|
Post by von Bek on Jul 31, 2007 14:16:48 GMT -5
Note, at my local comic shop, NA, has sold out every issue since #1 and is what the owner says is the second best seller next to his popular mangas. I´m not following you here. NA is second best selling title to every manga? Or to a specific manga title? If it is to every manga, than it can´t be the second best selling title.
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Doom on Jul 31, 2007 15:13:07 GMT -5
[ Do you have a source for that information? If the mega crossover is Final Crisis, where did you read it will retcon the Death of the New Gods? (But even if it would - which I doubt - the New Gods would still suck) To be precise, it's bringing back the New Gods in an updated form, and writer Grant Morrison doesn't really know anything about Death Of The New Gods, but they ae a big part of FC. My guess is that they're gonna try to launch another new series out of it. And, you know, the funny thing is, if we had no New Gods then we'd have a much more crap Star Wars so even if you can't appreciate The King's vision, we can all be thankful for that, right? Actually, I said "is often considered". Which is almost undeniably true. Ask around, find as many FF fans as you can, I doubt you'll find many major FF fans who will say Waid's work was anythingl ess than great. And you, with your talk of Bendis and Marvel Editorial, can hardly be poster boy for not presenting opinion as fact. Ba dum dum chish! How does that show that Marvel are losing sight of what makes the FF work? Because they swapped in another couple for literally six issues? If anything, this couple makes much more sense than any previous other FF incarnation with She-Hulk or whatever, at least this allows it to keep much of the family dynamic. And I guess you'll have to hunt down whoever made Spidey a reservist Avenger waaay back long before Bendis, right? No it couldn´t. NA is more violent than Simonson´s Thor ever was. ... ... You're joking, right? So you're now going to claim that Marvel Adventures Fantastic Four and Ultimate Fantastic Four are single handedly responsible for FF's failure to do as well as you seem to claim it should be doing? Oh, I'm sure there will be TONS of websites which say it was worse than Kirby's New Gods, since it and most comics since that were. But I'd be very interested in you trying to find, say, six websites which say Bendis' Daredevil run is absolutely awful, let alone DOZENS which implies at least twenty-four. True, but now you've sparked my interest, I've never read a negative review of Bendis' overall DD stuff. Go on, you're the Bendis hater, right? I'd love to see some folk who think his stuff is awful!
|
|
|
Post by Alchemist-X on Jul 31, 2007 17:54:39 GMT -5
Note, at my local comic shop, NA, has sold out every issue since #1 and is what the owner says is the second best seller next to his popular mangas. I´m not following you here. NA is second best selling title to every manga? Or to a specific manga title? If it is to every manga, than it can´t be the second best selling title. Err his most popular manga I meant sorry about the confusion Deathnote =#1 NA = #2 Astonishing =#3 last time I asked anyway (And yes, it was after Civil War I had this conversation)
|
|
|
Post by bendisbites on Jul 31, 2007 20:22:56 GMT -5
[ Do you have a source for that information? If the mega crossover is Final Crisis, where did you read it will retcon the Death of the New Gods? (But even if it would - which I doubt - the New Gods would still suck) To be precise, it's bringing back the New Gods in an updated form, and writer Grant Morrison doesn't really know anything about Death Of The New Gods, but they ae a big part of FC. My guess is that they're gonna try to launch another new series out of it. And, you know, the funny thing is, if we had no New Gods then we'd have a much more crap Star Wars so even if you can't appreciate The King's vision, we can all be thankful for that, right? Actually, I said "is often considered". Which is almost undeniably true. Ask around, find as many FF fans as you can, I doubt you'll find many major FF fans who will say Waid's work was anythingl ess than great. And you, with your talk of Bendis and Marvel Editorial, can hardly be poster boy for not presenting opinion as fact. Ba dum dum chish! How does that show that Marvel are losing sight of what makes the FF work? Because they swapped in another couple for literally six issues? If anything, this couple makes much more sense than any previous other FF incarnation with She-Hulk or whatever, at least this allows it to keep much of the family dynamic. And I guess you'll have to hunt down whoever made Spidey a reservist Avenger waaay back long before Bendis, right? ... ... You're joking, right? So you're now going to claim that Marvel Adventures Fantastic Four and Ultimate Fantastic Four are single handedly responsible for FF's failure to do as well as you seem to claim it should be doing? Oh, I'm sure there will be TONS of websites which say it was worse than Kirby's New Gods, since it and most comics since that were. But I'd be very interested in you trying to find, say, six websites which say Bendis' Daredevil run is absolutely awful, let alone DOZENS which implies at least twenty-four. True, but now you've sparked my interest, I've never read a negative review of Bendis' overall DD stuff. Go on, you're the Bendis hater, right? I'd love to see some folk who think his stuff is awful! Oh Doom, is life imitating art? The Doom of comics couldn't read properly and got his face blowed up and you can't read properly and your argument gets shot to all heck. Over the course of this entire argument I didn't merely say that the presence of alternate books was the sole reason, I also made several points about limited distribution and marvel's scattershot ad campaigns and I'm willing to bet there are other things I'm sure that I haven't picked up on, not being a marketing guy. if you add up several factors they do start to make a difference, and even small ones like having someone read 70 thousand copies of Ultimate FF and splitting the fandom along art and story lines will add to an overall problem. But you either ignored my other points or couldn't see them. In any case if you're going to transdimensionally call your mom, I'd get a flame retardant ski mask before dialing. And I've looked online. Of several online review sites many do like Bendis' DD, but my point is there are hundreds of blogs which have absolutely the same credence and many of those people like this one below don't love bendis. Am I going to read hundreds of webpages just to prove that there numerous people who dislike Bendis' run? No, because even when I prove my point, you don't live up to your promises Doom. I'm still waiting for the keys to your house which I won, thank you... savagecritic.com/2004/08/some-reviews-of-818-books-from-jeff.html
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Doom on Aug 1, 2007 5:28:21 GMT -5
Of course one could arguie that the Doom of comics is the msot brilliant mind in his world, so if life's imitating art then I guess I'm possibly the most brilliant mind on this forum. Thanks, BB Or else... thought they were wrong? Which they are. Which is pretty much proven by how The Ultimates was being published during a period where Avengers sales just grew and grew and then shot through the roof. You're making a hypothetical situation and trying to claim it's right, even though all the numbers disgaree with you. Good luck with that. You did not prove your point at all. In that particular argument, all you demonstrated was that either you were willing to blatantly lie to try to win an argument or else you were trying to claim that you were right as a fact and EVERYONE who likes Kirby's Fourth World (IE: Well, pretty much 3/4 of the comics industry today) MUST be wrong. Like right now where you embarass yourself again and prove my point. Psssst... the link you sent... it says ONE issue is surprisingly awful, surprisingly because the rest of the run is anything but. All you did is prove my point. Have fun spinning this to show how cool and laid back you are and how you can never be wrong. XD
|
|
|
Post by bendisbites on Aug 1, 2007 8:41:35 GMT -5
Of course one could arguie that the Doom of comics is the msot brilliant mind in his world, so if life's imitating art then I guess I'm possibly the most brilliant mind on this forum. Thanks, BB Or else... thought they were wrong? Which they are. Which is pretty much proven by how The Ultimates was being published during a period where Avengers sales just grew and grew and then shot through the roof. You're making a hypothetical situation and trying to claim it's right, even though all the numbers disgaree with you. Good luck with that. You did not prove your point at all. In that particular argument, all you demonstrated was that either you were willing to blatantly lie to try to win an argument or else you were trying to claim that you were right as a fact and EVERYONE who likes Kirby's Fourth World (IE: Well, pretty much 3/4 of the comics industry today) MUST be wrong. Like right now where you embarass yourself again and prove my point. Psssst... the link you sent... it says ONE issue is surprisingly awful, surprisingly because the rest of the run is anything but. All you did is prove my point. Have fun spinning this to show how cool and laid back you are and how you can never be wrong. XD I'm going to give you an exalt for living in denial, Doom. Anyone who can live in his own world like you do impresses me. My ideas are wrong in that The Ultimates sold okay for the current market? How does one make the other wrong? The Ultimates were a new number one, drawn by Wizard Top ten artists that sold well. How does that disprove the idea that all ages books ten, fifteen twenty plus years ago outsold Ultimates 3 to 1 ? How does that disprove that if Avengers was selling 75 thousand copies in 2002 or whenever and Ultimates was selling 120 thousand copies that both books were still not at the level of all ages books from just a few years earlier? It doesn't. But in your world Doom will make square peg fit in round hole by royal decree!! And here is the unedited review as presented on the site. If you can show me the sentence where he says the rest of the run is great, I'll give you another exalt because those seem to make you happy... DAREDEVIL #63: On the one hand, I'm glad Bendis didn't pull a "Zeiss" and make his hitman the most insanely super-competent mega-assassin to ever kill eleven people with a pencil eraser and a library card. On the other hand, the fact that Quinn was just a well-prepared shlub who beats two superheroes to a standstill with some guns and a SHIELD dog whistle pretty much sucks--and by "sucks," I mean "makes very little sense following a storyline where Murdock single-handedly beats eleven million yakuza on a rainy street." Surprisingly awful.
He says surprisingly awful. which could mean that he has been pleased by previous issues or it could mean based on his scale, which he uses to grade issues with terms like Awful and Good and Eh, it surprised him with its awfulness on the awful scale. Based on the way he talks about the previous issue it sounds pretty bad for this storyline and the previous one, but in Doom's world I'm sure this was a hit. And yes Doom is the most brilliant marvel mind in the marvel universe. Which makes it all the more embarrassing when he gets his butt beat by The Dazzler. And *snicker* The Micronauts...
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Doom on Aug 1, 2007 9:43:01 GMT -5
It's funny, BB, you have maybe the most distinctive argument style I've ever read. (And I've done a LOT of arguing.) It seems to consist of a wild mash of insulting those who argue with you, spinning anything anyone says very poorly, patting yourself on the back for percieved brilliance, indulging in rampant mockery even where it makes absolutely no sense, ignoring any and all facts that do not fit with your worldview and simply making things up wherever possible.
Really it's quite fascinating.
|
|
|
Post by von Bek on Aug 1, 2007 10:13:31 GMT -5
To be precise, it's bringing back the New Gods in an updated form, and writer Grant Morrison doesn't really know anything about Death Of The New Gods, but they ae a big part of FC. Again, where´s the source? Do you have Morrisson´s MSN? My guess is that they're gonna try to launch another new series out of it. At least now you´re saying it´s your guess... And, you know, the funny thing is, if we had no New Gods then we'd have a much more crap Star Wars so even if you can't appreciate The King's vision, we can all be thankful for that, right? What, Chewbacca was inspired in Granny Goodness? R2D2 in Lightray? Actually, I said "is often considered". Which is almost undeniably true. Ask around, find as many FF fans as you can, I doubt you'll find many major FF fans who will say Waid's work was anythingl ess than great. And you, with your talk of Bendis and Marvel Editorial, can hardly be poster boy for not presenting opinion as fact. Again, lots of people don´t like Waids writing. Others do. These are facts. But Waid can´t make a book sell 200K, not even JLA or FF. Another fact. When I post my opinion, it´s usually clear that´s an opinion. Now you got a band? How does that show that Marvel are losing sight of what makes the FF work? Because they swapped in another couple for literally six issues? If anything, this couple makes much more sense than any previous other FF incarnation with She-Hulk or whatever, at least this allows it to keep much of the family dynamic. Their marriage was so forced it became a joke in the industry, a family feeling means more than they´re married. And I guess you'll have to hunt down whoever made Spidey a reservist Avenger waaay back long before Bendis, right? A RESERVIST Avenger, right? To guest star ocassionaly in the book, right? What, Simonson´s Thor is more violent than NA? Sif got kicked between her legs or Balder was beaten to a pulp? Must have missed those issues...
|
|
|
Post by bendisbites on Aug 1, 2007 10:14:47 GMT -5
It's funny, BB, you have maybe the most distinctive argument style I've ever read. (And I've done a LOT of arguing.) It seems to consist of a wild mash of insulting those who argue with you, spinning anything anyone says very poorly, patting yourself on the back for percieved brilliance, indulging in rampant mockery even where it makes absolutely no sense, ignoring any and all facts that do not fit with your worldview and simply making things up wherever possible. Really it's quite fascinating. That's funny; I would've said pretty much the exact same thing about you. Except the mockery. You take yourself FAR too seriously. Are you just upset I brought up the Micronauts? That is an embarrassing one. I mean, I think a collie puppy beat them once... Ah Doom always bounces back, though. Even the most humbling defeats can't stop him.
|
|
|
Post by von Bek on Aug 1, 2007 10:21:41 GMT -5
Which is pretty much proven by how The Ultimates was being published during a period where Avengers sales just grew and grew and then shot through the roof. Dude, now it´s not even funny anymore. Do you know that the reason Busiek left the Avengers was because he didn´t want to compete with another Avengers comic (Ultimates) because it would probably split the readership? Because maybe the new comic would outsell Avengers (what actually happened)? From Geoff Johns to Chuck Austen Avengers left almost 40% of its readership. One of the reasons for A:D was to make the Avengers so different from the Ultimates so to gain some of the redership back.
|
|
|
Post by von Bek on Aug 1, 2007 10:24:50 GMT -5
In that particular argument, all you demonstrated was that either you were willing to blatantly lie to try to win an argument or else you were trying to claim that you were right as a fact and EVERYONE who likes Kirby's Fourth World (IE: Well, pretty much 3/4 of the comics industry today) MUST be wrong. Yes, 3/4 of the comics industry today like JK4W. that´s why the book never got axed and is in publication since 1971. One of DC flagship titles actually.
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Doom on Aug 1, 2007 10:49:44 GMT -5
Again, where´s the source? Do you have Morrisson´s MSN? A reputable one, moderator from the New Gods message board and respected forummer who got it from Morrison himself. You can scoff at it but you'll just leave yourself open to being proven definitively wrong in, say, 10 months time. Always would have! Naa, it may have been more to do with the hero being revealed to actually be the son of the evil villain in a shocking twist which was kept from him by his wise mentor who knew all along, while they all talk about an incalculable mythic energy called The Source/Force in their giant cosmic interstellar wars. Lucas himself has admitted he took inspiration from comic books. (Doctor Doom/Vader for example) Okay. But I thought you were saying that EVERY title could sell over 200k if they appealed to a wide range, just as Waid's FF did..l? As someone who'se already admitted to not actually reading the book, you are of course FAR more in the position to make this statement than those who, say, do read the book? Reservist Avenger is still an Avenger. Hell, he even popped up in JLA/Avengers! What, Simonson´s Thor is more violent than NA? Sif got kicked between her legs or Balder was beaten to a pulp? Must have missed those issues... Being kicked between the legs is not something STUNNINGLY violent that should NEVER, EVER be shown. You think if you show that to a child he will shriek in horror and then run out and kick his mom between the legs? Yes. And that's rather pathetic on Busiek's part- and I LOVE the guy's work! The reason people left the Avengers was not because of the Ultimates, it was because the stories sucked - or, to put it in a less opinionated way, fans did not respond well to the stories and left for other books. This is evidenced by the fact that when the NEw Avengers sales caused this book's sales to RADICALLY rise... the Ultimates sales did not fall. I love how you translate that to attempt (and fail) to imply they all hate it. Jack Kirby's Fourth World has been axed and rebooted repeatedly because the reboots were generally bad ideas. The reason it KEPT rebooting was because of the love for the characters and concepts. From John Byrne to Walt Simonson to Grant Morrison to Mark Waid to Mark Millar, a rather enormous number of writers today have expressed their love of the Fourth World. Hence the NEXT attempt at a reboot, through FInal Crisis. I don't mind saying I have higher hopes for this one than previously, not because Morrison';s a better writer than Simonson or even because I'm an optimist, but more because Morrison wrote the phenomenal "Rock of Ages" JLA story heavily featuring the New Gods with the now infamous slogan "Darkseid Is" which summarises so much about the character, and he also wrote some pretty great Seven Soldiers New Gods stuff.
|
|
|
Post by von Bek on Aug 1, 2007 14:10:58 GMT -5
A reputable one, moderator from the New Gods message board and respected forummer who got it from Morrison himself. You can scoff at it but you'll just leave yourself open to being proven definitively wrong in, say, 10 months time. This is just silly. You didn´t even name the message board or the respected forummer and moderator... Naa, it may have been more to do with the hero being revealed to actually be the son of the evil villain in a shocking twist which was kept from him by his wise mentor who knew all along, while they all talk about an incalculable mythic energy called The Source/Force in their giant cosmic interstellar wars. Lucas himself has admitted he took inspiration from comic books. (Doctor Doom/Vader for example) The the hero being revealed to actually be the son of the evil villain in a shocking twist bit seems forced, since Luke Skywalker and Orion have very little in common, same for Darth Vader and Darkseid. And the Source and the Force aren´t similar either. Okay. But I thought you were saying that EVERY title could sell over 200k if they appealed to a wide range, just as Waid's FF did..l? Every title has the potential to reach a larger audience, and I haven´t implied Waids FF automatically belongs in that category. As someone who'se already admitted to not actually reading the book, you are of course FAR more in the position to make this statement than those who, say, do read the book? The BP marriage was forced, there´s no way BP and Storm can reach the same family feeling than Reed and Sue. Reservist Avenger is still an Avenger. Hell, he even popped up in JLA/Avengers! Either you didn´t get my point or you just wanted to give any kind of answer, even one that doesnt make sense. Being kicked between the legs is not something STUNNINGLY violent that should NEVER, EVER be shown. You think if you show that to a child he will shriek in horror and then run out and kick his mom between the legs? Yes. And that's rather pathetic on Busiek's part- and I LOVE the guy's work! The reason people left the Avengers was not because of the Ultimates, it was because the stories sucked - or, to put it in a less opinionated way, fans did not respond well to the stories and left for other books. So you like Busiek stories, but they sucked... Yes, that makes sense... This is evidenced by the fact that when the NEw Avengers sales caused this book's sales to RADICALLY rise... the Ultimates sales did not fall. No, because NA is nothing like the old Avengers or the Ultimates, so the books weren´t competing for the same readership. I love how you translate that to attempt (and fail) to imply they all hate it. Jack Kirby's Fourth World has been axed and rebooted repeatedly because the reboots were generally bad ideas. The reason it KEPT rebooting was because of the love for the characters and concepts. From John Byrne to Walt Simonson to Grant Morrison to Mark Waid to Mark Millar, a rather enormous number of writers today have expressed their love of the Fourth World. Hence the NEXT attempt at a reboot, through FInal Crisis. Some creators may like the concept (Byrne and Simonson), but even the ones that cared about the characters couldn´t make JK4W interesting for the readership. That says something, doesnt it? I don't mind saying I have higher hopes for this one than previously, not because Morrison';s a better writer than Simonson or even because I'm an optimist, but more because Morrison wrote the phenomenal "Rock of Ages" JLA story heavily featuring the New Gods with the now infamous slogan "Darkseid Is" which summarises so much about the character, and he also wrote some pretty great Seven Soldiers New Gods stuff. Can you replace Darkseid in the Rock of Ages with any cosmic villain? And Orion in Morrisson´s JLA was so different from the original Kirby creation that one can assume Morrisson retooled the character on purpose. Doesn´t that say something?
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Doom on Aug 1, 2007 14:55:34 GMT -5
This is just silly. You didn´t even name the message board or the respected forummer and moderator... Oh Good Lord, you can't POSSIBLY be accusing me of lying. What on EARTH would I have to gain.... lemme check a second... www.comicboards.com/newgods/view.php?trd=070731044107The basic idea of the "I am your father" is still VERY similar between Luke and Orion, in VERY similar sagas. And again, given Lucas has admitted to be influenced by comic books (And the Source and the Force were i nthe beginning EXTREMELY similar) it would seem more likely than not that this influenced him. I'm not saying Luke is based on Orion, but this idea is almost certainly derived from the Fourth World Saga. Okay so what's wrong with it? Why doesn't it? Now who's stating opinion as fact? Not really. You tried to say Spidey wasn't an Avenger, I pointed out that actually, he was. A reservist Avenger is still an avenger. Actually, if you read what I say in context it's very clear that I'm saying the stories AFTER Busiek- the Johns and Austen runs- sucked. And for the record, I prefer Busiek's Avengers to anything that came before. How is it not? It's it's world's premier super team led by Captain America. Plenty of readers of the old Avengers stayed on, they were very much competing for the same readership. Notice there isn't a sudden decline in FF sales when UFF came out, the idea that the ultimate books split the potentia lsales of 616 books is nothing but hyperbole unbacked by any hard numbers beyond speculation. Not really. Again you're trying to associate sales/readership with quality, something which is not true- in fact, it CAN'T be true because the most essential component of your anti-NA argument is that sales do not equal quality. Actually no, because fan reaction to the Orion of JLA was overwhelmingly negative. Morrison (and Waid) later revealed that they were not free to write the character as they chose because of editorial constraints. And you certainly CANNOT replace Darkseid with any cosmic villain in that story, that it's Darkseid is ESSENTIAL, because the entire story is about the anti-life equation and Darkseid's possession of it. The Anti-Life Equation is VITAL to the storyline and it's also what Darkseid's obsession is. The idea of saying "Ah but what if Braniac got the anti life equation!" is ridiculous, it's like saying that the Death of Captain America would be just as brilliant/terrible (dpeending on your PoV) if Stilt Man was responsible, not the Red SKull, IE: It COULD be a different villain... but the story would maek much less sense and it wouldn't work nearly as well.
|
|
|
Post by Alchemist-X on Aug 1, 2007 15:07:19 GMT -5
Von Bek
If NA isn't competing for the same readership that the Ultimates is, how can you really say that the Ultimates would be directly competing for Avengers vol3 readership? Busiek Avengers doesn't strike me as particularily similar to the Ultimates, no more so than NA anyway.
|
|
|
Post by bendisbites on Aug 1, 2007 20:04:30 GMT -5
You know way back when in the olden days, when comics were under a buck and phones still had cords, comic companies used to do the darndest things. Like hiring a superstar artist and starting with a new number one issue. They would also sometimes redesign characters, or see what they looked like in alternate dimension where maybe the characters were slightly more hard edged or bring in new characters and slap a title so people knew it was new like well, "New Teen Titans" or "New Mutants", on it. They'd sometimes add new characters either brand new or established. Usually someone like Spiderman would at least guest star in an issue, although during the nineties it got so you could see Wolverine or Venom popping up too. Not all of these things were bad and some good comics came out of it to be sure, but people knew full well that using this techniques often resulted in good sales. They weren't surprised in the least when putting George Perez or John Byrne on a book with a number one had a good sales. So is it a surprise when these work for New Avengers and Ultimates with new number ones and hot artists like Finch and Hitch? Is it a surprise that with a mega crossover every four issues NA does well? That Ultimates does two long form stories and manages to keep interest in a mostly finite concept, essentially two maxiseries? I don't think so. The question is what do you do for the rest of your comic line, where many of the books are barely breaking even, because this kind of stunt promotion doesn't work forever? One would suggest a commitment to marketing and seeing what made the industry work across the board much better decades ago... Eh, why do I subject myself to such torture? I know someone will come along and excerpt one line, ignore the hundred other words that go with it and ask me to defend one isolated thought as if it exists in a vacuum? And it'll go something like this: New Avengers doesn't have a crossover every four issues!!! Why do you twist the facts to make your irrelevant points? Then I'll link to the definition of sarcasm and then get another response like: You're still dodging the facts! You don't know how to argue!!! And then I'll just laugh before writing a post to illustrate how silly the whole thing is in the first place. So guys, I've just saved you the trouble. Just a little service I provide...
|
|
|
Post by spiderwasp on Aug 1, 2007 22:23:55 GMT -5
So is it a surprise when these work for New Avengers and Ultimates with new number ones and hot artists like Finch and Hitch? Is it a surprise that with a mega crossover every four issues NA does well? Good point. I dropped NA with the new lineup but am still buying MA. Within a couple of issues, they were tying in to MA and now WWHulk. This makes it harder to pass up the new issues because I want to know how what happens will affect the titles I do reasonably enjoy. (MA is still a long way from the best periods for the Avengers and Bendis' dialogue is terrible but the overall effect is still giving me enough enjoyment to make it worth sticking with.) The problem is that if I buy the NA issues because of the links, it sends the signal that I like the books themselves and I really don't. The last several issues I bought, were awful (IMO). Now before someone decides to treat me like an idiot and point out that Marvel's goal is to sell more books, I understand that. I just miss those good old days you were referring to when Marvel got me to buy multiple monthly titles by making me enjoy them rather than by making me think I need them in order to tie in to the other titles that I do enjoy. Oh, and for the record, I have been strong and have not given in to the temptation. NA#27 was the last I bought and that was only because it was already on my pull list. Also, regarding MA #4, when did Carol's language and attitude get so bad? It's not like that in her own book and I don't ever recall it being like this in other books. She seems so cynical about everything and doesn't seem to like many of the other Avengers. Is just because we now hear her thoughts? Is it Bendis' contention that she's always been this much of a *%#@ but just on the inside. I've never had a problem with thought balloons before but, just like with many things, in Bendis' hands, they're just annoying.
|
|
|
Post by von Bek on Aug 2, 2007 9:15:38 GMT -5
So, your "source" is a post that says: So, from what I can put together, the Death of the New Gods is of their original Kirby-imagined forms, but they will still be part of the DCU. That part is my supposition. It's a guess. The guy himself says it´s a guess, Morrisson will probably only use the names of the characters, because Morrisson himself understand that the original concept doesn´t work... You didn´t help to prove your point very much with that link. The basic idea of the "I am your father" is still VERY similar between Luke and Orion, in VERY similar sagas. And again, given Lucas has admitted to be influenced by comic books (And the Source and the Force were i nthe beginning EXTREMELY similar) it would seem more likely than not that this influenced him. I'm not saying Luke is based on Orion, but this idea is almost certainly derived from the Fourth World Saga. No, it´s not. Again that´s all your opinion. Not really. You tried to say Spidey wasn't an Avenger, I pointed out that actually, he was. A reservist Avenger is still an avenger. He was made a reservist Avenger to have a reason to guest star in the book and... no wait, you can´t be serious, can you? Do I really have to explain that to you? Actually, if you read what I say in context it's very clear that I'm saying the stories AFTER Busiek- the Johns and Austen runs- sucked. And for the record, I prefer Busiek's Avengers to anything that came before. Which is weird, because Busiek´s work was almost turning the clock back to the Bronze Age. Not really. Again you're trying to associate sales/readership with quality, something which is not true- in fact, it CAN'T be true because the most essential component of your anti-NA argument is that sales do not equal quality. The most essential component of my anti-NA argument is that the book destroyed a concept that could be (and has been) more succesful than NA ever will be. And no, sales do not necessarily mean quality, but low sales doesn´t mean high art either.
|
|
|
Post by von Bek on Aug 2, 2007 9:19:00 GMT -5
Von Bek If NA isn't competing for the same readership that the Ultimates is, how can you really say that the Ultimates would be directly competing for Avengers vol3 readership? Busiek Avengers doesn't strike me as particularily similar to the Ultimates, no more so than NA anyway. I was not the first one to say it, Busiek himself was. And the Ultimates is basically Avengers MAX, all the basic Avengers concepts (I dont really have to list them, do I?) are present in the book. NA is very different, now that BENDIS! got rid of Cap and IM it has almost nothing (if anything) in common with the previous Avengers.
|
|
|
Post by Alchemist-X on Aug 2, 2007 14:42:40 GMT -5
Von Bek If NA isn't competing for the same readership that the Ultimates is, how can you really say that the Ultimates would be directly competing for Avengers vol3 readership? Busiek Avengers doesn't strike me as particularily similar to the Ultimates, no more so than NA anyway. I was not the first one to say it, Busiek himself was. And the Ultimates is basically Avengers MAX, all the basic Avengers concepts (I dont really have to list them, do I?) are present in the book. NA is very different, now that BENDIS! got rid of Cap and IM it has almost nothing (if anything) in common with the previous Avengers. maybe NA is a little different from a standard roster NOW, but back when Ultimates 2 was in full throttle, Cap and Ironman were on the team, and neither title appeared to suffer and considering the more mature NA, I think the target segments would overlap between it and Ultimates a fair bit as well.
|
|
|
Post by von Bek on Aug 2, 2007 15:49:13 GMT -5
maybe NA is a little different from a standard roster NOW, but back when Ultimates 2 was in full throttle, Cap and Ironman were on the team, and neither title appeared to suffer Not sure I understood you here. You mean Cap and IM were on both teams? OK, but the Ultimates had all the other characters that have been the heart and soul of the Avengers, NA had Luke Cage, Wolverine, Sentry and Spiderman. and considering the more mature NA, I think the target segments would overlap between it and Ultimates a fair bit as well. NA is not mature, it may be more violent and depressive, but that doesn´t tanslate as a mature title.
|
|
|
Post by The Night Phantom on Aug 2, 2007 19:34:18 GMT -5
For the record, I'll never spell check anything I post on an internet message board, I like the incorrect grammar, butchered spelling and mis-use of punctuation that is the internet, and I just love to contribute to it. Thanks for the heads-up. Sometimes I spend a little extra time trying to understand a person’s post—understanding might be difficult because the writer is not a native user of the language, the writer was rushed, the ideas are challenging, or for other reasons. But I put in the extra effort because communication is a two-way street, and I wish to do my part as the reader. And now that I know how much value you place on your own communications, I can better estimate how much of my time your posts are worth.
|
|
|
Post by redstatecap on Aug 2, 2007 23:15:13 GMT -5
and considering the more mature NA, I think the target segments would overlap between it and Ultimates a fair bit as well. NA is "mature?" Really? I haven't seen any evidence of that. RSC
|
|
|
Post by uberwolf on Aug 3, 2007 9:34:48 GMT -5
and considering the more mature NA, I think the target segments would overlap between it and Ultimates a fair bit as well. NA is "mature?" Really? I haven't seen any evidence of that. RSC perhaps he meant "immature"?
|
|