What 2000 AD graphic novels would you NOT like to see in 2010?

Mark Taylor · 22 November, 2009, 02:19:51 PM

For me, Cradlegrave. It started off good with an effective build-up of tension, etc., but then totally failed to deliver the anticipated payoff. Normally I like John Smith, too.

Jim_Campbell · 22 November, 2009, 02:20:57 PM

Hmm, yes. Let's slag off series that we didn't like, because these sort of threads always turn out SO well ...

Cheers

Jim

Mark Taylor · 22 November, 2009, 02:31:41 PM

I wasn't intending to creat a flame war. I haven't been frequenting this board for long but I've seen plenty of threads containing criticism here turn out perfectly okay, thank you, and spark debate without turning into a playground brawl.

I see constructive criticism as being as valuable as praise, personally... and if certain people can't keep their criticism measured and constructive then I'm happy to ingore their posts.

Those who oject on general principles can surely steer clear of the entire thread, no?

Jim_Campbell · 22 November, 2009, 02:35:33 PM

There's a difference between a discussion that contains criticism and a thread whose raison d'etre is "series we thought were shit".

As you suggest though, no-one is forced to participate, so I shall say no more.

Cheers

Jim

locustsofdeath! · 22 November, 2009, 02:40:20 PM

Dinosty.

Oh wait. Will anyone be pissed I mentioned this one...cause I mentioned it in the other, positive, thread as well. I love it and I hate it.

Mark Taylor · 22 November, 2009, 02:41:58 PM

Quote from: Jim_Campbell on 22 November, 2009, 02:35:33 PM
There's a difference between a discussion that contains criticism and a thread whose raison d'etre is "series we thought were shit".

As you suggest though, no-one is forced to participate, so I shall say no more.

Cheers

Jim

Well, okay, I see your point, but I did try to set the tone by NOT saying "I thought Cradlegave was shit" but rather offering a point of constructive criticism where I mentioned what was good about it and where I thought it went wrong.

Let's just see where the thread goes, eh, and if it all goes horribly wrong I'll admit full culpability and I can be publicly flambéd as the centerpiece of Tharg's Office Christmas Feast.

Mark Taylor · 22 November, 2009, 02:44:47 PM

Quote from: locustsoflove on 22 November, 2009, 02:40:20 PM
Dinosty.

Oh wait. Will anyone be pissed I mentioned this one...cause I mentioned it in the other, positive, thread as well. I love it and I hate it.

I'd like to see it as one of the Meg floppies. I see where you are coming from, because whilst I can see that it is seriously flawed I still like it a lot, especially the artwork which is just AWESOME.

locustsofdeath! · 22 November, 2009, 02:47:26 PM

Dinosty is one of those Pat Mills works that can't find it's focus. It's so haphazzard. I will say one thing, though: as soon as I flip to something like Dinosty, I know Pat Mills is responsible. Saurcery indeed.

Trout · 22 November, 2009, 03:12:22 PM

I make an effort to include details in any negative criticism I make on this board, but in Dinosty's case it's difficult to get past saying it's simply shit.

I hated the blotchy brown art, the poor dialogue, the single joke of humans as food/slaves and the way it seemed far too long.

I'll never read it again, in back progs or reprint form.

TordelBack · 22 November, 2009, 03:23:52 PM

QuoteI'll never read it again, in back progs or reprint form.

Whereas I have never read it at all, and would like to see a Meg floppy! You can't please all of the people etc.

Dinosty was a strip I occasionally saw when flipping depressedly through an unbought Prog in the newsagents during my Wilderness Years, shuddered, and replaced the copy on the shelf. Whatever happened to that writer/artist combo, eh? -opens this week's Prog, shudders, and puts it back on the pile- (Nah, I've enjoyed Langley's stuff plenty in the interim, just not right now...)

Anyway, I'll see your Dinosty and raise you an Outlaw.

Mark Taylor · 22 November, 2009, 03:26:26 PM

Quote from: King Trout on 22 November, 2009, 03:12:22 PM
I make an effort to include details in any negative criticism I make on this board, but in Dinosty's case it's difficult to get past saying it's simply shit.

I hated the blotchy brown art, the poor dialogue, the single joke of humans as food/slaves and the way it seemed far too long.

I'll never read it again, in back progs or reprint form.

If your Dinosty progs are brown and blotchy I can only assume that this is an unfortunate by-product of the sheer amount of ass being kicked by that very artwork!

SmallBlueThing · 22 November, 2009, 04:56:35 PM

I can honestly say that there isn't a single strip published in 2000AD or The Meg's history that I wouldn't like to see as a "graphic novel"/ "collection"/ "trade", whatever.

And the same goes for every single other comic strip published in all British comics, ever. If they were all reprinted, we'd never lose them. It breaks my heart that years and years of Billy's Boots, Death Wish, The Bash Street Kids, etc, will be lost to posterity, as the original comics decompose. These things are important, and should be republished.

SBT

TordelBack · 22 November, 2009, 05:29:18 PM

QuoteThese things are important, and should be republished.

I say again: Outlaw.

Ochs · 23 November, 2009, 03:17:13 PM

The last book of Blood of Satanus. I actually stopped buying the Meg after that. Not a personal criticism of either of the creators. I'm a big fan of Mills but that wasn't his best moment and the same I think could be said of the artwork too.

Bolt-01 · 23 November, 2009, 03:37:28 PM

Hmmm... Dinosty is one of those series that I think might actually get a reprint, but it is also one of those I would not like to see. Pat's story was weak, IMO, with little I found to be of interest, and Clint Langleys work, whilst technically more impressive, remains as poor in terms of storytelling to this day.

Outlaw, however, I like despite it being rubbish.