, who has no business claiming Marvel's doing well despite the fact they're not really at all. The reality is that even today, there's quite a few stores who had to close not only because they weren't selling well anymore, but also because some of the products they stored were non-returnable. Couple that with the bad stories put out by the Big Two and you can understand why businesses are going under.

Few people in Hollywood have more history with comic books adaptations than Michael Uslan, who began writing comic books in the 1970s and used that expertise as an executive producer on Tim Burton's "Batman," the 1989 hit that launched a new generation of superhero movies. Uslan recalled recently that top Marvel Comics executives treated him to a lavish Manhattan meal after the movie stirred fan interest in all comics and gave Marvel a hefty spike in sales.

"That was the case for years, big superhero movies brought new fans to comics, but it's not the case now," Uslan said. "The biggest comic book movies now have little or zero impact on the comics sales. The movies aren't rescuing the comics; they're replacing them. So now I really worry about comics. Any entertainment medium that can't connect with new generations, doesn't it have one foot in the grave?"

Sadly, yes. But then, how come he didn't get more involved in comicdom than movies, and why didn't people like him voice similar visions to Bob Layton, that pamphlets have to be phased out in favor of paperbacks? In fact, why don't guys like him admit forced partisan politics are another factor in the decline? How does he think he'll be doing any better if he won't acknowledge the elephant in the room? The following definitely isn't reliable:

Uslan and most longtime observers agree that on paper, at least, the future of Marvel appears far smaller than its past but that's not a world view shared by Dan Buckley, the president of publishing for Marvel Entertainment and an industry veteran who responds to the chorus of doomsayers with a survivor's chuckle.

"I've been managing over the demise of the print comic book business since 1991," Buckley said. "That's all anyone has talked about — how this is going to end. I find it fascinating that there’s a certain cynicism built into the beast. I've been fighting against it for a really long time.”

The truth, he says, is that, “it's a pretty fabulous business to be in."

Well it figures he'd lie, because for ignoramuses like Buckley, anything that puts money into their own pockets in the present is great to work in, even if they have no respect for the material they're working with, mainly because being Disney property now provides them with room to exploit for their own selfish benefit. If he was really battling the perception, he would've taken a lot of the steps I'd advocated and made improvements in their talent and publication format approach. That he's never done it speaks volumes. Heck, how come he never even did anything about Joe Quesada's maltreatment of Mary Jane Watson?

There are few places where kids might even bump into one by accident — Marvel's monthly issues aren't sold at Target, Barnes & Noble or even 7-11, where, in recent weeks, you could have found Marvel's fan-favorite character Deadpool on every Slurpee machine in America but nowhere on the magazine rack. At movie theaters Fox's "Deadpool 2" is the biggest R-rated film of 2018 — but would his comics sell like popcorn if they were available in the lobby?

At $4, probably not. And like Layton said earlier, Disney doesn't publish comics based on their classic cartoon casts anymore either, and probably haven't since the mid-90s. They probably don't even reprint them in paperback, because the modern staff for Disney's proven just as bad with their own wares, and already screwed up the Star Wars franchise to boot with the Han Solo film. (Update: IDW does print some under license, however.)

DC Comics is challenging the status quo with a just-announced Wal-Mart partnership. The retail giant will sell four different 100-page monthly anthologies of comics stories (mixing reprints with some new and exclusive content) that will not be sold to comics shop. The move was met with complaints from the comics shop community and curious interest by rival publishers, making it a topic of high interest next week in San Diego.

I still think it's a short-term answer to a much bigger problem, and besides, what if some of the stories inside are reprints of recent atrocities, including what's turning out to be more bad Bendis garbage in Superman? If the audience thinks the stories are bad, the anthologies won't avail for long.

Technology has helped somewhat in the form of digital comics, but after a decade on the scene, the screen versions of comics have been a middling success at best and even there, again, the in-demand product is primarily tailored to the sensibilities of longtime collectors, not newbies.

Umm, if you won't give sales figures, then it hasn't helped at all. Though it does hint nobody found the stories any good.

When Marvel got into the digital game back in 2007, a reporter for The Times asked Buckley about the key challenge facing his company. "We don't have a natural lifestyle interaction point for kids anymore," he said. Reminded of the quote by the same reporter, Buckley admitted that not much has changed over the past decade. "I was right when I said that and, you know, I'd be right if I said it again."

And that's because they're not truly dedicated to entertainment and escapism first and foremost; they're dedicated to leftist politics. Isn't that incredible Buckley, after claiming it's a great place to work despite blacklisting even some liberal writers along with conservative counterparts, goes on to admit they're not doing very well at all. So what was his point? Somebody in the comments made a much better one:

I've been a comic book reader (mainly Marvel) from age 10 since the mid 70's. What I see as the biggest reason for the decline of comic book sales, especially with Marvel is the decline in hiring qualified professional writers who can tell compelling heroic stories. The quality of storytelling has become increasingly sub-standard, it almost reads like terrible fan-fiction. Diversity has never been a problem in super hero comics, but the forced political ideologies of leftist writers and lack of adventurous tales over the past decade has definitely contributed to lower sales.

It's not diversity or politics that have hurt Marvel's comic sales, rather it's the bad storytelling from many of their writers who spend way too much time on social media sprouting their leftist ideologies and inserting it into the books. Being explicitly rude to fans/customers online is not going to bring in sales. There is no social media policy to keep Marvel employees from embarrassing themselves and the company they represent.

Furthermore it has been the infestation of identity politics that has spoiled Marvel Comics. Stan Lee used to say in the 60's that the Marvel Universe was “the world outside your window" it used to be "fiction with a subtle message" but not always. The representation of the "world outside your window" regards ALL people of society, without bias and discrimination. Any political message was subtle with a fair and balanced perspective. Super-heroes should never be primarily defined by their race, religion, gender, sexual orientation or political ideology.

Those traits are secondary to character development which is severely lacking in many Marvel comics today, where heroes don't really face adversity or hardships, they're not really overcoming anything or being victorious. Instead you get a leftist political lecture. Marvel comic book stories used to be dramatic, action-packed, full of adventure, and fun. The super heroes were flawed human beings but through their trials and tribulations, readers were inspired and entertained. But not anymore, there are maybe a couple of good books produced by Marvel Comics these days, but I gladly now spend my surplus income on comic books from smaller better publishers producing quality products.

Marvel Comics today ham fists the reader with moral relativism, unwanted political ideologies, with stories and plot lines that go nowhere. The original founding super heroes have been cast aside and replaced with bland teenage legacy characters that are supposedly better and smarter. The writing is so bad that characters sound like they're from a Disney teen sitcom.

One has to ask the question why have DC Comics listened to fan concerns and as a result their sales are increasingly healthy in comparison.

Also this notion that (until fairly recent memory, the majority of comics creators were white men creating stories about super-powered white men) is a fallacy. Marvel Comics was progressive in the right way and had male and female writers and artists over the decades of different ethnicities.

In the mid 60's we saw the introduction of the Black Panther, Falcon in the late 60's. The early 70's with Misty Knight, Luke Cage and Brother Voodoo and the biggest introduction of all was the ALL NEW ALL DIFFERENT X-MEN which featured Storm and a cast of mutants gathered from all over the globe - very diverse indeed.

I will have to just dissent about DC supposedly listening to fan concerns, because if their hiring Bendis says something, they've never strayed far from their own leftist leanings either (not to mention social justice propaganda), and they can be pretty heavy-handed too when they want to be. (Let's not forget Identity Crisis and Infinite Crisis from the mid-2000s.) Save for that, this comment is a lot more honest than anybody's comments in the article proper.

If comicdom - or the mainstream superhero genre - collapses, it'll be the fault of all these apologists who tiptoe around the meatier issues and refuse to admit ultra-leftism as seen today played a part in the demise of a once fine medium. And sadly, they won't admit their pathetic approach to the issues has to shoulder some blame.

Labels: bad editors, crossoverloading, dc comics, dreadful artists, dreadful writers, indie publishers, marvel comics, moonbat artists, moonbat writers, msm propaganda, politics, sales, technology