Comics are Awesome III

A general discussion forum, plus hauls and silly games.
User avatar
Shockwave
Supreme-Class
Posts: 6205
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 4:10 pm
Location: Sacramento, CA

Re: Comics are Awesome III

Post by Shockwave »

I think Dom's implication with digital content was internet piracy (ie, he doesn't know anyone that PAYS for digital content, not that he doesn't know anyone who HAS digital content).
User avatar
Dominic
Supreme-Class
Posts: 9331
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:55 pm
Location: Boston
Contact:

Re: Comics are Awesome III

Post by Dominic »

Shockwave nailed it. Like I said, I know plenty of people who read digital comics. But, JT is the only one I know of who *buys* digital comics.

(A friend of mine recently saw how much comics cost and said "I am so glad that I am stealing comics now.")
If consumers don't pay for content, there won't be a reason to produce quality content in the future.
True. But, if I pay for content, I want it in the format that I like it to be in. (I have tried digital comics on computer screens. I do not like them. And, I refuse to buy an e-reader.)

Paper is not a perfect medium. But, it is still better than digital. Once it is produced and printed on, it can be maintained and used with little external infrastructure, unlike computers which rely on infrastructure that users cannot control. (Even a machine that is not on the internet needs external power.)

That seems an awful lot like semantics.
What do you mean by "Extremis" stories? Ultimately, "Iron Man: Believe" is Gillen writing intelligently about technology and people. Not sure how Extremis being a McGuffin early in the run impacts that.

There should be value in a single issue, that's how it used to be, that's what built this medium - despite all your derision and claims to the contrary.
How much worth saying/reading can be fit in 22 pages, unless you are willing to settle for 6+ (likely crammed) panels per page?

The better writers are going to want to work with multiple issue arcs because there is more money in it, if only because major publishers are going to reward that behavior. The single issue stuff is going to be hit or miss at best. (I miss "Legends of the Dark Knight". But, most of that run was mediocre.)

Does it really answer the question? I thought they each got a crack at their own stories, there's a Betty series and a Veronica series. I have no problem with the "what if" factor, just the "let's keep telling this story for years" part, it's a bit cheap considering how little continuity exists in canon Riverdale as it is.
Archie's business model now seems to be to keep the main book stagnant, but to push creativity with their secondary and tertiary books.

And, yes, "Life with Archie" answered the question. But, rather than stopping there, the book went on to play out other scenarios in both timelines. (And, yes, it was canonically established that the two scenarios were two distinct timelines.) Archie realized that there there were things that could be done in "Life with Archie" that could not be done elsewhere. Have the gang grow apart? Have a character grow up and change? Have two former friends (Keller and Lodge) become enemies? Done. Done. Done.

And, now, fans want to see how things play out after Archie gets aced.

What is wrong with that? I will say it right now, Archie did a better job with it that Marvel did with their M2 books (which were functionally retrograde because of who was writing them).

teethed on Archie, I've known the series all my life, it's a good book, it doesn't need an extended continuity to tell engaging stories,
What engaging stories? What makes it good?

Who actually sticks with Archie beyond rote habit? Kids read Archie, and then they generally move on (or out of the hobby entirely) because the book never changes from an anemic status quo.


(On a semi-related note: I am really annoyed about "Earth 2" possibly sinking in to the toilet. I really do not know if I can handle a book by Levitz.)
User avatar
BWprowl
Supreme-Class
Posts: 4145
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 2:15 pm
Location: Shelfwarming, because of Shellforming
Contact:

Re: Comics are Awesome III

Post by BWprowl »

Dom wrote:(On a semi-related note: I am really annoyed about "Earth 2" possibly sinking in to the toilet. I really do not know if I can handle a book by Levitz.)
Surely the writer who wrote the stuff you liked in 'Earth 2' is writing or has written other stuff? Why not read that instead? Do you want good comics, or just comics with planet Earth-2 in them?
Spoiler
Sorry, couldn't resist.
Image
User avatar
Dominic
Supreme-Class
Posts: 9331
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:55 pm
Location: Boston
Contact:

Re: Comics are Awesome III

Post by Dominic »

At some point or another, I do plan to pick up the first year's worth of "Injustice". But, that is beside the point.

More fundamentally, "Earth 2" was the only book on my pull file (for most of my adult life no less) that I was not reading for the writer. I was reading it for the high concept. If I was reading it for the writer, I would have dropped it when Robinson bailed and would likely now be reading "Invaders".

I was reading it for the concept. It was supposed to be a capes and tights book that picked up after the big stupid event comic that we have all read a million times.

I can get good comics. If an idea based comic goes bad, I can buy something else. (As much as I liked Costa's TF run, when it ended, I was ready to go read something else. If Gillen's "Iron Man" run ends, I can go read something else.)

But, "Earth 2" was unique. The whole concept was based on something I have wanted to see for years. I did not have high standards for "Earth 2". The writing and art only needed to be middling. But, I did not sign on for this book to be given 6 months of lazy writing, especially when the same damned writer is arguably doing the same cliche (better) in another book. It just needed to be....passable. That is all. I held "Earth 2" to a lower standard than any other book on my pull-file.....ever. And, it is still failed to meet even that low bar. How many books like "Earth 2" are there? (Not many.)

So, yeah, I am happy to get good comics. But, I am annoyed that "Earth 2" cannot be one of them, despite the low bar I set for it. DC needs a Batman and/or Superman in the book. So, tey went for the worst possible Batman. They are bringing in a writer who is decades out of step with the industry (because that is what a book like "Earth 2" needs). They are doing this w/o an exceptional penciller who was able to make even some of the most tedious scenes visually interesting.
User avatar
JediTricks
Site Admin
Posts: 3849
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:17 pm
Location: LA, CA, USA

Re: Comics are Awesome III

Post by JediTricks »

Shockwave wrote:I think Dom's implication with digital content was internet piracy (ie, he doesn't know anyone that PAYS for digital content, not that he doesn't know anyone who HAS digital content).
Of course that's what he was saying, that's why I countered the "pro-piracy" argument in my post without even directly calling it out.
Dom wrote:True. But, if I pay for content, I want it in the format that I like it to be in. (I have tried digital comics on computer screens. I do not like them. And, I refuse to buy an e-reader.)
Well, it's too bad they don't make floppies anymore then. :roll:
Paper is not a perfect medium. But, it is still better than digital. Once it is produced and printed on, it can be maintained and used with little external infrastructure, unlike computers which rely on infrastructure that users cannot control. (Even a machine that is not on the internet needs external power.)
It can be lost, ruined, it ages to death in a relatively short time, and it takes up a mountain of space. Also, properly-purchased digital content is stored on the user's device.
How much worth saying/reading can be fit in 22 pages, unless you are willing to settle for 6+ (likely crammed) panels per page?
A lot. A lifetime, if done right. I hate to trot out this chestnut yet again, but "For Sale, baby shoes, never worn." You are woefully limited to your view of the format. SPLASH PAGE, CU: shoelace eyelet, low angle; BG: grandfather clock in darkened room. PAGE 2, PANEL 1: TEXT- "eleven months earlier"...
What is wrong with that? I will say it right now, Archie did a better job with it that Marvel did with their M2 books (which were functionally retrograde because of who was writing them).
You said it yourself, they refuse to move forward in the main continuity, then dangle moving continuity in tertiary books to get the buying audience hooked, only to erase the universe at some point.
What engaging stories? What makes it good?
There are some, I couldn't give you names, I have read literally hundreds of stories - the digests hold a lot and we had dozens at all times. What makes a good story in Archie? It's amusing, it's engaging, it has a brief but clear arc, it expresses an idea within the framework that resonates. It doesn't take much, just maybe a tale of kindness or self-defense or challenge, it's not complicated but it still engages. Hell, even the Jughead Dipsy Doodles can be engaging as far as psychedelia goes, and they are often mute.
Image
See, that one's a camcorder, that one's a camera, that one's a phone, and they're doing "Speak no evil, See no evil, Hear no evil", get it?
User avatar
Shockwave
Supreme-Class
Posts: 6205
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 4:10 pm
Location: Sacramento, CA

Re: Comics are Awesome III

Post by Shockwave »

JediTricks wrote:
Shockwave wrote:I think Dom's implication with digital content was internet piracy (ie, he doesn't know anyone that PAYS for digital content, not that he doesn't know anyone who HAS digital content).
Of course that's what he was saying, that's why I countered the "pro-piracy" argument in my post without even directly calling it out.
Oh. Ok. I'll shut up then.

I can see from both sides here, I like floppies mostly because I'm too impatient to wait for the trades and also, when I read, I like to have a physical page in front of me. I spend 8 hrs a day in front of a computer screen at work, I usually don't want to read stuff on one when I come home. HOWEVER... having comics in digital format does allow one to clear out space and also allows said information to be backed up to other sources just in case something should happen. Case in point: Last time my house got broken into, my laptop and external hard drive were stolen. I recovered 99.9% of the lost data because I had everything backed up to other sources.
User avatar
Dominic
Supreme-Class
Posts: 9331
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:55 pm
Location: Boston
Contact:

Re: Comics are Awesome III

Post by Dominic »

It can be lost, ruined, it ages to death in a relatively short time, and it takes up a mountain of space. Also, properly-purchased digital content is stored on the user's device.
Oh, digital storage cannot be beat. But, there is a cost in accessibility. I need to get a new cord for my laptop. (The converter "block" is over-heating more than I would like. It is also making a buzzing noise.) I cannot read my UK comic scans in the comfort of home right now. But, I can read my (admittedly fragile) paper copies of anything that I happen to have on hand.

I can see from both sides here, I like floppies mostly because I'm too impatient to wait for the trades and also, when I read, I like to have a physical page in front of me. I spend 8 hrs a day in front of a computer screen at work, I usually don't want to read stuff on one when I come home. HOWEVER... having comics in digital format does allow one to clear out space and also allows said information to be backed up to other sources just in case something should happen. Case in point: Last time my house got broken into, my laptop and external hard drive were stolen. I recovered 99.9% of the lost data because I had everything backed up to other sources.
I am not saying that digital is a terrible way to archive stuff. I use it. Besides space management and ease of storage, it can also be more secure (if you can be troubled to use passwords on certain files).

But, unless you have your own generator (and a store of spare components), digital has the drawback of relying on infrastructure that few people understand and even fewer can practically account for. (I understand how complex even my pre-paid phone is. But, I cannot do much about it should something go wrong.)

You said it yourself, they refuse to move forward in the main continuity, then dangle moving continuity in tertiary books to get the buying audience hooked, only to erase the universe at some point.
"Life with Archie" ran for three years. And, now it is ending (as more books should when they run out of things to say). How is that "dangling" anything? If nothing else, Archie is doing something that the big two should do. They have a fixed (and anemic) mainline of books while they promote better content in side books. Marvel's "What if..." and DC's (old) "Elseworlds" books were a baby step in this direction.

But, part of me wonders if Marvel might not be better off running "Marvel Adventures" type books as their mainline, and then having better executed (not written by DeFalco or otherwise in anachronistic styles) "M2" style books where stuff could change. (I would love to see Gillen's "Iron Man" run taken further than 616 Marvel would let it go. Similarly, I am sure Prowl might like to have seen "Superior Spider-Man" go longer and/or end with something other than a comprehensive reset.) Marvel has done more experimenting with this than DC. But, there is no reason that Archie should be doing better than either/both of the big two.
User avatar
BWprowl
Supreme-Class
Posts: 4145
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 2:15 pm
Location: Shelfwarming, because of Shellforming
Contact:

Re: Comics are Awesome III

Post by BWprowl »

Similarly, I am sure Prowl might like to have seen "Superior Spider-Man" go longer and/or end with something other than a comprehensive reset.
Not really? I mean, first of all, as we've been over, the comic didn't end with a reset. One of them 'soft reboots' we've argued over the definition of in the past, sure, but it was hardly like Peter Parker regressed to age sixteen and had to move back in with Aunt May and go back to High School with a miraculously-alive Gwen Stacy and a Flash Thompson who somehow grew his legs back. And that aside, the comic was about Otto learning what Peter-as-Spider-Man was about, and the ending delivered on that and wrapped *that* story, the story of the Superior Spider-Man, up in a satisfying way. And unlike you, I don't need 'changes' or 'results' or what-have-you to an ongoing fictional setting to feel like to ending to a story arc was worth anything; I just want the story *itself* to deliver on its ideas. Which it did.

Sure, it wasn't perfect all the way through; in particular, the Superior Venom arc was clearly used to accelerate whatever plans Slott had for Otto's world and ways to come crashing down around him, and definitely felt like something of a rush job, but I can't imagine the comic would have run TOO much longer even without it. Apparently Slott and his guys had (jokingly?) claimed they wanted 'Superior' to run for its own 700 issues, but whatever realistic time-frame they had got chopped down when Marvel editorial inevitably ordered Peter back in time to tie into Amazing Spider-Man 2 (which is complete bullshit that comics, from both of the Big 2, feel the need to do that. You want comics on the shelves that tie into the movies? Then put out some fucking movie-tie-in comics. IDW doesn't have their main-continuity Transformers get visual makeovers and adopt a Bay-style status quo every time a new film comes out, they just put out OTHER comics that tie into those films. Hot SHIT this should be easy.), but I think they still said their piece effectively, and 31 issues out of an idea as out-there as Superior Spider-Man is still decently impressive. Better than a comic I like just getting run into the ground until it sucks. And hey, Slott's STILL writing Spider-Man after this, so!
Image
User avatar
andersonh1
Moderator
Posts: 6323
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 3:22 pm
Location: South Carolina

Re: Comics are Awesome III

Post by andersonh1 »

Just to chip in on Superior Spider Man, I really enjoyed the series. I don't normally read much Marvel or Spider Man, but the concept and characters were enough to keep me reading. But the story was clearly one with direction and some kind of ending in mind, and I was about ready to get to that ending and see what the payoff for Ock was. I hope that he's not reset back to his pre-Spider-Ock days, but somehow retains the growth he got as a character from this storyline.

Otherwise, the whole "villain trying to be a hero" has been very entertaining. I love the pompous attitude and mad-scientist methods employed by Ock. It's been a lot of fun.
User avatar
Dominic
Supreme-Class
Posts: 9331
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:55 pm
Location: Boston
Contact:

Re: Comics are Awesome III

Post by Dominic »

And unlike you, I don't need 'changes' or 'results' or what-have-you to an ongoing fictional setting to feel like to ending to a story arc was worth anything; I just want the story *itself* to deliver on its ideas. Which it did.
I generally do not expect comics to work beyond the compilation level, maybe the tenure of a writer at most. (Long tenures are going to have problems foisted on them by editorial decrees.)

But, I am also annoyed when a run ends with transparent moves to set things back the way they were before the run began. "Oh, look, Peter is back." "Hey, Otto's superior infrastructure has been comprehensively destroyed." "Whoops, Peter is in hot water with ______________." Ending a run is fine. But, the step backwards at the end is a near constant problem for comics.

The fact that Marvel and DC market their books as being elements of a massive ongoing story accents this problem. When DC does an honest reset, I am fine with it. But, when a story functionally undoes what came before it (while editorial totally insists that the old story is still relevant), the mixed signals are bothersome.

Better than a comic I like just getting run into the ground until it sucks. And hey, Slott's STILL writing Spider-Man after this, so!
True enough on both counts.

I hope that he's not reset back to his pre-Spider-Ock days, but somehow retains the growth he got as a character from this storyline.
The problem is that we know how this is going to play out. There was plenty of room in "Superior Spider-Man" to assume that Otto made a back-up copy of his mine/soul/whatever. Peter came back from less, using Otto's memories of Peter's memories. The back-up will be from *before* the changes were made, effectively bringing the old Otto back.



Oh, reviews:

What if..? Age of Ultron #1-3:
The only real tie these have to "Age of Ultron" is that the "split-moment" is a result of time breaking in "Age of Ultron" #10. There is little thematic cohesion beyond this. The single issues range in theme, tone and quality. In practical terms, these read more like the vaguely premised "What if...?" comics of the late 90s and early part of the last decade than the specifically branded "What if...?" comics of more recent years.

Issue 2 has the best cover, but weakest story. Issue 3 plays most directly on the concept of time breaking and "rules" changing. Issue 1 is the best over-all.
Post Reply