Say whatever you want to in the comments to this post -- random, off topic thoughts, ideas, suggestions, questions, recommendations, criticisms (which can be anonymous), surveys, personal news, self-promotion, requests to be added to the blog roll and so on. If a week goes by and I have failed to add you to the blog roll TELL ME TO DO IT AGAIN, and KEEP TELLING ME UNTIL IT GETS DONE. I can be lazy about updating the non-post parts of this site. Tim Callahan, Dark Horse Presents (with the free Joss Whedon Fabio Moon comic, and the free Gabriel Ba comic) have been added to the sidebar links this week, as has my favorite website, Go Fug Yourself.
ALSO. You can use this space to re-ask me questions you asked me before that I failed to answer because I was too busy (but now might not be). That is often the reason I fail to get back to people, and on a blog, after a few days, the comments thread dies and I just kind of forget about it. Let's use this space to fix that, because it does need to be fixed; I look like a jackass sometimes, leaving people hanging. I will TRY to respond to any questions here.
AND you can use this space to comment on posts that are old enough that no one is reading the comments threads anymore. For example, if you thought of a great quote for the great quote commonplace book, but now no one is reading that, you could put it here.
Check out the superhero discussion (part of a comics issue) at Onion AV Club.
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed the Stardust movie far more than I expected.
ReplyDeleteIt's full of strange and wonderful bits. There's probably a lot to criticize about it (the Nothing But Trouble old-age make-up, the whimsical notion of narrative cohesion), but there's way more stuff I just loved. It was a good time.
Here goes:
ReplyDeleteI don't think Joss Whedon has the most persuasive view of evil in all of popular culture.
That honor goes to Stephen Sondheim and Sweeney Todd.
Timothy, I agree 100%. I went in expecting to like it, but came out loving it. I have not read the source material so I do not know how closely it follows, but I had a very good time watching it.
ReplyDeleteOk,has anyone read Spider-man: Reign? I finally found a copy that someone had taken out of the plastic and flipped through it... at first I was like 'Ok, just what I'd thought... this guy is plagiriszing 'Dark Knight'... but then... when I read a bit...it seemed like while he used DK's trappings, he did not try to turn Peter into Batman but, rather, simply placed him in a similar situation and stayed true to the character... however, other than that it does just seem he's aping Miller both visually and in his prose style. It could make for an intersting read... if you don't think it will, please stop me from wasting 20 bucks.
ReplyDeleteSpider-Man: Reign is worth reading, but I don't think it's worth $20. I love Kaare Andrews art, even when he's doing Frank Miller.
ReplyDeleteYou know, Amazon has the hardcover for $13.59. You should buy it at that price. It's interesting enough to get, yeah.
I thought Spiderman : Reign was pretty bad, if you think quoting Yeats is bad, wait til' you read The Spiderman Returns pretentiously quoting "Itsy Bitsy Spider".
ReplyDeleteOn Batman 667: As an Indian, (Native American for the sake of clarity), as I read this Batman issue, and was trying to figure out how to not be offended. I'm talking of the drunken indian and the general mannerisms. The only thing that was left was missing was the man blabbing about how he's rich off casino and firework money. Of course it's an offensive stereotype, but one would think that there is a narrative purpose for that. My guess at the moment is that it has something to do with the 60s shows and era, how parts of the past hold up even worse over the years, but it still left me asking where blackface Batman was.
ReplyDeleteI've read a few internet reviews that seem to be calling more attention to offense taken to the French and Roman stereotypes located within. I don't want to say my "offense" is more important. I've just found Musketeers to always be awesome, and the Roman is an obvious comment on Caeser, and had an effective end.
I believe Grant Morrison to be a smart writer, and he's written effective Indian (Native American) characters in the past, the Animal Man run is what I think of. It's just with the Super Apache of 52 already leaving a bad taste in my mouth, it was a bit of a surprise to read this.
I assume that what we're reading is a journey through the rougher bits of the Silver Age, warts and all.
I believe that with the beginning, seeing the new and improved Knight and Squire being the only ones to meet Batman, and the final stand of the Roman, I assume that we're looking at something of a redemption for each "Batman."
It's not that I'm that up in arms or anything, but it can be a bit tiresome.
Elijah, that's an interesting look at that issue, and one that I never gave a second thought to until you pointed out that the Indian character was a drunk. It's one of those stereotypes that I probably don't even notice unless it's pointed out. Interestingly, the sidekick character, who is the son of the stereotypical guy, seems to be angry with the way his dad is acting, and that might be a comment on a younger generation trying to distance themselves from those sorts of stereotypes. Also, Grant Morrison, being Scottish, might not even be aware of the stereotypes in American culture, at least not to the extent that U.S. citizens are. Or maybe he's just using a stereotype. He's a pretty damn good writer though, so if he is, it might have a purpose. We'll have to see what happens in the next couple of issues.
ReplyDelete