Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Any of you twats see me in Baltimore, then?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Did he mention anything about doing anything else with Dynamite? I'm guessing no, since he doesn't seem interested in doing anything outside of war books and Dynamite took pains in their solicitation of the next Battlefields series to point out that it was the last.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Simon Bowland View Post
      Folks, that's not Garth Ennis posting on here. In fact, I don't know why the mods haven't banned the account yet.
      The members seem to like him and it's public knowledge that it isn't Ennis, so I keep him around for entertainment. Hehe.
      Dynamite Entertainment
      Forum Administrator


      Check out Dynamite on Twitter here!

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by statsman View Post
        I am an ordained elder in the Presbyterian church.
        Really? Wow. I'm a LDS High Priest. Yes, seriously. We are without a doubt one of the oddest, yet coolest groups of people on the Internet. Now if we only had a Hassidic Jew, we could all walk into a bar together and see what happens.

        Comment


        • #34
          I wonder what Ennis would make of his diverse readership. You're a fairly relaxed bunch... or are you all on a mission to subvert atheist artists? Will I find you all on the Richard Dawkins boards? I mentioned earlier that I'm not a big fan of organised religion but I do find myself going to quite a few Baptist services as my wife is a very active church member. It's pretty boring I studied comparative religions at university and it pretty much put me off the lot of them. Here's my problem, in a nutshell the world is full of people running around claiming (to various extents) to have a monopoly on Absolute Truth. The ones who tacitly admit they may not know everything are pretty much harmless and do a lot of good for their members and in their communities but the ones that genuinely, unflinchlingly believe that they've got a 100 per cent monopoly on the truth can take their spirtual belief into some very dark places. They are non-negotiable, and if you question them you are the Enemy and your life is worthless. That's a pretty dangerous mindset, it strikes me; and it's why I tend to kick out against any absolutist set of beliefs.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Simon Rogerson View Post
            but the ones that genuinely, unflinchlingly believe that they've got a 100 per cent monopoly on the truth can take their spirtual belief into some very dark places. They are non-negotiable, and if you question them you are the Enemy and your life is worthless. That's a pretty dangerous mindset, it strikes me; and it's why I tend to kick out against any absolutist set of beliefs.
            I agree. I like to say that nobody can screw you over like somebody who is convinced he is on the side of the angels. A psychopath can only kill a few people. It takes a crusader (and I definitely include humanists in this- read the comment about Lenin "you can't make an omelet without breaking some eggs.") to build a death camp. When a movement kills millions, it's always done because somebody believes it's for the "greater good".

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by statsman View Post
              I like to say that nobody can screw you over like somebody who is convinced he is on the side of the angels. A psychopath can only kill a few people. It takes a crusader (and I definitely include humanists in this- read the comment about Lenin "you can't make an omelet without breaking some eggs.") to build a death camp. When a movement kills millions, it's always done because somebody believes it's for the "greater good".
              While I wouldn't include Lenin among the humanists (Communism as a doctrine has lots in common with religious fundamentalism, and the results are very similar), I absolutely agree with you.

              Comment


              • #37
                It's nice to have such an edgy, freethinking fan base. Not everyone has the courage to speak out against Islamic terrorists, Communist death camps, and fascism.


                Good article on why it's OK to shout fire in a crowded theatre

                Comment


                • #38
                  Not to bring comics back into our comic discussion, but has anyone read this?

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Garth View Post
                    It's nice to have such an edgy, freethinking fan base. Not everyone has the courage to speak out against Islamic terrorists, Communist death camps, and fascism.


                    Good article on why it's OK to shout fire in a crowded theatre


                    Behead those who speak against freedom of speech!

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Kamakazi View Post
                      Not to bring comics back into our comic discussion, but has anyone read this?


                      Noticed it in my store, but if it looks like 300, sounds like 300, and has the same identical format as 300, maybe Miller is getting old.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Boris View Post
                        Noticed it in my store, but if it looks like 300, sounds like 300, and has the same identical format as 300, maybe Miller is getting old.
                        I understand it's a Batman story that never happened because it was feared that Miller's anti-Arab/terrorist diatribe would be seen as hate-fostering. So Miller went it alone and created a sort of Batman analogue as the protagonist. In essence, the book is all about mashing up terrorists - Miller says that the wartime funny books would pit American heroes against Nazi caricatures (this was before the world discovered that the Nazi evil ran beyond caricature), so why couldn't he pen a rousing defence of American freedom at the cost of these sterotypical Arab terrorists.

                        From the little I've seen, critical reaction has teetered between boredom and revulsion, with a small measure of admiration for the action amnd the art. Personally, I don't think it's Miller's greatest hour. I didn't buy the characters and the story is dime-store fluff tarted up as high art. And yet it's not a million miles away from 300 in content and tone, and I quite liked 300 (I'm a little worried the Nazis would have liked it as well). Like a lot of Miller creations, it has some good ideas and the artwork is startling in places, but it just pummels the reader until you don't care any more. I could have lived quite happily without reading it.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by Garth View Post
                          It's nice to have such an edgy, freethinking fan base. Not everyone has the courage to speak out against Islamic terrorists, Communist death camps, and fascism.
                          Har-de-har. Talking about soft targets, Garth's two biggest long-runners have been devoted to satirising things that you don't believe exist (God) and things which definitely don't exist (meta-human type superheroes). Ooooh, you're so brave!
                          Last edited by Simon Rogerson; 09-25-2012, 01:42 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Simon Rogerson View Post
                            Har-de-har. Talking about soft targets, Garth's two biggest long-runners have been devoted to satirising things that you don't believe exist (God) and things which definitely don't exist (meta-human type superheroes). Ooooh, you're so brave!
                            Not to mention, anyone who penned Highland Laddie would not be in a position to berate his fanbase - Eh readers?!!

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              What I liked about "300":

                              It told the story as if the Spartan version were fact, oracles, omens, gods, excessive nationalism and all. that was fun, and it's good for curious readers to be reminded that history has not always been so meticulously sources and claims so thoroughly vetted. History was a lot more fun in the old days, when a legit historian could throw in a sea monster or two.

                              What I dislike about "300":

                              It shied away from the true (well, true per the Athenians) Spartan culture in all its wonderful weirdness. The Spartans were not actually the society of manly men as we understand manliness in this 21st century. They had very uncomfortable relationships between men and young boys. They had women living in separate compounds, because a man's closest romantic relationship was with another male.

                              I mean, you want to tell the story? Tell the story, then! Don't revise it to make yourself more comfortable. Tell it as it was, and find a way to understand why these people were the way they were.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Im not gonna lie the art in Holy Terror was just piss poor half the time I couldnt even tell what was going on and everyone had feet twice as big as their heads.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X