|
Post by MDG on Jan 5, 2016 16:49:18 GMT -5
Oh do I love Rumble Fish' soundtrack! With vocals by America's greatest songwriter.
|
|
|
Post by Action Ace on Jan 5, 2016 19:11:23 GMT -5
Boba FettNever understood the cult around him. I barely noticed him in the movies, he had no charisma or presence, and yet he seems dearly loved by almost everybody, to the point he was often used in the comics, and I still fail to see the attraction... I don't see it either. I always list his debut as my least favorite thing about the Star Wars Holiday Special.
|
|
|
Post by Action Ace on Jan 5, 2016 19:19:47 GMT -5
For me, punk means "listen to ANYTHING else." A man snoring, a jackhammer, a speech on hydroponic growing by Charo, ANYTHING. There. I said it.
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Jan 5, 2016 19:32:31 GMT -5
That's the key. He based him on The Police-era Sting, not the less interesting, more corporate, version we got after that. You're missing out on his solo albums like Ten Summoners tales and Sacred Love. They're awesome.
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Jan 5, 2016 19:34:41 GMT -5
Boba FettNever understood the cult around him. I barely noticed him in the movies, he had no charisma or presence, and yet he seems dearly loved by almost everybody, to the point he was often used in the comics, and I still fail to see the attraction... The two things that made him appealing was his great costume, especially his helmut and the way he kind of faced down Darth Vader when they were carbonizing Han. But he got killed so easily in ROTJ, that he lost the magic for me.
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on Jan 5, 2016 19:41:09 GMT -5
That's the key. He based him on The Police-era Sting, not the less interesting, more corporate, version we got after that. You're missing out on his solo albums like Ten Summoners tales and Sacred Love. They're awesome. I probably am discounting his work just after The Police since I have so little knowledge of it. Most of my dislike of later Sting comes from his 90's material, which is exclusively based on the stuff I heard on the radio.
|
|
|
Post by chadwilliam on Jan 5, 2016 22:56:59 GMT -5
Real life publishers, artists, writers showing up as themselves in stories is never cute, clever, amusing, or anything other than self-indulgent and sad.
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Jan 5, 2016 23:12:26 GMT -5
Real life publishers, artists, writers showing up as themselves in stories is never cute, clever, amusing, or anything other than self-indulgent and sad.
|
|
|
Post by realjla on Jan 5, 2016 23:19:02 GMT -5
I have to agree, when it comes to the DC "Earth Prime" stories. However, Julie Schwartz was an excellent guest star! Cary Bates and Elliot Maggin, on the other hand...no.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2016 23:33:29 GMT -5
Real life publishers, artists, writers showing up as themselves in stories is never cute, clever, amusing, or anything other than self-indulgent and sad. if this is self-indulgent and sad, then give me those kind of comics over anything put out by the big 2 featuring a cape and mask any day of the week... or this... or.... -M
|
|
|
Post by chadwilliam on Jan 6, 2016 0:43:17 GMT -5
Real life publishers, artists, writers showing up as themselves in stories is never cute, clever, amusing, or anything other than self-indulgent and sad.
Although I've never read this story - my familiarity with EC extends more towards MAD and their horror line of comics than to, I'm guessing, Weird Science - I'm sure it's intelligently written and obviously beautifully drawn, but is there any reason that we need a story about Wally Wood? Don't get me wrong, at a time when many comics didn't credit anyone, when Bob Kane was the only person who had ever drawn and written Batman as far as readers were concerned, when Roy Lichtenstein could swipe an artist's work knowing that few would regard such an act as theft since it's only comics, I'm all for everyone involved in this medium to be getting attention, credit, acclaim, but what does a story about Wally Wood accomplish that, say, a feature within the same issue wouldn't?
I'm fully aware that my statement is exact and absolute - I didn't say such uses "usually" or "almost" never work - and I'll admit that in stating that I haven't read every instance of this trope being employed I may be backing myself into a corner where I'll be exposed to the one instance where I have to go "You know what, it does work here" but I don't see it in this instance. EC stories usually have some neurosis or weirdness or brilliant idea driving them - this just seems so... I don't know, clean? Normal? Since when do normal people doing normal things such as drawing (even drawing brilliantly) get to be a story? Is it just because the artist is one of the EC stable? Sure, that artwork provided is beautiful, but it could have been presented in a tale with more detail to it. It seems that the whole purpose behind this story is to have that final image of Wally Wood sitting at his desk and to me, it's self-indulgent. Not saying it was Wood's idea or Gaine's or whoever's but that's the way I see it.
Oh, and I love Harvey Pekar's work which is all about Harvey Pekar, but since that's the point, I didn't consider that when I made my statement. Just want to say that now because if I'm going to shoot myself in the foot I'd like it to be here and now.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2016 1:02:54 GMT -5
Because every story, whether its about the mundane or the fantastic, is ultimately about the human condition, and if including the storyteller in the storytelling or telling a story of mundane things gets to the themes that underlie the story and make the plot more than a mechanical technical activity, then by all means they should be included. If the inclusion is vanity, then yeah it may be self-indulgent, but if the story is about the power of the imagination or the mind's ability to run wild with ideas and the creator (in this case Woody) includes himself to hammer home the idea, so be it. But blanket statement that mundane things aren't story are just delusional. Story is about conflict revealing character, and those conflicts can certainly be mundane, even an artist sitting at a drawing board struggling to capture his vision on paper. To me it has more to say and has more story than generic hero in a cape pounding villain for no apparent reason for the umpteenth time with no real change occurring to the hero or villain because of the conflict, or generic space explorer getting eaten because well reasons and that's the story...or not.
You may not like the inclusion of the storyteller in the story, and that's cool, it's a personal preference, but that does not make it invalid as a storytelling tool. You may not like stories that focus on the mundane, again that's cool. but it doesn't make it any less of a story because you don't like it.
-M
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Jan 6, 2016 6:47:21 GMT -5
The only one I remember abusing placing himself into a story was Byrne.
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on Jan 6, 2016 7:57:00 GMT -5
The only one I remember abusing placing himself into a story was Byrne. It wouldn't have been so bad if he'd drawn himself as he was --a guy in his mid-30's who was beginning to fill out--as opposed to a svelte distance runner dressed as a lumberjack. Byrne hasn't been that thin since the early 70's. If ever. Still a big fan of his 80's stuff and always will be!
|
|
|
Post by MDG on Jan 6, 2016 9:10:10 GMT -5
|
|