TF Views

Onslaught Six wrote:We already know they aren't shy about recasting roles (Banner is the most noticable example) but I doubt they would actually turn that around and try to "youngify" the characters, unless they were going to actually make any newer films with younger actors and still have time progress normally, the way comics do. (I have seen a detailed timeline that basically infers most of the Marvel cinematic universe is still taking place ~2008, so they still have a few years to catch up to the real world.)

I am convinced that the only reason Firefly has such a large fanbase is only because it was cancelled after like thirteen episodes. Other shows from that time period, like the Battlestar Galactica reboot, got like five or six seasons, and had enough time to stop being good and start being shitty. (By others' accounts, not mine. The hour-long TV drama format doesn't work for me.)

The recasting that irked me was replacing Terrence Howard with Don Cheadle. Don't get me wrong, Cheadle's a great actor but there was literally no reason for it.

Have you seen Firefly? Cause if not, you should. It's fucking awesome (which is why I think it has such a huge fanbase) but I will concede that a lot of the reason that it's probably REMAINED awesome is because it was cancelled. It wasn't on long enough to contradict itself. Between the series and the movie, the story is complete and does have an actual ending. Even the comics haven't taken place after the movie so the story is actually self contained.

Shockwave wrote:The recasting that irked me was replacing Terrence Howard with Don Cheadle. Don't get me wrong, Cheadle's a great actor but there was literally no reason for it.

That wasn't the fault of anyone making the movie, though. Howard wanted more money to do IM2--more money than even RDJ, the lead fucking actor was getting paid--so Disney told him to take a hike and got Cheadle instead. Maybe they could have worked something out, but Howard was having none of it. (He has since said that he kind of regrets it, because it got him a reputation as an asshole for a while and made it hard for him to find work.)

Have you seen Firefly? Cause if not, you should. It's fucking awesome (which is why I think it has such a huge fanbase) but I will concede that a lot of the reason that it's probably REMAINED awesome is because it was cancelled. It wasn't on long enough to contradict itself. Between the series and the movie, the story is complete and does have an actual ending. Even the comics haven't taken place after the movie so the story is actually self contained.

I haven't, because the fanbase has kind of built it up like it's this huge awesome thing, and if I watch it, I know it'll probably only be above average at best. (Also, like I said before, me and the hour-long TV drama format don't jive.)

Actually, that makes it easier to hate things. I dropped Animal Man because, for like the fifth month in a row, they were looking for Swamp Thing. This was the book's not-so-subtle way of telling me that I also should be reading Swamp Thing if I wanted to "get the full story." So I bought that month's issue of Swamp Thing, was completely fucking confused, and dropped both. (John Constantine also showed up at the end of that month's issue of Animal Man, cluing me in that I should also be reading Justice League Dark. Fuck you, DC.)

Uh, isn't Jeff Lemire writing all of those books? What is wrong with DC running a storyline through several books at once? That is standard practice in the industry.

Along the same wavelength, these are the same kind of fans who demand things that happened For Fucking Ever Ago stay in the canon, even if they no longer make any sense. Armour Wars is a great example. For when it was published, sure, it was relevant, but if you read it now and try to pretend that it's in any way relevant to a modern Iron Man comic, it's just...a big fucking incongruency.

And, again, Marvel fans are worse about this. And, for years, Marvel catered to them. For the last 20, Marvel has pretended to cater to them. And, they love every minute of it.

Every comic is awesome and has an impact that lasts for years. We know this because....Marvel tell us so.

"Armor Wars" is a good example of this principle. Allowing for problems that most comics in the 80s had, "Armor Wars" is a solidly planned and executed story that actually has *gasp* an idea that works with the main character. In that sense, it is still worth reading. But, it is still clearly set in the mid 1980s. There is a significant plot-point involving the Soviet Union (a country that did not exist less than a decade later). Read literally, and according to Marvel's apparent timeline, the "Armor Wars" happened in 2004 or so, complete with references to the Soviet Union.

The most that Marvel fans can accept is that Iron Man's origin gets dragged forward every so often. And, even that change has to be kept vague. But, Iron Man still fought Soviet personell. The Avengers formed with the assistance of HAM radio enthusiasts (rather than....I dunno, bloggers). And, this is supposed to be the world outside our window.

When did the X-Men form? When was "Days of Future Past" supposed to be set?


Dom
-bring on the reboot.

Dominic wrote:

Actually, that makes it easier to hate things. I dropped Animal Man because, for like the fifth month in a row, they were looking for Swamp Thing. This was the book's not-so-subtle way of telling me that I also should be reading Swamp Thing if I wanted to "get the full story." So I bought that month's issue of Swamp Thing, was completely fucking confused, and dropped both. (John Constantine also showed up at the end of that month's issue of Animal Man, cluing me in that I should also be reading Justice League Dark. Fuck you, DC.)

Uh, isn't Jeff Lemire writing all of those books? What is wrong with DC running a storyline through several books at once? That is standard practice in the industry.

Yost's Avenging Spider-Man and Yost's Scarlet Spider have nothing to do with each other, and they're both great books, your argument is invalid.

I don't get how you feel people should be 'expected' to pick up *multiple books* just because they just want to read *one book*. If Lemire wanted those books to be parts of the same big story that he wanted people to read all together, they should've been published as a single-book series called 'Nature Force' or something, which followed *both* Swamp Thing and Animal Man, instead of this weird, fractured, side-by-side shit. If you want me to buy two books, just staple them together and sell me two books. Don't go along for five months or whatever going "Oh, well you can buy just one book if you really want to..." and then turn around the last month and go "Haha, just kidding, both books were required reading but we sold them separately anyway, have fun trying to track down all the older issues of that other book you weren't reading".

(This is also one of the many, many reasons comics could benefit from switching to an anthology format. If Animal Man, Swamp Thing, and Justice League Dark were all in the same big anthology you bought each month, this sort of thing would not be a problem.)

Dominic wrote:

Actually, that makes it easier to hate things. I dropped Animal Man because, for like the fifth month in a row, they were looking for Swamp Thing. This was the book's not-so-subtle way of telling me that I also should be reading Swamp Thing if I wanted to "get the full story." So I bought that month's issue of Swamp Thing, was completely fucking confused, and dropped both. (John Constantine also showed up at the end of that month's issue of Animal Man, cluing me in that I should also be reading Justice League Dark. Fuck you, DC.)

Uh, isn't Jeff Lemire writing all of those books? What is wrong with DC running a storyline through several books at once? That is standard practice in the industry.

I didn't want to read all those books! I just wanted to read about Animal Man!

When did the X-Men form? When was "Days of Future Past" supposed to be set?

Exactly. Whereas the film continuity very solidly says, "The X-Men formed in the late 60s, and were involved in the Cuban Missile Crisis," the comics can't do that. For some reason.

Prowl wrote:(This is also one of the many, many reasons comics could benefit from switching to an anthology format. If Animal Man, Swamp Thing, and Justice League Dark were all in the same big anthology you bought each month, this sort of thing would not be a problem.)

Definitely. I would read "Former Vertigo Characters Monthly." (There's a joke in there somewhere.) On the other hand, the format they publish it in apparently gives readers an excuse to go to a comic shop more frequently.

Onslaught Six wrote:

When did the X-Men form? When was "Days of Future Past" supposed to be set?

Exactly. Whereas the film continuity very solidly says, "The X-Men formed in the late 60s, and were involved in the Cuban Missile Crisis," the comics can't do that. For some reason.

Says who? Tony Stark was originally injured during the Vietnam War in the comics. Granted, they have changed that over the years in order to keep the character young for modern readers, but they still tie it to events like the Gulf War or conflicts in the middle east to ground the character with an event in reality. Or Captain America, who they have kept his origins with World War II. And we have seen other ties like Spider-Man had that issue about helping at September 11th.

If Tony Stark was injured in the Vietnam War, and now has access to the internet, then... how old is he?

COMIX

Gomess wrote:If Tony Stark was injured in the Vietnam War, and now has access to the internet, then... how old is he?

COMIX

That would put him in his 70's/80's.

COMIX!!

And pre-emptively, I've heard all that "sliding timescale" rubbish before. Time is an important factor in storytelling!

Gom
-Resident comics hater

Onslaught Six wrote:

Shockwave wrote:The recasting that irked me was replacing Terrence Howard with Don Cheadle. Don't get me wrong, Cheadle's a great actor but there was literally no reason for it.

That wasn't the fault of anyone making the movie, though. Howard wanted more money to do IM2--more money than even RDJ, the lead fucking actor was getting paid--so Disney told him to take a hike and got Cheadle instead. Maybe they could have worked something out, but Howard was having none of it. (He has since said that he kind of regrets it, because it got him a reputation as an asshole for a while and made it hard for him to find work.)

Have you seen Firefly? Cause if not, you should. It's fucking awesome (which is why I think it has such a huge fanbase) but I will concede that a lot of the reason that it's probably REMAINED awesome is because it was cancelled. It wasn't on long enough to contradict itself. Between the series and the movie, the story is complete and does have an actual ending. Even the comics haven't taken place after the movie so the story is actually self contained.

I haven't, because the fanbase has kind of built it up like it's this huge awesome thing, and if I watch it, I know it'll probably only be above average at best. (Also, like I said before, me and the hour-long TV drama format don't jive.)

I didn't know that about the Howard thing. I'm remarkably less pissed about it now. Also, your comment on the hour long format intrigues me. I would like to know more if you don't mind explaining it?

Dominic wrote:Uh, isn't Jeff Lemire writing all of those books? What is wrong with DC running a storyline through several books at once? That is standard practice in the industry.

Yes it is and it is a major problem with the industry. The problem here is that it's an obvious money grab attempt to sell more books when all it really does is drive readers away. I sure as shit don't want to have to buy three issues a month to get all parts of the same story, especially if the story isn't going to make sense without one of those parts. The other problem is that the big two don't seem to know how to do anything else.

This is one of the reasons why I liked to think that all of the various titles should really be considered to be more or less in their own contained continuity/universe. We'd get more cohesive story writing and "crossovers" could be reserved for event type books.

BWprowl wrote:(This is also one of the many, many reasons comics could benefit from switching to an anthology format. If Animal Man, Swamp Thing, and Justice League Dark were all in the same big anthology you bought each month, this sort of thing would not be a problem.)

Except they would manage to fuck that up too. They wouldn't put all parts of the same story in the same anthology. What you'd wind up with is a bastardization of a part of a Batman Story, backed up by some unrelated Plastic Man story with a third story being something about... Blue Beetle. And then, just so they could sell more books, the other parts of those stories would be sold in some other book featuring other unrelated stories... it would just be a bigger clusterfuck than it is now.

COMIX!!