“IMWAN for all seasons.”



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 358 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 17  ( Previous  |  Next )
Author Message
 Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable
PostPosted: Sat May 01, 2010 11:12 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 07 Sep 2004
Posts: 8455
Location: Tampa, FL
Come on, are you going to tell me nowadays with it mentioned int he news as much as it is that a good editor can't see that line as being taken the wrong way? Please. I'm not saying Robinson meant it that way but please, ESPECIALLY after all the flack a few months ago with Cap.

_________________
DISCLAIMER: Everything I say from here on in is my opinion, semantics be damned.
Allen Berrebbi
Owner KRB Media


Big Bang Comics
The Knight Watchman
KRB Media

Image


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable
PostPosted: Sat May 01, 2010 11:17 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 26 Dec 2006
Posts: 26688
Location: Center of the Universe.
I'm more offended by Lois Lane being married to Superman and knowing his secret identity than any tea party mention.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable
PostPosted: Sat May 01, 2010 11:18 pm 
User avatar
What do you call a camel with three humps?

Joined: 21 Oct 2004
Posts: 58174
Location: Indiana
Hugh wrote:
Allen Berrebbi wrote:
Oh and I'm re-reading the Justice Society Kingdom Come books and have enjoyed those as well.

But don't worry guys.........here it comes........

I liked it except for the post Kingdom Come wrap up and the old global warming environmental stuff squeezed in. They just had to throw politics in there didn't they :)

WTF!?!?!?!
Global Warming?
In the last 3 pages that Ross painted?
You have to point that out to me because I didn't see it.


Read between the lines, bitch!


Top
  Profile  
 

IMWAN Admin
 Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable
PostPosted: Sat May 01, 2010 11:28 pm 
User avatar
Helpful Librarian

Joined: Day WAN
Posts: 196950
Location: IMWAN Towers
Bannings: If you're not nice
When's the next reboot?

_________________
Image


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable
PostPosted: Sat May 01, 2010 11:38 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 07 Sep 2004
Posts: 8455
Location: Tampa, FL
Night Owl wrote:
I'm more offended by Lois Lane being married to Superman and knowing his secret identity than any tea party mention.


Me too.

_________________
DISCLAIMER: Everything I say from here on in is my opinion, semantics be damned.
Allen Berrebbi
Owner KRB Media


Big Bang Comics
The Knight Watchman
KRB Media

Image


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable
PostPosted: Sat May 01, 2010 11:39 pm 
User avatar
Traveler

Joined: 03 Dec 2006
Posts: 33377
Location: 2015
Bannings: 3
Well, Man of Steel lasted about 15 years, Birthright about 5, since we are in the middle of Secret Origin, I'll say..next year.

_________________
Are you ready? Are you ready to jump right off the edge of everything?

Image


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable
PostPosted: Sat May 01, 2010 11:42 pm 
User avatar
Niatpac Levram!!!!!!

Joined: 30 Jul 2005
Posts: 26181
Bannings: Banned? Moi?
Allen Berrebbi wrote:
Come on, are you going to tell me nowadays with it mentioned int he news as much as it is that a good editor can't see that line as being taken the wrong way? Please. I'm not saying Robinson meant it that way but please, ESPECIALLY after all the flack a few months ago with Cap.

Yes. I am telling you that.
Not everyone is looking to find something political in their comics.
The way this phrase was used, is the same way it's been used for decades.
Just because "Tea Party" had been overhyped in the media recently, does not mean every mention of one has to do with anything.
Should the editor have pulled the writer aside and said "Hey, you know with all that's going on lately, could we use another phrase instead of Tea Party?", just because of the chance that a few people who seem to be looking for a reson to be bent out of shape might take offense?
Certainly not.
If he/she were like most people, they would read it as it was probably intended, and not given it a second thought.
It just seems to me that too many people out there these days are looking, even digging deep to find something to be butthurt over in their comics. People who don't want any politics in their comic books, are the ones that seem to be finding it the most, while everybody else just gets on with their lives.
Truthfully, I do agree that a comic book is no place to debate politics on either side of the coin, mostly because you are going to piss off half your readers regardless of which side you take. But worry about the stuff that really IS there in black and white/four colors, not something you are desperately trying to fit into the subtext.
Freud once said, sometimes a banana is just a banana.


Top
  Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable
PostPosted: Sat May 01, 2010 11:44 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 26 Dec 2006
Posts: 26688
Location: Center of the Universe.
Hugh wrote:
Should the editor have pulled the writer aside and said "Hey, you know with all that's going on lately, could we use another phrase instead of Tea Party?", just because of the chance that a few people who seem to be looking for a reson to be bent out of shape might take offense?
Certainly not.


I agree.

Should the editor have pulled the writer aside and said "Hey, you know with all that's going on lately, could we use another phrase instead of Tea Party?", just because of the chance that a MANY readers might take offense? Yes.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable
PostPosted: Sat May 01, 2010 11:47 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 07 Sep 2004
Posts: 8455
Location: Tampa, FL
Night Owl wrote:
Hugh wrote:
Should the editor have pulled the writer aside and said "Hey, you know with all that's going on lately, could we use another phrase instead of Tea Party?", just because of the chance that a few people who seem to be looking for a reson to be bent out of shape might take offense?
Certainly not.


I agree.

Should the editor have pulled the writer aside and said "Hey, you know with all that's going on lately, could we use another phrase instead of Tea Party?", just because of the chance that a MANY readers might take offense? Yes.


Exactly.

_________________
DISCLAIMER: Everything I say from here on in is my opinion, semantics be damned.
Allen Berrebbi
Owner KRB Media


Big Bang Comics
The Knight Watchman
KRB Media

Image


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable
PostPosted: Sat May 01, 2010 11:49 pm 
User avatar
Traveler

Joined: 03 Dec 2006
Posts: 33377
Location: 2015
Bannings: 3
"Tea Party" is now a radioactive term?

_________________
Are you ready? Are you ready to jump right off the edge of everything?

Image


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable
PostPosted: Sat May 01, 2010 11:51 pm 
User avatar
Not in Continuity

Joined: 03 Jun 2007
Posts: 24101
Location: Massachusetts
A reboot may be sooner than we know. I have a crazy theory but I think it just might be true...

DC has a problem in that they are bringing Bruce Wayne Batman back and they don't know what to do with Dick Grayson without him looking like a lame duck. They just went through the same thing with Barry Allen and Wally West. The Superman marriage is another narrative hole I am sure they wish they could get out of.

DC Is about to begin the Booster Gold led time travelling mini-series Timepoint. it is said to be leading up to the next line wide crossover, the Flash led Flashpoint, which is suuposed to deal with time in the DCU and lead to major ramifications.

I think DC is going to address the aging rates of it's characters and somehow many, maybe all, will de-age a bit. By the end of the series Dick Grayson will be Robin, Wally West will Be Kid Flash, Donna Troy will be Wonder Girl. It might even be a way to undo the super-marriage. Tim Drake, Bart Allen, et al will still exist but possibly in new identities.

Just a hunch, but I bet they have something like that up their sleeves.


Top
  Profile  
 

IMWAN Admin
 Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable
PostPosted: Sat May 01, 2010 11:56 pm 
User avatar
Helpful Librarian

Joined: Day WAN
Posts: 196950
Location: IMWAN Towers
Bannings: If you're not nice
That makes a lot of sense.

_________________
Image


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable
PostPosted: Sun May 02, 2010 12:03 am 
User avatar

Joined: 07 Sep 2004
Posts: 8455
Location: Tampa, FL
Ross wrote:
A reboot may be sooner than we know. I have a crazy theory but I think it just might be true...

DC has a problem in that they are bringing Bruce Wayne Batman back and they don't know what to do with Dick Grayson without him looking like a lame duck. They just went through the same thing with Barry Allen and Wally West. The Superman marriage is another narrative hole I am sure they wish they could get out of.

DC Is about to begin the Booster Gold led time travelling mini-series Timepoint. it is said to be leading up to the next line wide crossover, the Flash led Flashpoint, which is suuposed to deal with time in the DCU and lead to major ramifications.

I think DC is going to address the aging rates of it's characters and somehow many, maybe all, will de-age a bit. By the end of the series Dick Grayson will be Robin, Wally West will Be Kid Flash, Donna Troy will be Wonder Girl. It might even be a way to undo the super-marriage. Tim Drake, Bart Allen, et al will still exist but possibly in new identities.

Just a hunch, but I bet they have something like that up their sleeves.


The way they do it, there will still be continuity problems. This is what you do, just undo Crisis and have everyone go back to their right earths. And have the real Earth 1 return, with the heroes the proper ages and just wipe out this horrible one already.

Or just do a new earth where Superman is the first, Wonder Woman is the first superheorine and keep it classic

_________________
DISCLAIMER: Everything I say from here on in is my opinion, semantics be damned.
Allen Berrebbi
Owner KRB Media


Big Bang Comics
The Knight Watchman
KRB Media

Image


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable
PostPosted: Sun May 02, 2010 12:28 am 
User avatar
Ancient Alien Theorist

Joined: 24 Jun 2007
Posts: 105334
Location: The Fourth World
Bannings: 2001
Linda wrote:
There are others as well. Putting aside the question of who's right or wrong about the Tea Party, it appears to be a fact that DC is losing readers over this. Well, the editor is a fool for allowing it to happen when all he had to do was take the reference out and substitute another phrase.


They really shouldn't assume their audience is made of rational human beings who don't cry about being offended over the slightest thing.

Because really, even if the tea party this was a "jab" at the Tea Party?

It's fucking kid's gloves.


Top
  Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable
PostPosted: Sun May 02, 2010 12:31 am 
User avatar
Ancient Alien Theorist

Joined: 24 Jun 2007
Posts: 105334
Location: The Fourth World
Bannings: 2001
Hugh wrote:
Allen Berrebbi wrote:
Come on, are you going to tell me nowadays with it mentioned int he news as much as it is that a good editor can't see that line as being taken the wrong way? Please. I'm not saying Robinson meant it that way but please, ESPECIALLY after all the flack a few months ago with Cap.

Yes. I am telling you that.
Not everyone is looking to find something political in their comics.
The way this phrase was used, is the same way it's been used for decades.
Just because "Tea Party" had been overhyped in the media recently, does not mean every mention of one has to do with anything.
Should the editor have pulled the writer aside and said "Hey, you know with all that's going on lately, could we use another phrase instead of Tea Party?", just because of the chance that a few people who seem to be looking for a reson to be bent out of shape might take offense?
Certainly not.
If he/she were like most people, they would read it as it was probably intended, and not given it a second thought.
It just seems to me that too many people out there these days are looking, even digging deep to find something to be butthurt over in their comics. People who don't want any politics in their comic books, are the ones that seem to be finding it the most, while everybody else just gets on with their lives.
Truthfully, I do agree that a comic book is no place to debate politics on either side of the coin, mostly because you are going to piss off half your readers regardless of which side you take. But worry about the stuff that really IS there in black and white/four colors, not something you are desperately trying to fit into the subtext.
Freud once said, sometimes a banana is just a banana.


Hear, hear.

The editor should have taken the writer aside and said, "Don't worry about these crybaby pansies that are more than happy to lob grenades at the people on the other side but get a sandstorm in their vaginas over even the slightest possible criticism of anything they're for."


Top
  Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable
PostPosted: Sun May 02, 2010 12:37 am 
User avatar

Joined: 26 Dec 2006
Posts: 26688
Location: Center of the Universe.
Marvel Universe and DC Universe titles are not the place for partisan politics.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable
PostPosted: Sun May 02, 2010 12:41 am 
User avatar
Mr. IMWANKO

Joined: 18 Sep 2005
Posts: 73846
Location: the Moist Periphery of Pendulum Tide
Linda wrote:
Li'l Jay wrote:
Linda wrote:
Thanks, but I don't like the Krypton stuff.

Then you do not understand Superman, IMO. :smile:

Probably not.


You know, Last Son of the Planet Krypton. What, they're more of them? Oh, well. Never mind.

_________________
Staging Areas
Approach Area
Area of a Triquetra
Area of Effect
Life Longing


Top
  Profile  
 

IMWAN Admin
 Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable
PostPosted: Sun May 02, 2010 12:47 am 
User avatar
Helpful Librarian

Joined: Day WAN
Posts: 196950
Location: IMWAN Towers
Bannings: If you're not nice
One gorilla would have been better than this entire storyline and all its supporting characters, I think.

_________________
Image


Top
  Profile  
 

IMWAN Admin
 Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable
PostPosted: Sun May 02, 2010 12:54 am 
User avatar
Helpful Librarian

Joined: Day WAN
Posts: 196950
Location: IMWAN Towers
Bannings: If you're not nice
Hanzo the Razor wrote:
Hugh wrote:
Allen Berrebbi wrote:
Come on, are you going to tell me nowadays with it mentioned int he news as much as it is that a good editor can't see that line as being taken the wrong way? Please. I'm not saying Robinson meant it that way but please, ESPECIALLY after all the flack a few months ago with Cap.

Yes. I am telling you that.
Not everyone is looking to find something political in their comics.
The way this phrase was used, is the same way it's been used for decades.
Just because "Tea Party" had been overhyped in the media recently, does not mean every mention of one has to do with anything.
Should the editor have pulled the writer aside and said "Hey, you know with all that's going on lately, could we use another phrase instead of Tea Party?", just because of the chance that a few people who seem to be looking for a reson to be bent out of shape might take offense?
Certainly not.
If he/she were like most people, they would read it as it was probably intended, and not given it a second thought.
It just seems to me that too many people out there these days are looking, even digging deep to find something to be butthurt over in their comics. People who don't want any politics in their comic books, are the ones that seem to be finding it the most, while everybody else just gets on with their lives.
Truthfully, I do agree that a comic book is no place to debate politics on either side of the coin, mostly because you are going to piss off half your readers regardless of which side you take. But worry about the stuff that really IS there in black and white/four colors, not something you are desperately trying to fit into the subtext.
Freud once said, sometimes a banana is just a banana.

Hear, hear.

The editor should have taken the writer aside and said, "Don't worry about these crybaby pansies that are more than happy to lob grenades at the people on the other side but get a sandstorm in their vaginas over even the slightest possible criticism of anything they're for."

The editor should have done his job. Your, or his, judgments aren't relevant to the job. Part of the job is to avoid losing customers through inadvertently offending the readership. That means dealing with how the readership might react, regardless whether or not the editor agrees with their reaction, and regardless whether or not the writer even intended the meaning which generates that reaction.

_________________
Image


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable
PostPosted: Sun May 02, 2010 12:56 am 
User avatar
Ancient Alien Theorist

Joined: 24 Jun 2007
Posts: 105334
Location: The Fourth World
Bannings: 2001
Night Owl wrote:
Marvel Universe and DC Universe titles are not the place for partisan politics.


I totally agree. That moment where Wolverine and Spidey fist-bumped over Bush not being in office? Totally lame and totally inappropriate for a superhero comic.

That said, there's no evidence that this is even referring to the Tea Party and we've got people saying that DC should have put the kibosh on this even if it WASN'T intended as a slam because people might make it up in their heads that is. Sorry-- bullshit. Grow a thicker skin if something that HASN'T BEEN PROVEN to be an insult offends you.

Honestly, you have to just write the way you like it and if some lunatic out there invents in their heads that you're shitting on them, you can't worry about it. Don't cater to nutjobs.


Top
  Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable
PostPosted: Sun May 02, 2010 12:59 am 
User avatar
Traveler

Joined: 03 Dec 2006
Posts: 33377
Location: 2015
Bannings: 3
From now on, I'm gonna get offended every time I see the letter "U" in my comics. Because goddammit I find that letter offensive. Also, I want to know what a sandstorm in the vagina feels like.

_________________
Are you ready? Are you ready to jump right off the edge of everything?

Image


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable
PostPosted: Sun May 02, 2010 1:03 am 
User avatar
Ancient Alien Theorist

Joined: 24 Jun 2007
Posts: 105334
Location: The Fourth World
Bannings: 2001
Linda wrote:
The editor should have done his job. Your, or his, judgments aren't relevant to the job. Part of the job is to avoid losing customers through inadvertently offending the readership. That means dealing with how the readership might react, regardless whether or not the editor agrees with their reaction, and regardless whether or not the writer even intended the meaning which generates that reaction.


Again-- Wolverine & Spidey slamming Bush-- editor should have done his job.

But now they can't use the term "tea party" because there's an actual Tea Party out there? Seriously?

How far do we have to go in our society to protect everyone's precious feelings? If Superman said, "Zod, you're almost as bad as those Tea Party lunatics...", I would be 110% with you guys on this.

But they can't even say "tea party"? If Spider-Man burst in on the Sinister Six and said, "Sorry to burst in on your little tea party...", that would be inappopriate for a superhero comic?

To me, that's totally insane.


Top
  Profile E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 17  ( Previous  |  Next )
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 358 posts ]   



Who is WANline

Users browsing this forum: Amazon [Bot] and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powdered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited

IMWAN is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide
a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to amazon.com, amazon.ca and amazon.co.uk.