|
Post by berkley on Aug 16, 2017 2:59:10 GMT -5
Yeah, okay smart guys, how many sectors in a galaxy? Good question! I didn't know the answer to this myself so I'm not one of the smart guys, but it made me so curious I tried to look it up on wiki. As far as I can tell, it depends on whether you're talking about physics or Star Trek, but it isn't an either-or: there's a lot of overlap. Briefly, galactic quadrant seems to be the term in physics, so there are four of them. A sector could be one of those quadrants or a subsection of one of them or I suppose any other division based on the mathematical definition of a sector. Star Trek isn't that different - they use the centre of the galaxy instead of our sun as the pole from which the sectors are mapped, but apparently it differs from one show or movie to the other. And again, a sector could be one of the four quadrants or a subdivision of one of them or I suppose a subsection based on some entirely different mapping system, though still (I would hope) based on the mathematical definition of sector.
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Aug 16, 2017 4:18:09 GMT -5
If you mean modern day Marvel, you may be right Slam. DnA's GotG is the last new comic series I've read. And that might be in part, due to the fact that I like space operas, but not soap operas. And most of Marvel's new movies I've seen. Not one has really wowed me outside of GotG. I meant Marvel from the time of FF #1 forward. That was the whole thing that Marvel was different. The characters squabbled and had "personalities". There were drawn out subplots. Comics as soap opera has been Marvel's thing since the 60s. I think that's true: Stan Lee's sopa opera sub-plots had a lot to do with Marvel's success. But I think that was only one (very important) element amongst others. I think it was a combination of Stan's soap opera and 50s-MAD-style humour and ironic distance plus Kirby's science fiction/myth/folklore with superhero action into an unforeseeably (not a word, apparently) potent stew that totally revitalised superhero comics - as far as I can tell: my view is of course limited by when I was born and the things I've read. So yes, I think there's no question, soap opera has been a key element from the beginning and I would say has to be there to help prevent superhero stories from devolving into personally vicarious or worse, politically fascistic power-fantasy. However, it (soap-opera) can itself be over-emphasised, and maybe that's what adamwarlock was trying to say - instead of just blasting us with his soul-gem! As always, it depends on the individual reader's taste: I enjoy the soap opera and the power-fantasy and the irreverent humour but in different proportions at different times and with different characters or story-lines. For example, I think "arrogant" characters like Dr. Doom or Namor the Sub-Mariner or "pompous" ones like Captain America or Superman or Doctor Strange have to be played (i.e. written) "straight". Not that you can't have the bubble punctured from time to time by the right counter-foil, as Hawkeye used to do with CA, for example - though you have to be careful there too: if you do it too often both characters lose their effectiveness. But anyway, to cut this short, certain characters won't work if they're written as comical figures. I think the same thing is true with the soap opera: what works with Peter Parker or Matt Murdock doesn't necessarily work with, I dunno, the Silver Surfer or Adam Warlock. I think it's a big mistake to habitually treat these larger-than-life characters as if their life-experiences were just like our everyday ones. I said habitually: it can be done occasionally as a bit of comic relief, but if it becomes the norm you've lost that character, you've lost one bit of uniqueness (actually a word, apparently), you've made everything a little bit more the same.
|
|