|
|
Post by fanboystranger on Aug 9, 2015 20:19:14 GMT -5
Love it or hate it, I do appreciate that Kelley Jones does have his own style. It perhaps isn't to everyone's tastes but it's definitely not middle of the road for mainstream comics artwork. His earlier stuff is more in the Zeck/Golden (aka nu-Neal Adams) style. Obviously Jones and Doug Moench seemed to be a fairly simpatico comic team, they did quite a few good comics together. While obviously Bernie Wrightson's style is in there, I think Jones is fairly on his own ground. I kind of think it could have been how far out Sienkiewicz was getting that led Jones to start breaking down style rules. I'd figure Mignola's style also might have creeped into Jones work some too. Jones uses a ton of black in some of his Batman pages. Kevin O'Neill and Mick McMahon probably factor in there, too, but also some of the guys who were breaking in at the same time as Jones like Sam Keith, Simon Bisley, and Carl Critchlow. Jones really developed his own thing, though. He's definitely not indebted to one particular influence or style. |
|
|
|
Post by coveredinbees on Aug 12, 2015 22:27:13 GMT -5
God Loves Man Kills
There's no way that guy could've gotten an evil mob so big. The FBI would've been all over him.
I loved Magneto, though,and the idea overall.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Aug 13, 2015 8:26:23 GMT -5
God Loves Man Kills There's no way that guy could've gotten an evil mob so big. The FBI would've been all over him. I loved Magneto, though,and the idea overall. Looking at the Oath Keepers and Tea Baggers and all the folks believing what they hear on Fox news, I personally find reverend Stryker's mob rather realistic. I agree about the FBI, but I suspect that even a federal agent could be a Truther, a Jade Helm nut or a mutant hater. |
|
|
|
Post by chadwilliam on Aug 14, 2015 23:24:41 GMT -5
I recently watched Punisher: War Zone for the first time and thought it was a great film. I avoided it when it was released however because of dire reviews which persist to this day, yet this isn't one of those situations where I like it in a "it's so bad it's good" way or I enjoy in spite of the fact that I understand why some Punisher fans wouldn't - I genuinely don't see what's supposed to be wrong with this film. The Punisher is one of those characters who shouldn't be hard to adapt to film and yet he had failed on two previous ventures due to messing around with the conventions of the character and his world. This one plays it by the book though and the biggest liberty taken was having the Punisher kill an undercover cop by accident - a poignant touch that really added something to Castle here without removing anything. I honestly don't get the hate or even the apathy this film receives.
|
|
|
|
Post by batlaw on Aug 15, 2015 1:42:36 GMT -5
I recently watched Punisher: War Zone for the first time and thought it was a great film. I avoided it when it was released however because of dire reviews which persist to this day, yet this isn't one of those situations where I like it in a "it's so bad it's good" way or I enjoy in spite of the fact that I understand why some Punisher fans wouldn't - I genuinely don't see what's supposed to be wrong with this film. The Punisher is one of those characters who shouldn't be hard to adapt to film and yet he had failed on two previous ventures due to messing around with the conventions of the character and his world. This one plays it by the book though and the biggest liberty taken was having the Punisher kill an undercover cop by accident - a poignant touch that really added something to Castle here without removing anything. I honestly don't get the hate or even the apathy this film receives. It seems to be a pretty polarizing movie amongst fans. It's like the batman returns of the punisher movies. IMO the movie is simply awful. Casting was meh. Acting was atrocious almost laughable at times. So much was just so silly (dialog, writing, performances, settings and violence). I found the movie came off more like a spoof of than a sincere attempt. It felt like a cartoon to me, which seems to be what a lot of people who really liked it seem to like about it. Not me personally. The only good thing really IMO was micro. The first punisher movie suffered from low budget, mishandling and lack of faith. The second movie failed to embrace the character and tried to make him accessible. The third failed by not taking the character or his world seriously. It's always amazed me how the simplest of concept characters is so difficult for them to get. Want a good punisher movie? Look at movies like Man on Fire or A Man Apart. |
|
|
|
Post by crazyoldhermit on Aug 15, 2015 1:48:50 GMT -5
Classic: The Avengers. All of it. Just doesn't appeal to me. If I want to read a team book I'll read the FF, a team designed to be a team instead of a mish-mash of poorly selling characters. Modern: The Long Halloween. This book is boring and repetitive, and a mystery that doesn't get properly solved is a cheat. I recently watched Punisher: War Zone for the first time and thought it was a great film. I avoided it when it was released however because of dire reviews which persist to this day, yet this isn't one of those situations where I like it in a "it's so bad it's good" way or I enjoy in spite of the fact that I understand why some Punisher fans wouldn't - I genuinely don't see what's supposed to be wrong with this film. The Punisher is one of those characters who shouldn't be hard to adapt to film and yet he had failed on two previous ventures due to messing around with the conventions of the character and his world. This one plays it by the book though and the biggest liberty taken was having the Punisher kill an undercover cop by accident - a poignant touch that really added something to Castle here without removing anything. I honestly don't get the hate or even the apathy this film receives. I'd say it does it too much, by not picking a book and sticking with it. Lexi Alexander obviously had no real understanding of the character, simply picked a few Garth Ennis books off a shelf and threw them into a blender with a heaping pile of generic movie making. It feels like she picked up the cliffnotes of the franchise and the basic look of the MAX series and pasted them on a typical flashy action movie, while the parts that felt most like the comics felt like the Marvel Knights comics. It's just a horribly inconsistent tone where in one scene Frank is having an intense flashback to his family's murder and in another Jigsaw is hammy up a storm. A director who actually understood the books would see that MAX is like Taxi Driver-meets-The Sopranos while Marvel Knights is Looney Tunes with machine guns. But the biggest problem I have with it is it's just a bad movie. It's not funny |
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on Aug 15, 2015 7:08:26 GMT -5
Classic: The Avengers. All of it. Just doesn't appeal to me. If I want to read a team book I'll read the FF, a team designed to be a team instead of a mish-mash of poorly selling characters. I'm currently reading that, and it's taking me forever (less than one comic a day).  |
|
Crimebuster
CCF Podcast Guru
Making comics!
Posts: 3,958 
|
Post by Crimebuster on Aug 15, 2015 9:59:36 GMT -5
Lunatics! Avengers is the best team superhero book of all time in my opinion. Granted, for me it doesn't really hit its stride till around #52 or so. But after that it's great for the next 20 years.
|
|
|
|
Post by Trevor on Aug 15, 2015 15:22:17 GMT -5
Lunatics! Avengers is the best team superhero book of all time in my opinion. Granted, for me it doesn't really hit its stride till around #52 or so. But after that it's great for the next 20 years. I hope so. I started a read of (a limited) Marvel history where over the next few years I plan to read every issue of Avengers and all the big Marvel events in chronological order. The Stan Lee dialogue in these first 25 or so issues is killing me. |
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on Aug 15, 2015 16:00:52 GMT -5
Lunatics! Avengers is the best team superhero book of all time in my opinion. Granted, for me it doesn't really hit its stride till around #52 or so. But after that it's great for the next 20 years. I'm still on #44, so I hope it gets better soon. I got onboard at the end of the 70's, which means most of this early stuff, is new to me. |
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on Aug 15, 2015 16:22:23 GMT -5
The Stan Lee dialogue in these first 25 or so issues is killing me. Thomas isn't any immediate improvement, in that respect. |
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on Aug 15, 2015 17:27:17 GMT -5
Lunatics! Avengers is the best team superhero book of all time in my opinion. Granted, for me it doesn't really hit its stride till around #52 or so. But after that it's great for the next 20 years. I hope so. I started a read of (a limited) Marvel history where over the next few years I plan to read every issue of Avengers and all the big Marvel events in chronological order. The Stan Lee dialogue in these first 25 or so issues is killing me. Have you read other Silver Age Marvel stuff? Fantastic Four from, say 39-70 or the Romita Spider-man are (A) better, and (B) easier reads. Still, there's a bunch of stuff I like about the early Avengers: 1) The original team really do not get along AT ALL. They are the least chummy superhero team I've ever read in comics. Even the Defenders with Valkyrie, the Sub-Mariner and the Hulk were better buds. 2) There were quite a few surprisingly nuanced villains. Wonder Man, Swordsman, Power Man, the Enchantress and Kang (in his second appearance) all seemed more fleshed out and developed than your traditional comic super-villain. And while Zemo wasn't as developed, the emnity between Cap and Z gave their fights higher stakes than the traditional brawl. Again, the Avengers are the best at hating! 3) The parallel development between the Masters of Evil and the Avengers. Both teams gain, lose, and regain members and the bad guys actually get a little bit of ongoing character development! Honestly, I've never seen "evil team as reflection of the good team" done as well in comics, or done as long-term! (The MoE sub-plots lasted around a year and a half!) 4) Stan got the chance to stretch his comedy chops - and I think he is a really funny writer - with the Wasp, Hawkeye, and Rick Jones. It's not one of the best of the Silver Age Marvel titles, and there are long stretches that just aren't very good. But there's stuff in there I really like and some interesting ideas that no one else has picked up on in the last fifty years of superhero storytelling. |
|
|
|
Post by chadwilliam on Aug 15, 2015 17:53:17 GMT -5
Re: Punisher War Zone
I'm not familiar enough with Jigsaw to know if he was way out of character for this film or not. I did take note of how much the movie borrowed from the first Keaton Batman picture - the Alexander Knox-like stand-in, the mob doctor unveiling the new Billy Russo, the "You look great"/"I didn't ask" vs. "Do I do your makeup for you" scene, and so on - so I suspect that Jigsaw too, was influenced by Jack Nicholson's Joker, but I looked at the film the same way I view Abbott and Costello Meets Frankenstein - as long the Punisher (the monsters) get played straight, I don't care how cartoony other elements become. Like I said, not knowing enough about Jigsaw (the only comics I've read with him in them is the six-part Jigsaw Puzzle from the 80's/90's Punisher series and his appearance in the 1986 Grant/Zeck series) may actually help if his appearance here is drastically different from the comics and I guess my ignorance of that difference isn't going to exactly sway anyone's opinion (anymore than comparing him with Abbott and Costello, I suspect) but, I don't know, it felt like whatever liberties taken with the source material itself, for once paid off onscreen which is a rarity for superhero films.
I will note that Ennis' run had a lot of humour - I mean, the first page in his first issue opens with the Punisher telling a drug dealer to "Get a haircut" and the Russian is clearly a darkly comic villain. Different strokes for different folks, I guess. |
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Aug 15, 2015 19:13:26 GMT -5
Lunatics! Avengers is the best team superhero book of all time in my opinion. Granted, for me it doesn't really hit its stride till around #52 or so. But after that it's great for the next 20 years. I hope so. I started a read of (a limited) Marvel history where over the next few years I plan to read every issue of Avengers and all the big Marvel events in chronological order. The Stan Lee dialogue in these first 25 or so issues is killing me. It's funny but I think the first 30 issues or so are pure gold. It was great pretty much until issue 300. |
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on Aug 16, 2015 1:44:29 GMT -5
Not exactly "pure gold", but #5, 16 and 29 were more or less ok (maybe that's because, they're among the few ones I read as a kid).
|
|
