|
They didn't even make him a Disney style furry cat-man. He's a man with a proportional cat head.
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2020 20:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 19:55 |
|
|
Frekkie Melody posted:They didn't even make him a Disney style furry cat-man. That's how the characters in Robin Hood were mostly, the Ur-Furry movie.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2020 20:43
|
|
|
Endless Mike posted:Yeah he's a cat 
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2020 20:44
|
|
|
Picturing one of those hairless cats with a man’s body and lol
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2020 20:53
|
|
|
She’s a paramedic that drives an ambulance that is actually Danny (the former street) which contains a portal to Dannyland in the back. Gerard Way’s Doom Patrol is a lot of fun, and I need to catch up on the latest volume. I also suggest checking out the Milk Wars crossover. It has the Young Animal characters (Doom Patrol, Mother Panic, Shade the Changing Girl, and Cave Carson) with DC characters with a twist.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2020 00:55
|
|
|
That's Fritz the Cat! Don't have sex with Fritz the Cat!
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2020 09:11
|
|
|
My friend would really like to start getting into Superman. How many titles does he need to grab to be doing that right now? Off the top I imagine Superman, Action Comics, and Justice League.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2020 00:14
|
|
|
SonicRulez posted:My friend would really like to start getting into Superman. How many titles does he need to grab to be doing that right now? Off the top I imagine Superman, Action Comics, and Justice League. I'd start them with trades.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2020 00:19
|
|
|
Is the IDW TMNT all collected in trades or is it still ongoing? I need to add some more stuff to my X-mas list. Also I heard that Eastman and Laird are working together on kind of another Miller inspired TMNT reboot that started this year. Is that any good?
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2020 20:48
|
|
|
It's still ongoing, but there are trades collecting much of it. There are a lot of side series so I recommend using this guide to keep track. It is, in my view, the most consistently good and entertaining version of the TMNT franchise. The Bebop and Rocksteady minis are particularly great.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2020 21:06
|
|
|
If you can afford them, those IDW Collections are a pretty good way of reading everything in order.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2020 13:57
|
|
|
I read King in Black 1 and it is good for what it is but I felt a little lost at times, like I walked in midway through the story. I typically only collect stuff from the 70s to 90s so this is quite a common feeling for me whenever I read modern stuff. Like, Venom has a son and I get that, but where can I get background on Knull and how the avengers found out about him?Are there any stories or issues I should have read first?
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2020 19:40
|
|
|
The knull story starts with Donny Cates' venom run which began in E: quick check on Google says issue 1 came out may 2018 site fucked around with this message at 19:51 on Dec 8, 2020 |
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2020 19:49
|
|
|
CopywrightMMXI posted:I read King in Black 1 and it is good for what it is but I felt a little lost at times, like I walked in midway through the story. I typically only collect stuff from the 70s to 90s so this is quite a common feeling for me whenever I read modern stuff. Like, Venom has a son and I get that, but where can I get background on Knull and how the avengers found out about him?Are there any stories or issues I should have read first? You'd want Cates' Venom run for most of it. Silver Surfer Black expands it a bit, and technically Aaron's Thor stuff (at least the first arc) but that's more of a retcon.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2020 19:52
|
|
|
Thanks for the quick replies.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2020 19:58
|
|
|
How did She-Hulk get so Hulky? Is there a storyline I can read?
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2020 04:02
|
|
|
Beerdeer posted:How did She-Hulk get so Hulky? Is there a storyline I can read? I think it's mental trauma from getting put in a coma during Civil War 2.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2020 04:06
|
|
|
Beerdeer posted:How did She-Hulk get so Hulky? Is there a storyline I can read? Jason Aaron's Avengers is all you need
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2020 04:23
|
|
|
Beerdeer posted:How did She-Hulk get so Hulky? Is there a storyline I can read? There is no fully coherent explanation for this that doesn't involve at least one retcon/ignored storyline. Like Skwirl said, She-Hulk originally went full on angry small-word Hulk after Civil War 2 because of the trauma of seeing Bruce Banner die. This storyline was introduced and resolved within the pages of Hulk (2016) by Mariko Tamaki and Nico Leon. Jason Aaron then decided to make She-Hulk even angrier and even more small-word-y for his current Avengers run, and it kind of came out of nowhere and made very little sense when considering the storyline that came before it. It seems that a lot of other Marvel writers really dislike this creative decision, since almost all appearances of Jennifer Walters outside of Avengers either ignore it or come up with a quick way to make her normal again. Long story short, read Hulk (2016) if you want (it's pretty good!), but if you start reading the current Avengers run by Jason Aaron from the beginning you'll find as good of an explanation for Hulky She-Hulk as you're going to get. JordanKai fucked around with this message at 04:30 on Dec 14, 2020 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2020 04:27
|
|
|
JordanKai posted:It seems that a lot of other Marvel writers really dislike this creative decision, since almost all appearances of Jennifer Walters outside of Avengers either ignore it or come up with a quick way to make her normal again. Wasn't maintaining at least a semblance of consistency the job of editorial?
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2020 04:45
|
|
|
Pastry of the Year posted:Wasn't maintaining at least a semblance of consistency the job of editorial? Oh you sweet summer child.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2020 04:46
|
|
|
the job of editorial is to make sure the book comes out, preferably on time. The last time Marvel editorial had anyone who actively tried to shepherd continuity issues was probably Mark Gruenwald; these days it's less "does this match up with past stories" and more "will this make Disney unhappy"
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2020 04:50
|
|
|
Thanks much guys. I’ll try the 2016 Hulk at least.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2020 04:58
|
|
|
I think there was an issue of Avengers that more or less implied that Jen could go to her older form if she wanted to but she actually prefers the bigger Hulk Smash form.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2020 07:39
|
|
|
#20 sort of implies that. I might be wrong but I believe that early in the run we also see some contradiction between her "JEN SMASH" speech bubbles and more sedate interior monologue. See also Immortal She-Hulk. Edit: Normally I'd go looking for citations for this but it's 3:00 AM and I strongly dislike Jason Aaron's Avengers. I guess the whole run is up on Comixology Unlimited right now though so I don't know, give me a minute and I'll see if I fall asleep before I find anything. Ok, here we go. From Avengers (2018) #21, right after the aforementioned issue about Jen's adoption of the "savage" Hulk as a kind of deliberate performance. 
How Wonderful! fucked around with this message at 09:14 on Dec 14, 2020 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2020 08:59
|
|
|
This might be a bit subjective and the answer is probably "it depends" or "both" but was Jim Shooter a bad EiC at Marvel? I am currently reading Stan Lee's biography and it is pretty much a history of Marvel (whether it was when Lee was there or not) and I just got to the Shooter years. By the sounds of it Marvel had a hard time keeping a EiC for longer than a year or two and it seemed like a freeform unweilding mess trying to keep books right and out on time and whatever else. It also seemed to be Marvel at it's most creative. Then Shooter comes, gives more power to the editors and tries to run a tight ship from the sounds of it. It also seems like a lot of the talent hated him (never really mentions if it is because of the tight ship thing or personality wise). I am trying to remember the stuff I read in the Marvel Comics: The Untold Story and it seems like it is saying the same thing. So was he a bad EiC, a bad person on a personal level, or eventually correct in the way he ran things?
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2020 18:11
|
|
|
Madkal posted:This might be a bit subjective and the answer is probably "it depends" or "both" but was Jim Shooter a bad EiC at Marvel? I am currently reading Stan Lee's biography and it is pretty much a history of Marvel (whether it was when Lee was there or not) and I just got to the Shooter years. By the sounds of it Marvel had a hard time keeping a EiC for longer than a year or two and it seemed like a freeform unweilding mess trying to keep books right and out on time and whatever else. It also seemed to be Marvel at it's most creative. Then Shooter comes, gives more power to the editors and tries to run a tight ship from the sounds of it. It also seems like a lot of the talent hated him (never really mentions if it is because of the tight ship thing or personality wise). I am trying to remember the stuff I read in the Marvel Comics: The Untold Story and it seems like it is saying the same thing. So was he a bad EiC, a bad person on a personal level, or eventually correct in the way he ran things? The revolving door of EiCs in the 1970s was due in part to the second wave of Marvel Era people coming in and all fully buying into the Merry Marvel Marching Society ol' Bullpen Gang and all of them on one level or another wanted to be One of the Boys being creative in opposition to the stuffed shirt suits. This created many good comics and also a lot of bad comics and was a bit of a business disasters because being One of the Boys meant not being a jerk about deadlines or things not being coherent or etc. etc. Jim Shooter (though he was younger than I think anyone else who took over the slot besides maybe Conway?) was less concerned about being One of the Boys and more concerned about running Marvel successfully. He stopped letting deadlines/shipping dates slide, stopped letting editors assign books to themselves to write, and laid down a bunch of creative/editorial rules that people bristled over, though at the same time it's not like a bunch of groundbreaking/popular comics weren't launched during his tenure. And while he definitely was valuing "commerce" more than anyone in the era between him and Stan Lee, I always got the impression he also values the art side of the equation. When he got replaced by Tom DeFalco, who was more amenable to all of the variant covers, gimmick #1s, crossovers, etc. that marketing/executives were clamoring for, a lot of creators/editors were excited, because DeFalco was One of the Boys. But he was also One of the Boys who was willing to go along with pretty much anything pushed down from the top. When DeFalco was eventually replaced by Bob Harras, Harras was less interested in sugar coating the corporate mandates with "One of the Boys" camraderie, and was content to just play boss. One thing people frequently point out as "Jim Shooter is bad" is a wildly homophobic Rampaging Hulk magazine story he wrote, which is unquestionably gross; he did some decidedly mixed/mostly bad LGBTQ representation in early Valiant, as well. While not defending either of those in the slightest, it is also a signpost of how much (most of) society has evolved in the past 30-45 years, and despite what any older Jim Shooter Hatin' creator may say, that doesn't seem to have been any sort of source of anger/outrage from them contemporaneously. It's not like Shooter was making jolly "f-word slur" jokes in fanzines of the era -- that would be John Byrne, one of his biggest critics. It's also worth noting that two people from that era of Marvel who have almost exclusively positive takeaways from working with Shooter are Larry Hama and Jim Owsley, basically the only two not-white dudes in the offices for much of Shooter's tenure. There's also the whole Jack Kirby issue, where Shooter absolutely was the public face of some creator rights issues where Marvel came off horribly in the 1980s. He always insists that he fought back against these corporate edicts, and there's circumstantial evidence he did, but this is another thing that some old heads will always hate him for, and that's also understandable. This was not short at all. Jim Shooter is a land of contrasts, graded on a curve of Marvel EiCs I think he did a good job for his era from a creative/business perspective, but was definitely not the most personable/'cool' person to hold the position.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2020 19:09
|
|
|
Thanks for the write up. The impression I got from the books I was reading was rather vague in why he rubbed people the wrong way and what he actually did , but when describing those things in any amount of small detail they did give he didn't seem that bad and it felt like it was a clash of egos.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2020 19:28
|
|
|
Shooters biggest sin is publishing avengers 200 and then pretending he had no idea how it got put out
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2020 19:44
|
|
|
Madkal posted:Thanks for the write up. The impression I got from the books I was reading was rather vague in why he rubbed people the wrong way and what he actually did , but when describing those things in any amount of small detail they did give he didn't seem that bad and it felt like it was a clash of egos. A lot of the post-Shooter consensus seems to have just blindly accepted the opinions of people like John Byrne, who were all "oh he was a monster, how dare he restrain my genius" after literally burning Shooter in effigy
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2020 20:25
|
|
|
I cant help but like Jim Shooter despite some contemptible stuff he said and did because, man, gently caress John Byrne.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2020 21:23
|
|
|
Rohan Kishibe posted:I cant help but like Jim Shooter despite some contemptible stuff he said and did because, man, gently caress John Byrne. He was also 100% right about Jean Grey needing to die, don't get me wrong, I love her in a lot of stuff that came after she came back, but in that moment she needed to die.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2020 21:56
|
|
|
DivineCoffeeBinge posted:A lot of the post-Shooter consensus seems to have just blindly accepted the opinions of people like John Byrne, who were all "oh he was a monster, how dare he restrain my genius" after literally burning Shooter in effigy Yeah, a lot of the ire directed at Shooter by creative was bruised egos. Not every story decision Shooter made as EIC was right, but it was his right to make them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 13:57
|
|
|
I personally hold a grudge against Shooter for Dazzler: The Movie.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 14:17
|
|
|
I’m holding a grudge against E&C for mentioning the Merry Marvel Marching Society, because a guy from my local comic store has a laminated one from when he was a kid somewhere in his house, and said I could have it if he ever finds it. I want it so bad, I’d replace my drivers license with it in my wallet.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 20:04
|
|
|
site posted:Shooters biggest sin is publishing avengers 200 and then pretending he had no idea how it got put out He does accept any and all blame one wishes to give for it, though: Jim Shooter posted:I found my copy of Avengers #200. I read it. I agree with the consensus, it’s heinous. But, I don’t remember much about how it got that way. It being part of a Bullpen slap fight would make sense.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2020 23:49
|
|
|
Dawgstar posted:He does accept any and all blame one wishes to give for it, though: In that quote he blames everyone else and says he doesn't remember having any part of it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2020 10:31
|
|
|
Pat Mustard posted:In that quote he blames everyone else and says he doesn't remember having any part of it. He also says he takes full responsibility and he screwed up. That several decades after the fact Shooter does not recall the precise origins of a single comic should not shock somebody. Dawgstar fucked around with this message at 15:18 on Dec 16, 2020 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2020 15:13
|
|
|
It's kind of a half-apology where he goes "I don't know how my name got on it, I don't remember doing it, it had to have been one of these guys" in regards to his credit as co-plotter but does eventually loop back to "but in the end I suppose I really should've seen it and stopped it, sorry" in his role as EiC.
TwoPair fucked around with this message at 15:25 on Dec 16, 2020 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2020 15:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 19:55 |
|
|
He flat out takes "full responsibility" and says "sorry" twice. That's all the apology I've ever needed from anyone.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2020 00:55
|
|
