Messages

Yeah ... good prog with, oddly, Dredd the weakest thing in it. By no means unreadable, but still not really feeling like a Dredd story to me.

In the rest of the prog, we have the ABC Warriors kicking arse, and a plot twist, Ampney Crucis turning the bonkers up a notch, and Dante continuing to be the best thing in the prog by a mile.

Special mention to Bob Byrne. I've said some very uncomplimentary things about some of his strips in the past, but I thoroughly enjoyed this one. It could probably have been shorter, but certainly didn't outstay its welcome.

A thoroughly worthwhile prog to find on the doormat this morning.

Cheers!

Jim

Basically if played right keeping Batman and co high in sells for the next couple of years.

Although I think it's worth pointing out that the level of sales that puts a book in the US top ten today would have meant cancellation 20 years ago, which is kind of my point: I don't think that the industry has a clue how to appeal to the mass market any more, and I think this Batman RIP schtick is an illustration of this.

Cheers

Jim

Kill the franchise you say? okay then. No chance.  

No, I agree, but no matter how short-lived the supposed "death" of Batman, the fact remains that a non-comic fan coming to a Batman book off the strength of -- say -- getting bought Dark Knight on DVD for Christmas is going to find that Bruce Wayne isn't Batman, plus (and I confess, I haven't been reading any of the books) there's all that shit with his supposed son (?) and any number of things that would make a non-comic fan wonder if they'd bought the right title ...

This is the problem with Marvel and DC these days: even their flagship titles are largely impenetrable unless you're already a fan. There has been much scratching of heads at Marvel over why it should be that three smash hit Spider-Man films yielded barely a blip in sales of the comic and the conclusion seems to have been that movies don't bring in readers.

Alan Grant's experience on Detective does not bear out this conclusion. In his Megazine interview, he says that the pay for the early issues of Detective was so poor that John Wagner jacked it in, whilst Grant stuck it out and reaped substantial rewards when the sales rocketed and (and this is the key part) stayed up when the first Burton Batman movie came out.

Why? Because the Grant/Breyfogle Detective was absolutely, recognisably Batman. Not the Batman of fanboys, but a Batman identifiable to the wider public. Son of murdered parents, yes, but not some angsty, snivelling twat. Driven and focussed, yes, but not some raging ninja psycho.

Grant (somehow) even managed to get DC to let him sideline Robin out of the title completely, leaving you with month after month of solid, often classic, Batman tales drawn with style and wit by Breyfogle.

Surely someone at DC has enough brain cells to see how this works?

Cheers!

Jim

DC are actually out of their collective minds.

"Hey, one of our signature characters starred in the biggest movie of the summer, managing to garner not only massive box office but significant critical acclaim as well."

"Fantastic news! How can we capitalise on this huge success?"

"I know, why don't we fuck with all the elements that make Batman recognisably Batman, so that anyone who thinks about picking up one of our comics on the strength of the movie, or the DVD, will find the character bears absolutely no fucking resemblance to the character we've been publishing for 70 years nor, indeed, to the one portrayed in the aforementioned smash hit movie."

"You're a genius! Let's get Grant Morrison to write it, then it will be way kewl."

"Step 3: Profit!"

Unbefuckinglievable.

Cheers

Jim

Kung-Fu Panda: Hugely enjoyable, surpassing my middling expectations. Didn't suffer the usual Dreamworks shortcomings. (apart from the obligatory superfluous celebrity voiceovers)

This one is awaiting my attentions. Quite looking forward to it, although I kind of wish they'd done the whole thing in the style of the first five minutes, which I have already seen on teh interwebs.

Cheers!

Jim

Sadly still not caught up withj WALL-E yet; might buy it as a "family" Christmas present.

Oh, do ... it's everything I said at the top of the thread. Perfectly judged, perfectly paced and gorgeous to look at. I can pretty much guarantee that it will be the best thing you watch on Christmas Day.

Unless The Great Escape is on, obviously.

Cheers!

Jim

Yes I know the end is a mess (I still don't know what happened) but in no way does drippy Tyler even begin to compare to the pure beauty of Jennifer Connelly!

Actually, I have to give you that.

Cheers!

Jim

The Incredible Hulk: Pish. Banna was better.

Sorry, Ump ... are you seriously trying to suggest that Ang Lee's incomprehensible snoozefest with at least one action sequence (mutant dogs) clearly shoe-horned in when the producers realized exactly how long the film had been running without any-fucking-thing happening, and an ending that made no sense whatsoever, was preferable to a decent amount of Hulk-y action, the very decorative Liv Tyler and a plot that, whilst admittedly untaxing, at least made for some kind of coherent story?

Takes all sorts, I suppose!

Cheers

Jim

Of all the films mentioned in this thread, I have seen exactly... none (although I've seen about ten minutes of Finding Nemo).

Think the last film I saw at the cinema was King Kong. It's a revelation to hear of Buttonman's cinemagoing.

Watch The Incredibles, Jimbo. Best. Superhero. Movie. EVAH.

Cheers!

Jim

['In Bruges', 'The Savages', 'Rambo', Iron Man, 'Forgetting Sarah Marshall', 'Harold & Kumar 2']

Pah! You lesser mortals with your web based critiques! I have flown that coop to become a radio celebrity.

Oooh, 'ark it 'im with 'is 'oity-toity, radio celebrity airs and bleedin' graces! Forgot where 'e come from, 'e 'as.

Best of the year for me include 'In Bruges', 'The Savages', 'Rambo', Iron Man, 'Forgetting Sarah Marshall', 'Harold & Kumar 2' (not as good as first one though), 'The Happening, 'Dark Knight, 'Hell Boy 2', 'City of Ember', 'Taken', 'Burn After Reading' and 'Ghost Town'.

Bugger! Forgot about Burn After Reading (sadly not about an arsonist touring the dormitory towns of Berkshire, as the title originally made me suspect) ... I shall have to fit that in before Christmas. Not a summer blockbuster, though ...

I may consider my season ticket renewal, especially if they disregard my request for a 'no arsehole' rule.

How will you sit if they agree?

Cheers!

Jim

(Sorry if this smacks of rampant egotism, but I couldn't be arsed tracking down the relevant threads for each movie and tacking my comments onto the end of each of them ...)

Over the last couple of months, I've been catching up with the summer's big blockbuster movies on DVD and have, I must admit, been pleasantly surprised by the general lack of suckage ...

There may be SPOILERS but I'm not tagging them in movies that have been out for months. You have been warned.

Dark Knight Returns: OK, I actually paid to see this one in the cinema. I'm not entirely convinced that the plot holds together, and have a suspicion that on a repeat viewing the whole thing may fall apart. However, on the whole I found a first viewing carried you through the film's running time in reasonably satisfactory way. Best line went to Morgan Freeman and -- if you're going to swipe chunks of your plot wholesale from the comics -- there are worse things to swipe from than Killing Joke, with which the film shares much more than it does with its titular* semi-namesake.

Hellboy II: Likewise, a cinema viewing for me. I'll be interested to see whether this works on DVD, since the film seemed to be short on plot and long on "Ooh! Pretty!" It felt a lot less like a Hellboy movie and much more like a Guillermo Del Toro movie (to the extent that I am slightly concerned for The Hobbit now). Nonetheless, there was much to like here. Pretty much every scene looked fabulous and the raw imagination on display was impressive. Ron Perlman is always watchable and reprised the role with same gruff charm and engaging petulance that worked so well in the first film.

The Incredible Hulk: Although I can see the attraction, I've never been a particular fan of the comics and -- I think it is uncontroversial to say -- the last attempt at a film version sucked pretty mightily. Thus, the uncomplicated pleasures of this film provided a thoroughly entertaining couple of hours. I can do no better than agree with the Right Honourable Mr Tordel B. Ack when he said: "Much was smashed by the Hulk, including large amounts of military hardware. Betty worried prettily, Thunderbolt Ross hunted obsessively, the Abomination abominated".

Iron Man: Suprise hit of the crop for me. Iron Man has always seemed to me be a brilliant idea for a superhero, but Marvel have, over the years, filled his title with thoroughly odd and fanciful villains which seem to be at odds with what is a remarkably down-to-earth and "straight" SF concept. Fortunately, they pretty much went with a splendid performance by Downey Jr, a lot of hardware getting blown up or mangled, and a massive punch up at the end. The script was sprinkled with an excellently judged dusting of humour and all the subsidiary performances were more than satisfactory.

Indiana Jones & The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull: I don't know whether I my expectations were pre-lowered by some piss-poor word of mouth, or whether I was prepared to give this film a free pass because, well, you know, it's an Indiana Jones movie, but I enjoyed it a whole lot more than I expected to. There's some oddly shonky CGI at the start, on some totally mundane backgrounds as well, but beyond that I enjoyed it pretty much without reservation. I've read some people complaining about silliness and unrealistic elements, but this is an Indiana Jones movie. Likewise, complaints of the ending degenerating into a special effects fest which has little relation to, or involvement by, the hero ... it's an Indiana Jones movie. Could it have been better? Doubtless, and probably by an order of magnitude with a better screenplay. However, it was exciting in all the right places, funny in all the right places, and was much enlivened by a splendidly sparky performance from Karen Allen, who must have a painting in her attic that doesn't look so good.

Wall•E: For some reason, I have to fight with my wife to make her watch every Pixar movie. In fact, I practically have to tie her to a fucking chair** to make her watch them. Despite loving Monsters Inc, I've had to insist on watching FInding Nemo, The Incredibles, Ratatouille and now Wall•E. I don't know exactly what it is that Pixar have, but it's a magic touch. Wall•E is touching without being sentimental, charming without being ingratiating, funny without being laboured, and manages to be engagingly subversive as well. As if all that wasn't enough, it looks absolutely fantastic, too.

Haven't got round to Whatnot of Solace yet, but that will pretty much clear the decks of 2008 films I wanted to see. Bring on Star Trek, Watchmen, Monsters v Aliens, Terminator: Salvation and Up. Oh, and Apoloosa.

Cheers!

Jim

* Huh-huh-huh ... I said "titular". Ahuhuhuhuh.

** But enough about my private life.

[ai ftagn!]

Hurrah! Prog!

Exams! Revision! Boo! Never mind, I can take a little time off in the pursuit of thrill-power, eh?

Dredd: it's not actually bad, it just doesn't feel like Dredd, and never does when Pat writes it these days. That's not actually a particular criticism; there're bloody few writers who can make Dredd work as a character, even when the plot is up to scratch.

Stalag: not sorry it's done. I couldn't really care about any of the characters, and it could really have used four episodes pruning off. I think at a shorter run, this would have been a solid, workmanlike thrill. I hope Tony won't be too disheartened by the negative comments (poo notwithstanding), because there was quite a lot to be positive about here. I think a more focussed cast and a faster pace were all that was really required.

ABC Warriors: ah. Now I get it ... I remember where we are now! I couldn't really summon any enthusiasm for Zippo, so I'm glad to see the Warriors reappear. I go back and forth on Langley's art, but I quite like this episode.

Amply Crucial: I'm still undecided. Somehow, it's all seemed a bit, well, mundane so far. I wanted more exotic fruit-loopery, more gibbering eldritch monstrosities, more, I dunno, ai ftagn![/b]

Dante: nasty, nasty! This is superb stuff. I think there is an element of ambiguity in Burns' painted work that lends itself to the mood of this story, that Simon's clearer, cleaner line wouldn't have provided (and I say that as a HUGE Simon Fraser fan).

Not a bad prog, but I'm looking forward to the decks being cleared for the end-of-year extravaganza.

Cheers!

Jim

Good stuff Herr.Bhuna.
D'israeli has a good step by step runthrough on how he produces his pages on his blog site. I would post a link but haven't got a clue how. Worth a look though.

Follow this link and just keep clicking "next" until you're finished.

By the time you get to the last page, you'll be able to draw as well as D'israeli. Honest!

Cheers

Jim

Interested to know what you lot thought of it, and whether you had seen the original.

Didn't watch, didn't see the original. Which makes this post pretty pointless, I suppose, but your comments, Herr Von Scott, have triggered off a line of thought ...

Am I missing something? Is it just that we're so jaded now that TV drama lacks the power to shock and, yes, frighten us? Or is just that the focus-group-ruled, OFCOM fearing TV companies are incapable of producing something that genuinely scares the crap out of the audience?

I mean, I have some very vague recollection of (what I presume were repeats of) Quatermass, but my childhood TV was populated by early Baker Dr Who, Nightmare Man, The Day of the Triffids, Sapphire and Steel, and then, later, Threads, Edge of Darkness ...

Moffat's Doctor Who has approached that level with The Empty Child and Blink, but otherwise ... where is this stuff?

Random thought over. We now return you to your regularly scheduled programming.

Cheers

Jim

Well, since this topic is also -- by a strange coincidence -- also on the 2000AD review site, I can't really do any more than repeat my comments from there ...

Progs 250 - 350, however, gets you:

The Apocalypse War Edit to add: although my memory was slightly faulty when I made this claim - it ACTUALLY starts in issue 245.

Rogue Trooper with Colin Wilson and Cam Kennedy on art as Gibbons bows out

Ace Trucking

Harry 20

Robo-Hunter

More Dredd (including Trapper Hag, The Stupid Gun and Cry of the Werewolf)

Nemesis Books II and III

Slaine (including the debut of McMahon, although we miss Sky Chariots with this selection)

And ... the start of DR & Quinch.Edit to add: although you lose this if you move your 100 progs back to 245-345 to get the start of the Apolcalypse War.

You might shift these 100 issues forward by about 10-12 and include the whole of DR & Quinch and Sky Chariots, but you lose the Apocalypse War as a complete story in doing so.

I will roll up my sleeves and fight any man who says that this is not an absolute epoch of thrill power!

Edit: I would add to the above -- having Ezquerra pretty much full-time on Dredd costs us Strontium Dog during this period, which is the only thing that keeps this from being an absolutely perfect run of progs. There are some pretty bad Mean Arenas during these two years. Imagine if we'd had classic Wagner/Grant Stront in that slot!

Cheers!

Jim