Messages

And, see, even if we just accept that all the additional surface rendering in the modern version is just How Things Are Done Now™, I've noticed in a lot of these re-colouring jobs, there's a tendency for the colourist to think about light and palette and forget about depth and clarity.

Notice the first panel on the right-hand page. In the new version, I completely lose Swampy's hands because they're coloured identically to the beetle. Wood's original picks them out in a different tone.

I wonder how much of a purist approach there is to this argument. I read a few Amazon reviews of this set before I bought it and the biggest complaint was that the re-colouring was done at all; completely replacing the original. I've never read it in this form, and until today I've never even looked through one of my original issues. So I'm not really biased towards one over the other. I think the new colours look amazing. Especially in volume 1.

There are panels where clarity has been increased, I think. Consider below. In the original it's not clear what's happening - the "double exposure" effect is not clear at all, but clarified in the new colours. There are pros and cons, I guess.



(With apologies to Colin for derailing his thread a bit!)

Issue #56 is one of only 4 from this era that I actually have in an original copy!

As someone relatively unread in comics, but trying to catch up (despite being beset by long delays due to renovations taking an insufferably and inordinately long time to get finished), and who has read almost all the Moore Swamp Thing now, from cold, without having read anything from before or after that run, and the only exposure to Swamp Thing before that being the 80s movie, I have to say I don't really recognise what I have read of it from these descriptions all that much!

Maybe it's because I've read so little of comics (compared to you vets), or because I approached it without any particular reverence for Moore. I've thoroughly enjoyed what I've read so far, but didn't think the incidental characters were neglected, unlikeable, or irritating. I also it doesn't really feel much like a superhero story, despite some of those old trouts turning up.

Perhaps I should also say that I'm reading the Absolute editions, and I'm not forcing myself to keep reading when I get tired - I just pick it up again later. I'll definitely be re-reading them, too, at some point.

Oh yeah? Well you were touching the dog and the dog farted, so you farted, so ner.

Incorrect. Hoover bags are placed in a vacuum cleaner they don't exist there.

Incorrect. If I put you in a vacuum you'd exist there, for a while.

"Top c*ntributer"?

Yeah. There are two sides to every story, as we all know, but that's not helping sway anyone to his side.

Good to know there is actually going to be a volume 6!

I use it for the same reason as Lorenzo, except that for me it's musicians and record labels who I follow. I resent having to use it just to keep up with their releases, I wish they'd find something else to use, and I'm very happy to condemn it. Facebook too.

I haven't read a Stephen King novel in years, and not read the Dark Tower ones at all. I've read a great many older ones though. My favourite is probably the Langoliers, from Four Past Midnight. I don't remember the other stories in that volume, but I've read that one lots.

The biggest issue I have with King is his tendency to go off into multi-chapter-long flashbacks, remembrances, or some other sort of aside, and leave the "main" narrative hanging for an excessive amount of reading-time. It's a common technique, I know, but he does it to a degree that's beyond just irritating, and it actually puts me off re-reading the longer books, or reading newer ones at all.

Meanwhile, Lost Treasures from Hibernia has just plopped on my doormat (figurative - I don't have a doormat), so I'll be reading that!

Surely 95% of the market for Turbo Jones and Loner would be people who already know what Wildcat was?  And, given that Wildcat's stories were inter-linked at points, why package them stand-alone?

Wouldn't there be more sales potential in publishing all the Wildcat stories together, as a full set, split across a couple of volumes?

I had the same thought too, but since two already are out, and the remaining three are stalled (or abandoned), my assumption was that they'd decided not to bother with anything more.

Plus once the teams split up in issue 1, there's barely any crossover. Doesn't mean it's a bad idea though. I'd buy them.

If they can't put the work hours into faffing about with scans they can use my scans for nothing!

It's the equivalent of my parents' generation saying "we worked hard so you could have an easier life than we had", and the next day "bloody kids have it so easy these days".
It'll be the same for the generation after us. They'll inherit the Earth regardless of what we do, so as long as enough of them are better than us, that's what counts...

I got this about my pre-order at the end of last month.

We are getting in touch with you regarding your pre-order of the 40 Years of Scream! collection.
 
We have been informed that due to ongoing delays to global shipping, we have unfortunately been forced to push back the release date of this title. Both standard and slipcase editions will now ship on or before the 22nd of May.
 
While these delays are beyond our control, we are very sorry for the delay. We want to ensure that you receive a premium product to the highest possible standard and we are doing all we can to ensure that the dispatch of all orders will commence as swiftly as possible.
 
We greatly appreciate your patience as we work to get this book to your hands, but we believe the wait will be worth it.

Good point. It's not as if it's a clear cut issue of always-this-way-in-the-country and always-that-way-in-the-city. Obviously both are types of community and all communities are vulnerable to the same types of upset. The degree & proportions vary, is all. I think that the trend is enough to cause a geographical separation of left & right. And then, of course, people migrate to where they'll feel they belong. Naturally there are other considerations to within-borders movements (finances being one), but, again, the trend is probably enough to shift red & blue further apart.

I think it's probably mostly to do with a) the concerns that Trump addresses, and his non-politician origins, are in sync with rural dwellers and their sympathies. And that the population is more dispersed. In cities there are more interactions with others, and those interactions are more significant to an individual's own life. More opportunity to fall into a clique, and less room to defy the mainstream or suffer ostracisation (which is more of a nightmare for a close community). So if it becomes "trendy" (pardon the sledgehammer of a term) to think one way, thinking another way comes at a price. Doesn't happen so much in the rural areas.
Also, the things that Trump doesn't seem to give a poo about (social care and other typically left issues) are more important in a densely populated area.

I find it easier to navigate this argument when I think of the current debate around trans identity being played out noisily in the media. [snip for brevity!] The thing is, that violence against women by men is very real - and very prolific. So, her hatred is grounded in a lived reality.

Again I agree, although I don't really have an opinion on JKR as I've spent almost zero time reading about the matter and I don't think I can judge anything based on the murmurings drifting in on the wind on the rare occasions that I have the metaphorical window open.

But regarding your last paragraph, what usually gets overlooked (switching from racism to your violence-against-women illustration for a moment) is that, whilst it's true that the vast majority of violence against women is conducted by men, and it's also true that the vast majority of violence against men is conducted by men, and that the amount of violence against women outweighs that of violence against men (hope you're keeping up with this!), it's not true to say that "men are the problem". The problem must be something else because not all men exhibit violence against women or men. You might as well say that in the matter of terrorism, the problem is "Muslims" (equally untrue).

To couch this in a black/white illustration again, it's true that white people have perpetrated injustices of many kinds against black people, but to say that only white people have done this is untrue, and to say that all white people have done this is equally untrue. If you identify the problem as "white people" then you've misidentified the problem. Any plan to deal with it is going to be misdirected, and be ineffective at best, and at worst cause a good deal more harm.

I wish people would identify the issue correctly before harm is done by shooting the wrong target.