Title: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: strontium71 on 22 February, 2012, 10:32:25 AM
Post by: strontium71 on 22 February, 2012, 10:32:25 AM
Not really a review , I'll leave that to better wordsmiths - my problem is that my issue came today but without a floppy copy of Death Planet. Anyone else got there copy without it?
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: flip-r mk2 on 22 February, 2012, 10:40:14 AM
Post by: flip-r mk2 on 22 February, 2012, 10:40:14 AM
Same here, mine came through the door 5 minutes ago opened it up and no floppy.
filip
filip
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: strontium71 on 22 February, 2012, 10:40:58 AM
Post by: strontium71 on 22 February, 2012, 10:40:58 AM
Never thought to phone Rebellion , d'oh!
The chap on the phone has just told me the issues have been posted early by mistake and without floppies inserted. They'll now be posted separately hurrah!
The chap on the phone has just told me the issues have been posted early by mistake and without floppies inserted. They'll now be posted separately hurrah!
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: strontium71 on 22 February, 2012, 10:50:02 AM
Post by: strontium71 on 22 February, 2012, 10:50:02 AM
A very quick flip reveals that in an interview with Tiernen Trevallion , there's a familiar picture of someones commission....
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Trout on 22 February, 2012, 11:52:59 AM
Post by: Trout on 22 February, 2012, 11:52:59 AM
I'm afraid it didn't take long to read.
The lead Dredd story is good enough, although kind of light. It's about Jeremy Kyle coming to the Meg. I'm sad to say I spent much of it predicting, correctly, what was going to happen next.
It's the last episode of Armitage, and the final panel made me grin. I'm not sure my suspension of disbelief stretches to the theory that [spoiler]judges' DNA can be booby-trapped,[/spoiler] but it's all science fiction so I'm not going to worry about it.
American Reaper isn't for me, I'm afraid. It has, at least, ended for now. It's back in the "fall".
Again, Strange and Darke is (IMO) the best thing in the Meg. It's now openly referencing the Wicker Man, which is kind of a relief as its influence is so obvious. But it has lots of great ideas in it and I'm loving the uncontrollable extra voice. It's a bit exposition-heavy this month, but hey-ho. Colin MacNeil drew it, so I'm happy.
Next month: the return of Diggle and Jock! Thank Drokk for that.
- Trout
The lead Dredd story is good enough, although kind of light. It's about Jeremy Kyle coming to the Meg. I'm sad to say I spent much of it predicting, correctly, what was going to happen next.
It's the last episode of Armitage, and the final panel made me grin. I'm not sure my suspension of disbelief stretches to the theory that [spoiler]judges' DNA can be booby-trapped,[/spoiler] but it's all science fiction so I'm not going to worry about it.
American Reaper isn't for me, I'm afraid. It has, at least, ended for now. It's back in the "fall".
Again, Strange and Darke is (IMO) the best thing in the Meg. It's now openly referencing the Wicker Man, which is kind of a relief as its influence is so obvious. But it has lots of great ideas in it and I'm loving the uncontrollable extra voice. It's a bit exposition-heavy this month, but hey-ho. Colin MacNeil drew it, so I'm happy.
Next month: the return of Diggle and Jock! Thank Drokk for that.
- Trout
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Trout on 22 February, 2012, 11:54:06 AM
Post by: Trout on 22 February, 2012, 11:54:06 AM
Forgot to add: no floppy here, either. I don't often read them, anyway.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: worldshown on 22 February, 2012, 12:27:45 PM
Post by: worldshown on 22 February, 2012, 12:27:45 PM
No floppy here too. Assumed my copy of Death Planet had been sent to Garth Ennis just to prove it could be collected.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: IndigoPrime on 22 February, 2012, 12:44:44 PM
Post by: IndigoPrime on 22 February, 2012, 12:44:44 PM
As per strontium71's message earlier, the printer screwed up and subs will have their floppies dispatched separately within a few days.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: mygrimmbrother on 22 February, 2012, 12:46:51 PM
Post by: mygrimmbrother on 22 February, 2012, 12:46:51 PM
American Reaper's coming back??? >:(
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Steve Green on 22 February, 2012, 12:49:51 PM
Post by: Steve Green on 22 February, 2012, 12:49:51 PM
American Reaper : Autumn 2012, Snapshot next month.
Re: The floppy - Any idea if we have to let them know, or do they already know who hasn't got them?
Cheers
Steve
Re: The floppy - Any idea if we have to let them know, or do they already know who hasn't got them?
Cheers
Steve
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Buttonman on 22 February, 2012, 01:39:06 PM
Post by: Buttonman on 22 February, 2012, 01:39:06 PM
Forget the floppie - who's in the Dreddlines?
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: James Stacey on 22 February, 2012, 01:40:26 PM
Post by: James Stacey on 22 February, 2012, 01:40:26 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 22 February, 2012, 12:49:51 PMThe snapshot is 16 pages long.
American Reaper : Autumn 2012, Snapshot next month.
Re: The floppy - Any idea if we have to let them know, or do they already know who hasn't got them?
Cheers
Steve
I assume all copies went out without the floppy ?
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Steve Green on 22 February, 2012, 01:46:58 PM
Post by: Steve Green on 22 February, 2012, 01:46:58 PM
Oh right, I thought it was longer than that.
Cheers
Cheers
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Proudhuff on 22 February, 2012, 02:15:03 PM
Post by: Proudhuff on 22 February, 2012, 02:15:03 PM
Quote from: Buttonman on 22 February, 2012, 01:39:06 PM
Forget the floppie - who's in the Dreddlines?
woteesaz!
The Memsabib has informed me that mine has arrived at Huff Mansions...
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Trout on 22 February, 2012, 02:22:54 PM
Post by: Trout on 22 February, 2012, 02:22:54 PM
No Dreddlines this month. Sorry lads.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Pete Wells on 22 February, 2012, 02:28:55 PM
Post by: Pete Wells on 22 February, 2012, 02:28:55 PM
Aaaaaagh, mine hasn't arrived yet! Is the commission my Dredd and Fink or Bad Company's bloody brilliant Warlord one?
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Trout on 22 February, 2012, 02:32:49 PM
Post by: Trout on 22 February, 2012, 02:32:49 PM
Dredd and Fink.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: radiator on 22 February, 2012, 02:38:34 PM
Post by: radiator on 22 February, 2012, 02:38:34 PM
QuoteAmerican Reaper : Autumn 2012
Oh, for Gods sake! I really hoped we'd seen the back of the bloody thing!
I'm very tolerant of strips I don't care for, but come on! It takes up so much of the Megazine month in, month out and is obviosuly divisive to say the least with readers, I hoped they'd rest it for a bit, if not for good.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Steve Green on 22 February, 2012, 03:45:03 PM
Post by: Steve Green on 22 February, 2012, 03:45:03 PM
Well Autumn is resting it for a bit, isn't it?
I'm not a massive fan of it, but it at least deserves to play out rather than be dropped entirely.
I'm not a massive fan of it, but it at least deserves to play out rather than be dropped entirely.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: radiator on 22 February, 2012, 03:47:09 PM
Post by: radiator on 22 February, 2012, 03:47:09 PM
What is it in a monthly magazine? 7 issues?
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: radiator on 22 February, 2012, 03:48:50 PM
Post by: radiator on 22 February, 2012, 03:48:50 PM
Doesn't seem that far away to me.
As I said, I've tried to be patient, and I've bitten my tongue over American Reaper for it's entire run, but the thought of it coming back so soon is very disappointing.
I can only think of one regular boarder who actually likes it.
As I said, I've tried to be patient, and I've bitten my tongue over American Reaper for it's entire run, but the thought of it coming back so soon is very disappointing.
I can only think of one regular boarder who actually likes it.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: James Stacey on 22 February, 2012, 03:50:53 PM
Post by: James Stacey on 22 February, 2012, 03:50:53 PM
Got to wonder if it was written by anyone else if it would still be with us.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Colin Zeal on 22 February, 2012, 03:56:24 PM
Post by: Colin Zeal on 22 February, 2012, 03:56:24 PM
Quote from: radiator on 22 February, 2012, 03:48:50 PM
Doesn't seem that far away to me.
As I said, I've tried to be patient, and I've bitten my tongue over American Reaper for it's entire run, but the thought of it coming back so soon is very disappointing.
I can only think of one regular boarder who actually likes it.
I like it.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Pete Wells on 22 February, 2012, 04:18:22 PM
Post by: Pete Wells on 22 February, 2012, 04:18:22 PM
Quote from: King Trout on 22 February, 2012, 02:32:49 PM
Dredd and Fink.
Wahoooooo! Pete Wells Block has finally made the Meg ('cept Tiernan forgot to put 'Pete Wells Block' on the pic, Drokk it!)
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: exilewood on 22 February, 2012, 04:22:22 PM
Post by: exilewood on 22 February, 2012, 04:22:22 PM
American Reaper is excellent, I love it - & usually I don't dig Clint's art at all.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Steve Green on 22 February, 2012, 04:31:22 PM
Post by: Steve Green on 22 February, 2012, 04:31:22 PM
Quote from: Pete Wells on 22 February, 2012, 04:18:22 PMQuote from: King Trout on 22 February, 2012, 02:32:49 PM
Dredd and Fink.
Wahoooooo! Pete Wells Block has finally made the Meg ('cept Tiernan forgot to put 'Pete Wells Block' on the pic, Drokk it!)
there, there Pete... *we* know which block it is...
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Pete Wells on 22 February, 2012, 06:36:10 PM
Post by: Pete Wells on 22 February, 2012, 06:36:10 PM
Cheers Steve, yer a pal! :D
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Mark Taylor on 22 February, 2012, 06:48:36 PM
Post by: Mark Taylor on 22 February, 2012, 06:48:36 PM
Floppyless here too... not too serious a problem though as Judge Anderson Psi Files Vol. 2 also popped through my door to keep me occupied whilst I'm waiting.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Dr Feeley Good on 22 February, 2012, 06:54:05 PM
Post by: Dr Feeley Good on 22 February, 2012, 06:54:05 PM
My dead plant was with my meg :D
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Dr Feeley Good on 22 February, 2012, 06:54:59 PM
Post by: Dr Feeley Good on 22 February, 2012, 06:54:59 PM
Only joking !!! ::)
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Dandontdare on 22 February, 2012, 07:03:37 PM
Post by: Dandontdare on 22 February, 2012, 07:03:37 PM
Megazine on a Wednesday? It's one step away from anarchy I tells ya. See what happens when you start mucking about though? No floppy!
American Reaper (plus all thecrappy filler spoof adverts) takes up far too much space, but here's looking forward to a summer without it. Nice ostriches though.
Rest of the Meg looks lush though
American Reaper (plus all the
Rest of the Meg looks lush though
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: mygrimmbrother on 22 February, 2012, 08:04:47 PM
Post by: mygrimmbrother on 22 February, 2012, 08:04:47 PM
Terrible cover. Bad idea, poorly executed. Enjoy aspects of the meg but seriously weighing up whether to bother with it anymore. The promise of more AR is just the final nail in the coffin I think.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: JUDGE BURNS on 22 February, 2012, 08:08:37 PM
Post by: JUDGE BURNS on 22 February, 2012, 08:08:37 PM
My MEG was on my doorstep when I got back home tonight. No GN included in the bag and I agree a , one of the worst covers for a long while....I am now off to read my MEG.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: James Stacey on 22 February, 2012, 08:09:56 PM
Post by: James Stacey on 22 February, 2012, 08:09:56 PM
Quote from: James Stacey on 22 February, 2012, 01:40:26 PMI should add I assumed a 'snapshot' of AR was included in next months not a series called snapshot.
The snapshot is 16 pages long.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: vzzbux on 22 February, 2012, 08:45:59 PM
Post by: vzzbux on 22 February, 2012, 08:45:59 PM
I didn't notice there wasn't a floppy until I approached this thread.
V
V
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Steve Green on 22 February, 2012, 09:23:56 PM
Post by: Steve Green on 22 February, 2012, 09:23:56 PM
Quote from: James Stacey on 22 February, 2012, 08:09:56 PMQuote from: James Stacey on 22 February, 2012, 01:40:26 PMI should add I assumed a 'snapshot' of AR was included in next months not a series called snapshot.
The snapshot is 16 pages long.
No... Jock/Diggle series, no idea how long it's running for...
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Bolt-01 on 22 February, 2012, 09:37:41 PM
Post by: Bolt-01 on 22 February, 2012, 09:37:41 PM
Another one here who enjoys American Reaper. It really works well IMO.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Richard on 22 February, 2012, 10:39:38 PM
Post by: Richard on 22 February, 2012, 10:39:38 PM
I like American Reaper. It's different, and the Megazine should try out things which "divide the readership" now and then. John Hickleton's art for example. Some of my favourite stories and artists are ones which I disliked when I first encountered them. As for it being the "final nail in the coffin" for the Megazine, if it survived the shit that was being printed in the 1990s then it can survive 7 episodes of some outstanding Clint Langly art and some pretty interesting ideas. I'm looking forward to the second part.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: mygrimmbrother on 22 February, 2012, 10:50:00 PM
Post by: mygrimmbrother on 22 February, 2012, 10:50:00 PM
Fair point Richard, I just meant it's likely to be the final nail in the coffin for me personally. I hope the meg will be around for many years to come, and I'm sure it will be.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Leigh S on 22 February, 2012, 11:43:43 PM
Post by: Leigh S on 22 February, 2012, 11:43:43 PM
The sexiest ostrich is Octavia... Er I mean, no Death Planet for me either...
Chalk me up as another one enjoying AR (The Darkness not withstanding)
Chalk me up as another one enjoying AR (The Darkness not withstanding)
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Taryn Tailz on 23 February, 2012, 12:15:16 AM
Post by: Taryn Tailz on 23 February, 2012, 12:15:16 AM
I've never bought the meg really but decided to try late last year. I gave up after two issues as I wasn't reading American Reaper, which takes up so much of the meg. I think the meg is pricey as it is but when im not reading a large chuck of it I had to consider it a waste of money. I really want to give the meg a chance but Im not gonna bother untill the (rumoured?) Simping Detective series appears and American Reaper is gone.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Grey M@a on 23 February, 2012, 12:35:14 AM
Post by: Grey M@a on 23 February, 2012, 12:35:14 AM
When did Meg 321 come out for subs? Can't say I've had mine as yet. Will phone them tomorrow to see if one was sent out, if not then hopefully will get a replacement :)
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: James Stacey on 23 February, 2012, 09:18:36 AM
Post by: James Stacey on 23 February, 2012, 09:18:36 AM
Well it's not due to be sent till Saturday so you have a couple of days yet before you worry.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Grey M@a on 23 February, 2012, 11:08:45 AM
Post by: Grey M@a on 23 February, 2012, 11:08:45 AM
Fair enough, with them being sent out early I assumed the whole batch had gone early. I will keep an eye out for it and if nothing by Monday will drop them a line :)
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Proudhuff on 23 February, 2012, 11:40:24 AM
Post by: Proudhuff on 23 February, 2012, 11:40:24 AM
Quote from: King Trout on 22 February, 2012, 11:52:59 AM
I'm afraid it didn't take long to read.
The lead Dredd story is good enough, although kind of light. It's about Jeremy Kyle coming to the Meg. I'm sad to say I spent much of it predicting, correctly, what was going to happen next.
It's the last episode of Armitage, and the final panel made me grin. I'm not sure my suspension of disbelief stretches to the theory that [spoiler]judges' DNA can be booby-trapped,[/spoiler] but it's all science fiction so I'm not going to worry about it.
American Reaper isn't for me, I'm afraid. It has, at least, ended for now. It's back in the "fall".
Again, Strange and Darke is (IMO) the best thing in the Meg. It's now openly referencing the Wicker Man, which is kind of a relief as its influence is so obvious. But it has lots of great ideas in it and I'm loving the uncontrollable extra voice. It's a bit exposition-heavy this month, but hey-ho. Colin MacNeil drew it, so I'm happy.
Next month: the return of Diggle and Jock! Thank Drokk for that.
- Trout
I think Trout says it all here more or less, except the cover seems a bit left field, aimed at who? and the whole AR adverts are just a waste of expensive space especially the derogatory boob job bit, the text bits are fine with a chat with some newbie artists, lack of Dreddlines leaves me wondering if there is nothing but negative comments about AR flooding the meg-office so best say nothing?
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: radiator on 23 February, 2012, 11:50:55 AM
Post by: radiator on 23 February, 2012, 11:50:55 AM
QuoteI like American Reaper. It's different, and the Megazine should try out things which "divide the readership" now and then.
All of which is fine, but a) AR seems to swallow up a lot of the page count, month in, month out - much more than an average strip, which is a hell of a lot of the Meg that goes unread by me every month, and b) it's coming back quite soon, which I can't help but find disappointing and is what moved me to comment on it.
There have been many strips over the years that I didn't like, but never commented as such because they're relatively shorter and less frequent. Though it obviously has more fans than I first thought, AR does seem to have on the whole been very poorly received by the majority of readers and I'm surprised to see that it will be back so soon.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: IndigoPrime on 23 February, 2012, 12:58:32 PM
Post by: IndigoPrime on 23 February, 2012, 12:58:32 PM
I just wish Pat Mills would write something that was self-contained for once. "Book one of eleven billion."
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Gonk on 23 February, 2012, 02:03:20 PM
Post by: Gonk on 23 February, 2012, 02:03:20 PM
I like American Reaper too and find it a bit strange how it keeps getting sledged all the time. If you don't like something fair enough, but why keep saying it in such a spiteful way? I don't find anything so bad in 2000ad that makes me want to complain so much. If I don't like something I'm just indifferent to it and do not bother spending time and money on it. End of.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: James Stacey on 23 February, 2012, 02:07:17 PM
Post by: James Stacey on 23 February, 2012, 02:07:17 PM
Quote from: fonky on 23 February, 2012, 02:03:20 PMNot spending money on it isn't an option when you subscribe to an anthology.
If I don't like something I'm just indifferent to it and do not bother spending time and money on it. End of.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: radiator on 23 February, 2012, 02:43:06 PM
Post by: radiator on 23 February, 2012, 02:43:06 PM
QuoteI like American Reaper too and find it a bit strange how it keeps getting sledged all the time. If you don't like something fair enough, but why keep saying it in such a spiteful way? I don't find anything so bad in 2000ad that makes me want to complain so much. If I don't like something I'm just indifferent to it and do not bother spending time and money on it. End of.
Hello? Can anyone hear me!?!?
For a start, it isn't 'spiteful' to say you don't like something and you're glad to see the back of it, and don't want it to return. It would be spiteful to make nasty, derogatory comments without anything to back them up, or to attack the creators on a personal level - "Strip X is a load of shit", "Writer X is a talentless prick" etc. That sort of thing gets (rightly) frowned upon on this forum.
As I said before, there are a few of strips in 2000ad and the Megazine I don't really like and/or skip over, but that's fine - there are others who like them and I don't begrudge them a place in the comic. Crucially - they'll be gone after a few weeks, and only return once a year, or even once every few years. The news that AR will be back in the Meg in a matter of months is what moved me from a position of indifference and ignoring it to me actively disliking it and getting a bit irritated as a consumer.
AR is a special case - it takes up massive chunks of a comic I subscribe to - if there's a duff strip in the prog, that's fine as it's only 20% or less of the contents - AR can take up between a third and a half of the strip content of the Megazine. Your 'don't buy it' argument is nonsensical - it's not as if strips can be bought individually.
If the readers don't like something, they should say so (in as polite a way as possible) - how else are the publisher supposed to know what is going down well - or not - with the readers?
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Gonk on 23 February, 2012, 03:52:43 PM
Post by: Gonk on 23 February, 2012, 03:52:43 PM
Quote from: James Stacey on 23 February, 2012, 02:07:17 PMQuote from: fonky on 23 February, 2012, 02:03:20 PMNot spending money on it isn't an option when you subscribe to an anthology.
If I don't like something I'm just indifferent to it and do not bother spending time and money on it. End of.
I know what you mean James Stacey, but I'm probably a bit more ruthless than you in my choices of what I read. Now I know we all like different stuff, but with me if I have a series of comics, like the Meg, and I start finding I'm not enjoying it, I won't continue buying it just for the sake of having every one in the collection, even if there is one strip in it I still like might like. That's just me, I'm not attacking anybody's reading habits. They could put a "Return of the Return of Roy of the Rovers" strip in the next MEG, I'd still buy it 'cos I like the MEG and one strip isn't going to change that.
I didn't actually notice anything spiteful in your comments Rad. you've jumped the gun a bit there! I'm not pointing the finger at any one in particular, I've just noticed some of the comments on AR were a bit off colour for a 2000ad strip, thass all, no offence implied.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: James Stacey on 23 February, 2012, 03:58:13 PM
Post by: James Stacey on 23 February, 2012, 03:58:13 PM
No one has posted anyone poo yet so it's all quite restrained really.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Banners on 23 February, 2012, 04:36:30 PM
Post by: Banners on 23 February, 2012, 04:36:30 PM
Quote from: fonky
They could put a "Return of the Return of Roy of the Rovers" strip in the next MEG, I'd still buy it 'cos I like the MEG and one strip isn't going to change that...
That would be awesome. Any chance of a cameo for Egbert Blabwort?
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: The Sherman Kid on 23 February, 2012, 10:26:33 PM
Post by: The Sherman Kid on 23 February, 2012, 10:26:33 PM
Quote from: King Trout on 22 February, 2012, 02:22:54 PM
No Dreddlines this month. Sorry lads.
You almost never reply to letters anyway.
Could anyone answer why this is?In 2000ad most letters seem to get a reply, especially when a question is posed but in the Meg nobody seems to bother which seems very lazy and inconsiderate.I've had letters printed in the Meg before but no answer to the questions or issues posed -WHY IS THIS?
You would no doubt get more letters if a response was made.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Buttonman on 23 February, 2012, 10:54:03 PM
Post by: Buttonman on 23 February, 2012, 10:54:03 PM
Quote from: The Sherman Kid on 23 February, 2012, 10:26:33 PMQuote from: King Trout on 22 February, 2012, 02:22:54 PM
No Dreddlines this month. Sorry lads.
You almost never reply to letters anyway.
I've had letters printed in the Meg before
It's not Fishy's fault - he's a partial friend of the letters page!
Many claim a letter printing heritage and we've been burned before. Please detail your claim and the Beast will decide!
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: The Sherman Kid on 24 February, 2012, 12:00:29 AM
Post by: The Sherman Kid on 24 February, 2012, 12:00:29 AM
Quote from: Buttonman on 23 February, 2012, 10:54:03 PMQuote from: The Sherman Kid on 23 February, 2012, 10:26:33 PMQuote from: King Trout on 22 February, 2012, 02:22:54 PM
No Dreddlines this month. Sorry lads.
You almost never reply to letters anyway.
I've had letters printed in the Meg before
It's not Fishy's fault - he's a partial friend of the letters page!
Many claim a letter printing heritage and we've been burned before. Please detail your claim and the Beast will decide!
Apologies to 'fishy' ,thought he was at Rebellion
Claim?Think I've had 4 in last few years.The last one specifically pointed out the lack of replies on Dreddlines, guess what happened......
I really like having a letters page in the Meg ,but it would be far better if they regularly replied to those who take the trouble to write in.Can't say fairer than that.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Trout on 24 February, 2012, 01:36:06 AM
Post by: Trout on 24 February, 2012, 01:36:06 AM
Quote from: The Sherman Kid on 24 February, 2012, 12:00:29 AMQuote from: Buttonman on 23 February, 2012, 10:54:03 PMQuote from: The Sherman Kid on 23 February, 2012, 10:26:33 PMQuote from: King Trout on 22 February, 2012, 02:22:54 PM
No Dreddlines this month. Sorry lads.
You almost never reply to letters anyway.
I've had letters printed in the Meg before
It's not Fishy's fault - he's a partial friend of the letters page!
Many claim a letter printing heritage and we've been burned before. Please detail your claim and the Beast will decide!
Apologies to 'fishy' ,thought he was at Rebellion
Claim?Think I've had 4 in last few years.The last one specifically pointed out the lack of replies on Dreddlines, guess what happened......
I really like having a letters page in the Meg ,but it would be far better if they regularly replied to those who take the trouble to write in.Can't say fairer than that.
I'm Tharg in disguise. I'm also John Wagner, Pat Mills and Hilary Robinson. In a hat.
- Trout
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: A.Cow on 24 February, 2012, 02:48:21 AM
Post by: A.Cow on 24 February, 2012, 02:48:21 AM
Call me picky, but surely (counting the gosh-darned awful cover) we've now got to the stage where the American Reaper spoof adverts are threatening to outnumber the actual story pages.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Buttonman on 24 February, 2012, 07:58:48 AM
Post by: Buttonman on 24 February, 2012, 07:58:48 AM
QuoteClaim?Think I've had 4 in last few years.The last one specifically pointed out the lack of replies on Dreddlines, guess what happened......
Please provide name/town or at least one issue that you were in an the Letters Beast Database will verify your claim. Not that we wouldn't take your word for it but people come on here all the time with fanciful claims!
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: James Stacey on 24 February, 2012, 09:23:06 AM
Post by: James Stacey on 24 February, 2012, 09:23:06 AM
Notice how Buttonman is happy with Trouts claims but take claim to a printed letter and it's like the Spanish Inquisition. This is why we love him.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Richmond Clements on 24 February, 2012, 10:49:51 AM
Post by: Richmond Clements on 24 February, 2012, 10:49:51 AM
My major problem, well one of my major problems, with Langley's photostrip work is that fact that he only ever uses one page layout. Maybe if he mixed the panels up a bit it would be a bit better.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: radiator on 24 February, 2012, 10:58:27 AM
Post by: radiator on 24 February, 2012, 10:58:27 AM
My problem is just how naff it looks.
I feel bad because Langley is a hugely talented artist and must be one of the hardest working in the industry, but I just cannot fathom why he persists with the photo-manipulated style.
I don't mind his ABC Warriors stuff, but whenever a human character turns up it all crumbles.
This is a good example - an amazingly good cover, ruined by the inclusion of the jarring-looking photo of the woman.
I feel bad because Langley is a hugely talented artist and must be one of the hardest working in the industry, but I just cannot fathom why he persists with the photo-manipulated style.
I don't mind his ABC Warriors stuff, but whenever a human character turns up it all crumbles.
This is a good example - an amazingly good cover, ruined by the inclusion of the jarring-looking photo of the woman.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Spaceghost on 24 February, 2012, 11:12:42 AM
Post by: Spaceghost on 24 February, 2012, 11:12:42 AM
Quote from: radiator on 24 February, 2012, 10:58:27 AM
My problem is just how naff it looks.
I feel bad because Langley is a hugely talented artist and must be one of the hardest working in the industry, but I just cannot fathom why he persists with the photo-manipulated style.
I don't mind his ABC Warriors stuff, but whenever a human character turns up it all crumbles.
That's exactly why I don't like it. All those gurning faces just look so silly.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: TordelBack on 24 February, 2012, 11:20:20 AM
Post by: TordelBack on 24 February, 2012, 11:20:20 AM
Quote from: radiator on 24 February, 2012, 10:58:27 AM
...I just cannot fathom why he persists with the photo-manipulated style.
Probably because it gets him plenty of work, and his principle collaborator clearly likes it, and there are plenty of people (wrong people, obviously) who think his Sláine is the definitive version. Your choice of Mongrol cover is a brilliant example of the problem - it looks really great, and then your eye is drawn Lara/Niamh/Nest/Lemmy or whoever and the whole thing collapses (for me).
It's not like Langley can't draw people, in fact I think he did really great faces in Lord of Misrule, and grud knows he cares hugely about how his work is presented and perceived, to judge by the extra pages and reworkings he lavishes on the collections. As Radiator notes, it's also apparent that he works like a madmen, so it's certainly not a labour-saving method. To me that indicates that it's an artistic choice he's making, and we're probably stuck with it until he moves on creatively, or the work dries up. But no, I don't understand it.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: James Stacey on 24 February, 2012, 11:23:45 AM
Post by: James Stacey on 24 February, 2012, 11:23:45 AM
Yep I have to agree with Radiator too. His ABC work is lovely and works really well, as long as there aren't humans involved.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Steve Green on 24 February, 2012, 11:48:37 AM
Post by: Steve Green on 24 February, 2012, 11:48:37 AM
Speaking of photo-ref, I picked up the second Anderson trade, which has Postcards from the Edge in it...
I'd blotted out how bad some of that art was.
I'd blotted out how bad some of that art was.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: radiator on 24 February, 2012, 12:15:54 PM
Post by: radiator on 24 February, 2012, 12:15:54 PM
QuoteSpeaking of photo-ref, I picked up the second Anderson trade, which has Postcards from the Edge in it...
I'd blotted out how bad some of that art was.
Yeah it's pretty rough isn't?
Fair to say that very few of those artists (Mark Wilkinson, Steve Sampson, Tony Luke, Charles Gillespie) would stand a chance of getting hired by Tharg if they submitted that standard of work now - the bar to entry is so much higher these days, and there is much more of a focus on storytelling ability and draftsmanship. Seems like anyone who could wave a paintbrush around got commissioned back then.
Weirdly I remember really liking Sampson's work when I first got into 2000ad, but it's dated horribly since. I fear that Langley's will date very poorly also - to my eyes it looks dated even now.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Steve Green on 24 February, 2012, 12:29:43 PM
Post by: Steve Green on 24 February, 2012, 12:29:43 PM
Yeah, the Tony Luke parts are by far the worst for me, I'd add Xuasus to that list as well.
Rotten stuff.
Rotten stuff.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: TordelBack on 24 February, 2012, 12:50:32 PM
Post by: TordelBack on 24 February, 2012, 12:50:32 PM
Quote from: radiator on 24 February, 2012, 12:15:54 PM
Weirdly I remember really liking Sampson's work when I first got into 2000ad, but it's dated horribly since. I fear that Langley's will date very poorly also - to my eyes it looks dated even now.
At the time Sampson's stuff seemed to me to have something, a deliberate style, but I think it's dated so very badly because it never went anywhere, and thus remains as static as the images themselves. Looking recently at Langley's Books of Invasions and earlier Volgan War work, I don't think it's aged too badly at all - if anything I prefer it now to when it ran first. The later ABC Warriors material, with Lemmy and Max Schreck and the same lady in the same viz vest over and over, and some of the Slaine the Wanderer collection does little for me, and I fear it will go the way of Batman: Digital Justice.
That said, I am in no way suggesting that I wouldn't love a nice glossy collection of early Doomlord, Joe Soap, Mannix and Thunderbolt and Smokey.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Gonk on 24 February, 2012, 01:07:05 PM
Post by: Gonk on 24 February, 2012, 01:07:05 PM
Quote from: radiator on 24 February, 2012, 10:58:27 AM
My problem is just how naff it looks.
When I see a picture like this so brilliantly executed, although naff looking, I can't help feeling that that is the point of it.
Looking at a lot of paintings from the past, especially Victorian era ones, they are the same, brilliantly painted but naff. Isn't Langley's work self reflexive in some way don't you think?
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: radiator on 24 February, 2012, 01:18:33 PM
Post by: radiator on 24 February, 2012, 01:18:33 PM
Not really, no.
I don't know why, but there is simply something very cheesy and unnatural about photos of awkwardly-posed people with word balloons coming from their mouths.
I can't look at American Reaper without being reminded of Dear Deirdre or those old photo strips from 1970s girl's magazines (or the send ups of same that Viz used to do).
I feel the same way about a lot of conventional comic art that looks too heavily photo-referenced.
I don't know why, but there is simply something very cheesy and unnatural about photos of awkwardly-posed people with word balloons coming from their mouths.
I can't look at American Reaper without being reminded of Dear Deirdre or those old photo strips from 1970s girl's magazines (or the send ups of same that Viz used to do).
I feel the same way about a lot of conventional comic art that looks too heavily photo-referenced.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: TordelBack on 24 February, 2012, 01:34:36 PM
Post by: TordelBack on 24 February, 2012, 01:34:36 PM
Quote from: radiator on 24 February, 2012, 01:18:33 PMDear Deirdre
My secret vice. I love that column, but for fear of endorsing it, I only ever read in in canteens and waiting rooms.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: radiator on 24 February, 2012, 01:40:50 PM
Post by: radiator on 24 February, 2012, 01:40:50 PM
QuoteI'd add Xuasus to that list as well.
There's something a bit ugly about the work of Xuasus, but ISTR that his storytelling was a lot better and figures less stiff and lifeless than the other artists mentioned. Never quite understood all the hate, but I'll be giving his work a closer look when I finally get round to reading Psi Files 02.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: The Sherman Kid on 24 February, 2012, 02:03:17 PM
Post by: The Sherman Kid on 24 February, 2012, 02:03:17 PM
Quote from: Buttonman on 24 February, 2012, 07:58:48 AMQuoteClaim?Think I've had 4 in last few years.The last one specifically pointed out the lack of replies on Dreddlines, guess what happened......
Please provide name/town or at least one issue that you were in an the Letters Beast Database will verify your claim. Not that we wouldn't take your word for it but people come on here all the time with fanciful claims!
Really don't get your post.The point I was raising was the general lack of replies in Dreddlines,not just to my own.It's rare any reply is posted -which is clear to all, simply looking for an explanation.
As for the 'fanciful claims' -I'm not claiming to have shot dead four men for pete's sake, just letters printed.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Spaceghost on 24 February, 2012, 03:03:21 PM
Post by: Spaceghost on 24 February, 2012, 03:03:21 PM
Cover - Awful but maybe it'll be eyecatching on the shelves.
Judge Dredd - I liked this. It captured something of the fun of 'golden age' Dredd and had some nice wacky MC1 cits to enjoy.
Armitage - An ok little story, wrapped up quickly with no room wasted. Some aspects were a bit daft, like the booby trapped DNA and I'm never comfortable when writers seem to imply that Dredd never removes his helmet because he's disfigured in some way (if this was the case then why hide Fargo, Rico and Dolman's faces as they would look different to Dredd anyway).
American Reaper - I've already bashed this enough in previous Meg reviews so I'll just say that I'm looking forward to Jock and Diggle's new story next month.
Strange and Darke - Yes, I like this a lot. I didn't realise there were any rural areas left in Brit-Cit. I always assumed that there was one big Mega City surrounded by a sort of Cursed Earth wasteland. Love the killer sheep.
An ok issue dominated by my least favourite strip for many years. Looking forward to next issue.
Judge Dredd - I liked this. It captured something of the fun of 'golden age' Dredd and had some nice wacky MC1 cits to enjoy.
Armitage - An ok little story, wrapped up quickly with no room wasted. Some aspects were a bit daft, like the booby trapped DNA and I'm never comfortable when writers seem to imply that Dredd never removes his helmet because he's disfigured in some way (if this was the case then why hide Fargo, Rico and Dolman's faces as they would look different to Dredd anyway).
American Reaper - I've already bashed this enough in previous Meg reviews so I'll just say that I'm looking forward to Jock and Diggle's new story next month.
Strange and Darke - Yes, I like this a lot. I didn't realise there were any rural areas left in Brit-Cit. I always assumed that there was one big Mega City surrounded by a sort of Cursed Earth wasteland. Love the killer sheep.
An ok issue dominated by my least favourite strip for many years. Looking forward to next issue.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Trout on 24 February, 2012, 03:07:03 PM
Post by: Trout on 24 February, 2012, 03:07:03 PM
Quote from: The Sherman Kid on 24 February, 2012, 02:03:17 PMQuote from: Buttonman on 24 February, 2012, 07:58:48 AMQuoteClaim?Think I've had 4 in last few years.The last one specifically pointed out the lack of replies on Dreddlines, guess what happened......
Please provide name/town or at least one issue that you were in an the Letters Beast Database will verify your claim. Not that we wouldn't take your word for it but people come on here all the time with fanciful claims!
Really don't get your post.The point I was raising was the general lack of replies in Dreddlines,not just to my own.It's rare any reply is posted -which is clear to all, simply looking for an explanation.
As for the 'fanciful claims' -I'm not claiming to have shot dead four men for pete's sake, just letters printed.
He wants your details so he can look your letters up in the database he made of all the letters ever printed in the prog and Meg. He's also taking the piss a little. He does that. Don't worry about it. :)
- Trout
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Proudhuff on 24 February, 2012, 03:48:14 PM
Post by: Proudhuff on 24 February, 2012, 03:48:14 PM
He's mostly harmless
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: James Stacey on 24 February, 2012, 04:00:56 PM
Post by: James Stacey on 24 February, 2012, 04:00:56 PM
Quote from: King Trout on 24 February, 2012, 03:07:03 PMFTFY
He's also drawing pictures of piss a little. He does that. Don't worry about it. :)
- Trout
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Proper Dave on 24 February, 2012, 09:22:51 PM
Post by: Proper Dave on 24 February, 2012, 09:22:51 PM
Dredd Not Showing His Face: no spoilers here, but it's the standard, dating back to the Bolland strip where it was covered by a big 'censored' stamp and the perps dropped dead from the paroxysm of seeing the sheer horror of it.
And even if he's had reconstructive surgery and rejuve-treatments, whatever facial features he has under the hood are irrelevant. Dredd's FACE is the one that has the hat on.
And even if he's had reconstructive surgery and rejuve-treatments, whatever facial features he has under the hood are irrelevant. Dredd's FACE is the one that has the hat on.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Spaceghost on 24 February, 2012, 09:51:50 PM
Post by: Spaceghost on 24 February, 2012, 09:51:50 PM
Quote from: Proper Dave on 24 February, 2012, 09:22:51 PM
Dredd Not Showing His Face: no spoilers here, but it's the standard, dating back to the Bolland strip where it was covered by a big 'censored' stamp and the perps dropped dead from the paroxysm of seeing the sheer horror of it.
And even if he's had reconstructive surgery and rejuve-treatments, whatever facial features he has under the hood are irrelevant. Dredd's FACE is the one that has the hat on.
Without wishing to sound patronising, I think you're refering to that strip from the first 6 months of Dredd drawn by Bellardinelli where the script called for Dredd to be seen without his helmet.
Apparently, the Editorial opinion was that Bellardinelli's Dredd face was somewhat below par and a hasty edit was carried out, slapping a 'censored' sign over the uninspiring face and adding some adhoc "oh, it's horrible!" dialogue which hasn't really ever been referenced since. I don't think it was ever meant to be written in stone (y face).
Anyway, I didn't mean to moan. I really enjoyed the story, I just think the 'disfigured face' thing is one of those things which have basically been ignored and left behind by John Wagner but which other writers occasionally refer back to.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: TordelBack on 24 February, 2012, 10:11:43 PM
Post by: TordelBack on 24 February, 2012, 10:11:43 PM
Quote from: Lee Bates on 24 February, 2012, 09:51:50 PM
Apparently, the Editorial opinion was that Bellardinelli's Dredd face was somewhat below par and a hasty edit was carried out, slapping a 'censored' sign over the uninspiring face and adding some adhoc "oh, it's horrible!" dialogue which hasn't really ever been referenced since.
I always find that a bit hard to believe - it reads like a standard comics CENSORED! gag, and I'd bet it was written like that. Present the proof!
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Spaceghost on 24 February, 2012, 10:25:52 PM
Post by: Spaceghost on 24 February, 2012, 10:25:52 PM
Well that's the way it's presented in both the Judge Dredd Mega History and Thrill Power Overload books and those are the only sources I have.
Apparently, in the original script, the perps were so awe struck by Dredd's heroic visage, they spontaniously surrendered. The face that Bellardinelli presented didn't project the kind of gravitas required and so the 'censored' thing was slapped on it.
Could be true, could be bollocks but the fact is that it's been largely papered over ever since.
Apparently, in the original script, the perps were so awe struck by Dredd's heroic visage, they spontaniously surrendered. The face that Bellardinelli presented didn't project the kind of gravitas required and so the 'censored' thing was slapped on it.
Could be true, could be bollocks but the fact is that it's been largely papered over ever since.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Proper Dave on 24 February, 2012, 10:33:29 PM
Post by: Proper Dave on 24 February, 2012, 10:33:29 PM
Bardinelli, that's who I was thinking of. :p
(EDIT: And while I'm here, not having seen it yet, did they change [spoiler]'Judge José Dredd, you have something I need inside me'[/spoiler]?)
(EDIT: And while I'm here, not having seen it yet, did they change [spoiler]'Judge José Dredd, you have something I need inside me'[/spoiler]?)
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Martin Howe on 24 February, 2012, 10:47:03 PM
Post by: Martin Howe on 24 February, 2012, 10:47:03 PM
American Reaper 321 wasn't too bad an issue, despite the comic's cliché ("Oh no I shot my son, now my daughter's in danger") ridden ("Oh no, the scanners don't work any more, we're f***ked") retro ("Hey its the 1950s in the 2150s) look.
As for the filler material, Armitage was good except for the Judge Dredd DNA nonsense, which rather spoiled it all.
So apart from the intro Judge Dredd story, it seems the Thrill Suckers have been busy this month :(
5/10
As for the filler material, Armitage was good except for the Judge Dredd DNA nonsense, which rather spoiled it all.
So apart from the intro Judge Dredd story, it seems the Thrill Suckers have been busy this month :(
5/10
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Martin Howe on 24 February, 2012, 10:51:02 PM
Post by: Martin Howe on 24 February, 2012, 10:51:02 PM
Actually, make that 6/10 for the AR artwork. Sure it's 50's retro cliche but at least it's illustrated well.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Richmond Clements on 24 February, 2012, 10:54:53 PM
Post by: Richmond Clements on 24 February, 2012, 10:54:53 PM
QuoteAs for the filler material
I'm sure the creators working on those strips will appreciate how much you think of their work...
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Spaceghost on 24 February, 2012, 11:03:41 PM
Post by: Spaceghost on 24 February, 2012, 11:03:41 PM
Quote from: Proper Dave on 24 February, 2012, 10:33:29 PM
Bardinelli, that's who I was thinking of. :p
Bellardinelli. Are you drunk Dave? I am drunkened to fuck.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: vzzbux on 24 February, 2012, 11:07:00 PM
Post by: vzzbux on 24 February, 2012, 11:07:00 PM
Armitage, Filler?
I would say it is the best of the four.
Not much Dredd in the Dredd story.
V
I would say it is the best of the four.
Not much Dredd in the Dredd story.
V
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Spaceghost on 24 February, 2012, 11:11:07 PM
Post by: Spaceghost on 24 February, 2012, 11:11:07 PM
Quote from: Proper Dave on 24 February, 2012, 10:33:29 PM
Bardinelli, that's who I was thinking of. :p
(EDIT: And while I'm here, not having seen it yet, did they change [spoiler]'Judge José Dredd, you have something I need inside me'[/spoiler]?)
It actually says [spoiler]"Judge Joseph Dredd of Mega-City One, you have something inside you that I [/ineed]".[/spoiler]
All sauciness expunged.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Spaceghost on 24 February, 2012, 11:13:03 PM
Post by: Spaceghost on 24 February, 2012, 11:13:03 PM
Fuck knows what happenrd then. I'm pissed.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Buttonman on 25 February, 2012, 05:49:37 PM
Post by: Buttonman on 25 February, 2012, 05:49:37 PM
Quote
As for the 'fanciful claims' -I'm not claiming to have shot dead four men for pete's sake, just letters printed.
Come now, anyone can kill a few people but not everyone can get letters printed. The Beast is filing this under 'Claim Denied' unless we get the numbers!
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Grey M@a on 25 February, 2012, 10:28:00 PM
Post by: Grey M@a on 25 February, 2012, 10:28:00 PM
I think my copy of Meg 321 has gone walkies again. I got the floppy this morning of Death Planet but still no sign of Meg 321 :( From the sounds of it though its nothing to be excited for so not to worried about it going missing after they were sent out early.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: DrJomster on 25 February, 2012, 11:32:03 PM
Post by: DrJomster on 25 February, 2012, 11:32:03 PM
Well, one positive aspect of the latest Meg is the amount of fairly passionate discussion... ;)
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: IndigoPrime on 26 February, 2012, 12:06:32 AM
Post by: IndigoPrime on 26 February, 2012, 12:06:32 AM
Floppy arrived today, and just read it. Ugh. In fact, ugh x 2. The floppies are always a bit of a crapshoot, but I always thought Angel was utter trash, and as for Death Planet... Well, at least the cover was nice.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Proper Dave on 26 February, 2012, 01:49:36 AM
Post by: Proper Dave on 26 February, 2012, 01:49:36 AM
Quote from: Lee Bates on 24 February, 2012, 11:11:07 PM
It actually says [spoiler]"Judge Joseph Dredd of Mega-City One, you have something inside you that I [/ineed]".[/spoiler]
Aw. I was really hoping that they would get on board with the fact that the Joe in Dredd should be based on [spoiler]José[/spoiler] and not [spoiler]Joseph[/spoiler].
Yet another case of white, privileged men appropriating something other than them.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Trout on 26 February, 2012, 02:56:18 PM
Post by: Trout on 26 February, 2012, 02:56:18 PM
Jose Dredd? Where does that come from? I thought he was supposed to be black.
As for the floppy: bloody hell. It reads like a couple of rejected Starblazer submissions. Utter tosh.
- Trout
As for the floppy: bloody hell. It reads like a couple of rejected Starblazer submissions. Utter tosh.
- Trout
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Steve Green on 26 February, 2012, 03:54:20 PM
Post by: Steve Green on 26 February, 2012, 03:54:20 PM
I think that was just Mick drawing him as black originally - not sure if it was ever specified by the writer or Carlos.
Fargo seems to be Welsh originally according to the interwebs... I always though Dredd's lineage was supposed to be italian-american if anything, not hispanic.
On a side note, Brian Bolland picked out the Ostrich cover at the 2000AD panel on saturday, and said he really liked it...
Fargo seems to be Welsh originally according to the interwebs... I always though Dredd's lineage was supposed to be italian-american if anything, not hispanic.
On a side note, Brian Bolland picked out the Ostrich cover at the 2000AD panel on saturday, and said he really liked it...
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Spikes on 26 February, 2012, 04:48:11 PM
Post by: Spikes on 26 February, 2012, 04:48:11 PM
Quote from: Steve Green on 26 February, 2012, 03:54:20 PM
I think that was just Mick drawing him as black originally - not sure if it was ever specified by the writer or Carlos.
It was Carlos who originally gave Dredd some typically non-white features, to "put a mystery as to his racial background", and when Mick was asked to copy the template set by Carlos, he just assumed he was black and sorta drew him as such - for a while.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Gonk on 26 February, 2012, 06:08:07 PM
Post by: Gonk on 26 February, 2012, 06:08:07 PM
I thought he was just a clone.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Martin Howe on 26 February, 2012, 10:23:02 PM
Post by: Martin Howe on 26 February, 2012, 10:23:02 PM
Quote from: Richmond Clements on 24 February, 2012, 10:54:53 PMEr, engage humour detectors please :)QuoteAs for the filler materialI'm sure the creators working on those strips will appreciate how much you think of their work...
(I thought calling it an issue of "American Reaper" was an obvious humour giveaway. Though perhaps we need a "Joke Alert" icon like as used in The Register.)
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: DrJomster on 26 February, 2012, 11:16:38 PM
Post by: DrJomster on 26 February, 2012, 11:16:38 PM
I think Strange & Darke would benefit from being before American Reaper to be honest. It's coming along nicely and Colin's art is great as always but it should be in among the normal length material.
Good Dredd this Meg and Armitage I think would benefit from a longer run. Good to see Dredd's helmet staying on though!
Those ostriches on the cover were good though. :)
Couldn't finish the floppy, I'm afraid. Sorry! That Durham Red one recently was top though.
Good Dredd this Meg and Armitage I think would benefit from a longer run. Good to see Dredd's helmet staying on though!
Those ostriches on the cover were good though. :)
Couldn't finish the floppy, I'm afraid. Sorry! That Durham Red one recently was top though.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Gonk on 27 February, 2012, 09:19:11 AM
Post by: Gonk on 27 February, 2012, 09:19:11 AM
Quote from: Martin Howe on 26 February, 2012, 10:23:02 PM
Er, engage humour detectors please :)
(I thought calling it an issue of "American Reaper" was an obvious humour giveaway. Though perhaps we need a "Joke Alert" icon like as used in The Register.)
seems a lot of MEG readers missed the irony in AR and thought they were having the piss ripped out of them.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Spaceghost on 27 February, 2012, 09:55:37 AM
Post by: Spaceghost on 27 February, 2012, 09:55:37 AM
Quote from: Steve Green on 26 February, 2012, 03:54:20 PM
I always though Dredd's lineage was supposed to be italian-american if anything
Giuseppe Dredd?
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Proudhuff on 27 February, 2012, 10:13:09 AM
Post by: Proudhuff on 27 February, 2012, 10:13:09 AM
Quote from: fonky on 27 February, 2012, 09:19:11 AMQuote from: Martin Howe on 26 February, 2012, 10:23:02 PM
Er, engage humour detectors please :)
(I thought calling it an issue of "American Reaper" was an obvious humour giveaway. Though perhaps we need a "Joke Alert" icon like as used in The Register.)
seems a lot of MEG readers missed the irony in AR and thought they were having the piss ripped out of them.
nope you're wrong, there is no irony in AR, standard Pat, dare I say striaght faced story, piss has been ripped by the length, page count and bogus adverts
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 27 February, 2012, 10:29:37 AM
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 27 February, 2012, 10:29:37 AM
I can't wait to get my copy this Wednesday, as the Meg sounds great this month!
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Gonk on 27 February, 2012, 11:38:29 AM
Post by: Gonk on 27 February, 2012, 11:38:29 AM
Quote from: Proudhuff on 27 February, 2012, 10:13:09 AMQuote from: fonky on 27 February, 2012, 09:19:11 AMQuote from: Martin Howe on 26 February, 2012, 10:23:02 PM
Er, engage humour detectors please :)
(I thought calling it an issue of "American Reaper" was an obvious humour giveaway. Though perhaps we need a "Joke Alert" icon like as used in The Register.)
seems a lot of MEG readers missed the irony in AR and thought they were having the piss ripped out of them.
nope you're wrong, there is no irony in AR, standard Pat, dare I say striaght faced story, piss has been ripped by the length, page count and bogus adverts
My friend, it's a comic strip, a form of cheap popular entertainment, not Picasso or Ezra Pound. I am not in any way trying to patronise you proudhuff, you obviously know what you like and don't like, but comics are ten a penny, you only have to go into a newsagent to see this. For me AR is a reflection of this throwaway commodity culture we are unfortunate to be living in. That's how I read it. If the strip seems bankrupt of ideas and artistic merit that's because we live in a society that is totally bankrupt financially, emotionally, morally and spiritually. AR is attempting to portray the contemporary attitudes to life which seems to visualise the realisation of happiness through the material possessions of a young body and owning a car.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: mygrimmbrother on 27 February, 2012, 11:40:05 AM
Post by: mygrimmbrother on 27 February, 2012, 11:40:05 AM
Maybe, but it's still terrible.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: TordelBack on 27 February, 2012, 11:42:10 AM
Post by: TordelBack on 27 February, 2012, 11:42:10 AM
Quote from: fonky on 27 February, 2012, 11:38:29 AM...but comics are ten a penny, you only have to go into a newsagent to see this...
Brother, you have got to tell me where this newsagent is.
I have never bought the idea of comics as 'cheap popular' entertainment. By any measure they'd be neither.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: mygrimmbrother on 27 February, 2012, 11:46:49 AM
Post by: mygrimmbrother on 27 February, 2012, 11:46:49 AM
Yeah, and there's me thinking the medium had been striving for years now to get away from that perception. Obviously not hard enough. Now I know there are still way too many daft and inconsequential costumed hero comics, and there's still a ways to go yet before the most popular images on the covers and on Deviant Art don't show lycra-clad females with big buns and bigger guns, but there are also numerous attempts to make comics 'art'. I've just this morning finished 'Luna Park' by Kevin Baker and Danijel Zezelj, and was hugely moved by it several times.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: BPP on 27 February, 2012, 12:04:45 PM
Post by: BPP on 27 February, 2012, 12:04:45 PM
Boy, you may not like AR but you sure like saying how much you don't like AR.
(btw - the comics/page count in the Meg went up with AR, the other 3 strips getting the same page count as before so to gripe that its taking up a lot of your comics pages is a bit off as I'd imagine there is a fair chance to total number of comics-pages will go back down with the replacement strip. Clearly AR is designed to be read in larger chunks than the tradition prog/meg 5-6 page batches (or 12-13 pages for Meg Dredd) and so the comics page count with its presence was hugely increased to facilitate).
Personally I thought it was great, not 10-star Pat Mills but good stuff. Can't complain about Clint's future-cheesecake either. Hopefully Rebellion are in on the reprint rights too as collected Mills and Langley clearly shifts units. There is a reason for Slaine and ABC Warriors being the only things getting the hardback treatment and I doubt its 'be nice to Pat'.
But what do I know? I LOVED Death Planet.
(btw - the comics/page count in the Meg went up with AR, the other 3 strips getting the same page count as before so to gripe that its taking up a lot of your comics pages is a bit off as I'd imagine there is a fair chance to total number of comics-pages will go back down with the replacement strip. Clearly AR is designed to be read in larger chunks than the tradition prog/meg 5-6 page batches (or 12-13 pages for Meg Dredd) and so the comics page count with its presence was hugely increased to facilitate).
Personally I thought it was great, not 10-star Pat Mills but good stuff. Can't complain about Clint's future-cheesecake either. Hopefully Rebellion are in on the reprint rights too as collected Mills and Langley clearly shifts units. There is a reason for Slaine and ABC Warriors being the only things getting the hardback treatment and I doubt its 'be nice to Pat'.
But what do I know? I LOVED Death Planet.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Proudhuff on 27 February, 2012, 01:19:46 PM
Post by: Proudhuff on 27 February, 2012, 01:19:46 PM
Different stokes etc, i haven't counted the pages, lifes too short, if the page number has been upped to accomodate AR then fine. I don't hate it, don't even dislike it, it just seems to take sooo long to get from A to B never mind back again. oh and the gurning I dislike but then again I can remember the Jackie comic from the 70's.
Wonky I'm begining to believe the rumours...
Wonky I'm begining to believe the rumours...
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Gonk on 27 February, 2012, 01:37:29 PM
Post by: Gonk on 27 February, 2012, 01:37:29 PM
Quote from: TordelBack on 27 February, 2012, 11:42:10 AM
Brother, you have got to tell me where this newsagent is.
I have never bought the idea of comics as 'cheap popular' entertainment. By any measure they'd be neither.
It's called WHSmith Tordell. Every time I go in there to find 2000ad I'm faced with row upon row of magazines, too numerous to count. Well, Tordel, buying a magazine costs a few quid, there's millions of them produced every day, there are only one of Picasso's "Les Demoiselles d' Avignon" which if you wanted to buy would cost you millions upon millions of filthy lucre. This is how I discriminate between cheap and expensive art. However, Picasso and magazines though not equal when it comes to buying it are more or less equal when it comes to to being popular. In fact more people have probably heard of Picasso than they have 2000ad, which might be why his paintings are more expensive to buy than a comic.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: James Stacey on 27 February, 2012, 01:53:11 PM
Post by: James Stacey on 27 February, 2012, 01:53:11 PM
Bollocks. A quick google reveals Picasso's "Les Demoisellesd' Avignon" postcards, prints and all sorts. I'd bet it's even appeared in those same magazines in WHS more than once. You can't compare the original art by one person with a copy of someones else and say .. look this copy is cheap and mass produced. (Yes I know the original Picasso will cost more than a Langley original, but the fact remains - your argument is flawed)
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Spaceghost on 27 February, 2012, 01:57:06 PM
Post by: Spaceghost on 27 February, 2012, 01:57:06 PM
Quote from: fonky on 27 February, 2012, 01:37:29 PMQuote from: TordelBack on 27 February, 2012, 11:42:10 AM
Brother, you have got to tell me where this newsagent is.
I have never bought the idea of comics as 'cheap popular' entertainment. By any measure they'd be neither.
It's called WHSmith Tordell. Every time I go in there to find 2000ad I'm faced with row upon row of magazines, too numerous to count. Well, Tordel, buying a magazine costs a few quid, there's millions of them produced every day, there are only one of Picasso's "Les Demoiselles d' Avignon" which if you wanted to buy would cost you millions upon millions of filthy lucre. This is how I discriminate between cheap and expensive art. However, Picasso and magazines though not equal when it comes to buying it are more or less equal when it comes to to being popular. In fact more people have probably heard of Picasso than they have 2000ad, which might be why his paintings are more expensive to buy than a comic.
This is completely meaningless waffle which has nothing to do with the quality of a comic strip.
You seem to be suggesting that Pat Mills and Clint Langley have purposefully created a tacky, cheap, gaudy comic with no substance as a cheeky nod to our culture's obsession with shallowness and materialism and that you're the only one perceptive enough to have noticed. Absolute hogwash.
Even if that was the case (which it is not) the fact that most of the readers, intelligent readers at that, have not picked up on this suggests that the creators have failed to pull this off.
By your rationale, if the Meg printed 15 pages of a poorly drawn stickman saying the words 'modern society is rubbish' over and over again, you would back that as a valid endevour as "it's only stupid comics anyway".
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: BPP on 27 February, 2012, 02:30:41 PM
Post by: BPP on 27 February, 2012, 02:30:41 PM
Quote from: Lee Bates on 27 February, 2012, 01:57:06 PM
By your rationale, if the Meg printed 15 pages of a poorly drawn stickman saying the words 'modern society is rubbish' over and over again, you would back that as a valid endevour as "it's only stupid comics anyway".
To be fair, it would be cheaper for Rebellion just to license that sorta thing off Fantagraphics circa 1990.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Gonk on 27 February, 2012, 03:29:55 PM
Post by: Gonk on 27 February, 2012, 03:29:55 PM
If you take the time to read my comments on AR you will see that I have been defending the quality of the comic strip, not attacking it.
Tacky, cheap, gaudy, you've got it, that's what you've been accusing AR of being, not me. My point is mass produced comics are deemed to be this as a whole, and I read AR as a reflection of this.
My argument isn't flawed at all. Magazines are produced by, on the whole, people on low wages and in shit jobs. I do not refer to artistic creators or geniuses, but the mass of people who are needed for a magazine to be printed, bound and distributed. Picasso made single work of arts. The magazine industry reproduced them by cheap labour for a cheap market.
Tacky, cheap, gaudy, you've got it, that's what you've been accusing AR of being, not me. My point is mass produced comics are deemed to be this as a whole, and I read AR as a reflection of this.
My argument isn't flawed at all. Magazines are produced by, on the whole, people on low wages and in shit jobs. I do not refer to artistic creators or geniuses, but the mass of people who are needed for a magazine to be printed, bound and distributed. Picasso made single work of arts. The magazine industry reproduced them by cheap labour for a cheap market.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Grey M@a on 27 February, 2012, 03:53:29 PM
Post by: Grey M@a on 27 February, 2012, 03:53:29 PM
I think Rebellion really do need to pay the Denise Droid a lot more money for her job. No matter what issue's I have with subs, within seconds its sorted :D Hopefully this Meg copy will get to me :)
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Spaceghost on 27 February, 2012, 03:58:33 PM
Post by: Spaceghost on 27 February, 2012, 03:58:33 PM
Quote from: fonky on 27 February, 2012, 03:29:55 PM
If you take the time to read my comments on AR you will see that I have been defending the quality of the comic strip, not attacking it.
I did read your comments. You appear to be saying that it's meant to be vacuous and low brow. I don't think it is.
Quote from: fonky on 27 February, 2012, 03:29:55 PM
Tacky, cheap, gaudy, you've got it, that's what you've been accusing AR of being, not me. My point is mass produced comics are deemed to be this as a whole, and I read AR as a reflection of this.
'Deemed' by who? Not me. "It's supposed to be terrible" isn't a very good argument in defense of this story.
Quote from: fonky on 27 February, 2012, 03:29:55 PM
My argument isn't flawed at all. Magazines are produced by, on the whole, people on low wages and in shit jobs. I do not refer to artistic creators or geniuses, but the mass of people who are needed for a magazine to be printed, bound and distributed. Picasso made single work of arts. The magazine industry reproduced them by cheap labour for a cheap market.
This has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the perceived quality of this story. And surely a comic strip, whilst needing a large company to print and distribute it, is a very intimate dialogue between the writer, artist (and Editor I suppose) and reader. It doesn't matter if it's mass produced or not, the creators are communicating directly with their readership.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: TordelBack on 27 February, 2012, 04:26:15 PM
Post by: TordelBack on 27 February, 2012, 04:26:15 PM
Nah Fonky, I wasn't talking about art - I was responding to your observation that comics are "cheap popular entertainment". They're not, they're bloody expensive (imagine trying to sell a novel that costs over 10c a page - an average fantasy paperback would cost €50+, and you could still read 100+ comics in the time it'd take to read it), take ages to create, and they really aren't that popular. Comics can be art, serious art (whatever that is), and they can also be the printed equivalent of Home and Away without the wit.
As to the wages of those who create them: care to tell me how much money Van Gogh made off his art?
As to the wages of those who create them: care to tell me how much money Van Gogh made off his art?
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Gonk on 27 February, 2012, 05:32:36 PM
Post by: Gonk on 27 February, 2012, 05:32:36 PM
No Lee Bates you keep missing my point, I do not think AR is vacuous and low brow, I think it reflects the vacuous and low brow elements of our society/culture (exactly what they are is a different debate), this is what the strip wants to portray, and I think it does this successfully by the way it is presented to us in the MEG.
The creators are communicating with their readership, true enough. My point is the guy who is stacking 1000's of magazines in a warehouse on a minimum wage is not going to be bothered whether it's 2000ad or Which? Magazine he's stacking because he is not getting paid to worry over it. To him it's a wage and not art. The guy stacking magazines is essential because without him the publication won't get out of the warehouse and to the customer. 2000ad is produced for a mass market, "Les Demoiselles de Avignon" is a unique object created by Picasso. The fact that it's been reproduced millions of time in the mass media just increases it uniqueness and value.
Tell me about it Tordell. Remeber I paid 50 quid for Nemesis Book 3! ;) I never said comics couldn't be art. No one can agree what is really art and what isn't. When you hold a Stars Wars figure in your hand do you see a work of art or a product?
The creators are communicating with their readership, true enough. My point is the guy who is stacking 1000's of magazines in a warehouse on a minimum wage is not going to be bothered whether it's 2000ad or Which? Magazine he's stacking because he is not getting paid to worry over it. To him it's a wage and not art. The guy stacking magazines is essential because without him the publication won't get out of the warehouse and to the customer. 2000ad is produced for a mass market, "Les Demoiselles de Avignon" is a unique object created by Picasso. The fact that it's been reproduced millions of time in the mass media just increases it uniqueness and value.
Tell me about it Tordell. Remeber I paid 50 quid for Nemesis Book 3! ;) I never said comics couldn't be art. No one can agree what is really art and what isn't. When you hold a Stars Wars figure in your hand do you see a work of art or a product?
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: TordelBack on 27 February, 2012, 06:54:59 PM
Post by: TordelBack on 27 February, 2012, 06:54:59 PM
Product based on a work of art.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Gonk on 27 February, 2012, 07:10:32 PM
Post by: Gonk on 27 February, 2012, 07:10:32 PM
So being a creative, imaginative individual, you could turn that product based on a work of art back into a unique work of art. How? Drawing a picture of it yourself or incorporating it into your own story or imagination in some way.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: A.Cow on 28 February, 2012, 02:07:20 AM
Post by: A.Cow on 28 February, 2012, 02:07:20 AM
Quote from: fonky on 27 February, 2012, 11:38:29 AM
My friend, it's a comic strip, a form of cheap popular entertainment, not Picasso or Ezra Pound.
You explain that to Pat Mills. He appears to take this stuff far more seriously in interviews.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Gonk on 28 February, 2012, 09:39:49 AM
Post by: Gonk on 28 February, 2012, 09:39:49 AM
I would never deny that the artists who make the stories for 2000ad are not very skilled craftsmen.
Comic strips are associated with low popular culture, like the newspapers that originally spawned them.
Because something belongs to low popular culture does not make it of any less value than something belonging to high popular culture, such as Pound's Cantos. Heck! I can enjoy a Shakespeare play as much as I can enjoy watching a wrestling match.
I enjoyed AR, a few on here are evaluating a bit harshly for a comic strip. That was my original contention. As far as comics go I think 2000ad is of the highest standard, and I do not bother reading any others because I do not think they are as good as 2000ad.
Comic strips are associated with low popular culture, like the newspapers that originally spawned them.
Because something belongs to low popular culture does not make it of any less value than something belonging to high popular culture, such as Pound's Cantos. Heck! I can enjoy a Shakespeare play as much as I can enjoy watching a wrestling match.
I enjoyed AR, a few on here are evaluating a bit harshly for a comic strip. That was my original contention. As far as comics go I think 2000ad is of the highest standard, and I do not bother reading any others because I do not think they are as good as 2000ad.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: TordelBack on 28 February, 2012, 10:31:57 AM
Post by: TordelBack on 28 February, 2012, 10:31:57 AM
Quote from: fonky on 28 February, 2012, 09:39:49 AMI can enjoy a Shakespeare play...
Themselves 'low popular culture', by your definition: one penny for a groundling in the Globe, 2000 at a time, doesn't get much cheaper that that, even in the early 17th century. Shakespeare wasn't just writing immortal drama for the connoisseur of classical allusion, he was writing bawdy jokes, pratfalls, historical inaccuracies, ridiculously overblown melodrama and superstitious nonsense for the common person with a copper to spend on entertainment. Does that automatically make his plays cheap and undeserving of serious criticism?
Don't mean to be unduly argumentative with you Fonky, I accept that you are not running down 2000AD or comics creators in general, but I think your underlying assumption of a division between 'high' and 'low' art and culture is just plain wrong: there's just art you like and art you don't, everything else is just that opinion in cultural aggregate and over time. I quite agree with you that a strip can be enjoyed even if it's just pitched as throwaway fun, but even so it doesn't mean that it should automatically be excused its perceived flaws on the basis that the medium its in is somehow cheap and mainly meant to appeal to the LCD.
(Incidentally I haven't seen anything of American Reaper beyond review excerpts, so I'm talking in the abstract here and not about the strip itself).
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Spaceghost on 28 February, 2012, 10:46:01 AM
Post by: Spaceghost on 28 February, 2012, 10:46:01 AM
Quote from: fonky on 28 February, 2012, 09:39:49 AM
I enjoyed AR, a few on here are evaluating a bit harshly for a comic strip. That was my original contention.
No. You see, this is where you are very, very wrong. Saying, as you are, that "It's ok because comics are a trashy, low brow medium", is not only condescending to the creators, it's also patronising to the readers.
Comics can be just as life affirming, affecting, and important as any art house film or prize winning novel. They can also be as broad in scope and scale as a blockbuster film due to the fact that there is, in effect, an unlimited budget as far as location and SFX goes.
To suggest that the creators went out of their way to create a strip which is supposed to be enjoyed as vacuous fluff is insulting to say the least.
I may not like American Reaper but I would never suggest that it's good if only enjoyed on the level of throwaway trash because comics are supposed to be low art, disposable entertainment.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: TordelBack on 28 February, 2012, 10:55:30 AM
Post by: TordelBack on 28 February, 2012, 10:55:30 AM
Anecdote time: I once worked with a lady who was an enormous Opera buff, spent her salary traveling the world attending festivals from New York to Vienna, had librettos and boxsets and handwritten correspondence from Domingo, the whole thing. On her return from a once-in-lifetime trip to a full production of Der Ring des Nibelungen in Bayreuth, and casting around for a topic of conversation I (being a colossal nerd, but one who absolutely hates opera and knows nothing about it) asked her something or other about Siegfried and Hagen and the Ring (probably gleaned from a commentary of Lord of the Rings): she hadn't a clue what I was talking about. She'd just spent several days enjoying the music and the spectacle, she had only the sketchiest idea about the story or its origins. So, was she enjoying high art, because it's a Wagner opera cycle, or low art, because it was just singing and gilt sets? And did that matter at all?
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: John Caliber on 28 February, 2012, 11:26:11 AM
Post by: John Caliber on 28 February, 2012, 11:26:11 AM
Opinions regarding AMERICAN REAPER aside for a moment. Re: its return in the Autumn, I would have thought that, with the release of DREDD 3D, the Megazine should have been wall-to-wall Dredd for 3-4 months to capitalise? More so than 2000AD since the Megazine covers prominently feature Dredd's name.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: radiator on 28 February, 2012, 11:28:26 AM
Post by: radiator on 28 February, 2012, 11:28:26 AM
That's a good point. I'd quite like a new series of The Lost Cases, but get Al Ewing, Si Spurrier, Rob Williams and Gordon Rennie to pitch in stories as well as Alan Grant. That way we'd at least get two Dredds a month.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Proudhuff on 28 February, 2012, 11:39:15 AM
Post by: Proudhuff on 28 February, 2012, 11:39:15 AM
Got to agree with John and Rad excelent ideas!!
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: John Caliber on 28 February, 2012, 11:52:46 AM
Post by: John Caliber on 28 February, 2012, 11:52:46 AM
I wonder if a serialised adaptation of the movie is in the works for the latter-year Megs?
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Proudhuff on 28 February, 2012, 11:54:23 AM
Post by: Proudhuff on 28 February, 2012, 11:54:23 AM
not according to Mol-R
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Gonk on 28 February, 2012, 12:09:21 PM
Post by: Gonk on 28 February, 2012, 12:09:21 PM
Quote from: Lee Bates on 28 February, 2012, 10:46:01 AMQuote from: fonky on 28 February, 2012, 09:39:49 AM
I enjoyed AR, a few on here are evaluating a bit harshly for a comic strip. That was my original contention.
No. You see, this is where you are very, very wrong. Saying, as you are, that "It's ok because comics are a trashy, low brow medium", is not only condescending to the creators, it's also patronising to the readers.
Comics can be just as life affirming, affecting, and important as any art house film or prize winning novel. They can also be as broad in scope and scale as a blockbuster film due to the fact that there is, in effect, an unlimited budget as far as location and SFX goes.
To suggest that the creators went out of their way to create a strip which is supposed to be enjoyed as vacuous fluff is insulting to say the least.
I may not like American Reaper but I would never suggest that it's good if only enjoyed on the level of throwaway trash because comics are supposed to be low art, disposable entertainment.
No Lee Bates, I'm saying AR reflects the trashy low brow elements of comics. I think this strip has jokingly been referred to as resembling something from Mandy or Bunty, I don't know which, and I think that's part of the AR strip, to call into question the trashy throw away elements of comics. My view is AR is a ambitious undertaking by it's creators.
Comics can be a very subversive element in the cultural life of a society. I do not thnik it's vacuous fluff in the least. At the end of the day it's down to the reader to decide how they want to interpret the comic.
Comics as a whole are products for a commodity market. It is people like us, who collect and nuture them, that recuperate them from this status as plain commodity into something more significant.
I see your point Tordel. But even the most open minded and liberal of us must at some point decide that Wagner's music is of more consequnce than something by Jedward.
I'd like wall to wall Dredd for a few months.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: James Stacey on 28 February, 2012, 12:16:15 PM
Post by: James Stacey on 28 February, 2012, 12:16:15 PM
Quote from: fonky on 28 February, 2012, 12:09:21 PM
I think this strip has jokingly been referred to as resembling something from Mandy or Bunty, I don't know which, and I think that's part of the AR strip, to call into question the trashy throw away elements of comics. My view is AR is a ambitious undertaking by it's creators.
No I think you are missing the reason. The same comments can be levelled to Slaine or ABC, it's just more evident in AR. Langleys photoshopping of photos is how he creates strips now so can't really be said to be an intentional conceit of AR.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: TordelBack on 28 February, 2012, 12:34:11 PM
Post by: TordelBack on 28 February, 2012, 12:34:11 PM
Quote from: fonky on 28 February, 2012, 12:09:21 PM
I see your point Tordel. But even the most open minded and liberal of us must at some point decide that Wagner's music is of more consequnce than something by Jedward.
Two points on a spectrum defined by the aggregate appreciation of their work, not inhabitants of discrete universes of 'high' and 'low' culture (although arguably hailing from two different species entirely). Do you automatically give Jedward a free pass to be utterly shite because they're just miming along to synthetic jingles in a medium that is basically shite anyway? Or do you say that you don't like them because you find their output empty, grating and devoid of any musical merit? As a man who obviously loves music, I'm guessing the latter.
As to Wagner, he wasn't always belle of the cultural ball. Wagner's first opera wasn't produced until after his death. His second closed after the second performance. He abandoned his job as director of the Opera in Riga due to massive debts. Nothing he wrote had any kind of positive reception until he was 39*. This suggests that his early audiences may have thought him the Jedward of the opera house scene.
I'd suggest there are real distinctions between the two, and they lie in complexity and craft and long-term widespread appeal. But it's not because one is opera and one is reality-TV manufactured pap.
*Thank you Wikipedia. As noted above, I know nothing about opera.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Spaceghost on 28 February, 2012, 01:39:13 PM
Post by: Spaceghost on 28 February, 2012, 01:39:13 PM
Quote from: fonky on 28 February, 2012, 12:09:21 PM
At the end of the day it's down to the reader to decide how they want to interpret the comic.
And yet you continually state that everyone but you is missing the point when they say they don't like American Reaper.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: TordelBack on 28 February, 2012, 01:58:14 PM
Post by: TordelBack on 28 February, 2012, 01:58:14 PM
Look on the bright side, this is all going to make for a magnificent intro to the collection!
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Gonk on 28 February, 2012, 01:58:54 PM
Post by: Gonk on 28 February, 2012, 01:58:54 PM
You're reading more into my posts than is there Tordel. I don't like Wagner. His music is too over blown for me, too pompous. I like Jedward, they make me laugh. I can still see that even I don't appreciate his work, that Wagner is more important to the musical world than Jedward are or ever will be.
No again Lee Bates. I'm saying not everyone thinks AR is rubbish. Those who do are making a value choice. I'm the same as you, I won't let comments on a forum stop my enjoyment of 2000ad.
No it's not an intentional conceit of AR but Langley's own creative technique, yes James Lacey I agree.
Quote from: Lee Bates on 28 February, 2012, 01:39:13 PMQuote from: fonky on 28 February, 2012, 12:09:21 PM
At the end of the day it's down to the reader to decide how they want to interpret the comic.
And yet you continually state that everyone but you is missing the point when they say they don't like American Reaper.
No again Lee Bates. I'm saying not everyone thinks AR is rubbish. Those who do are making a value choice. I'm the same as you, I won't let comments on a forum stop my enjoyment of 2000ad.
No it's not an intentional conceit of AR but Langley's own creative technique, yes James Lacey I agree.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: TordelBack on 29 February, 2012, 02:13:53 AM
Post by: TordelBack on 29 February, 2012, 02:13:53 AM
Interestingly the great Colin Smith has been having relevant thoughts about comics and high vs. populist culture:
Worth a look, as ever.
http://toobusythinkingboutcomics.blogspot.com/2012/02/on-seths-its-good-life-if-you-dont.html
QuoteIn short, I admit to being weary of the fact that a great deal of the pop culture I most value has been consistently defined as being either pablum for half-wits or pretentious artistry for the chattering classes. It's always either what Gore Vidal called the P-Novel or the U-Novel, the unashamed and populist or the self-conscious and excluding, and I've never felt comfortable with either front in that particular culture war. In fact, I've always failed to be able to distinguish between the ultimate worth of, say, Ditko's many super-men and the novels of Jane Austen, despite knowing how ridiculous the dilemma will appear, and I rather resent feeling as if I ought to be able to do so.
Worth a look, as ever.
http://toobusythinkingboutcomics.blogspot.com/2012/02/on-seths-its-good-life-if-you-dont.html
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Gonk on 29 February, 2012, 08:57:01 AM
Post by: Gonk on 29 February, 2012, 08:57:01 AM
Yes it's a confusing mess. How do you evaluate a work's artistic merit? Through the amount of time that is spent producing it? Or by how well known it is? Or how difficult it is for an audience to interpret? There doesn't seem to be a reliable criteria to judge something by. Usually if something is very old then it is taken as having artistic value because of it's longevity. But a work's survival over the centuries could also just be down to pure chance, or habit, and not due to an intrinsic artistic superiority in the piece.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: TordelBack on 29 February, 2012, 09:04:43 AM
Post by: TordelBack on 29 February, 2012, 09:04:43 AM
Quote from: fonky on 29 February, 2012, 08:57:01 AMBut a work's survival over the centuries could also just be down to pure chance, or habit, and not due to an intrinsic artistic superiority in the piece.
Chance is a massive part of what endures over time, but if my limited travels have taught me anything (other than how to ask for beer in 10 languages), it's that the stuff that ends up celebrated as seminal works of a culture (in whatever medium) very seldom, if ever, disappoint. Like clichés, they're there for a reason.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: mygrimmbrother on 29 February, 2012, 09:19:34 AM
Post by: mygrimmbrother on 29 February, 2012, 09:19:34 AM
Also, chance plays a huge part in works of art gaining recognition in the first place, not just in enduring through the ages.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: TordelBack on 29 February, 2012, 09:22:59 AM
Post by: TordelBack on 29 February, 2012, 09:22:59 AM
Absolutely - 99.99% of all the good stuff is lost, in whatever medium. You can be sure that there were works every bit as good and probably far better than the celebrated survivors, but you can also be reasonably sure that what does survive still has real merit.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Gonk on 29 February, 2012, 11:00:03 AM
Post by: Gonk on 29 February, 2012, 11:00:03 AM
What I mean by chance, is that over time many great works have been either lost or destroyed. Look at the ancient Greeks. There is so much that we can't appreciate of it because it no longer exists. This is not down to aesthetic choice but to the ravages of time.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: SmallBlueThing on 01 March, 2012, 08:18:00 PM
Post by: SmallBlueThing on 01 March, 2012, 08:18:00 PM
Ive just finished a read-through of American Reaper, which ive been looking forward to since it started. So much so, in fact, that i stopped reading it in The Meg after part two, as in pieces i felt i wasnt getting the full benefit.
Since we dont have an AR thread, i'll use this one to say the following:
I bloody loved each and every panel. Every exquisitely rendered cityscape, car and gurning close-up. It's that kind of simple story that Mills tells so well, and which absolutely reverberates with his rage at the injustices in modern living and takes it to extremes. As a comic strip, its been a long time since one has raised my heart rate like this did- if i were a hollywood producer, i'd green light this in a second. The coolness, the cars, the gadgets, the clothes, everything is designed to surf the zeitgeist-just-coming. Having put it down ten minutes ago, i feel like ive just come out the cinema from a particularly good sci fi action movie- and that cant be bad.
Autumn cant come quick enough (cont)
Since we dont have an AR thread, i'll use this one to say the following:
I bloody loved each and every panel. Every exquisitely rendered cityscape, car and gurning close-up. It's that kind of simple story that Mills tells so well, and which absolutely reverberates with his rage at the injustices in modern living and takes it to extremes. As a comic strip, its been a long time since one has raised my heart rate like this did- if i were a hollywood producer, i'd green light this in a second. The coolness, the cars, the gadgets, the clothes, everything is designed to surf the zeitgeist-just-coming. Having put it down ten minutes ago, i feel like ive just come out the cinema from a particularly good sci fi action movie- and that cant be bad.
Autumn cant come quick enough (cont)
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: SmallBlueThing on 01 March, 2012, 08:21:27 PM
Post by: SmallBlueThing on 01 March, 2012, 08:21:27 PM
(cont) for me, im afraid- though it appears not to be a popular opinion- and this is the best thing The Meg has run in YEARS. In comparison, the rest of the comic pales- with the exception of Strange & Darke, which shows promise.
But, bloody hell, what a strip. Im gobsmacked.
SBT
But, bloody hell, what a strip. Im gobsmacked.
SBT
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 02 March, 2012, 08:42:25 AM
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 02 March, 2012, 08:42:25 AM
Has anyone actually attempted reading the floppy, I've just went to bed and thought I'd give it a read to help me me nod off, but there is a slight problem. It's completely out of order and repeated all over the place.
Death Planet part 4
Death Planet part 5
Death Planet part 6
Death Planet part 7
Death Planet part 4
Death Planet part 5
Death Planet part 6
Death Planet part 7
Death Planet part 8
Death Planet part 9 (I think, no number but it's the final part)
Angel part 1
Angel part 2 (two pages)
Death Planet part 8
Death Planet part 9
Angel part 1
Angel part 2 (two pages and then the final page of the actual strip)
So much for a quiet read before bed >:(
Death Planet part 4
Death Planet part 5
Death Planet part 6
Death Planet part 7
Death Planet part 4
Death Planet part 5
Death Planet part 6
Death Planet part 7
Death Planet part 8
Death Planet part 9 (I think, no number but it's the final part)
Angel part 1
Angel part 2 (two pages)
Death Planet part 8
Death Planet part 9
Angel part 1
Angel part 2 (two pages and then the final page of the actual strip)
So much for a quiet read before bed >:(
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: SmallBlueThing on 02 March, 2012, 09:09:18 AM
Post by: SmallBlueThing on 02 March, 2012, 09:09:18 AM
Ring up and get a new one, cf, as mine is fine- i have it on my lap and have checked.
SBT
SBT
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: James Stacey on 02 March, 2012, 09:11:32 AM
Post by: James Stacey on 02 March, 2012, 09:11:32 AM
mine is still in its bag. I'll never know.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Steve Green on 02 March, 2012, 09:58:52 AM
Post by: Steve Green on 02 March, 2012, 09:58:52 AM
My one was fine - you can have it if you want...
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 02 March, 2012, 01:39:09 PM
Post by: COMMANDO FORCES on 02 March, 2012, 01:39:09 PM
That is very kind of you Steve :thumbsup:
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: strontium71 on 02 March, 2012, 01:43:17 PM
Post by: strontium71 on 02 March, 2012, 01:43:17 PM
Think of it as a special rare issue that is different from all the rest that were put out!
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Banners on 02 March, 2012, 01:47:58 PM
Post by: Banners on 02 March, 2012, 01:47:58 PM
No - the ostriches aren't sexy.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Steve Green on 02 March, 2012, 02:12:40 PM
Post by: Steve Green on 02 March, 2012, 02:12:40 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 02 March, 2012, 01:39:09 PM
That is very kind of you Steve :thumbsup:
No problem, PM me your address either here or on Facebook and I'll pop it in the post.
Cheers
Steve
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Zarjazzer on 03 March, 2012, 11:33:49 AM
Post by: Zarjazzer on 03 March, 2012, 11:33:49 AM
Bizarre cover. Floppy good if a little bit of a quick ending to Death Planet. AR "no comment" as the villains say.
Strange and Darke is the best in it. Seems much feebler than the recent megs.
Strange and Darke is the best in it. Seems much feebler than the recent megs.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: SKD on 03 March, 2012, 12:39:38 PM
Post by: SKD on 03 March, 2012, 12:39:38 PM
Quote from: COMMANDO FORCES on 02 March, 2012, 08:42:25 AM
Has anyone actually attempted reading the floppy, I've just went to bed and thought I'd give it a read to help me me nod off, but there is a slight problem. It's completely out of order and repeated all over the place.
So much for a quiet read before bed >:(
Mine was all t'cock too CF. There's a droid on the way to Mek-Quake I think.
Strange & Darke is my fave strip at the moment, John Smith's story is building nicely, I just hope it doesn't end too quickly. Colin Macneil's art is wonderful, I really like this new spin to his style. And the colours... (the sun setting and the darker turn to the story over the last five/six pages) Gorgeous. Top marks to Len O'Grady & Dee Cunniffe. All of this would not be complete without the work of Ellie De Ville, letterer supreme. :thumbsup: This is the strip for me that makes the Meg worth buying. Cheers.
Stew.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Link Prime on 05 March, 2012, 06:53:05 PM
Post by: Link Prime on 05 March, 2012, 06:53:05 PM
Quote from: A.Cow on 24 February, 2012, 02:48:21 AMThere's a story?
Call me picky, but surely (counting the gosh-darned awful cover) we've now got to the stage where the American Reaper spoof adverts are threatening to outnumber the actual story pages.
On a slightly nicer note, I'm a big fan of Mills & Langley on ABC Warriors, so was glad to hear they're back with the Meknificent Seven later this year.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: staticgirl on 09 March, 2012, 08:28:33 PM
Post by: staticgirl on 09 March, 2012, 08:28:33 PM
I loved the cover (to the point of thinking a print would be very nice) and I like the spoofverts very very much. The strip I think is okay rising to the beautiful at times - I like everything except the faces and the fact I keep recognising the models when they're different characters in different stories and it throws me out. Plus the gurning. The story is fine but I think the art distracts from it.
I loved Armitage especially the last panel. He's pretty fit for a scruffy old git. More please.
I love Dark and Strange, the art is understandably cracking but I love the pagan horror of the story too.
Dredd was funny!
I loved Armitage especially the last panel. He's pretty fit for a scruffy old git. More please.
I love Dark and Strange, the art is understandably cracking but I love the pagan horror of the story too.
Dredd was funny!
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: BPP on 10 March, 2012, 02:56:11 PM
Post by: BPP on 10 March, 2012, 02:56:11 PM
I loved the cover too - and the faux-adverts have had some of the nicest art I've seen in ages (the one in the diner about 2 issues back was particularly lush).
Sure I'd not like covers like that all the time but me-thinks if it was accompanying a Dredd story about some Mega-City sex-fad there would be nothing but praise and laughter with it. It's ludicrousness is it's brilliance and hurrah to Cyber-Matt for going with it.
Thought it was a great Meg all-round. Want to see more Goddard on Dredd-world / Armitage for sure.
Sure I'd not like covers like that all the time but me-thinks if it was accompanying a Dredd story about some Mega-City sex-fad there would be nothing but praise and laughter with it. It's ludicrousness is it's brilliance and hurrah to Cyber-Matt for going with it.
Thought it was a great Meg all-round. Want to see more Goddard on Dredd-world / Armitage for sure.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Gonk on 10 March, 2012, 05:17:20 PM
Post by: Gonk on 10 March, 2012, 05:17:20 PM
I think it was a bit of a departure for a lot of Dredd fans ,and ruffled a few (ostrich) feathers among the ranks. It was a bit too much for a lot of fans, that style of vulgarity, but I quite enjoyed the irony of it. It will be interesting to see if it divides opiion so much whe n it reurns in "the fall". :D
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Emperor on 11 March, 2012, 05:39:59 PM
Post by: Emperor on 11 March, 2012, 05:39:59 PM
Quote from: staticgirl on 09 March, 2012, 08:28:33 PM
I loved the cover (to the point of thinking a print would be very nice) and I like the spoofverts very very much.
Yes I think the cover actually works quite well, the white background (which Simon Davis also deploys well) really makes it "pop" on the shelves and ostriches with the legs of dancers is odd enough to get a doubletake out of a casual browser. It wouldn't work all the time but makes a nice change from Dredd action poses.
Also the fake ads are the best thing about American Reaper and Fay Dalton is a great find (Pat really does have a good eye for artists). She now has a page dedicated to her AR work on her site:
www.faydaltonillustration.com/page3.htm
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: flintlockjaw on 15 March, 2012, 03:25:10 AM
Post by: flintlockjaw on 15 March, 2012, 03:25:10 AM
Quote from: worldshown on 22 February, 2012, 12:27:45 PMHAHAHAHAHHAHA!
No floppy here too. Assumed my copy of Death Planet had been sent to Garth Ennis just to prove it could be collected.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: flintlockjaw on 15 March, 2012, 03:30:04 AM
Post by: flintlockjaw on 15 March, 2012, 03:30:04 AM
Quote from: IndigoPrime on 23 February, 2012, 12:58:32 PMNemeis the Warlock is 'self-contained'. Only three collected volumes. No more.
I just wish Pat Mills would write something that was self-contained for once. "Book one of eleven billion."
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: radiator on 15 March, 2012, 06:34:49 AM
Post by: radiator on 15 March, 2012, 06:34:49 AM
Well, no. Nemesis was TEN 'books' (series), plus many spinoffs and specials.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Gonk on 15 March, 2012, 06:49:12 AM
Post by: Gonk on 15 March, 2012, 06:49:12 AM
Such as "The Black Hole". Essential stuff for Nemesis fans. :D
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: flintlockjaw on 15 March, 2012, 01:43:24 PM
Post by: flintlockjaw on 15 March, 2012, 01:43:24 PM
Quote from: radiator on 15 March, 2012, 06:34:49 AMThat were collected into three volumes. I see the point...but it still had an ending.
Well, no. Nemesis was TEN 'books' (series), plus many spinoffs and specials.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Dark Jimbo on 15 March, 2012, 01:59:30 PM
Post by: Dark Jimbo on 15 March, 2012, 01:59:30 PM
Nemeis reads very much like a finite story. The apocalypse looms as early as the fifth book, and the rest is a race against (and through) time to prevent the End of Days, while 'back home' the world falls apart around everyone's ears; all the while the two leads' hatred for one another grows ever more intense and vindictive, building towards an inevitable final confrontation.
How it read at the time, spread out across ten or fifteen years, I have no idea, but reading the whole lot in the trades makes it very clear Mills always had an end in sight.
How it read at the time, spread out across ten or fifteen years, I have no idea, but reading the whole lot in the trades makes it very clear Mills always had an end in sight.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: flintlockjaw on 15 March, 2012, 04:10:25 PM
Post by: flintlockjaw on 15 March, 2012, 04:10:25 PM
It was a pretty decent ending too. Perfectly suitable for ending a not so good guy and an evil piece of scum.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Gonk on 15 March, 2012, 09:13:29 PM
Post by: Gonk on 15 March, 2012, 09:13:29 PM
Not a good ending for me, as I felt Seth got a raw deal. Seth at least, didn't deserve his fate. :(
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: I, Cosh on 16 March, 2012, 09:23:52 AM
Post by: I, Cosh on 16 March, 2012, 09:23:52 AM
Individual books of Nemesis have a satisfying, self-contained storyline. At least up to four. Can't remember much after that.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Gonk on 16 March, 2012, 04:51:12 PM
Post by: Gonk on 16 March, 2012, 04:51:12 PM
That's true cosh, which is why book 10 seemed a bit of an anticlimax for me. It appeared to me more as a pastiche of the whole series rather than a conclusion, a final battle between Nemesis and Torquemada. I got the impression of a record needle being stuck in a groove in book 10 and not an ending. The only character I felt any sympathy for in the end was the Blitzspear.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: judgefloyd on 24 March, 2012, 08:33:49 AM
Post by: judgefloyd on 24 March, 2012, 08:33:49 AM
I liked it, but hadn't read any of the other books, so avoided that needle stuck in record feeling. I too felt sorry for the Blitzspear.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Grant Goggans on 29 March, 2012, 03:54:49 PM
Post by: Grant Goggans on 29 March, 2012, 03:54:49 PM
Quote from: The Sherman Kid on 24 February, 2012, 02:03:17 PM
As for the 'fanciful claims' -I'm not claiming to have shot dead four men for pete's sake, just letters printed.
I know that I'm late to this thread and this comment, owing to the month-lag for the digital, but that made me laugh like a drain, that did.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Emperor on 02 April, 2012, 03:52:18 PM
Post by: Emperor on 02 April, 2012, 03:52:18 PM
Quote from: SKD on 03 March, 2012, 12:39:38 PMTop marks to Len O'Grady & Dee Cunniffe.
Dee has a post on his blog showing how he did the flatting for this Meg's S&D:
http://deesaturate.blogspot.co.uk/2012/03/strange-darke-new-blood-part-3.html
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: NorthVox on 03 April, 2012, 11:42:56 PM
Post by: NorthVox on 03 April, 2012, 11:42:56 PM
I liked American Reaper. Always a sucker for Langley's art, and the story was pretty interesting too. Definately did not see the twist coming at the end, can't wait for the next run.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Gonk on 05 April, 2012, 05:44:43 PM
Post by: Gonk on 05 April, 2012, 05:44:43 PM
Quote from: judgefloyd on 24 March, 2012, 08:33:49 AM
I liked it, but hadn't read any of the other books, so avoided that needle stuck in record feeling. I too felt sorry for the Blitzspear.
I read it as being intentional to the Nemesis saga. With the final chapter there is only the sense of surfaces without any depth. It's similar to sampling in music.
It's ironic that the final chapter isn't final but the replaying of the first chapters; style takes precedence over substance; which works well in a graphic story such as Nemesis that is more about visuality than dramtic tension of characters/situations. If I was to want a definitive ending for the story there is quite a few places I could point to in the saga, my choice would be Torqumada and Candida's wedding.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Mr Ruh on 18 April, 2012, 04:46:54 PM
Post by: Mr Ruh on 18 April, 2012, 04:46:54 PM
Worst cover ever. >:(
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Dash Decent on 02 July, 2012, 02:31:54 PM
Post by: Dash Decent on 02 July, 2012, 02:31:54 PM
Death Planet - page 2, we find out a woman is in charge. Page 3, things start going wrong. I'm sure there's a connection.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Judo on 10 September, 2012, 12:50:37 PM
Post by: Judo on 10 September, 2012, 12:50:37 PM
I know I'm very late to the party on this one but only got a chance to catch up recently.
I don't really bother with bad strips and iffy concepts, just wizz by them but mills work here is really lackadaisical. I just don't believe he's working 9-5, giving it his all on this strip. Again, ill pass by on things that people have worked hard on that are a bit shit but this just feels like he's in it for the money which is saddening. I really hope this isn't the case as we fans all have to work very hard in crap jobs to pay for these things. Felt like the whole strip could have been condensed into 2 or 3 pages with a bit of editing. I'm in camp 'draw yah bas' so can't really comment on photo art as a whole but i agree with the comments about static layouts.
Cover doesn't seem to popular round here but reminded me of a certain part of Crooked Little Vein so did give me a giggle. Feather boa made me cry lolol.
Everyone elses work was really solid and enjoyable.
And just for richmond ITS ALL SHIIIITTTTT ;) hehe x
I don't really bother with bad strips and iffy concepts, just wizz by them but mills work here is really lackadaisical. I just don't believe he's working 9-5, giving it his all on this strip. Again, ill pass by on things that people have worked hard on that are a bit shit but this just feels like he's in it for the money which is saddening. I really hope this isn't the case as we fans all have to work very hard in crap jobs to pay for these things. Felt like the whole strip could have been condensed into 2 or 3 pages with a bit of editing. I'm in camp 'draw yah bas' so can't really comment on photo art as a whole but i agree with the comments about static layouts.
Cover doesn't seem to popular round here but reminded me of a certain part of Crooked Little Vein so did give me a giggle. Feather boa made me cry lolol.
Everyone elses work was really solid and enjoyable.
And just for richmond ITS ALL SHIIIITTTTT ;) hehe x
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Mardroid on 11 September, 2012, 01:18:58 AM
Post by: Mardroid on 11 September, 2012, 01:18:58 AM
I really liked the premise of American Reaper, and I didn't dislike the story, but I felt it was too bloated, if that's the right word. Too many spreads. Could have been told in half the space.
As for photo-art, I think I'd prefer more traditional art, yet I am fascinated by the method this employs. I.e. is the artist literally taking photos of people posing then copying them to a computer and manipulating the image? Or is he actually painting the images using the photos as references? I know the answer may seem obvious, but I have seen painted art which is extremely realistic.
I agree, it does look rather static though. I like this style of art in ABC warriors though. It works very well with robots and machinery.
As for photo-art, I think I'd prefer more traditional art, yet I am fascinated by the method this employs. I.e. is the artist literally taking photos of people posing then copying them to a computer and manipulating the image? Or is he actually painting the images using the photos as references? I know the answer may seem obvious, but I have seen painted art which is extremely realistic.
I agree, it does look rather static though. I like this style of art in ABC warriors though. It works very well with robots and machinery.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: Tiplodocus on 14 October, 2012, 11:40:23 PM
Post by: Tiplodocus on 14 October, 2012, 11:40:23 PM
Finally caught up to here with my digital program and Meg catch up.
Sad to say this will be my last Meg. Reading it all in a row makes me feel there really isn't enough in it for me to justify 72 quid a year.
There has been the odd goody recently; Number Cruncher and Cursed Earth Coburn both great. And I really like the film review chap.
But as for the other content, I just don't find reading the artist interviews engaging ("and then I dropped out of art school").
The floppies have been very power as well. Cripes, Mercy Heights and Tor Cyan were dull. And went on for so long.
But the nail in the coffin for me was American Reaper. There's the start of a good idea in there but no story. And the art s not good comic art. It doesn't tell the story well enough and as many people have said, the faces pull you out of it. Really don't think ive disliked a strip so much in a long time. And it seems to take up so much space.
I've had a feeling that I have been subsidising an average Meg for a long time but I'm not going to subsidise it, especially American Reaper any more.
Sad to say this will be my last Meg. Reading it all in a row makes me feel there really isn't enough in it for me to justify 72 quid a year.
There has been the odd goody recently; Number Cruncher and Cursed Earth Coburn both great. And I really like the film review chap.
But as for the other content, I just don't find reading the artist interviews engaging ("and then I dropped out of art school").
The floppies have been very power as well. Cripes, Mercy Heights and Tor Cyan were dull. And went on for so long.
But the nail in the coffin for me was American Reaper. There's the start of a good idea in there but no story. And the art s not good comic art. It doesn't tell the story well enough and as many people have said, the faces pull you out of it. Really don't think ive disliked a strip so much in a long time. And it seems to take up so much space.
I've had a feeling that I have been subsidising an average Meg for a long time but I'm not going to subsidise it, especially American Reaper any more.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: mygrimmbrother on 15 October, 2012, 12:15:53 PM
Post by: mygrimmbrother on 15 October, 2012, 12:15:53 PM
Quote from: Tiplodocus on 14 October, 2012, 11:40:23 PM
Finally caught up to here with my digital program and Meg catch up.
Sad to say this will be my last Meg. Reading it all in a row makes me feel there really isn't enough in it for me to justify 72 quid a year.
There has been the odd goody recently; Number Cruncher and Cursed Earth Coburn both great. And I really like the film review chap.
But as for the other content, I just don't find reading the artist interviews engaging ("and then I dropped out of art school").
The floppies have been very power as well. Cripes, Mercy Heights and Tor Cyan were dull. And went on for so long.
But the nail in the coffin for me was American Reaper. There's the start of a good idea in there but no story. And the art s not good comic art. It doesn't tell the story well enough and as many people have said, the faces pull you out of it. Really don't think ive disliked a strip so much in a long time. And it seems to take up so much space.
I've had a feeling that I have been subsidising an average Meg for a long time but I'm not going to subsidise it, especially American Reaper any more.
I think next month's may be my last, and yeah, it's the inevitable return of the worst strip I've had the misfortune to read in years too that's tipped me over the edge. I'm gonna switch to Dark Horse Presents instead I reckon for my monthly anthology fix.
Title: Re: MEG 321 - American Reaper , sexy ostriches?
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 25 October, 2012, 10:12:23 PM
Post by: CrazyFoxMachine on 25 October, 2012, 10:12:23 PM
Quote from: mygrimmbrother on 15 October, 2012, 12:15:53 PM
I think next month's may be my last, and yeah, it's the inevitable return of the worst strip I've had the misfortune to read in years too that's tipped me over the edge.
...it's coming BACK?! Groan. I'll ALWAYS read the meg. Tank Girl was shite but I'm glued to the house of Tharg like a limpet to a dog. The dog doesn't know I'm there, but if it did it probably wouldn't be happy about it.