|
Post by Randle-El on Mar 8, 2021 11:42:08 GMT -5
Can we get specifics on what series people are talking about to get more of an idea? (Also any delays in 2020-2021 I'm going to disregard, because with Covid there are so many issues affecting production and distribution) The OP mentions Lazarus, Black Magick, Wytches, Southern Bastards and Velvet. Black Magick had a long hiatus between the various arcs, I don't know why, but I assume conflicting schedules or wanting to have a complete story before they release the individual issues. When the individual arcs come out, they usually are either monthly or bi-monthly for the 5-6 issues they release at a time. Can't tell anything about Wytches and Southern Bastards. Lazarus: stuck to a monthly/bi-monthly schedule for 2013-2015. Took a six month break (which I think was announced but I have to recheck my issues) and then continue bi-monthly till 2017, where it was temporarily replaced with the 6 issue series Lazarus+66 (last issue of that one was 2-3 months late. Series was partly because the artist was unavailable during that time)), returning to 2 issues as Lazarus and then switched to a quarterly format with Lazarus: Risen. I don't see any long term hiatus except for the time between between Lazarus and Lazarus: Risen. The switch to Risen was announced though. Velvet: The first series is done, Brubaker and Epting said so in the final issue as the story was wrapped up. They want to return to the series at a later point, but had another project planned first and both also had seperate projects planned.
As far as I can tell, most of those books went on hiatus because the creators (writers usually) were working on something else (usually superhero books for the big two). In the cast of Lazarus and Black Magick (which are somewhat back to publishing on a sorta normal schedule last I checked), Greg Rucka also seems to be getting busier doing TV and film work.
I'm not complaining that creators have/choose to take other assignments -- particularly writers, who usually have the bandwidth to write several books a month. I get that DC and Marvel work often pays the bills in ways that creator-owned doesn't. At the same time, I'm not as sympathetic as I once was to that argument. Maybe if you're a second or third-tier creator at Marvel or DC and your creator-owned work is a passion project that has to be subsidized by superhero work. But guys like Rucka, Scott Snyder, Jason Aaron et al., are top-selling writers, and often times their creator-owned work sells just as well as their superhero stuff.
This is one of the reasons why I really respected Robert Kirkman's comic work. Even with the massive success of TWD, he still wrote 2-3 books, and those books released every month. Before you object -- yes, I realize Kirkman is not the norm (and you could argue that the very success of TWD is what allowed him to do that). I'm not saying you have to be Kirkman. But it would be nice if creators could find a way to better balance their output between creator-owned and Big Two. I just really respected that Kirkman recognized that comics is the medium that gave him all this success, and that he still chooses to prioritize writing comics when he could be doing TV work and finding more ways to monetize his IP.
|
|
|
Post by Randle-El on Mar 8, 2021 11:25:55 GMT -5
Gene Hackman's Luthor is silly, but I'd argue that his Luthor is meant to match the tone of the film once it reaches it Metropolis. Everything prior to Metropolis has more gravitas and seriousness, but once it reaches Metropolis, the film becomes more lighthearted. People in Krypton act like aliens reading dialogue written by Victorians, in Smallville they act like small town folks from a Norman Rockwell painting, but in Metropolis they act like an exaggerated version of the way non-urbanites imagine city people to act like. In a lot of ways, it mirrors how a lot of films and TV shows have always portrayed the city when telling the story of a country bumpkin coming to town. It's also effective in highlighting just how out-of-place Clark/Superman is in jaded Metropolis -- an earnest and sincere throwback hero who never lies and fights for truth, justice, and the American way (even Lois laughs him off when he says this). Not everyone may agree with that choice, but I think it works much better than if they had attempted to maintain the same tone throughout the entire film. In fact, I'd argue that this is one of the things that made Superman Returns a lesser facsimile of the Donner film. Singer's film failed to provide the right tonal backdrop for Kevin Spacey's performance of Lex Luthor. Singer was trying to be grandiose and respectful of the Donner films, while Spacey was channeling Hackman's performance, and this created a huge tonal clash that just did not work, IMO.
And for what it's worth -- the greatest live action Lex Luthor is Michael Rosenbaum from Smallville. He portrayed Luthor with just the right mix of charm and menacing darkness. Other live action Luthors merely served as antagonists, but Rosenbaum's Luthor is a true villain.
|
|
|
Post by Randle-El on Mar 5, 2021 23:27:51 GMT -5
I'm a tiny bit disappointed that {Spoiler: Click to show}Pietro/Ralph's appearance ended up being a glorified cameo/red herring/fan service. I mean, it was funny and clever, but I wish there had been more to his appearance than simply making him the doppleganger of the Fox Studios Quicksilver.
|
|
|
Post by Randle-El on Mar 4, 2021 23:05:44 GMT -5
So I just received a shareholder memo from Wizard World (note: I am not a shareholder of Wizard World and have no idea why I received this).
Deny it all you want! We know the truth.
|
|
|
Post by Randle-El on Mar 4, 2021 12:14:14 GMT -5
People keep using the word "obligation" in this thread, but I don't think anyone is arguing that creators are *obligated* to continue producing anything. That is too strong of a word, and not what I'm suggesting. The basis of my post/semi-rant was that the creators of creator-owned books often ask that readers purchase their books monthly as the best way to support the book. And I think creators realize that this is asking readers to step up their commitment, because in most cases buying monthly is more expensive and requires readers to commit to a long haul compared to trade waiting. My argument is that if creators are asking readers to step up their commitment by purchasing monthly, I think its not unreasonable for readers to be disappointed if creators do not likewise deliver on at least a semi-regular basis (e.g., not taking years off of the book). I also think it is not unreasonable if, based on that disappointment, readers choose not purchase the book monthly anymore. In fact, I think most people in this thread arguing "creators are not obligated to do anything because you already paid for your book" would agree that it would be reasonable to do so.
Nobody is saying readers should boycott the creators, start doxxing campaigns, or do anything else ridiculous beyond what normal recourse consumers always have if they are not happy with a product or service -- no longer purchasing the product or service. I don't think that not buying the product anymore is necessarily borne of a sense of entitlement or fanboy outrage. Is it entitlement or outrage if Coca-Cola changes their recipe and I don't like it anymore so I stop buying it?
To be clear, for those books that I chose to stop buying monthly because of irregular releases -- in most cases, I still intend to buy them eventually, either in collections, digitally, or perhaps a big stack of back issues. So with the exception of the last option, I'm still purchasing the product and still patronizing the creators.
But they're not asking you to buy monthly, they are asking you to buy the single issues whenever they come out. Monthly is the consumer's assumption but monthly in today's market environment is only a realistic expectation if you are reading assembly line comics put together by whomever happens to be available to meet the publishing schedule not by a consistent creative team bringing their "A" game every installment. In fact, many of the creator-owned series that have become iconic were not produced on anything like a monthly schedule. It took Jack Katz 12 to produce 24 issues of First Kingdom, the Pinis 7 years to produce 21 issues of Elfquest, etc. They came out when they came out, an issue or two a year. They both asked consumers to buy single issues to help support the book, but monthly was never part of the equation (or if it was it was simply a false assumption on the consumer's part). Monthly in the creator-owned realm is the exception, not the rule, yest consumers take it as a given it will be monthly and become upset when it is not. Again, the core of the issue is unrealistic expectations and consumers not managing their expectations creating their own source of frustration. But people don't seem to want to take responsibility for their own expectations and reactions, it's easier to point fingers and place blame elsewhere. -M
By "monthly" I meant "somewhat regularly". Given the nature of how comics have been released historically, I use the term monthly interchangeably with "regularly". Apologies for using unclear language.
|
|
|
Post by Randle-El on Mar 4, 2021 11:10:49 GMT -5
People keep using the word "obligation" in this thread, but I don't think anyone is arguing that creators are *obligated* to continue producing anything. That is too strong of a word, and not what I'm suggesting. The basis of my post/semi-rant was that the creators of creator-owned books often ask that readers purchase their books monthly as the best way to support the book. And I think creators realize that this is asking readers to step up their commitment, because in most cases buying monthly is more expensive and requires readers to commit to a long haul compared to trade waiting. My argument is that if creators are asking readers to step up their commitment by purchasing monthly, I think its not unreasonable for readers to be disappointed if creators do not likewise deliver on at least a semi-regular basis (e.g., not taking years off of the book). I also think it is not unreasonable if, based on that disappointment, readers choose not purchase the book monthly anymore. In fact, I think most people in this thread arguing "creators are not obligated to do anything because you already paid for your book" would agree that it would be reasonable to do so.
Nobody is saying readers should boycott the creators, start doxxing campaigns, or do anything else ridiculous beyond what normal recourse consumers always have if they are not happy with a product or service -- no longer purchasing the product or service. I don't think that not buying the product anymore is necessarily borne of a sense of entitlement or fanboy outrage. Is it entitlement or outrage if Coca-Cola changes their recipe and I don't like it anymore so I stop buying it?
To be clear, for those books that I chose to stop buying monthly because of irregular releases -- in most cases, I still intend to buy them eventually, either in collections, digitally, or perhaps a big stack of back issues. So with the exception of the last option, I'm still purchasing the product and still patronizing the creators.
I guess what I'm getting at is that if creators are going to ask us to buy monthly to "support" their work, they should recognize that we have options and that monthly buying is sometimes a bigger ask than trade waiting. I think that a gesture of good will is that if you're going to make the "buy monthly" pitch, there should be some reciprocity. Maybe it doesn't *have* to be a release every month. It could be extra content that you're not getting in trades. Greg Rucka was doing this for Lazarus by including a letters column and extra content in the back of the single issues that weren't published in the trades. He didn't have to do that. But I think it was a solid move on his part and motivates us to buy monthly.
|
|
|
Post by Randle-El on Mar 4, 2021 0:17:07 GMT -5
Do they drop any hints that reveal how Clark and Lois have teenage boys? From the continuity of the rest of the Arrowverse shows, the kids should be much much younger.
At the end of the Crisis crossover, Lois calls Clark and says "the boys" need him. But based on what we saw in the open of Superman & Lois, they rewrote the entire timeline of the characters when they moved over to Earth Prime. All the writers used the Crisis as a way to both fix, as well as set up stuff across the Arrowverse. I imagine they knew the direction they wanted to take with the characters beyond their appearances in Supergirl and were able to fit it in at the end.
Yes, I recall that... but unless I was mistaken, that was only establishing that they had twins. I was under the impression that they were still babies. I suppose that since Crisis is being used as a catch-all fix for continuity, it's not a stretch to just wave your hands and say Crisis did it all. Still, for some reason the fact that they are teenagers seems more jarring than there being two of them when there used to be one. Maybe it's also because Clark and Lois don't really look old enough to be parents of teenagers.
|
|
|
Post by Randle-El on Mar 2, 2021 2:11:39 GMT -5
That's true, but I feel like past adaptations made significant enough changes that it kept you guessing. Captain America: Civil War was a pretty significant departure from the comic book story. Same for Infinity War. And Infinity War/Endgame even more so -- I was honestly surprised about how and when they chose to actually use the snap and subsequent undo. The elements borrowed for Wandavision seem like they are a bit too on the nose.
I guess I'm not following close enough, what elements are you talking about that are close to the source material ?
Maybe I should have worded it differently -- it's not so much that it was that close to the source material, but that it was done in a way that was predictable. A big one was the character of Agnes being Agatha Harkness... seems like that was a surprise to nobody. Also the significance of Wanda having never been called Scarlet Witch in the MCU -- why make that point if you're not going to pay it off later?
For what it's worth, I'm not complaining. TBH, Avengers history is not really my wheelhouse (I was more of an X-Men, Spidey, and Daredevil reader), so a lot of this is new to me. But it seemed like it wasn't very hard for the fans to figure things out. Either they're really on the ball, or perhaps Marvel dropped too many breadcrumbs? *shrug*
|
|
|
Post by Randle-El on Mar 1, 2021 13:43:33 GMT -5
I found the latest episode to be entertaining and it filled in a quite a bit of information, but I have to say that it's pretty crazy how the fan community has accurately predicted important elements of the show. I think almost every single reveal of the last couple of episodes was floated in various fan theories I've seen on the web.
Many of the story elements have been taken from the 50 plus years of comic history so I guess that if you throw enough things against the wall, something has to stick.
That's true, but I feel like past adaptations made significant enough changes that it kept you guessing. Captain America: Civil War was a pretty significant departure from the comic book story. Same for Infinity War. And Infinity War/Endgame even more so -- I was honestly surprised about how and when they chose to actually use the snap and subsequent undo. The elements borrowed for Wandavision seem like they are a bit too on the nose.
|
|
|
Post by Randle-El on Mar 1, 2021 1:27:05 GMT -5
I know it's not a film... but if you're going to gripe about not having a good live action Superman, you all need to go watch the new Superman and Lois show on the CW right now.
|
|
|
Post by Randle-El on Mar 1, 2021 1:15:59 GMT -5
Agreed with all the positive comments. As a lifelong Superman fan, especially in all of his live action TV and film appearances, I was really looking forward to this show and it did not disappoint. I feel like it's been too long since we've had a proper live action Superman. I followed Smallville faithfully through its ups and downs, but because of its constant flirtation-with-Superman-without-being-Superman, it wasn't a proper Superman show to me. The Snyderverse/DCEU Superman was such a big disappointment to me on so many levels. Brandon Routh's Superman was promising, but it never reached its full potential. I hope that this show can maintain a high level of quality, as it has a real chance to be one of the high points of live action Superman adaptations.
Things I loved:
The costume -- I feel like this costume is the perfect balance between the classic look with modern updates (textured fabric, no trunks, darker but not dingy colors). I wasn't a fan of the shoulder pads from the Supergirl version of the costume, so glad to see those go. I feel like this is the version that Caville's version could have been had they not decided to go extra dark and drab with the colors and added all the extra unnecessary alien swirlies.
Tone -- This is obviously a comic book show that's going to have fantastical elements, but there's a weightiness to the tone that lends it more realism than most of the other Arrowverse shows. Let's be honest, some of those other shows can get pretty out there and silly with the comic elements (Legends and Flash, I'm looking at you).
Superman and Lois as parents -- The perennial complaint about Superman is that he is a hard character to write because he's so powerful that it's hard to create challenging situations for him. Which is exactly why making him a parent to teenagers is such a brilliant move. It's the ultimate challenge that he can't fix with his powers. And I think it hits home for a lot of us who are parents, who might feel pretty accomplished and put together in our professional lives or other accomplishments, but are easily humbled by the demands of parenting.
Questions I have:
Do they drop any hints that reveal how Clark and Lois have teenage boys? From the continuity of the rest of the Arrowverse shows, the kids should be much much younger.
Totally tangential Star Trek TNG observation:
Did anyone else notice that the actress playing Martha Kent was played by Michele Scarabelli, who played Jenna D'Sora, Data's experimental girlfriend?
|
|
|
Post by Randle-El on Mar 1, 2021 0:54:06 GMT -5
I found the latest episode to be entertaining and it filled in a quite a bit of information, but I have to say that it's pretty crazy how the fan community has accurately predicted important elements of the show. I think almost every single reveal of the last couple of episodes was floated in various fan theories I've seen on the web.
|
|
|
Post by Randle-El on Feb 22, 2021 0:12:41 GMT -5
I don't recall there being any kind of information released to indicate any of the Disney+ MCU shows will be multiple season affairs. But if I were to speculate, I don't see shows like WandaVision or FatWS getting more than one season. They seem to be transitional shows that are designed to introduce new characters and plot points that help to set up the chess board for the next few years of Marvel movies. On the other hand, I could see shows like She-Hulk, Ms. Marvel, or Moon Knight being more of a normal TV series with multiple seasons. They could be similar to the Netflix MCU shows, in that they inhabit their own corner of the MCU with their own adventures. But unlike those shows, they have been architected into the main MCU and have more potential to cross over with the films and other shows.
I could also see a sort of minor league system being employed. The more B-list characters like Moon Knight or She-Hulk are given their own shows that are more peripheral to the main MCU action, and if they prove to be popular, they get called up the major leagues (i.e., the movies) and are given storylines that are more consequential to the broader MCU.
|
|
|
Post by Randle-El on Feb 19, 2021 23:06:33 GMT -5
I love how the voice cast is like a reunion of The Walking Dead.
|
|
|
Post by Randle-El on Feb 19, 2021 23:04:41 GMT -5
I'm sure that {Spoiler: Click to show}"It was Agatha all the time..." was just a feint. I'm guessing that we'll get the big bad reveal just in time for him to disappear into the multiverse and set up Doctor Strange 2. And we still have that "Luke Skywalker in the Mandalorian" level cameo to come. Is it Doctor Strange? Or is that not big enough? Despite it being a success, I still think they've save a lot for the movies. {Spoiler: Click to show} I was under the impression that the massive cameo was Evan Peters as Quicksilver.
|
|