TF Views

BWprowl wrote:

If you can build onto something and contribute to the work, then by all means do it. I'm sure parts of this will fit in with the original work very well.

I flat-out disagree with this. Tons of works are best on their own and left alone. Sure, maybe parts of this *will* fit in well, but will it be worth the other 90% that don’t fit in and just shit up the story?

I can think of several movies that fit this. Finding Nemo was awesome but I don't wanna see a sequel to it. Or the Jerk with Steve Martin. Also an awesome movie. But I don't wanna see movies detailing the "orgins" of the secondary characters in that film.

Hell, really, there shouldn't be sequels to anything, period. Eh, I might be overstating it, there may be one or two good prequel things that have happened ever. But I'm drawing a blank on what they might be. Unless, I dunno, does "Muppet Babies" count?

Dominic wrote: If this was "Watchmen by Kirkman, Furman, Johns, Champagne and Stan Lee", then I would be completely on board with you. A few of those names are enough to put me off a book. These are guys who have not demonstrated the ablity to write at the level something like this requires. In fact a few of them have a demonstrable lack of talent.

But, those guys are not on these books.

No, but JMS is, and c'mon, that dude's worse than ANYONE you just mentioned. He's the bum that did those awful Squadron Supreme comics you mentioned, remember?

I'm surprised that there's actually quality creators on some of these things, though. In a way, if they were gonna do this, I wish they'd just have thrown Liefeld at this thing. If you're gonna go, go big, you know?

Yo Prowl: instead of "Original Watchmen", I move we start calling it "Proper Watchmen".

EDIT: Yes, I've totally made up my mind about these things based on the fact that they exist. While I can see what Dom and O6 are getting at by hinting that every book in here might not be a heaping bowl of abortion soup, I'm pretty much in the "They oughtn't exist" crowd.

Sorry I'm not jumping into the Watchmen discussion, but I've never read it and have no feelings about the prequels one way or the other.

I didn't have any new issues out this week, so I got caught up on back issues of Superman and last month's Action Comics. Same character, but a completely different approach makes Grant Morrison's Action Comics really enjoyable, while George Perez' Superman is so very bland.

Superman 3, 4 and 5
I'll lump all of these in together since they're chapters in the same storyline. A few interesting things happen, and some of the new character details are more appropriate to the modern day than what we've seen in the past (Lois as tv news producer for example), but the story drags on with very little to keep my interest. And it comes down to the fact that Perez doesn't seem to know how to write Superman in a way to make me like or root for him. He's just a cipher, going through all of the standard Superman actions without any real attitude or passion. The whole storyline feels "by the numbers", though the revelation that the alien enemies of the past few issues were sent to attack Superman by Superman himself is somewhat interesting. There's a new creative team coming onboard for issue seven, so it might be worth sticking with the book to see what they do since I like the character. Or rather, I liked him as he's been presented since the Byrne reboot. It's hard to make a call on the new version so far, other than detesting the new super-suit.

Action 5
On the other hand, this retelling of Superman's origin story has a lot more to recommend it than I thought, including some pretty good reasons why Jor-El and Lara didn't escape into the phantom zone before Krypton was destroyed (an option they discuss) and why they don't all go on the rocket to Earth. The ship is apparently sentient, which explains why Superman was talking to it back in issue 2. Grant Morrison continues to not only come up with off-the-wall ideas, but to give his characters life and energy, something George Perez ought to be doing. And the backup story with Ma and Pa Kent (dead in the present day) is surprisingly touching, as they go through years of trying to have children, but are unable to, before the baby Kal-El crashes in front of them.

If you like Superman, Action is the good book right now. Superman's not bad, it's just not all that interesting.

As an aside, I was pointing out to my wife ads for Catwoman and Suicide Squad as an example of how DC is treating its female characters these days. She was as disgusted by it as I have been. She also thought it was a bit unfair that the legion of super heroes chick had some clearly visible boobs under her superhero spandex, while Superman's package wasn't actually visible. I should have pointed out the super-butt on the cover of issue 3. Bring back the red shorts, I don't want to see that!

I can think of several movies that fit this. Finding Nemo was awesome but I don't wanna see a sequel to it. Or the Jerk with Steve Martin. Also an awesome movie. But I don't wanna see movies detailing the "orgins" of the secondary characters in that film.

What if the movie was likely to be good? What if it had a cast and crew that ranged from competent to better than average, maybe even excellent?

Would you not want it made because it was a prequel focusing on a secondary character in the original?

No, but JMS is, and c'mon, that dude's worse than ANYONE you just mentioned.

Say what I will about the man's work in comics, but he has too much good work elsewhere for me to completely discount him. (Yes I defending the man responsible for the worst run of "Spider-Man" in at least 15 years, arguably over 20 years.) He might be able to pull this off. (What about his "Thor" run? I never read that.)

Grant Morrison continues to not only come up with off-the-wall ideas, but to give his characters life and energy, something George Perez ought to be doing.

And, the "most predictable event of the year" goes to "Action Comics" for "Grant Morrison does something praise-worthy despite the complaints of early and impatient nay-sayers". (Sorry, but this is a thing for me. For all my complaints about Morrison, he has more raw skill than any other writer that I can think of, in or out of comics.)

In defense of Perez, he is primarily an artist (and a damned good one). He likely never developed anything more than the grinding style you describe here. He can tell a story with a beginning, middle and end. But, it would not do to expect much beyond that form him. On the other hand, his more simplistic run is a good alternative for people who cannot "get" Morrison.


Dom
-yeah, went the snob road there.

BWprowl wrote:Hey, I woulda been all for the idea of more Beast Wars stories too, if they actually added to the universe that story was set in instead of just rehashing the same three years of TV adventures set on the same friggin’ planet.

Following new characters using a thread from the show to spin off from, yet follows its own separate plot, is not a rehash of the tv show.

Shockwave wrote:Or like that Romeo and Juliet with Leo DiCaprio and Claire Daines. Where they tried to make it modern? Yeah that was a trainwreck.

It's not that bad of an adaptation actually.

Like the one where Trelane is retconned into being a child Q and "Q" has to parent him through adolescence.

Seriously? I can see them calling him a Q given his powers and attitude towards humans (in which case he should have been called Q)... But not THE Q's kid.

Dominic wrote:These are guys who have not demonstrated the ablity to write at the level something like this requires. In fact a few of them have a demonstrable lack of talent.

Your personal opinions isn't fact Dom.

Yes I defending the man responsible for the worst run of "Spider-Man" in at least 15 years, arguably over 20 years.

His run may have been heavily criticized for a few particular stories (which were heavily altered by editorial influence), but it's not the worst run in the last 15-20 years. And actually, ever since he left the title ASM has seen a downward trend in sales (save for a few spikes, namely the Obama issue).

Reaction to post JMS "Spider-Man" is positive in terms of reviews. That counts for something.

JMS gave us the Spider-Avatar and Goblin Bastards. I ain't forgiving those ideas....

Your personal opinions isn't fact Dom.

Putting aside our disagreements about Johns and Furman, are you really going to defend Kirkman or Champagne or Stan Lee?


Dom
-

Sparky Prime wrote:

Like the one where Trelane is retconned into being a child Q and "Q" has to parent him through adolescence.

Seriously? I can see them calling him a Q given his powers and attitude towards humans (in which case he should have been called Q)... But not THE Q's kid.

That's what they did, he was A "Q", not literally the child of "Q". "Q" was for some reason just in charge of raising him during adolescence (apparently "Q" knows his parents or something)

Shockwave
-Which totally retcons the "Q" have never mated thing in Voyager.

Que?

Shockwave wrote:-Which totally retcons the "Q" have never mated thing in Voyager.

Which in itself was a bit of a retcon because TNG introduced Amanda Rodgers as a child of two Q. But then again, maybe she doesn't count because her parents had conceived her after they'd gone to Earth to live as humans. And the Continuum didn't seem to know she was a Q until her powers started showing up later in her life.

Gomess wrote:Que?

This time, it's the letter Q.

Qs (or is it Cues?) are omnipotent anyway, right? They could mate, reproduce asexually, or breathe life into a clay statue of a baby if they felt like it, I'd have thought. Of course, I didn't pay the least bit of attention to Star Trek between Next Generation and new movie, so if it's established elsewhere, I wouldn't know.

Oh yeah, I bought a stack of good comics today, I'll write about some of 'em tomorrow.