Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Jim_Campbell

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 926
Film & TV / Re: Wheel Of Time.....
« on: 06 December, 2021, 06:21:49 PM »
I'm not sure where that expectation comes from.

From the complete absence of any humour, as I explained…?

Film & TV / Re: Wheel Of Time.....
« on: 06 December, 2021, 01:55:12 PM »
The more I think about this, the more I'm convinced that what's really getting up my nose about this series is that it's so utterly po-faced. There isn't a whiff of humour in the entire thing, making it horribly portentous and stodgy, and incredibly hard to warm to any of the characters.

I mean, I know Jackson's LotR films mortified any number of Tolkien fans by having actual gags in them, but even GoT had the nouse to invest (at least some of) its characters with a sense of humour. Right from the first episode, with the tension-deflating "You got old"/"You got fat" exchange between Robert and Ned, through any number of Tyrion double-acts (notably Bronn and later Varys), a decent chunk of Arya and the Hound…

This, though… it doesn't seem to have the depth the weighty tone seems to imply we should be finding in it.

Film & TV / Re: Accident Man 2
« on: 06 December, 2021, 08:46:07 AM »
Apologies if offence was caused; it's just that as a layperson I find creator rights a little perplexing at times (e.g. can someone please explain why Dave Gibbons gets the credit for Harlem Heroes instead of Carlos Trigo?)

Unless some special arrangement is made, it's usually as simple as whoever's name is on the first episode published — you don't get a creator credit for having been involved in an unused/abandoned pre-publication version. Technically, Robo-Hunter should be credited to Ferrer/Gibson as joint artistic creators, since both artists' work feature in the early episodes… I don't have a reprint volume to hand to check whether that's the case.

If those initial Ferrer episodes had been scrapped entirely, he would't get a credit. McMahon gets the artist creator credit for VCs, Angie Kincaid for Slaine, despite only having drawn one episode of each, because it was the first.*

The only big exception I can think of is Ezquerra's creator credit on Dredd, but that's an unusual one since his episode was the first drawn, and then handed off to McMahon, Gibson, et al, to work from his designs, but ended up not being the first published.

In some respects, I think Trigo got a bit of a rough deal on Harlem Heroes, though, since a fair chunk of his design work for the Prog 0 dummy seems to have survived into the published Gibbons version in Prog 1… although I'm not sure we have any way of knowing whether he was given a design brief by someone else (Doug Church, maybe?).

*As I've mentioned before, it's hard to argue that any modern incarnation of Wolverine owes more to the original Wein/Trimpe guest star in Incredible Hulk 181 than it does to the Claremont/Cockrum/Byrne version from Uncanny X-Men, but Wein and Trimpe get the credit because they created the character. Re-defining the character, no matter how well, or how definitively, doesn't get you squat.

The only exception to that I'm aware of is Jamie Delano's co-creator credit with Alan Moore for John Constantine, but that only happened because Moore asked for it to be that way.

Film & TV / Re: Wheel Of Time.....
« on: 05 December, 2021, 08:39:13 PM »
Couldn't actually make it to the end of Ep3. This is such painfully generic stuff that's back-referencing Tolkien and trying simultaneously to be Game of Thrones (could the opening titles be trying any harder?) but fails to have a single original or even interesting character anywhere in the whole thing, never mind an original idea.

I've been urged to stick with it because, apparently, it gets better… but I'm getting old and my hours are increasingly precious, so fuck this. Sorry. If you're enjoying it — fantastic, honestly, but I'm done.

General / Re: The 2000AD Messageboard Advent Calendar, 2021 edition
« on: 05 December, 2021, 01:00:35 PM »
Every day that my schedule allows, I'll endeavour to post a festive sound effect, drawn with my own fair hands. :-)

Film & TV / Re: Accident Man 2
« on: 02 December, 2021, 11:06:22 PM »
The whole Luke Kirby thing -claiming he avoided signing the contract that, as an editor, he made his freelancers sign; trying to completely deny the artist any rights as co-creator - tells you everything you need to know about Alan McKenzie.

I have genuinely never heard a single UK freelancer speak with affection or respect about their dealings with McKenzie. I mean… even 'controversial' figures within the industry have their defenders, which makes that a pretty singular comment about his time in comics.

Off Topic / Re: Real life accidents on film/tv sets
« on: 02 December, 2021, 10:48:32 PM »
That was on Friedkin, because he was a fricking maniac who told the stunt guy to pull the rope as hard as he could without telling the actor. He was and is a piece of shit in the Kubrick mould of abusing women.

I'd really like it if film directors could be brilliant and also not be complete pieces of shit.* Just in the interests of my mental health, could folks maybe give me a few examples of brilliant directors who are also OK humans? They don't have to be humanitarian of the year… at this point, I'd just settle for not being weirdo misogynists, sex pests, child rapists, or dropping helicopters on people. That sort of stuff.

I don't exactly have my ear to the ground, but I've never heard bad stuff about John Carpenter, for example.** I'd like to think it's possible to be great in your field, without being a total arsehole.

* Yes, I know this isn't new. We didn't really have a sense of who the people were behind the names on the credits were until (relatively) recently.

** I may be wrong about Carpenter… maybe don't disillusion me tonight, eh? Also, yes, I know his best years are a lonnnnng way behind him.

Off Topic / Re: Real life accidents on film/tv sets
« on: 02 December, 2021, 11:44:25 AM »
Finger guns or nothing!

Or we're back to Laura Dern going "PEW! PEW!" every time she fired her blaster in The Last Jedi… :-)

Film & TV / Re: Accident Man 2
« on: 02 December, 2021, 07:47:36 AM »
Footnote: I should add that that I don't think any of us has had sight of the contract Emond signed. It's possible that he was brought onto the project under work-for-hire terms by the writers,* in which case he wouldn't be entitled to a creator credit… although that would seem to be at odds with the entire "more equitable deal for the creators" ethos which was supposed to be one of Toxic's founding principles.

*More common than you might think. As I've mentioned before, take a look at the legal blurb of a lot of "creator owned" books and you'll find that a surprising number are "writer owned", meaning that everyone else is on WFH terms. "Creator owned" isn't a universal panacea for inequitable treatment of creators in comics… sometimes, it just changes the nature of who's doing the screwing.

Film & TV / Re: Accident Man 2
« on: 02 December, 2021, 07:18:46 AM »
But what precisely was Emond's contribution (as a creator)?  If it was purely the visual appearance then it must be noted that the characters in the movie look significantly different to those in Toxic!, which would certainly explain the apparent snub.

That's not how it works. The IP exists to be adapted because of the creators. Creators get credited, regardless of how far the adaptation deviates from the original work, and in what respects.

Off Topic / Re: Real life accidents on film/tv sets
« on: 01 December, 2021, 10:54:10 PM »
I agree with X that things got a bit fierce towards Shark and there was a bit of a pile on. Sorry, Shark.

I would respectfully suggest that if Shark didn't wade in with ludicrous strawmen, such as suggesting that anyone in the discussion had said "to hell with the victim", then responses might have been more temperate.

Off Topic / Re: Real life accidents on film/tv sets
« on: 01 December, 2021, 09:26:02 PM »
I don't feel that strongly about it. Not enough to prolong this debate. But I do feel that Sharky is trying to make that point - "but it was a gun" - and is maybe being shot down too fiercely, maybe because of other arguments.

As Sheridan notes upthread — it was not meant to be an unloaded gun, it was meant to be a gun loaded with blank cartridges instead of live ammunition. That means rounds in the clip/cylinder even if the weapon was safe.

Are you suggesting that an actor should remove rounds from a firearm handed to them in order to inspect them and make sure they’re blanks…? Squeeze a couple off into a nearby wall, just to be sure? This is patently ludicrous.

Off Topic / Re: Real life accidents on film/tv sets
« on: 01 December, 2021, 02:16:31 PM »
The armourer must take some blame. Whoever let the gun be used for target practice should take some blame.

Also the armourer.

"I was told it was safe," does not allow you to abdicate responsibility in other situations.

It most certainly does when the person telling you bears legal responsibility for ensuring that safety.

The Health & Safety officer signing off on scaffolding, as I mentioned before. If you're not a scaffolder, and you paid an appropriately skilled scaffolder to put the thing up, then got a H&S officer to confirm it's safe, how is it conceivably your fault if it falls down and kills someone…?

"My doctor told me it was safe to give my child these tablets," as another example. Turns out they weren't safe. How were you supposed to know? You're not qualified to make that judgement, which is why you defer to the expertise of someone with a legal responsibility to make it on your behalf.

General / Re: The 2021 2000AD Messageboard Advent Calendar
« on: 30 November, 2021, 03:01:24 PM »
I won't go in to specifics here, but it's good news for Pete

He's the new CEO of Greggs, isn't he…? They foolishly introduced a "Get one share in the company for every ten steak bakes purchased" loyalty scheme and he had a controlling interest in the business in under a year.

Off Topic / Re: Real life accidents on film/tv sets
« on: 30 November, 2021, 02:58:00 PM »
Absolutely nobody in this thread has suggested that, so why are you pretending they have?

Because that's the entire schtick — strike a contrarian position on a fairly uncontroversial topic and then ratchet up the debate by erecting increasingly ludicrous strawmen and attempt to claim the moral/philosophical high ground by opposing statements that literally nobody made.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 926