Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 

Author Topic: Prog 1978 - outer dark  (Read 13157 times)

Proudhuff

  • Member
  • CALL-ME-KENNETH!
  • *****
  • Posts: 13281
  • Lorne; it's a square thing
    • View Profile
Re: Prog 1978 - outer dark
« Reply #15 on: 24 April, 2016, 04:20:08 PM »
The strange thing for me is that my politics and Mr Mill aren't that far from each other but I do object to the lack of subtly in the passing on of the info...
DDT did a job on me

The Amstor Computer

  • Member
  • Bionic Fingers
  • *****
  • Posts: 6512
    • View Profile
Re: Prog 1978 - outer dark
« Reply #16 on: 24 April, 2016, 04:58:46 PM »
Also bizarre that Mills would consider the Bishop/Diggle era the nadir of 2000 AD, given the absolute garbage shat out during the end of Burton's run and almost all through McKenzie's.)

My impression - and this may not necessarily be accurate, but looking in from the outside etc. etc. - is that a combination of things might account for this.

First, I felt that Diggle (and possibly Bishop?) were more inclined to treat Mills' work in the way they would any other writer. Indeed, I think one particularly sore point for Mills' was Andy editing his work on the ABCs, to what Pat felt was its detriment (I think late changes to dialogue were the main complaint, but I can't recall exactly). I get the impression that earlier editors either let him have his head more, or the pushback came from further up so the relationship with editors was better, and I also get the impression that Matt Smith has a better working relationship with him, either because he doesn't make major changes, or because any changes are done hand-in-hand. I don't know, and I can't really make any claims here, but Pat has been a fixture of the prog in the Rebellion/Smith era, with more new stuff like Defoe and reboots/continuations of older stories like Flesh, Greysuit, ABCs etc., and I can only imagine that's because Pat is comfortable with the current editorial setup, and the content of the stories seems to be (for better or worse, depending on your viewpoint) more "Pat" than during Bishop/Diggle's run.

Second, there seems to have been some friction (to say the least) during the Thrill-power Overload research/writing, and I wonder if that contributed in large part to Pat's unhappiness with David Bishop. I thought David's book was fair and well-researched/written, but it's clear Pat is (rightly) protective of his position in the history of 2000AD and I could see that being a source of conflict. It wouldn't be the first time two people - both acting in good faith - clashed over something like that because they had different takes on matters based on their relative experiences. It's not necessarily a story about "Bad Bishop upsets Pat" or "Grumpy Pat tries to dictate history" but perhaps just that they both saw things differently and it just caused friction. Or perhaps not - again, looking in from outside etc.

Given those two things, I could see Pat having a better opinion of Burt/Mackenzie's era - when he perhaps had more leeway, or at least didn't have conflicts like TPO or editorial changes colouring his take - than he does of Bishop/Diggle's time on the prog/Meg. After all, his personal experience of writing his stories and dealing with editorial is very different from that of readers getting an issue a week and basing their opinion of the team on that as a whole.

Or perhaps he really just hated the Preacher reprints!

Colin YNWA

  • Member
  • CALL-ME-KENNETH!
  • *****
  • Posts: 17469
  • testing testing...
    • View Profile
Re: Prog 1978 - outer dark
« Reply #17 on: 24 April, 2016, 05:22:25 PM »
Much as I love Uncle Pat it always feels to me he is unable to judge the quality of 2000ad by the materials alone, rather he does by his relationship with the editors at that time. Which given he's on the inside is probably very understandable (and means he knows rather than me just spouting). It also means that Uncle Pat's history of 2000ad will always be glorious, passionate BUT a little unreliable.

Dark Jimbo

  • Member
  • Bionic Fingers
  • *****
  • Posts: 7490
  • Grobbendonk spoke gibberish, a fringeworld dialect
    • View Profile
    • DarkJimbo on Deviantart
Re: Prog 1978 - outer dark
« Reply #18 on: 24 April, 2016, 05:25:20 PM »
Also bizarre that Mills would consider the Bishop/Diggle era the nadir of 2000 AD, given the absolute garbage shat out during the end of Burton's run and almost all through McKenzie's.)

Pat's so keen to avoid accusations of plaigarism that he doesn't actually read the prog (and presumably hasn't for a long while), so he's basing his opinion not on the prog content but solely on his own working relationship with the editors.

Magnetica

  • Member
  • Evil Cyborg
  • ****
  • Posts: 2013
    • View Profile
Re: Prog 1978 - outer dark
« Reply #19 on: 26 April, 2016, 06:29:27 AM »
I like the cover. Well I did until I read Proudhuff's comment about the left arm. Now that's all I can see. The design of the habitat is all a bit Babylon 5 for me though.

I think that is PJ's best work ever on Dredd. I am totally convinced he is not dead now. I think who ever said he has been captured by the Lawlords is spot on and that it is a follow on from the Gyre. Same with Joyce. Only problem with that theory is we didn't see the funny electrical effect before the van exploded.

Aquila gets more like Blackhawk with every passing episode. So from now on presumably it's half disfigured warrior in search of his soul.

Tainted- sorry don't really like this much at all.

SG - it's ok I guess.

Colin YNWA

  • Member
  • CALL-ME-KENNETH!
  • *****
  • Posts: 17469
  • testing testing...
    • View Profile
Re: Prog 1978 - outer dark
« Reply #20 on: 26 April, 2016, 06:31:58 AM »
I think that is PJ's best work ever on Dredd. I am totally convinced he is not dead now.

Wow just cos he's not drawn in the Prog for a while you think PJ's passed away.

Do you see what I did there... do you... oh...

...sorry...

The Enigmatic Dr X

  • Member
  • Bionic Fingers
  • *****
  • Posts: 5743
    • View Profile
Re: Prog 1978 - outer dark
« Reply #21 on: 26 April, 2016, 09:15:00 AM »
I was a bit grumpy when I read the prog and really only enjoyed Acquila.

The Dredd is a bit annoying because I know he's not dead, and so already feel that we are treading water for the big reveal that he is, in fact, alive and the Cursed Earth and Brit-Cit stuff is an over-arching plot by [Sino-Cit/ the Kleggs/ the LawLords/ Max Normal] (delete as appropriate)
Lock up your spoons!

Hawkmumbler

  • Member
  • Bionic Fingers
  • *****
  • Posts: 8627
    • View Profile
    • http://hawkmonger.deviantart.com/
Re: Prog 1978 - outer dark
« Reply #22 on: 26 April, 2016, 10:08:23 AM »
I think that is PJ's best work ever on Dredd. I am totally convinced he is not dead now.

Wow just cos he's not drawn in the Prog for a while you think PJ's passed away.

Do you see what I did there... do you... oh...

...sorry...
Eh?...He's been working on Dept of Monsterol...oh, I see what you did there.

Very clever. :lol:

Frank

  • New Arrival
  • Bionic Fingers
  • *****
  • Posts: 8607
  • Bad Boy
    • View Profile
Re: Prog 1978 - outer dark
« Reply #23 on: 27 April, 2016, 07:36:50 AM »

Four Irish lads take a trip to London; bombs start going off and one of them ends up in the back of a police van. Pete Postlethwaite could have played Michael Carroll in the film adaptation.



Fungus

  • Member
  • Evil Cyborg
  • ****
  • Posts: 2401
    • View Profile
Re: Prog 1978 - outer dark
« Reply #24 on: 27 April, 2016, 10:31:24 AM »
Reviews haven't said much concrete about Brink, but that cover alone looks like it's pretty much a clone of The Fuse? But a fave comic so not a complaint. Lovely cover and near-total eclipsing of the title works well for me. Looking forward to my Wednesday  WH Smith trip to pick this up.

Dredd's deadness is pretty thrilling, and well done. The consensus that it's clearly a ruse (and not just for the readership but the participants) lessens the impact. May skip prog reviews, depending on how this goes. But not before contradicting myself... I'm in the camp that wouldn't mind one bit to find the death real enough, while the strip carries on in clone form. How apt. Mostly I wanted to echo the earlier suggestion that Wagner is writing this, under the Carroll pseudonym. His latest pen name in a long line and throwing canon fans into apoplexy. How delicious.

Jim_Campbell

  • 2000AD Creator
  • CALL-ME-KENNETH!
  • *****
  • Posts: 13583
  • Letterer to the Stars! (and PJ)
    • View Profile
    • deviantArt Gallery
Re: Prog 1978 - outer dark
« Reply #25 on: 27 April, 2016, 10:52:09 AM »
Mostly I wanted to echo the earlier suggestion that Wagner is writing this, under the Carroll pseudonym. His latest pen name in a long line and throwing canon fans into apoplexy. How delicious.

Have you met Mike? Lots of people have. I have. I'm not sure if this is meant to be humour, but it's pretty insulting to suggest that the only way Mike's work can have weight if is it's really written by Wagner.

Bah.

Jim
Stupidly Busy Letterer: Samples. | Blog
Less-Awesome-Artist: Scribbles.

Link Prime

  • Member
  • Bionic Fingers
  • *****
  • Posts: 5202
    • View Profile
Re: Prog 1978 - outer dark
« Reply #26 on: 27 April, 2016, 10:56:02 AM »
Mike ain't no Keef Ripley.

Hawkmumbler

  • Member
  • Bionic Fingers
  • *****
  • Posts: 8627
    • View Profile
    • http://hawkmonger.deviantart.com/
Re: Prog 1978 - outer dark
« Reply #27 on: 27 April, 2016, 11:02:19 AM »
Mostly I wanted to echo the earlier suggestion that Wagner is writing this, under the Carroll pseudonym. His latest pen name in a long line and throwing canon fans into apoplexy. How delicious.

Have you met Mike? Lots of people have. I have. I'm not sure if this is meant to be humour, but it's pretty insulting to suggest that the only way Mike's work can have weight if is it's really written by Wagner.

Bah.

Jim
Well is Willy Shakespear fooled people for 300 years...


*I'm joking, Shakey really wrote his own plays! I knows, crazy idea!

GordonR

  • 2000AD Creator
  • Battle Hardened War Robot
  • *****
  • Posts: 3380
    • View Profile
Re: Prog 1978 - outer dark
« Reply #28 on: 27 April, 2016, 12:08:15 PM »
Mostly I wanted to echo the earlier suggestion that Wagner is writing this, under the Carroll pseudonym. His latest pen name in a long line and throwing canon fans into apoplexy. How delicious.

Have you met Mike? Lots of people have. I have. I'm not sure if this is meant to be humour, but it's pretty insulting to suggest that the only way Mike's work can have weight if is it's really written by Wagner.

Bah.

Jim

It's a really (unintentionally, I'm assuming) insulting thing to suggest about both John and Mike; that one of them would suggest to the other that he write under his name so readers wouldn't' think the story was so important, and that the other one wouldn't - quite rightly - punch his teeth down his throat in response.
« Last Edit: 27 April, 2016, 12:10:18 PM by GordonR »

Fungus

  • Member
  • Evil Cyborg
  • ****
  • Posts: 2401
    • View Profile
Re: Prog 1978 - outer dark
« Reply #29 on: 27 April, 2016, 12:12:34 PM »
Mostly I wanted to echo the earlier suggestion that Wagner is writing this, under the Carroll pseudonym. His latest pen name in a long line and throwing canon fans into apoplexy. How delicious.

Have you met Mike? Lots of people have. I have. I'm not sure if this is meant to be humour, but it's pretty insulting to suggest that the only way Mike's work can have weight if is it's really written by Wagner.

Bah.

Jim

It's humour.