Recent Future Shocks

[Tiplodocus]

Anybody else feel that the Future Shocks of late have been shocking for all the wrong reasons?  I thought that one about Doner/Donor Kebabs was incredibly weak; an old schoolboy joke, poorly realised.

I must express a vested interest as I have recently submitted a few Future Shocks myself - I realise I am still learning how to write a proper story but it does pain you to see some of the recent stories that come no way near to matching the standards set out in the submission guidelines (hook, identifiable protaganist, drama arising out of conflict etc. - all missing).

[DavidXBrunt]

What really bugs me about the Shocks, apart from the sound reasons you listed, is the contents page listing.

If that sounds picky just look at some of the recent listings for the strip. They have a little text blurb and a single image. On several occasions the image chosen has been the last one of the strip - you know the twist one that supposed to be a surprise. Several stories have been spoiled in recent weeks by their giving the endings away.

[Thread Zero]

Paul,

Don't worry.

2k sure write a nice rejection letter. In fact, they are better written than most future shocks.

Beat that!:)

scojo

[nathan]

Snacks of Doom was a Terror Tale, not a Future Shock. I thought it was fun, despite the mediocre artwork.

N

[Tu-plang]

Terror Tales is just a fancy-arse name for a future shock which is less Sci-fi and more horror.  Reefer Madness was an uncredited Terror tale.

When 2k gets scary... we get Snacks of Doom?

[nathan]

Snacks of Doom, like Reefer Madness, was more horror-themed humour than a straight horror tale. As such I think it was more successful than In Memoriam (prog 1281).

N