Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

My DC reading list is shrinking again.

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

  • Originally posted by ChastMastr View Post
    On a lighter (?) note re incest, and perhaps this is a nice place to move back onto---please, anything but incest... an excerpt from Weird Al Yankovic's parody of "Complicated," "Constipated":
    I quite like Weird Al Yankovic. That said, however, it has to be noted that if you're not familiar with the song being parodied, it loses a lot.
    On the other hand, I've also always enjoyed Barnes & Barnes (actually Bill Mumy & Miguel Ferrer, for those who know them). Their little ditty, "I Married Mama", really puts the "ick" in sick:

    Oh
    I married mama, twas the proper thing to do
    I had to marry mama cause soon our baby's due
    We'll love our little baby, we'll name it after dad
    Yes I married mama, the best girl I ever had

    Oh
    I married mama, we ran away together
    I had to marry mama, regardless of the weather
    We swore we would be happy, forever and a day
    I had to marry mama, it just turned out that way

    Mama oh mama
    Come hold me in your arms
    Sing to me a lullaby alone
    Mama oh mama
    Please let me see your charms
    Our love is much greater than gold

    And I tell you
    I married mama in the church down by the river
    I had to marry mama, she's ready to deliver
    I knew that we were fated from the moment I first kissed her
    Oh I married mama, she's better than my sister

    Mama oh mama
    Come hold me in your arms
    Sing to me a lullaby alone
    Mama oh mama
    Please let me see your charms
    Our love is much greater than gold

    I married mama, twas the proper thing to do
    I had to marry mama cause soon our baby's due
    We'll love our little baby, we'll name it after dad
    Yes I married mama
    The best girl I ever had

    I married mama, the best girl I ever had
    Except for maybe Grandma

    Comment


    • I mainly know them from Fish Heads.

      Arguably Tom Lehrer does very well in the "sick humor songs" category. "I Hold Your Hand In Mine," etc.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by ChastMastr View Post
        Again, I really hope not, and I think that something that like that would be a terrible mistake in the long run.
        nooooooo

        please don't be right

        nooooooo


        http://www.newsarama.com/21974-could...ch-reboot.html

        Comment


        • Adventures of Superman #16

          Out this week, this issue, written by Joe Keatinge, functions as a very nice sort of 75th Anniversary tribute for Superman. Unfortunately, the story's enjoyment is somewhat marred by a hodge-podge of lesser-talented artists, this being kind of a standard budgetary constraint of DC's digital first titles.

          I'm somewhat surprised that no one at DC recognized the quality of the script here as deserving of better. This would have made a very nice one-shot Anniversary Special had the script been paired with a quality artist, or even several artists.

          In short, what we have here is a trip into metacomics terrritory, in the best sense of Grant Morrison's work. Joe Keatinge seems to have tapped into the same sort of vibrational frequencies from the multiverse that Morrison does when he's at the top of his game. But it's one that serves to illuminate what Superman IS at his best, and what he means or represents. Still a thumbs-up, despite reservations on the visual level.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by ChastMastr View Post
            nooooooo

            please don't be right

            nooooooo


            http://www.newsarama.com/21974-could...ch-reboot.html
            So now they've gone from "We'll never reboot" to "declined to comment" when asked point-blank about the possibility; might be good news for you, Chast. The fact that they're NOT now vehemently denying it may mean "Yeah, let them talk about us. Controversy is good for sales." Or, it could mean that other thing.

            Comment


            • Oh my. I must say I find myself surprised to be overflowing with unaccustomed positivity for DC Comics these last two weeks. First Multiversity #1, then Adventures of Superman #16, and now All Star Western featuring Jonah Hex #34. I doff my hat to the writing team of Jimmy Palmiotti and Justin Gray, joined in this farewell issue by artist Darwyn Cooke, as they draw "The Final Curtain" on the adventures of DC's legendary bounty hunter of the old west.

              In a story that is both a fine 'done-in-one' issue and that also serves as the ultimate culmination of all of Hex's previous adventures, Palmiotti and Gray bid adios to their long association with Hex, as he sails off into the sunset in a story that deftly references Michael Fleischer's original tale of the final fate of Jonah Hex without contradicting it. DC made a wise choice in allowing Darwyn Cooke to return one last time for the final artistic word in Hex's saga, with Hex looking here more like a young(er) Clint Eastwood than ever before. Rarely can I recall reading a more satisfying conclusion to a character's long-running adventures.

              I'd be a little surprised if this issue weren't nominated for several "Best Single Issue of a Comic Book Series" awards.

              As Justin Gray saddles up to ride out of town from All Star Western, it's with happy anticipation that I await his arrival at Dynamite to scout new trails for the continuing ride of of the Lone Ranger and Tonto.
              Last edited by pulphero; 08-27-2014, 08:15 AM.

              Comment


              • Oh my. I must say I find myself surprised to be overflowing with unaccustomed positivity for DC Comics these last two weeks. First Multiversity #1, then Adventures of Superman #16, and now All Star Western featuring Jonah Hex #34. I doff my hat to the writing team of Jimmy Palmiotti and Justin Gray, joined in this farewell issue by artist Darwyn Cooke, as they draw "The Final Curtain" on the adventures of DC's legendary bounty hunter of the old west.

                In a story that is both a fine 'done-in-one' issue and that also serves as a true culmination of Hex's previous adventures, Palmiotti and Gray bid adios to their long association with Hex with as he sails off into the sunset in a story that deftly references Michael Fleischer's original tale of the final fate of Jonah Hex (Jonah Hex Spectacular, 1978). DC made a wise choice in allowing Darwyn Cooke to return one last time for the final artistic word in Hex's saga, with Hex looking here more like a young(er) Clint Eastwood than ever before. Rarely can I recall reading a more satisfying conclusion to a character's long-running adventures.

                I'd be a little surprised if this issue weren't nominated for several "Best Single Issue of a Comic Book Series" awards.

                As Justin Gray saddles up to ride out of town from All Star Western, it's with happy anticipation that I await his arrival at Dynamite to scout new trails for the continuing ride of of the Lone Ranger and Tonto.
                Last edited by pulphero; 08-27-2014, 08:43 AM.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by pulphero View Post
                  So now they've gone from "We'll never reboot" to "declined to comment" when asked point-blank about the possibility; might be good news for you, Chast. The fact that they're NOT now vehemently denying it may mean "Yeah, let them talk about us. Controversy is good for sales." Or, it could mean that other thing.
                  From Tom Brevoort's Tumblr ( http://brevoortformspring.tumblr.com/ ):

                  You're planning a reboot for May of next year. I'm on to you guys.
                  Anonymous

                  I got about six of these this morning, all based, I presume, on that speculative Newsarama story.

                  Do you really think wed be so obvious about what we were doing that Newsarama could figure it out?
                  I live in hope!!

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by ChastMastr View Post
                    I live in hope!!
                    You gotta love that old "answer in the form of another question" dodge. "Do you really think...?" is just another way of saying "Answer your own question"... "but don't hold me accountable for whatever answer you might come up with". If the answer you come up with is the answer you were hoping to hear, well then. Total deniability. Just remember it's not your name on Tom Brevoort's paychecks.

                    Or maybe he really IS saying "We are geniuses here at Marvel; the people at Newsarama are complete idiots. You figure it out." Then again, sometimes the best form of misdirection is "hide in plain sight". If it's too obvious, then it obviously can't be true -- right?

                    You really were better off with "Marvel declined to comment", because that could easily be read as "Oh brother, not this again. We don't have the time for this; we've got comic books to get out."

                    You really aren't going to read "Why yes, we are going to reboot" any more than you're going to read "Why yes, Luthor, I actually AM Batman" (*sly reference to a recent issue of Justice League).

                    The number one rule of Reboot Club is that you don't talk about Reboot Club.
                    Last edited by pulphero; 08-28-2014, 12:20 AM.

                    Comment


                    • An awful lot of Marvel readers are deeply invested in their history, which is hardly surprising as Marvel (post 1961) was built on the concept of an ongoing shared universe. I really don't think they'd be stupid enough to alienate them with a reboot the way DC did.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by tony ingram View Post
                        An awful lot of Marvel readers are deeply invested in their history, which is hardly surprising as Marvel (post 1961) was built on the concept of an ongoing shared universe. I really don't think they'd be stupid enough to alienate them with a reboot the way DC did.
                        And neither did DC readers, who were (I can assure you) ALSO quite invested in the history of its characters. I grew up with one boot firmly rooted in both universes, but Marvel has managed to largely alienate me by a gradual take-your-time-about-it process, as surely as DC did in one fell swoop. My guess would be that Marvel would use the same rationale that DC did, i.e. "Well, if you want to read DC comics, nobody else is going to be publishing them." One could certainly make the argument that DC's rationale for the original CRISIS (which seems a very kindly sort of reboot indeed, by comparison to the New 52), i.e. "Multiple parallel timelines far too confusing to casual outsiders/potential readers", applies to Marvel in spades and makes DC's 1980s multiverse look like a child's grade-school primer.

                        And who says Marvel would go the radical reboot route anyway? I'd be thinking a lot less like New 52 Action Comics and Justice League, and a lot more like New 52 Batman and Green Lantern titles. A lot of cosmetic stuff, characters slightly de-aged, a general "don't count on it unless we confirm it" continuity cleanup, and some to-be-revealed retcons-as-we-go-along. Marvel would obviously benefit from an analysis of DC's New 52, in terms of 'what they did right vs. what they did wrong', but the main aim would remain the same: to create a massive across-the-board ground-level jumping-on point for new readers. What you seem to be arguing, Tony, is that Marvel doesn't need any such mass infusion of new readers, that the old 'steady trickle' process is working just fine.

                        You might well argue, what has DC really gained in the long run, by a temporary boost in sales of a few years, only to return to pre-New 52 levels? Well, they've gained a readership whose average median age is a lot younger than it was, pre-reboot. Those new cows now have decades of milking time left ahead of them.
                        Last edited by pulphero; 08-28-2014, 05:37 AM.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by pulphero View Post
                          And neither did DC readers, who were (I can assure you) ALSO quite invested in the history of its characters. I grew up with one boot firmly rooted in both universes, but Marvel has managed to largely alienate me by a gradual take-your-time-about-it process, as surely as DC did in one fell swoop. My guess would be that Marvel would use the same rationale that DC did, i.e. "Well, if you want to read DC comics, nobody else is going to be publishing them." One could certainly make the argument that DC's rationale for the original CRISIS (which seems a very kindly sort of reboot indeed, by comparison to the New 52), i.e. "Multiple parallel timelines far too confusing to casual outsiders/potential readers", applies to Marvel in spades and makes DC's 1980s multiverse look like a child's grade-school primer.
                          I grew up reading both, too, but Marvel in the 70s were far more invested in the idea of cohesive line wide continuity. And to be honest, I always thought Crisis had more to do with writers getting confused rather than readers: all the DC readers I knew were far from confused, new or not. I'd agree Crisis was a far less drastic event than the 2011 reboot, though. That's why I carried on reading DC after Crisis, but was totally alienated by the Nu52. I haven't bought a mainstream DC title since 2011, whereas before that I'd been reading their books for about 36 years and was, at the time, spending roughly 100 per month on them, with no intention of stopping. If Marvel did the same thing, they'd lose me too, after close to 40 years as a reader.
                          And who says Marvel would go the radical reboot route anyway? I'd be thinking a lot less like New 52 Action Comics and Justice League, and a lot more like New 52 Batman and Green Lantern titles. A lot of cosmetic stuff, characters slightly de-aged, a general "don't count on it unless we confirm it" continuity cleanup, and some to-be-revealed retcons-as-we-go-along. Marvel would obviously benefit from an analysis of DC's New 52, in terms of 'what they did right vs. what they did wrong', but the main aim would remain the same: to create a massive across-the-board ground-level jumping-on point for new readers. What you seem to be arguing, Tony, is that Marvel doesn't need any such mass infusion of new readers, that the old 'steady trickle' process is working just fine.

                          You might well argue, what has DC really gained in the long run, by a temporary boost in sales of a few years, only to return to pre-New 52 levels? Well, they've gained a readership whose average median age is a lot younger than it was, pre-reboot. Those new cows now have decades of milking time left ahead of them.
                          I don't see much evidence of this, in fact. What DC did cost them quite a few readers, and while a lot more initially jumped on board, many of those appear to have been either existing comics readers who simply hadn't been buying DC, or lapsed former DC readers. I don't think they actually got many new readers, as such, and certainly not a significant number of younger ones.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by tony ingram View Post
                            I don't see much evidence of this, in fact. What DC did cost them quite a few readers, and while a lot more initially jumped on board, many of those appear to have been either existing comics readers who simply hadn't been buying DC, or lapsed former DC readers. I don't think they actually got many new readers, as such, and certainly not a significant number of younger ones.
                            Perhaps they don't account for "the bulk" of DC's readership, but I've seen this younger DC demographic in the comic shop, so I can attest to it. By contrast, I've seen no comparable infusion of this demographic to Marvel, except by way of osmosis via DC. Even where there is but a temporary surge in comic readership (to the many who can't maintain the sort of devoutness to their religion that the cognoscenti do), DC/Warner benefits in some fashion by creating more potential customers for its collected editions, merchandise, toys, video games, movies, etc., and these are the trickle-down economics that we can't see in the comics industry, because these consumers are impacting the world outside of comic shops.
                            Last edited by pulphero; 08-28-2014, 06:24 AM.

                            Comment


                            • Believe me, Tony. I know where you're coming from on this. Comic books have "nerd appeal", that sort of underground-y/cult/subversive attraction of being immersed in a secret society, an insider's club with all its rites, rituals, history, etc. We want to keep the riff-raff out, the non-committed, the Johnny-come-latelies, the wet-behind-the-ears newbies who aren't devoted enough, knowledgeable enough, etc. The whole DC reboot thing is so counter-intuitive to our way of thinking... it's maddening, it's insane. It shouldn't have worked. For a good six months or more I just gritted my teeth as I refused to buy into DC's whole plan, I just figured, Good Lord, it's "Heroes Reborn" all over again, this time on a line-wide scale. I just figured, well, I'll tough it out for a year or so until the craziness settles down, until those idiots running DC come to their senses. Which, of course, to any sensible DC reader, was the only possible outcome. Why couldn't DC see that? What kind of corporate suicidal thinking was going on up there?

                              But even while this knife was twisting in the gut of every devoted DC reader who ever owned a comic shop, not a single one that I'm aware of hung a sign in his window saying "WE NO LONGER SELL CURRENT DC COMICS", or "DC NEW 52 COMICS AVAILABLE BY SUBSCRIPTION ONLY" or anything to that effect. Not one of them said "Well, screw this crap, MARVEL will get us through, we're not going to promote this DC debacle; we'll suffer through somehow, they'll come to their senses, and we'll all have a good laugh about it 5 or 10 years from now -- if we can only weather the storm until then". No, they bought. They bought because DC offered them volume discounts, and credit returns. And against all logic, they sold them, even when not making huge efforts to promote them. When they had piles left over, they simply stripped the covers for credit. People actually came in to ask for them. HOW? How was this even possible? It made no sense. Lapsed readers coming back into the comic shop, to read about their beloved old favorites, because they just heard that DC had gone and TOTALLY CHANGED THEM? What kind of Arkham Asylum lunacy was at work here? Are we living in Bizarro World? Even with the hardcore DC fans dropping their subscriptions in droves, new readers came in? Because if they didn't, then why didn't the new titles just DIE on the racks? Well, SOME of them did. But SOME sold better than ever. ???? To this day, you can still sell 30+ issue runs of a few New 52 DC titles online, quite briskly. Again --- HUH??

                              I admit I can't explain it either, yet here we are, three years later, and the "common sense wisdom" that told us all that this was stunt-marketing at its most extreme, that would revert back to business (and universe)-as-usual after all the hoopla and huzzahs had faded away, is nothing but a dying ember. Despite those that cut back their DC purchases to only a few New 52 DC titles, or only NON-New 52 DCs, or even those that refused to allow DC to take another of their hard-earned pennies. Yes, even those incensed enough to refuse to purchase even DC reprint collections or DC Direct merchandise based on the classic character images.

                              Yet somehow we think Marvel could NEVER, *would* never. Because... Marvel is our friend? And yet... Marvel IS the company that brought us "Heroes Reborn"... and Ultimate Marvel. AND... "Brand New Day". (Which caused... HOW many Spider-Fans to Quit Forever...?) Perhaps it's not so much a matter of "NEVER" as "maybe a few exploratory probes here and there..." Perhaps relative failure and success is evident by comparison to the New 52 in learning the lesson of "You're your own worst competition", and "Don't do things by halves". A Marvel reboot (or something like "It's NOT a reboot"... ) isn't so "unthinkable" when you consider that The Unthinkable (for many of us) is already a fait accompli.

                              Well, now you've gone and gotten me started. I'll have more to say on this, but I think I need some time.
                              Last edited by pulphero; 08-28-2014, 01:19 PM.

                              Comment


                              • I would think that Marvel would be smart enough to realize what most people already have: that DC's relaunch/renumbering stunt would have been just as successful without rebooting the history, and they'd have regained those lapsed readers and brought in those comparatively few new readers without losing any of their already existing and proven loyal fanbase. And that is probably what Marvel will do, and will keep doing.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X