|
Post by DE Sinclair on Nov 20, 2015 11:21:50 GMT -5
Just like I'm trying to repress what Chameleon Boy is doing in your avatar.... He had it coming! I'm sure Reep would have wrang Proty's neck more if he knew he was eventually going to be marrying Imra in Garth's body! Am I the only one who thinks that's NOT what it looks like is happening? Or is that what the kids are calling it these days? "Wringing Proty's neck"?
|
|
|
Post by Pharozonk on Nov 20, 2015 11:23:06 GMT -5
He had it coming! I'm sure Reep would have wrang Proty's neck more if he knew he was eventually going to be marrying Imra in Garth's body! Am I the only one who thinks that's NOT what it looks like is happening? Or is that what the kids are calling it these days? "Wringing Proty's neck"? The fact that it has thought bubbles is giving your insinuation disturbing connotations.
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on Nov 20, 2015 14:12:17 GMT -5
I just sold a Spider-man 129 for 225 dollars. I shoulda asked if you guys were interested, first.
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Nov 20, 2015 14:18:39 GMT -5
One of us, one of us, one of us.... I have BEEN one of us. Also: now I know where Wildfire gets his name! Well, at least I think I do. Unless there are other Wildfire characters other than the one from Legion of Superheroes? Funnily enough, the fact that I use Wildfire as my internet handle has nothing whatsoever with the Legionnaire. It's actually from a Role Playing character I played in a table top game in my college days.. I used to use 'Ravage' but it was too often already taken, so I switched to Wildfire and never looked back. I didn't know Wildfire existed as a character until much later... my first Legion was the triangle era, where he and Dawnstar were pretty much left off. Now that I've read more Legion and know he exists, I actually really like him, but it's totally a co-incidence.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2015 17:27:26 GMT -5
I'm sorry to interrupt a conversation between two old curmudgeons...but I seriously need another PunisherMAX fix, and fast. I love the anti-hero, no nonsense shit, plus it has F-words and he shoots scum. Have you tried Scalped Jez ??/
Not anti-hero like Punisher but it is hard as nails.
I must look into that...thanks for the mention.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2015 18:33:37 GMT -5
I have BEEN one of us. Also: now I know where Wildfire gets his name! Well, at least I think I do. Unless there are other Wildfire characters other than the one from Legion of Superheroes? Funnily enough, the fact that I use Wildfire as my internet handle has nothing whatsoever with the Legionnaire. It's actually from a Role Playing character I played in a table top game in my college days.. I used to use 'Ravage' but it was too often already taken, so I switched to Wildfire and never looked back. I didn't know Wildfire existed as a character until much later... my first Legion was the triangle era, where he and Dawnstar were pretty much left off. Now that I've read more Legion and know he exists, I actually really like him, but it's totally a co-incidence. So far, to me in what little I have read, Wildfire doesn't put up with crap. He gives zero craps.
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Nov 20, 2015 20:21:48 GMT -5
Yeah, it gets a little angsty eventually, but he's mostly awesome
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Nov 20, 2015 23:15:05 GMT -5
Frank Miller killed the Batman I loved. i haven't been able to stand the character since (in the mainstream DCU, that is, as I love the animated version of the '90s). Cei-U! I summon the distaste! It's been nearly 30 years since I've read them but my feeling is that Dark Knight and Year One frm the 80s worked fine as stand-alone stories. My impression is that the problem was that later writers took that typically Milleresque sort of hardboiled Batman and tried to transplant him into the regular DCU where he just comes across as an idiot. In the noirish world of Miller's stories, sure, he's a jerk, but so is almost everyone else, to some degree. Now, I think there is an argument to be made that Miller's whole idea of combining the hardboiled or noir style and attitude with superhero characters is a bad idea and a creative dead end - I feel this way myself, most of the time, which is why I don't rate Miller's Daredevil quite as highly as some readers - but it was an interesting experiement. I found the Batman books easier to accept because they were limited series rather than an extended like Miller's DD. Just realised I clicked on the first rather than the last page of the thread so maybe this discussion has already been played out. But I'll leave the post as it is, in case anyone wants to take it up again.
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Nov 21, 2015 11:01:25 GMT -5
Frank Miller killed the Batman I loved. i haven't been able to stand the character since (in the mainstream DCU, that is, as I love the animated version of the '90s). Cei-U! I summon the distaste! It's been nearly 30 years since I've read them but my feeling is that Dark Knight and Year One frm the 80s worked fine as stand-alone stories. My impression is that the problem was that later writers took that typically Milleresque sort of hardboiled Batman and tried to transplant him into the regular DCU where he just comes across as an idiot. In the noirish world of Miller's stories, sure, he's a jerk, but so is almost everyone else, to some degree. Now, I think there is an argument to be made that Miller's whole idea of combining the hardboiled or noir style and attitude with superhero characters is a bad idea and a creative dead end - I feel this way myself, most of the time, which is why I don't rate Miller's Daredevil quite as highly as some readers - but it was an interesting experiement. I found the Batman books easier to accept because they were limited series rather than an extended like Miller's DD. Just realised I clicked on the first rather than the last page of the thread so maybe this discussion has already been played out. But I'll leave the post as it is, in case anyone wants to take it up again. The rub is that these kinds of characters are not meant to have a finite existence, like real people or legions of other fictional characters. The one-time versions, like some of the Elseworlds stories (e.g., Gotham by Gaslight) are enjoyable as takes on characters; when something like DK or the Miller Daredevil saga becomes popular, imitation and duplication follow and dreck is engendered. The crucial parts of a character's DNA have to be present when he or she is modernized, updated, adapted, rebooted, whatever, or else why bother? Make up someone new. I do think that Miller was better at staying true to Daredevil's roots than he was to Batman's. It's been ages since I read either one, but I know I thought that Miller was exploring Daredevil's character; with Batman he was simply attaching a persona to him that just didn't fit. I remember reading a Sherlock Holmes novel once in which he is swept up in the Martian invasion of Wells's War of the Worlds. All went well until Holmes returns to Baker Street one night and goes to bed with Mrs. Hudson, his landlady. Had there been the slightest hint, whisper, intimation, suggestion, or flimsy shred of evidence of such an assignation in Doyle's stories or others loyal to the character, I might have kept reading. There wasn't; I didn't.
|
|
|
Post by Hoosier X on Nov 21, 2015 11:33:11 GMT -5
It's been nearly 30 years since I've read them but my feeling is that Dark Knight and Year One frm the 80s worked fine as stand-alone stories. My impression is that the problem was that later writers took that typically Milleresque sort of hardboiled Batman and tried to transplant him into the regular DCU where he just comes across as an idiot. In the noirish world of Miller's stories, sure, he's a jerk, but so is almost everyone else, to some degree. Now, I think there is an argument to be made that Miller's whole idea of combining the hardboiled or noir style and attitude with superhero characters is a bad idea and a creative dead end - I feel this way myself, most of the time, which is why I don't rate Miller's Daredevil quite as highly as some readers - but it was an interesting experiement. I found the Batman books easier to accept because they were limited series rather than an extended like Miller's DD. Just realised I clicked on the first rather than the last page of the thread so maybe this discussion has already been played out. But I'll leave the post as it is, in case anyone wants to take it up again. The rub is that these kinds of characters are not meant to have a finite existence, like real people or legions of other fictional characters. The one-time versions, like some of the Elseworlds stories (e.g., Gotham by Gaslight) are enjoyable as takes on characters; when something like DK or the Miller Daredevil saga becomes popular, imitation and duplication follow and dreck is engendered. The crucial parts of a character's DNA have to be present when he or she is modernized, updated, adapted, rebooted, whatever, or else why bother? Make up someone new. I do think that Miller was better at staying true to Daredevil's roots than he was to Batman's. It's been ages since I read either one, but I know I thought that Miller was exploring Daredevil's character; with Batman he was simply attaching a persona to him that just didn't fit. I remember reading a Sherlock Holmes novel once in which he is swept up in the Martian invasion of Wells's War of the Worlds. All went well until Holmes returns to Baker Street one night and goes to bed with Mrs. Hudson, his landlady. Had there been the slightest hint, whisper, intimation, suggestion, or flimsy shred of evidence of such an assignation in Doyle's stories or others loyal to the character, I might have kept reading. There wasn't; I didn't. It would have made more sense if he'd gone to bed with Dr. Watson.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2015 12:34:23 GMT -5
Superman and Batman must never be seen on a comic book cover trying to inflate a flat tyre ever again and looking like 2 asshats. Leave that in the 60s.
There, I said it nyah nyah.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2015 14:34:22 GMT -5
Superman and Batman must never be seen on a comic book cover trying to inflate a flat tyre ever again and looking like 2 asshats. Leave that in the 60s. There, I said it nyah nyah. But this is why I don't get along with most of current comics from the Big 2. I don't like consequences and death for my superheroes. I don't want my comics anything like real life. I live life and see reality. I don't want to read that when I'm escaping.
|
|
|
Post by adamwarlock2099 on Nov 21, 2015 17:25:57 GMT -5
Superman and Batman must never be seen on a comic book cover trying to inflate a flat tyre ever again and looking like 2 asshats. Leave that in the 60s. There, I said it nyah nyah. But this is why I don't get along with most of current comics from the Big 2. I don't like consequences and death for my superheroes. I don't want my comics anything like real life. I live life and see reality. I don't want to read that when I'm escaping. Ive said that so much in the last 5-10 years I'm blue in the face. It's fine that they are what they are now, modern comics, there's plenty of old stuff for me to read, but why people want to ruin their escapism with reality is beyond me. Especially nowadays with people raging about political and social issues being misrepresented or absent in fiction. As if fiction by the definition of the word has any obligation to reality. Caroline Knapp told me the truth about my alcoholism when she wrote. Charles Bukowski told me a story about it.
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Nov 21, 2015 19:05:43 GMT -5
Bendis and the disassembled storyline didn't kill the Avengers. The Marvel movies killed the Avengers. The last few years has turned the Avengers into the Legion Of Superheroes and an overcrowded mess. And, I like the days when Cap, Iron Man and Thor liked each other.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2015 19:21:05 GMT -5
The movies did not make them dislike each other.
|
|