View unanswered posts | View active topics
Author |
Message |
Allen Berrebbi
|
Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 11:12 pm |
|
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
|
|
Top |
|
 |
Night Owl
|
Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 11:17 pm |
|
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 |
|
 |
Steve
|
Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 11:18 pm |
|
 |
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 |
|
 |
Linda
IMWAN Admin |
Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 11:28 pm |
|
 |
Helpful Librarian
|
Joined: | Day WAN |
Posts: | 196949 |
Location: | IMWAN Towers |
Bannings: | If you're not nice |
|
When's the next reboot?
_________________
|
|
Top |
|
 |
Allen Berrebbi
|
Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 11:38 pm |
|
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
|
|
Top |
|
 |
Rafael
|
Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 11:39 pm |
|
 |
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?
|
|
Top |
|
 |
Hugh
|
Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 11:42 pm |
|
 |
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 |
|
 |
Night Owl
|
Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 11:44 pm |
|
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 |
|
 |
Allen Berrebbi
|
Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 11:47 pm |
|
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
|
|
Top |
|
 |
Rafael
|
Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 11:49 pm |
|
 |
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?
|
|
Top |
|
 |
Ross
|
Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 11:51 pm |
|
 |
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 |
|
 |
Linda
IMWAN Admin |
Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 11:56 pm |
|
 |
Helpful Librarian
|
Joined: | Day WAN |
Posts: | 196949 |
Location: | IMWAN Towers |
Bannings: | If you're not nice |
|
That makes a lot of sense.
_________________
|
|
Top |
|
 |
Allen Berrebbi
|
Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable Posted: Sun May 02, 2010 12:03 am |
|
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
|
|
Top |
|
 |
Hanzo the Razor
|
Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable Posted: Sun May 02, 2010 12:28 am |
|
 |
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 |
|
 |
Hanzo the Razor
|
Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable Posted: Sun May 02, 2010 12:31 am |
|
 |
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 |
|
 |
Night Owl
|
Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable Posted: Sun May 02, 2010 12:37 am |
|
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 |
|
 |
Beachy
|
Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable Posted: Sun May 02, 2010 12:41 am |
|
 |
Mr. IMWANKO
|
Joined: | 18 Sep 2005 |
Posts: | 73846 |
Location: | the Moist Periphery of Pendulum Tide |
|
|
Top |
|
 |
Linda
IMWAN Admin |
Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable Posted: Sun May 02, 2010 12:47 am |
|
 |
Helpful Librarian
|
Joined: | Day WAN |
Posts: | 196949 |
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.
_________________
|
|
Top |
|
 |
Linda
IMWAN Admin |
Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable Posted: Sun May 02, 2010 12:54 am |
|
 |
Helpful Librarian
|
Joined: | Day WAN |
Posts: | 196949 |
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.
_________________
|
|
Top |
|
 |
Hanzo the Razor
|
Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable Posted: Sun May 02, 2010 12:56 am |
|
 |
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 |
|
 |
Rafael
|
Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable Posted: Sun May 02, 2010 12:59 am |
|
 |
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?
|
|
Top |
|
 |
Hanzo the Razor
|
Post subject: Superman: Impenetrable Posted: Sun May 02, 2010 1:03 am |
|
 |
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 |
|
 |
|
Page 5 of 17
|
[ 358 posts ] |
|
View unanswered posts | View active topics
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
|
|