|
Post by redstatecap on Feb 27, 2007 22:24:17 GMT -5
I think my point is being missed. It's not that people aren't allowed to express their opinions, I'm just tired of seeing each and every thread turned into a Marvel bash-a-thon. I feel like I can't say ANYTHING without five people coming in and going on and on and on about how much they hate Marvel right now. That's what pisses me off. It's just the negavity. Look at the threads, yourself. Every thread in the "New Avengers," "Mighty Avengers," and "Civil War" forums has at least three people gripping uncontrollably about how much they hate Marvel right now. I KNOW YOU HATE MARVEL RIGHT NOW. I UNDERSTAND. I READ 5 BILLION TIMES! WHY DO YOU HAVE TO POST IN EVERY THREAD ABOUT IT? WHY CAN'T YOU LET THE PEOPLE WHO LIKE IT RIGHT NOW JUST TALK ABOUT IT NORMALLY WITHOUT INTERUPTING US WITH YOUR USUAL BRAND OF NEGAVITIY AND CYNISM? I AM SICK AND TIRED OF HAVING TO ARGUE AND DEBATE THINGS TO DEATH! See, I had to type in Caps to get my point across. Now, I wouldn't apply this everyone, but that's for everyone who isn't quite getting what I'm saying. I'm just tired of not being able to have a discussion without the thread being lead into a Bendis/Millar/Marvel/Quesada bashing thread. What's the difference in what you are complaining about in others, and your own repeated postings, ad infinitum, of how much you love what's going on in Marvel, NA, and CW? Shouldn't we on the other side of things be getting tired of hearing that for the 57th time? Don't we deserve the same consideration that you are demanding -- to have your personal opinion unchallenged by someone with a different opinion? WE KNOW YOU LOVE MARVEL, BENDIS, AND MILLAR. WE UNDERSTAND THAT. WHY DO YOU HAVE TO POST IN EVERY THREAD ABOUT IT? etc. etc. etc. Hey, you said it, I didn't! RSC
|
|
|
Post by thew40 on Feb 27, 2007 22:28:51 GMT -5
What's the difference in what you are complaining about in others, and your own repeated postings, ad infinitum, of how much you love what's going on in Marvel, NA, and CW? Shouldn't we on the other side of things be getting tired of hearing that for the 57th time? Don't we deserve the same consideration that you are demanding -- to have your personal opinion unchallenged by someone with a different opinion? WE KNOW YOU LOVE MARVEL, BENDIS, AND MILLAR. WE UNDERSTAND THAT. WHY DO YOU HAVE TO POST IN EVERY THREAD ABOUT IT? etc. etc. etc. Actually, I don't love everything at Marvel. I don't love that Benids and Millar have put out. And I certainly don't shove it down everybody's throat like you do. ~W~
|
|
|
Post by spiderwasp on Feb 27, 2007 22:34:32 GMT -5
I KNOW YOU HATE MARVEL RIGHT NOW. I UNDERSTAND. I READ 5 BILLION TIMES! WHY DO YOU HAVE TO POST IN EVERY THREAD ABOUT IT? WHY CAN'T YOU LET THE PEOPLE WHO LIKE IT RIGHT NOW JUST TALK ABOUT IT NORMALLY WITHOUT INTERUPTING US WITH YOUR USUAL BRAND OF NEGAVITIY AND CYNISM? I AM SICK AND TIRED OF HAVING TO ARGUE AND DEBATE THINGS TO DEATH! See, I had to type in Caps to get my point across. ~W~ Thanks. We've all been thoroughly confused before but now that you've used all caps, we get it. Oh, wait, that was sarcasm. I'll brace myself for your usual slap on the wrist. We could ask you the same questions you asked us. Why do you have to constantly interupt our venting with your reprimands? I'll try your use of all caps for this one. WHEN WE CRITICIZE MARVEL, BENDIS, JOE Q, NEW AVENGERS, ETC., WE ARE NOT AIMING IT AT YOU. WE KNOW YOU DON'T LIKE IT THAT WE ARE CRITICAL. YOU'VE TOLD US A BILLION TIMES. WE, HOWEVER, RESERVE THE RIGHT TO CRITICIZE, USE SARCASM, HUMOR, OR WHATEVER WE WISH TO GET OUR POINTS ACROSS (EVEN ALL CAPS IF IT HELPS.) WE RESPECT AND APPRECIATE YOUR DISAGREEING WITH THE CONTENT REGARDING WHAT WE HAVE TO SAY. WE ARE, HOWEVER, SICK AND TIRED OF YOU ACTING ALL HOLIER THAN THOU AND TELLING US WHAT YOU DO AND DO NOT WANT US TO POST. There hopefully the all caps helped.
|
|
|
Post by thew40 on Feb 27, 2007 22:41:03 GMT -5
I KNOW YOU HATE MARVEL RIGHT NOW. I UNDERSTAND. I READ 5 BILLION TIMES! WHY DO YOU HAVE TO POST IN EVERY THREAD ABOUT IT? WHY CAN'T YOU LET THE PEOPLE WHO LIKE IT RIGHT NOW JUST TALK ABOUT IT NORMALLY WITHOUT INTERUPTING US WITH YOUR USUAL BRAND OF NEGAVITIY AND CYNISM? I AM SICK AND TIRED OF HAVING TO ARGUE AND DEBATE THINGS TO DEATH! See, I had to type in Caps to get my point across. ~W~ Thanks. We've all been thoroughly confused before but now that you've used all caps, we get it. Oh, wait, that was sarcasm. I'll brace myself for your usual slap on the wrist. We could ask you the same questions you asked us. Why do you have to constantly interupt our venting with your reprimands? I'll try your use of all caps for this one. WHEN WE CRITICIZE MARVEL, BENDIS, JOE Q, NEW AVENGERS, ETC., WE ARE NOT AIMING IT AT YOU. WE KNOW YOU DON'T LIKE IT THAT WE ARE CRITICAL. YOU'VE TOLD US A BILLION TIMES. WE, HOWEVER, RESERVE THE RIGHT TO CRITICIZE, USE SARCASM, HUMOR, OR WHATEVER WE WISH TO GET OUR POINTS ACROSS (EVEN ALL CAPS IF IT HELPS.) WE RESPECT AND APPRECIATE YOUR DISAGREEING WITH THE CONTENT REGARDING WHAT WE HAVE TO SAY. WE ARE, HOWEVER, SICK AND TIRED OF YOU ACTING ALL HOLIER THAN THOU AND TELLING US WHAT YOU DO AND DO NOT WANT US TO POST. There hopefully the all caps helped. WELL, TO BE HONEST, THE ALL-CAPS WASN'T POINTED AT YOU. I DON'T NECESSARILY CARE ABOUT THE CONTENT, IT'S JUST THAT I FEEL LIKE IT'S CONSTANTLY BEING SHOVED DOWN MY THROAT. I MEAN, I COME HERE AND ALL I HEAR IS "GROAN HATE BENDIS, GROAN HATE MILLAR, GROAN HATE QUESADA, GROAN GOOD OLD DAYS, ETC." I THINK YOU MAY BE TAKING WHAT I'M SAYING IN THE WRONG WAY. IT'S NOT THAT I DON'T THINK ANYONE HAS A RIGHT TO EXPRESS THEIR OPINION, IT'S JUST THAT I'D LIKE TO HAVE A DISCUSSION THAT DOESN'T END UP BEING FIVE PAGES OF MARVEL HATING. THERE ARE DOZENS OF DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THAT. I'M TIRED OF IT AND WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A DICUSSION THAT DOESN'T INVOLVE BLIND-BASHING. TO CLARIFY, I DON'T TAKE INSULT WHEN YOU GUYS TAKE POT SHOTS AT THE CREATORS. I THINK IT'S CHEAP, MIND YOU, AND REALLY COMES OFF AS SHALLOW. I MEAN, WHY NOT GO AFTER THE WORK RATHER THAN THE PERSON? IT MAKES ONE SEEM A LITTLE MORE SOUND. ALSO, MY APOLOGIES AT THE HOLIER-THAN-THOU ATTITUDE. I DON'T MEAN TO BE PROJECTING THAT. THAT BEING SAID, I GET THE SAME THING FROM A NUMBER OF PEOPLE HERE. ~W~
|
|
|
Post by The Night Phantom on Feb 27, 2007 22:43:42 GMT -5
We need a Marvel equivalent to Mark Waid. Or—we just need Mark Waid back!
[...] those who have kept that reason- Night Phantom [...] Night Phantom's over-the-top and amusing style The compliments are nice, but they’re hard to live up to! ;D
I hold on to some special, secret hope that maybe - JUST MAYBE - someone other than Doctor Doom and iastagehand will have something positive to say and maybe even get a little excited about a project. This sort of thing does happen—in the Agents of Atlas thread, for instance.
I am sick to death of having to defend the freedom of speech. Alas, such eternal vigilance is the price…
A lot has happened in the past 24 hours. And maybe that’s part of the problem. Folks, I’d like to suggest that if someone’s post gets you hot under the collar, sometimes it might be better not to respond right away. Now, if only I were better at following my own advice!
|
|
|
Post by thew40 on Feb 27, 2007 22:48:06 GMT -5
A lot has happened in the past 24 hours. And maybe that’s part of the problem. Folks, I’d like to suggest that if someone’s post gets you hot under the collar, sometimes it might be better not to respond right away. Now, if only I were better at following my own advice! Night Phantom, you are a cool glass of water on a sweltering summers day. I will leaving for the evening . . . and perhaps not even returning to this thread. ~W~
|
|
|
Post by spiderwasp on Feb 27, 2007 22:59:52 GMT -5
ALSO, MY APOLOGIES AT THE HOLIER-THAN-THOU ATTITUDE. I DON'T MEAN TO BE PROJECTING THAT. THAT BEING SAID, I GET THE SAME THING FROM A NUMBER OF PEOPLE HERE. ~W~ Fair enough. As I said in an earlier post, I don't claim the problem is completely one sided. The times I have had a problem with you, however, is when I say something that, at least in my opinion is funny, and you come back all serious with the "How can you say something like that about ...?" When I or others say these things, I suppose we are looking for a reaction or comment, but in good natured retaliation for what we said, not as "You should be ashamed of yourself for having said it." It's also very hard to criticize the work without criticizing the creator. They go hand in hand. Now, in the case of a writer I really like (Dan Slott, for example), if he writes a story I really don't like, I might only go after the story, but not him because it's just one story. That's where things are different with Bendis. It isn't one story that many of us don't like, it's the whole direction he's been taking for more than two years with our favorite book. It's gone beyond a bad day and yes, we just don't like him. I do agree that sometimes, some people go overboard with the whole "I hate Marvel" thing and I wonder why they even want to come here if there is nothing they like. However, reprimanding doesn't help matters at all. It's time to catch on to that. You have to admit though that you sometimes go overboard in the other direction. When I recently joked about the costs of 48 new books in your Initiative post, you went on about why these comments make you hate coming here. For the record, since Slott is writing the Initiative series, I'm actually looking forward to it. I'm not excited about the concept because I think it is too big to handle, but I think that if any writer at Marvel can do it, it's him. That's not to say that I won't gripe and complain if I end up thinking it's a bomb. I never said this at the time though because I ended up just fighting a battle to defend my comment about the price of 48 new series. Had you just said "Ha Ha," we could have gone on with the conversation. My point is let's just put an end to this tiresome argument and get back to the books. However, to make this work, we have to all accept that we can't control what others decide to post and just have to make the best of it.
|
|
|
Post by balok on Feb 27, 2007 23:20:15 GMT -5
You can be a real jerk, redstatecap. ~W~ Argumentum ad hominum. You lose. Whenever someone posts something, or links to something, that contains things others disagree with, they're liable to pipe up. It doesn't matter if they've made that point before, or not. Just as when people agree with a post or some linked material, they're going to say so, no matter how often they have done so in the past. It might be a problem if someone used all their own past posts as proof that they were right, essentially turning themself into a chorus, but I don't see that. A lot of us express negativity because to us, the Marvel Universe isn't a very pleasant place right now. I stayed with New Avengers for almost 20 issues - far longer than I normally give a book to grab and hold my attention. The first couple of issues were good, but in my view it quickly went downhill. Bendis (and now Millar) have convinced me through what they write that they don't really understand, or care about, the history of the characters they write. And I will remain convinced of that no matter how often you tell me I should not be. The only thing that can unconvince me is if Bendis changes how he writes the characters. If you, or Doctor Doom, pipe up with how great something us, you can expect to be disagreed with. The fact that you've heard it all before or that it seems to you to be negative is entirely irrelevant. I don't know Bendis, or Millar personally - they might be nice guys. I do know that I don't like their writing, and I don't like what they've done to Marvel. You might. But you will never convince anyone by calling them a jerk, or whining about how often they post their opinions. You'll convince them by making a consistent, coherent argument that supports your view.
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Bong on Feb 28, 2007 1:04:01 GMT -5
Well said, Balok!
|
|
|
Post by thew40 on Feb 28, 2007 8:54:57 GMT -5
Again, not getting my point here . . . Whenever someone posts something, or links to something, that contains things others disagree with, they're liable to pipe up. It doesn't matter if they've made that point before, or not. Just as when people agree with a post or some linked material, they're going to say so, no matter how often they have done so in the past. It might be a problem if someone used all their own past posts as proof that they were right, essentially turning themself into a chorus, but I don't see that. A lot of us express negativity because to us, the Marvel Universe isn't a very pleasant place right now. I stayed with New Avengers for almost 20 issues - far longer than I normally give a book to grab and hold my attention. The first couple of issues were good, but in my view it quickly went downhill. Bendis (and now Millar) have convinced me through what they write that they don't really understand, or care about, the history of the characters they write. And I will remain convinced of that no matter how often you tell me I should not be. The only thing that can unconvince me is if Bendis changes how he writes the characters. If you, or Doctor Doom, pipe up with how great something us, you can expect to be disagreed with. The fact that you've heard it all before or that it seems to you to be negative is entirely irrelevant. Okay, this is what bothering me. I hate that every thread is turned into this. I know that you don't like it right now. Why is there a need to keep saying so? Every time I post a thread, I know that everyone here (with the except of the 2-3 of us that disagree) will immediately bog it down with stuff like what you just wrote . . . and the thread will become about hating/bashing Bendis and Millar. It's a two-way street. This is almost exactly I what I said about about bashing the creators instead of critizing their works. As for RSC, I'm just tired of his attitude. ~W~
|
|
|
Post by Black Knight on Feb 28, 2007 10:19:21 GMT -5
Again, not getting my point here . . . Whenever someone posts something, or links to something, that contains things others disagree with, they're liable to pipe up. It doesn't matter if they've made that point before, or not. Just as when people agree with a post or some linked material, they're going to say so, no matter how often they have done so in the past. It might be a problem if someone used all their own past posts as proof that they were right, essentially turning themself into a chorus, but I don't see that. A lot of us express negativity because to us, the Marvel Universe isn't a very pleasant place right now. I stayed with New Avengers for almost 20 issues - far longer than I normally give a book to grab and hold my attention. The first couple of issues were good, but in my view it quickly went downhill. Bendis (and now Millar) have convinced me through what they write that they don't really understand, or care about, the history of the characters they write. And I will remain convinced of that no matter how often you tell me I should not be. The only thing that can unconvince me is if Bendis changes how he writes the characters. If you, or Doctor Doom, pipe up with how great something us, you can expect to be disagreed with. The fact that you've heard it all before or that it seems to you to be negative is entirely irrelevant. Okay, this is what bothering me. I hate that every thread is turned into this. I know that you don't like it right now. Why is there a need to keep saying so? Every time I post a thread, I know that everyone here (with the except of the 2-3 of us that disagree) will immediately bog it down with stuff like what you just wrote . . . and the thread will become about hating/bashing Bendis and Millar. It's a two-way street. This is almost exactly I what I said about about bashing the creators instead of critizing their works. As for RSC, I'm just tired of his attitude. ~W~ I am sorry, but what you are saying is, anybody that disagrees with my opinion, don't post on my threads. That may not be what you mean, but that is sure how it came across to me. If that is what you want, well fine I guess, but then I guess that we can reverse that, and say that people here don't want to see anything postive about NA on there negative threads. That wold be untrue, as I value others opinions, espeicially when presented well. Really, you need to get off your soapbox.
|
|
|
Post by balok on Feb 28, 2007 10:56:28 GMT -5
Again, not getting my point here . . . I understand your point just fine. You don't want to hear people's opinions because you've heard them before. I have to say it: if you want a message board that works that way, you're going to have to establish and moderate one yourself, so that you can lay down the ground rules. Frankly, if Van or shiryu, the people actually authorized to run these boards, tell me to shut up, then I'll do so. You haven't got that authority. Okay, this is what bothering me. I hate that every thread is turned into this. I know that you don't like it right now. Why is there a need to keep saying so? You posted a thread containing commentary from a creator of the book. It happens that I disagree with the man. I'm going to say so. It sounds like you want a forum like the DemocraticUnderground or Free Republic, where the forum rules specifically exclude those who disagree. I don't visit those fora, because every thread starts with a comment and ends with dozens or hundreds of "Me, too" posts. There's no dialogue, no intelligence, there. I hope this forum doesn't turn into that. Every time I post a thread, I know that everyone here (with the except of the 2-3 of us that disagree) will immediately bog it down with stuff like what you just wrote . . . and the thread will become about hating/bashing Bendis and Millar. Except that the commentary here has been critical of THEIR WORK. When I say "Millar doesn't understand Captain America" that's not an ad hominem - that's a criticism of what he has said. I'm not sure you understand the difference. More on this in a moment. As for RSC, I'm just tired of his attitude. I can tell you that I'm bitter about Marvel. As far as I'm concerned, creatively, Bendis and Millar might as well have pulled out their gear and taken a giant whiz on everything I love about the Marvel Universe. It takes a real effort to remain civil when discussing their creative output. Then along comes an interview with one of them where they about break their arm patting themself on the back like they've accomplished something worthwhile, and BOOM! it's like hitting a deep aquifer of loathing - I can't keep the bile inside any longer. You're liable to hear it, from me or from someone else, every time you post something we disagree with. I suspect that others, and redstatecap in particular, might feel the same way. We could easily take approximately the same position with you. We could say, "there goes thew40, posting something designed to irritate us, again." But I don't *think* that's what you're doing. I took your post in the spirit I hope it was meant - to post something you found interesting for comment. Except that when you do that, you may not like the comment. That's the world. Interestingly enough, YOU, by your continuing presence, understand America better than Millar does. Why? Because you and Doom are pretty outnumbered here. Few agree with you consistently. And yet you're still here. Because you understand that some things aren't about a popularity content. When Captain America is competently written, he understands that the freedoms and values that make America great are not about a popularity contest. Cap - the real Cap - would never surrender because people disagreed with him, if he knew he was right. You have the courage of your convictions, and more power to you for it. That's the courage that lets the sheriff stand between the mob and a suspect and tell them they will not lynch the man. It's the courage that lets a kid stand in front of a tank in Tienanmen Square, knowing that the least that will happen is a dank prison cell. It's the courage that won World War II. And it's the courage Millar wrote out of Captain America, and out of every "hero" who meekly accepted an amnesty after fighting for principles. Just. Plain. Bad. Writing.
|
|
|
Post by redstatecap on Feb 28, 2007 12:26:20 GMT -5
It's a two-way street. This is almost exactly I what I said about about bashing the creators instead of critizing their works. As for RSC, I'm just tired of his attitude. You seem to be the only poster making ad hominem attacks here, so I find your statement curious. First, you consistently take an attack on a creator's work as an attack on the creator. This isn't the case. The vast, vast, amount of comment on these boards is directed at the work Bendis has done on the Avengers, and the work Millar has done on Civil War. Whether they are nice guys or something else is irrelevant. I think their work sucks, and I'm going to say so. Second, you consistently take an attack on a creators' work as a personal attack against you. I really don't understand this particular facet of comic fandom, but I see it all the time. I guess your feeling is that if you like it, someone that hates it must hate you. Well, I couldn't care less if you defend the work, so long as you can do so with logic and facts. That's part of why I post here, not merely to see a chorus of approval. I don't take strong disagreement personally. Third, you seem to be of the opinion that a critic can voice his opinion only one time, and that's it. He has to shut up thereafter. I suppose everyone would have to continually mine the archives to find out just what each other's opinions are on a subject. On the other hand, it seems to be perfectly acceptable for you to post every month how much you love what Bendis is doing. I will say this one last time: This is a public forum. People who disagree with what you have to say are going to tell you so. You can either take it or leave it, but that's how it is. RSC
|
|
|
Post by von Bek on Feb 28, 2007 13:09:28 GMT -5
Again, not getting my point here . . . I understand your point just fine. You don't want to hear people's opinions because you've heard them before. I have to say it: if you want a message board that works that way, you're going to have to establish and moderate one yourself, so that you can lay down the ground rules. Frankly, if Van or shiryu, the people actually authorized to run these boards, tell me to shut up, then I'll do so. You haven't got that authority. Well said, Balok. What Thew40 didn´t seem to understand is that he doesn´t have the authority (or the right) to control what people post and how people respond and react to the threads he started (and that are not his threads BTW.) Regarding the "great interview" all I saw was Millar trying to show the readers how cool and hip he is. And before someone says it, I´m not a Millar hater, I´m a big Ultimates fan actually.
|
|
|
Post by dlw66 on Feb 28, 2007 13:11:25 GMT -5
For what it's worth, I like Millar in the Ultimate Universe. BUT, my expectations of that universe are different, and given that it is still kind of "new" I have much more tolerance for what would be mischaracterizations in the 616. I think that is why I also like Bendis' Ultimate Spider-Man (although as I've said -- I am around 2-3 tpbs behind in my reading of that book; it may have changed for the worse, I don't know).
That all being said, I'll reiterate that I don't care for either writer's handling of the Marvel Universe.
|
|
|
Post by balok on Feb 28, 2007 13:37:57 GMT -5
I, too, liked Millar's work on the Ultimate Universe - which is a much grimmer place in a lot of ways, suitable for telling the stories Millar is good at telling. He is not, in my opinion, good at telling 616 stories.
|
|
|
Post by Black Knight on Feb 28, 2007 13:43:28 GMT -5
I understand your point just fine. You don't want to hear people's opinions because you've heard them before. I have to say it: if you want a message board that works that way, you're going to have to establish and moderate one yourself, so that you can lay down the ground rules. Frankly, if Van or shiryu, the people actually authorized to run these boards, tell me to shut up, then I'll do so. You haven't got that authority. Well said, Balok. What Thew40 didn´t seem to understand is that he doesn´t have the authority (or the right) to control what people post and how people respond and react to the threads he started (and that are not his threads BTW.) Regarding the "great interview" all I saw was Millar trying to show the readers how cool and hip he is. And before someone says it, I´m not a Millar hater, I´m a big Ultimates fan actually. This is why I like this board, the moderators allow us to all express our opinions without fear of banning as long as we are civil, I have been banned from one site because I didn't like NA, and express that. When I ask why I got banned to the owner, his only responce was, if you don't know, I can't tell you. Basically there was no reason other then he wanted his forum to be pro NA completely.
|
|
|
Post by Black Knight on Feb 28, 2007 13:44:36 GMT -5
I, too, liked Millar's work on the Ultimate Universe - which is a much grimmer place in a lot of ways, suitable for telling the stories Millar is good at telling. He is not, in my opinion, good at telling 616 stories. I love Ulitimates, I find it vastly better then the current 616 AVengers comics. Also, I like Alias by Bendis. So I don't hate the writer, I just feel he can't right super hero teams.
|
|
|
Post by von Bek on Feb 28, 2007 14:04:02 GMT -5
I, too, liked Millar's work on the Ultimate Universe - which is a much grimmer place in a lot of ways, suitable for telling the stories Millar is good at telling. He is not, in my opinion, good at telling 616 stories. I love Ulitimates, I find it vastly better then the current 616 AVengers comics. Also, I like Alias by Bendis. So I don't hate the writer, I just feel he can't right super hero teams. My problem with NA is not so much that BENDIS! can´t write a team of heroes but rather the bad clichés, lame sitcom jokes, plot holes and morbid (mis)characterizations. Yes, Alias wasn´t that bad.
|
|
|
Post by Black Knight on Feb 28, 2007 14:08:57 GMT -5
I love Ulitimates, I find it vastly better then the current 616 AVengers comics. Also, I like Alias by Bendis. So I don't hate the writer, I just feel he can't right super hero teams. My problem with NA is not so much that BENDIS! can´t write a team of heroes but rather the bad clichés, lame sitcom jokes, plot holes and morbid (mis)characterizations. Yes, Alias wasn´t that bad. Well that kinda went into my over all problem, the plot holes I can drive a mac truck through and everything else you mentioned, bothers me as well. I think bendis, is an excellent crime nior writer, but can't right action super heroes worth a darn.
|
|
|
Post by Shiryu on Feb 28, 2007 14:47:04 GMT -5
Ok, good to see things are getting quieter on their own. Earlier on today and yesterday eve I was tempted to lock the thread, but I concluded that it would have left things boiling and potentially escalate in other topics, so I decided against it unless the situation would get extreme, which luckily didn't happen. Big thumb up to everyone who gradually regained control (or never lost it). Just a few things - The forum of course is a public place, and this point is especially valid for this one where everyone can read without registration. It is also linked to one of the best Avengers website around, so it's imperative that a certain tone is kept. As such don't use rude language, and especially don't find your way around censors using * in the middle of the word (there's a reason censors are there, you know : . I noticed two or three yesterday, but they seem to be gone now, so the author edited the message (which is appreciated). - Sadly it's clear there are a few personal issues here and there. As Phantom suggested already, if someone posts something you really don't like, even if it's aimed at you, just ignore it. Flames don't burn without oxygen and there's no gain or good in getting upset over posts. - If you really really can't ignore something and you feel it's like a personal attack, sort it with PM. They keep the whole thing much more contained and prevent other people from stepping in. This being said, we can go finally back to the topic's topic. PS, Blacknight, I almost never ban anyone, since I'm rather against the whole concept of banning (even in my own forum I have only banned one guy ever, and he was hopeless). In real life it's not like you can ban from existence someone who you don't like, so feel always free to express your opinions on NA or whatever. As long as they are civil, like they have been so far, you, or anyone else, won't risk anything
|
|
|
Post by Black Knight on Feb 28, 2007 15:23:48 GMT -5
Shiryu, Thanks, that is the main reason I like it here. That and the overall mature level of the majority of the posters.
I just felt it is sad, that some forums feel they have to ban people to prevent a point of view from being voiced.
|
|
|
Post by imperiusrex on Feb 28, 2007 16:44:01 GMT -5
now that things have calmed down I can make a point or two about Millar's interview. Here's one of the things that convinced me he's not a longtime marvel fan. In regards to Clor and why would Hank Pym help make him, his reponse essentially is "he made Ultron didn't he?" Short answer, yes. Long answer that shows you have a knowledge of the character is "he made Ultron, but certainly didn't intend to make a killing machine. He intended to make a self aware robot, which was a good idea. his mistake was in using his own brain patterns. perhaps hank misguidedly thought Clor was going to be used differently and not harm anyone. Although I must admit it doesn't really explain why Clor had robot parts." He also makes the point that in the real world the sentinels would be used after Connecticut and that's why Stark does what he does. Really? The same Sentinels that helped Onslaught completely raze New York? The same Sentinels that Kang used in his Kang Dynasty, the worst invasion we've seen in recent memory? I think people would be afraid of twenty ton thirty foot tall robots these days as well. It's why I think the inherent idea behind Civil War and Millar's reasoning is so faulty. We wouldn't put these guys in prison or use Sentinels. We would just kill them all. Period. They're all too dangerous. Ant Man could kill the President. Water Wizard could start WW III, Sleepwalker could steal the nuclear codes from Bush's naptime. From Magneto to everyone besides DD's old foe Frog-Man, they're all an immediate and present danger. If you really create threat scenarios and assessments, you'd have to kill the FF in a heartbeat. There's just no way to defend against them should they go rogue and have a specific target. Plus think of the technological developments they have. Tony Stark has built a human fighter plane that needs two inch wide jets to produce supersonic speed. SHIELD has flying cars. How does Marvel Earth have a oil dependency when these guys have innovations a hundred years ahead of what we've currently got? If you go down the path of "the real world" eventually either you have to go all out and get into the ridiculous minutae or stop producing them as it gets too confining. That's why once you start making it about "this would happen in the real world" I'm already like "it's pointless." You don't have to be real to have conflict and drama. Emotion and feeling for the characters does that. You can have the ridiculous and improbable as long as people care. Most sci-fi doesn't trouble itself with what's real, and it's still a healthy genre. Don't know why comics feel they have to I don't feel for Cap and I don't feel for IM. Thus I feel the story failed and Millar's interview doesn't convince me that he understands how to make me feel for the characters.
|
|
|
Post by dlw66 on Feb 28, 2007 20:03:32 GMT -5
Great post, Rex!!
I, however, would be scared of Frog-Man, particularly if I lived in a third-story apartment and had a pie cooling on the windowsill...
|
|
|
Post by thew40 on Feb 28, 2007 20:42:07 GMT -5
As long as we're cooling off here, I'd like to chime in about something that's been on my mind in regards to the real world comparisons.
While I tend to agree that the SHRA should have been dealt with more in-depth (perhaps in the "Civil War Files" one-shot -- that would have been the perfect opportunity), I feel as though the more one compares the events of "Civil War" to the real world, the more the MU seems to just kinda . . . fall apart.
I guess my reasoning is that if I can accept that this is a world where a radioactive spider will pass along its traits to teenager and a gigantic dude from outer space will eat the planet, then I can accept the SHRA. The Marvel Universe is a universe full of potential faults and I have always felt that a certain amount of suspension of belief is needed for it work as an both an entertainment and literary concept.
~W~
|
|
|
Post by The Night Phantom on Feb 28, 2007 22:05:45 GMT -5
[…] I feel as though the more one compares the events of "Civil War" to the real world, the more the MU seems to just kinda . . . fall apart. I guess my reasoning is that if I can accept that this is a world where a radioactive spider will pass along its traits to teenager and a gigantic dude from outer space will eat the planet, then I can accept the SHRA. The Marvel Universe is a universe full of potential faults and I have always felt that a certain amount of suspension of belief is needed for it work as an both an entertainment and literary concept. I’ve felt some of the real-world comparison (e.g., “would you really want people roaming anonymously with the equivalent of weapons of mass destruction?”) has hurt the case for the SHRA. Despite my misgivings regarding civil-rights issues in the specific implementation, the general concept does not strike me as outrageous…in the world I inhabit. But in the Marvel Universe, letting people like the Avengers, the FF, Spider-Man, the Defenders, Daredevil, Doctor Strange, the X-Men, etc. serve the public on their own terms has generally worked out well—so, the comparison and contrast makes the Act all the less compelling in view of the Marvel Universe’s history.
|
|
|
Post by thew40 on Feb 28, 2007 22:11:36 GMT -5
But in the Marvel Universe, letting people like the Avengers, the FF, Spider-Man, the Defenders, Daredevil, Doctor Strange, the X-Men, etc. serve the public on their own terms has generally worked out well—so, the comparison and contrast makes the Act all the less compelling in view of the Marvel Universe’s history. Until Stamford. The idea that the government would want to both keep track of super-heroes and/or create their own teams is the next logical step in the MU (in my opinion) in preventing another Stamford-like event. ~W~
|
|
|
Post by redstatecap on Feb 28, 2007 22:34:40 GMT -5
Until Stamford. The idea that the government would want to both keep track of super-heroes and/or create their own teams is the next logical step in the MU (in my opinion) in preventing another Stamford-like event. ~W~ There's yet another point where the CW premise falls flat. You act as if Stamford is something new. It isn't. Events the magnitude of Stamford -- and in fact orders of magnitude beyond Stamford -- have been happenening on a daily basis in the MU for the last 40 years. Washington DC got nuked a few years ago. New York has been devastated more times than you can count. Millions dead, over and over and over and over again. Like it or not (I don't, actually.) that's the genre. Yet now 600 people die and "everything changes." More to the point, "everything changed" because Marvel has suddenly decided that there is a fast buck to be made from pretending as if everything has changed. That's what's really going on with CW. Given what has happened in Marvel history it is simply ridiculous to ask me to believe that something like Stamford is some huge, watershed event. RSC
|
|
|
Post by thew40 on Feb 28, 2007 22:50:09 GMT -5
Those events you mentioned weren't done out of want for ratings on the part of the super-hero. Those battles and events were performed by villians, with heroes stopping them. The New Warriors messed things up when they took on Nitro.
Plus, other than Kang striking at Washington, we haven't seen the kind of causalties before (not counting "Infinity Gauntlet," simply because everyone came back at the end).
~W~
|
|
|
Post by Tana Nile on Feb 28, 2007 23:07:26 GMT -5
let's face it, regardless of whether the folks at Marvel want to admit it or not, CW is based on the political state of the real world. The U.S. is currently living in a climate of fear and uncertainty (which some of us might think is encouraged by the current administration, while others would certainly disagree ) and CW is a reflection of this. People get scared, and are willing to trade away their rights and freedoms in order to feel safe. It ain't pretty but it's true. It does seem ridiculous to think that Stamford has been the only incident which made Marvel folks feel distrustful of superheroes, but then again, we've got Tom Brevoort saying that the average citizen in the MU also does not believe in alien life forms. Yeah, right, after everything they've seen and heard...it seems like maybe they are trying a little too hard to make the MU more like the real world.
|
|