34 Comments
Posted by dawnell_do@yahoo.com

Cool podcast, guys!

Edited by johnny_spam

Now I have read comments apparently people don't like the end of the Spider-Man Mary Jane relationship because it sacrificed some character development to both characters. It sounds like the other complaint is that breaking up Peter did not make him have more girl troubles but instead he can have lots of one night stands. 
  
@Babs you like Adam Beechen? He was the writer who started Cassandra Cain's downfall. Also in that same issue of Smallville where Lois was wearing a dress ended like this. A very schizophrenic episode. 
 
I did lose some respect for Alan Moore's anger at David Loyd and Dave Gibbons. They were co creators and co plotters yet they should thank him?  At this point he is just steaming mad at anyone.   
  
Ryan Reynolds would not be a better Wally then Hal he would not match that character at all.  
 
That is true Chris Claremont intended for Mister Sinister to be the creation of a disturbed young boy which is why his name was very childish. 

Online
Edited by ArtisticNeedham

Luke Cage, Hawkeye, Spider-Man, Wolverine, They are Life Model Decoys.
 
In the old days Peter had girl trouble.  The only girl who would give young Parker the time of day was older and graduated Betty Brant.  And even then he liked her, but being Spider-Man got in the way.
Its not that Peter is such a loser he can't get a girl, its like he is seen as so unreliable that he ends up looking like a jerk and no one wants to date him.  But once they give him a chance he is a good guy, but being Spider-man still gets in his way.
 
I liked that it was Mephisto who broke them up, leaving MJ and Peter's love in tact.  neither had an affair or fell out of love, or died.
I don't like when writers try and make a character more interesting by having that character (like Cyclops) have an affair.  It doesn't make them more interesting, it just makes them a jerk.  Its like the Hank Pym slap.  That is something hard to get over or forget about.
 
I think if they brought MJ back into Peter's life, maybe have him and her remember everything but no one else does.  She remembers everything that really happened plus all the stuff about OMIT and all her new memories since then.  And Peter remembers everything to.  Maybe now they try to be friends for a while, few years even.  Then perhaps try dating and keep them dating for a few years now.  Get her more involved in Peter's world without altering everything too much.  Sort of like a retcon without it being a retcon.
 
I guess Spider-Man being like friends is sort of a good thing right?
Because one of the reasons Brand New Day started was because they wanted to restore Peter's world of friends.  Because up till this they said that Peter only had MJ and Aunt May.  He stopped working at the paper, and the various friends they tried to introduce were forgotten by the next artist or were forgettable anyway.
So now Peter has a world of friends and supporting characters.  right?
 
Peter shouldn't be paid, or would expect it, because of his sense of he has to do it no matter what.
but the writers want it that way because that brings back the old Peter who had his miserable life get worse when he became Spider-Man, not better because he had powers.  Another reason they wanted changes was because being Spider-Man had actually become too much of a day job.  Peter went on patrol, he didn't have to sneak off or hide being Spider-Man because MJ and Aunt May knew and helped him.
 
But Peter getting drunk or having one night stands?  Not Peter, never.  Thats not him.
 
About downloading the cartoon DVDs, the money from buying the DVDs goes to paying the artists and making more animated DVDs, showing the studio there is demand for more.  24 drawings a second (7200 drawings in a 2 hour movie) doesn't pay for themselves.
 
In JLA versus the Avengers Batman marvels that Tony Stark could put this super invention together so fast, in like hours.
Buy Absolute Kingdom Come.  100 additional pages of character sketches and story ideas and such.

Posted by Crono11

Haven't had a chance to listen yet (just started) but I'm very glad that Norm is back.  I hope that he is a permanent part of the podcast.  

Edited by Krak0

I read what  Mark Millar wanted to do with Red  Myst, i just don't see Christopher MIntz playing a  Charles Manson type character believably. But who knows he may be able to pull it off and creep us out.

Posted by untammed

haha

Posted by Bald Eagle

Joe Quesada is ruining Spiderman!!!!  I think Joe Quesada thinks Spiderman should be a certain way, despite what the fans want and he is in charge so I guess he can do whatever he wants. 
 
They should use their so called creative talent at Marvel and make MJ the true supportive character she should be.  She was his wife and best friend.  She should be the perfect person to talk to about his problems. Being his wife, she is his emotional support.  To make him a stronger person. 
 
They need to quit trying to keep him in the 1960's as an awkward teenager.  Peter should be in his mid twenties and married to MJ with Harry Osborn still dead.
Posted by RomaTotti10

The Amazing Spider-Man comics has really hit a low.The whole OMIT was just awful. 
 
Great podcast.

Posted by Dr. Detfink

Norm! The Asian Invasion begins! 
 
Alan Moore is just being a jerk. He's not original either and yet, he's complaining that there is no originality in comic books today? His Watchmen characters aren't even original either.

Posted by G-Man
@Crono11: If I have anything to say about it, yes.
Staff
Posted by Decept-O

Very happy to have Norm return for another Podcast.  Man knows his comics and I value his opinions even if ( rarely ) I disagree with some of them.  Nice job by everyone, enjoyed the conversations.   
 
@G-Man:  I have to agree 100% I was also very surprised and very perturbed to read some people had already seen the Superman/Batman Apocalypse ( Is that the correct title? ) animated movie featuring Supergirl.   
 
  Everything you said I have to agree with, it is just plain out and out thievery!  If you don't have the funds to buy something, do something about it in a mature and honest way.  Get a job, a second job, do some extra work or plain save up your pennies so you can either buy or rent the movie, don't frikkin' download it or access it illegally!     What's sad is that these goofballs are proud of having done it?   Asinine.     
Edited by Dr. Detfink

A few things:
 
1. Incredible Hulks is just the latest in a trend of using a single character to serve as a core title to stimulate satellite titles. I don't know if the Hulk is such a character to support a family of books. Personally, I think the Hulk was a character never meant to have a family of books. 
 
2. Daredevil Reborn? Seriously...there's no need for that after Captain America. Never cared for Diggle's writing. His Thunderbolts was awful. The Losers wasn't all that either. All these meaningless satellite titles for no reason than to pinch some extra coin with no consequences.
 
3. Black Panther, Man without Fear: One of comic book's first black editors, Christopher Priest (aka Owsley) already wrote this story when Marvel Knights launched. T'Challa lived in New Lots, Brooklyn while exiled from his country. BTW that final issue of Doom War...DREADFUL. So after, Black Panther 86-ed all the vibranium, I loved that contrived line, "He set us free..." by sending the nation into poverty? Geezus.
 
4. Mark Millar can be a douche at times. Talented writer with questionable finishes. He just said crazy stuff to get a reaction. Let's talk about how horrible Nemesis is. Talk about no understanding of the government or the secret service that a simple beat cop would be placed in charge? Eh? 
 
5. Say what you will about DC, quietly they have supported A LOT of Female characters:
Zatanna: Paul Dini is working his magic again. Pun intended.
Birds of Prey: Two words, Gail Simone
Supergirl: Most improved title over the last year
Batgirl: Sorry Babs, I love this title and now you see as Batgirl moves into year 2 Miller's plan of growing this character. 
Batwoman: How well someone convinces you of a gay character is debatable. The use of recently unconstitutional Don't Ask, don't tell in a story...brilliant.
 Wonder Woman: I have my issues with Xena Warrior Princess but it's WORLD's better than Superman walking the Earth like Forrest Gump meets Cain from Kung-Fu.
 Powergirl: Don't know about Winick but Connor/Jimmy was terrific balance of fun and action.
 
6. Spider-man OMIT= One Mess I Target
 
7. Norm, next time please review Morning Glories. Want to know what you think about this title. First and second issues gone to reprint already. #2 Sold out of every NYC comic book store within 1 day. 
 
Great podcast guys...

Edited by Nick-SV(ril)
@Decept-O:  You know of course the fact alone when a movie gets leaked, is because those who are responsible for making the movie most likely give a promo copy to some "entrusted" guy, but he ends up uploading it anyway? I can't find any other reason of this happening. Yeah, I'm not gonna hide that I downloaded the movie, cause I was impatient as hell, but there's no way I'm gonna miss on buying this. I got a wall full of cd's and dvd's and if I hate something its piracy.  

Btw, I posted my opinion on it yesterday, and I realized this morning, this and couple of my last posts(4-5) were gone/deleted somehow.
Edited by Grimoire
@Nick-SV(ril) said:

" @Decept-O:  You know of course the fact alone when a movie gets leaked, is because those who are responsible for making the movie most likely give a promo copy to some "entrusted" guy, but he ends up uploading it anyway? I can't find any other reason of this happening. Yeah, I'm not gonna hide that I downloaded the movie, cause I was impatient as hell, but there's no way I'm gonna miss on buying this. I got a wall full of cd's and dvd's and if I hate something its piracy.   Btw, I posted my opinion on it yesterday, and I realized this morning, this and couple of my last posts(4-5) were gone/deleted somehow. "

I agree with Nick-SV(ril) about this point. Grouping everyone into the bragging/jerk/downloader who doesn't contribute to the sales is a bit one sided. I have watched but have never kept a movie from the internet. Not all get the DVD or Blu-ray get sent to them to review. Some are in places that:
1 Don't have enough jobs to get a first one let alone a second one. 
2 Some might want to see it once, make a decision, then buy it like I hope most to all do.  (I can dream.lol)
or 3 having medical reasons like myself that takes up quite a bit of money per month to support so has to be choosy what they buy whether it be movies or comics. (Also no comic stores anywhere near my town and I don't trust buying over the internet so save up to go to a city a few hours away every so often.) 

That's why sites like this are useful. I remember as an example a long time age when Ebert was part of Siskel and Ebert. I never watched the show before but I saw their names all over the place when rating movies. One night I watched an older episode because they were going to show their review of one of my favorite movies The Crow which I had bought recently and both hated the movie almost completely and thinking of it now most likely affected its sales. After that I don't really trust reviews unless I see it for myself and buy what I like and want to keep. (Again I really hope most do this if they do.)
 
A lot of people say when they go on-line they like the pseudo freedom they think they have with the anonymity so they say or write just about anything but for people like myself who don't use this to its full advantage by telling the truth since the idea of lying to someone you don't know personally sounds rather stupid IMO. 
 
Thinking in black and white while on the internet is a bit ....ya know ridiculous.lol
Edited by Nick-SV(ril)
@Grimoire:  Since you mentioned it, I'm under those categories. I mean, I don't have a job for a little more than a year(for which people probably don't care, I'm just saying), so what I do is end up selling "useless" stuff all the time, so I can be able to get new or back issues. Plus, there's none comic stores in my town, so pretty much all my purchases are based through internet, in which way I loose a couple bucks for shipping and stuff. Said that, I won't tolerate those who are gonna call me names.
Oh, and you know what being a collector is. You stick on buying something even if you end up not liking it in the end.
 
We are going far off topic, so I'm just gonna say: Great podcast, and since Norm made the reference on Friends, Spider-Man should be Joey , not accepting money from Tony Stark (Chandler), not Ross, haha.
Edited by Grimoire
@Nick-SV(ril) said:

" @Grimoire:  Since you mentioned it, I'm under those categories. I mean, I don't have a job for a little more than a year(for which people probably don't care, I'm just saying), so what I do is end up selling "useless" stuff all the time, so I can be able to get new or back issues. Plus, there's none comic stores in my town, so pretty much all my purchases are based through internet, in which way I loose a couple bucks for shipping and stuff. Said that, I won't tolerate those who are gonna call me names. Oh, and you know what being a collector is. You stick on buying something even if you end up not liking it in the end.  We are going far off topic, so I'm just gonna say: Great podcast, and since Norm made the reference on Friends, Spider-Man should be Joey , not accepting money from Tony Stark (Chandler), not Ross, haha. "

I'll agree with that. lol Its way off topic and I thought it was a great podcast too. Sometimes when I write it gets away from me. I only noticed the podcast option only three casts ago and just watched the video's before so I'm backtracking them somewhat. I'm sticking with the Hulk comic since he's still my favorite marvel character and his new attitude interests me since he seems to be an even better melding of Banner and Hulk.
Posted by Decept-O
@Grimoire:   Guess what my friend.  I am in the same boat you are.  In fact I am "disabled" a word I am not too keen on using.  A little personal info so you know I not only sympathize, but empathize concerning the financial situation.   
 
 I have a chronic heart condition along with other health issues, such as gout and pneumonia, both of which flare up and cause me to go to the hospital once or twice a year.    I also am constantly seeing Docs, Cardiologists, having X-Rays, monthly lab draws,  meds,  and other stress tests to keep up with my health.  I don't get a lot of help financially.  I pay rent, utilities, etc.  Funny thing is prior to becoming incapacitated, I used to work for a private direct care company as well as for the State assisting males with mental and physical "disabilities" so I am doubly aware of all the expenditures associated in these areas.    Yet, I manage my money, not very wisely mind you, but I  do what I can to earn extra income via other avenues.  LEGALLY.   
 
I can wait for a movie or other entertainment property.  I don't have to have it right away.   If job opportunities aren't available in your area, then you shouldn't waste what little money you have by downloading something that isn't legal.  Not to mention the last part---you are risking your own record.  I sure as hell wouldn't want a criminal record. 
 
I think that's the problem today a lot of people simply can't wait.  I have been impatient I admit.  I am no better than anyone else.  Yet, when you access something like a movie from a site you are literally taking away the income, the hard work and creative efforts of everyone involved who produced it.  Yes a number of the movies are a bit expensive.  However, there is the option of renting.  You can also find USED DVDs at discounted prices.   Wait awhile the prices will come down.  Have patience.  There are other avenues to persue to get your mitts on a movie you want.   Also did you know a number of libraries also carry animated features?  In a small town not far from the city where I currently live, that library carries a number of JUSTICE LEAGUE and BATMAN DVDs.  You just have to look.  If you are already finding this on the Internet then obviously you have the intelligence to search someplace else.
 
Maybe I am old-fashioned.  A lot of people think they are entitled to things free all the time.  If you want a loaf of bread, do you go to the store and tell the cashier, "Give me that Wonder Bread free. NOW. " ?     
 Same prinicple like it or not.  
 
@Nick-SV(ril): 
What you are saying is possible.  I will respond assuming what you are saying may be true because I simply don't have any facts one way or another to refute what you are saying.    
 
Let's say this happens.  However, does that make it justifiable? I can make several analogies but I have already rambled on quite a bit.  Don't know if what I am saying has any influence whatsoever.  Its odd because you are not acting like the heroes portrayed in the very movies you downloading.  You are acting the opposite.   
 
Both of you should ask yourselves this question:  "Is what I am doing right?".  
Edited by Nick-SV(ril)
@Decept-O: I don't expect you to believe what I'm saying and for sure I got nothing against you here. We're just having a conversation. 
All I'm saying is how the facts most likely are. And the fact that I'm downloading the movie, and then delete it, means nothing of piracy to me once I'm buying it by the time its out. And don't tell me you've never downloaded a movie in your whole life. Everyone has done it, some more, some less. And its even worse blaming others, than not accepting your own part of doing it (always speaking in general).
As for the portayal of the heroes comment, I guess that's something I know very good on my own.
Posted by Decept-O
@Nick-SV(ril): 
Any movies I have downloaded were Public Domain or trailers or snippets of movies that are promotional materials.     I don't have NETFLIX as of yet and that is legal.   So no  I have not downloaded any movies via the Internet that were released the same time they put out in stores.   
 
I am not really contesting what you are saying when you mention someone gains a copy of a movie then posts it on the Internet for others to download before its theatrical or marketed release.  What I am asking you, "Is it right?"  
 
None of it seems right to me.  If you have to hide that you are downloading the movie or you are deleting it, that makes me question whether it is right.   
 
I admit perhaps my knowledge in this area is limited but I am siding with G-Man on this, it just smacks of not doing it legally.  
 
I wish you'd address G-Man specifically with your comments and defend what you are doing because obviously he's the man in the know.  It doesn't sit right with me but hey, if you want to do what you're doing I can't stop you and will leave it at that.
 

 
Perhaps I am not understanding something.  How can someone download a movie and then delete it?   Why would you delete it unless its wrong to own it in which case doesn't that imply it is illegal? 
Edited by Nick-SV(ril)
@Decept-O: I delete it cause I only want to check the movie. Call me impatient. There's nothing else you can gain from just a file just sitting in your computer on some random file, than having the original packaging in your hand, and thus, thats why I'm buying it when it is officially out. 
 
No one said it is right, but temporarily if I'm given a chance to check it, I wont say no. I'm sure you know the saying "You don't look a gift horse in the mouth". 
 
I would say to G-Man the same things like I'm saying to you. It just happened that you first mentioned and I addressed it to you. It could 've been just anyone. Plus, If I wanted to hide it, I wouldn't even have mentioned it in the first place. Point is, we 're both in the same page in the end. I just don't see the big deal since I'm supporting the movie -or whatever that is- by buying it, no matter if I've downloaded it a week or so ago to check it.
Posted by Decept-O
@Nick-SV(ril): 
  IF it is LEGAL to download it, watch it, and own it via the methods you guys are talking about,  then I am in the wrong.   However my understanding is that it is not.  It is illegal is it not? 
 
I still say if you are downloading it instead of purchasing it or renting it,  then its wrong.    
 
As I said I haven't downloaded a movie via the computer yet, not bought one, don't yet have NETFLIX ( hope to though ).  If I did download a movie and if it were LEGAL for me to keep it on file if I PAID for then I can see where it would be OK.  What you are saying though, it jsut doesn't make sense.   
 
Also the term "Don't look a gift horse in the mouth" is hardly applicable here.   What you are getting isn't a gift.  A gift is something given to another person as a symbol of appreciation and love for that person in honor of them as a person, to celebrate a Holiday or birthday, anniversary, etc.  However that term is primarily used when someone gives you something unexpectedly.  Not when you are actively seeking it out yourself.  There's a difference.  
  
Regarding G-Man, I am not upset you are addressing me at all.  I am asking you to defend your actions to G-Man, because in the Podcast he specifically states he does not have any respect for anyone who downloads a movie illegally.    
 
Can you respond to him with your defense of your actions?
Edited by Nick-SV(ril)
@Decept-O: We could go on for hours, both of us stating our beliefs and seems like we would never reach an end. In your book what I do is wrong, in mine it is not. The End.
Posted by Decept-O
@Nick-SV(ril):
Agreed.  Just curious if you can defend yourself to G-Man's opinion regarding the matter.  Thanks for the replies and comments, they are appreciated, even if we don't agree!
Edited by Nick-SV(ril)
@Decept-O:  Yeah, there's absolutely nothing wrong here. We re just talking . Like I said, I would say the same stuff I said to you, and as it seems, G-Man would say the same things you said too. So, dead end again.
Edited by Grimoire
@Decept-O:  If that's your version of watching something then we are talking about different things then. I have never downloaded something onto my comp or onto a cd or dvd movie or otherwise besides maybe pics. I stream sometimes mostly anime since it literally takes years before it comes over the ocean and when it does I buy the ones I liked. Before as well I mentioned a reason for my position on it and not as an excuse. lol
Posted by Decept-O
@Grimoire:
A bit confused with your statements.  You say you agree with  Nick-SV(ril)    and you download movies the same way  but don't buy them.   
 
If what you're doing is legal where you are then I am in error.  If not, well, I've already said my opinion regarding the topic.    
Edited by Grimoire
@Decept-O:   Yeah, I'm not gonna hide that I downloaded the movie, cause I was impatient as hell, but there's no way I'm gonna miss on buying this.
 
This part that's in bold I agreed with. I also have a movie/anime collection that has built up quite a bit over 15 years so I guess I should have been more specific. lol All from stores since I really do believe the industry should be supported for its work. The same with anime even though it costs a lot more than any normal movie DVD or Blu-ray. (Which is a big margin btw but you really have to buy them to show the anime companies in Japan that there is a want for it over here.)
Posted by Decept-O
@Grimoire:
Obviously you are in Japan.  I realize there is a large population in your country and your social system is different than the U.S.A.  I just fail to recognize how downloading a movie is legitimate in any fashion despite that fact.  
 
Anime is still a niche market here in the U.S.A. and not nearly as prevalent as in your country.  Like I said I can't stop you, just stating how I feel about the topic. 
Posted by Grimoire
@Decept-O:  LOL I'm sorry but there seems to still be two misunderstandings. 
1 When I said (Which is a big margin btw but you really have to buy them to show the anime companies in Japan that there is a want for it over here.)  meaning I'm across the ocean in Canada btw and buy them to get more of them over here and even though its a niche market here I still love it more than any other medium.
2 I don't think streaming media is the same as downloading since when I close the window its gone. For those that intend to buy the content its a good way to check stuff out and not buy anything you will only watch once. In this instance however I forgot the release date and thought it was already out which is my bad but in the end I'm still buying it when it comes out.
Only question now is Blu-ray or DVD since I don't own any Blu-ray's and only have DVD's. I am not sure if there be that much difference in format for 2d animation like this movie.
Posted by Decept-O
@Grimoire:
Well, nothing personal my young friend, but being in Canada is NOT "across the ocean".  Last I checked there wasn't any ocean which separated the U.S.A. and Canada but I think you are simply using that term to denote you're in another country.  Not being rude or anything by any means just saying that is part of the reason why I thought you were in Japan.  The other reason naturally being you said you had an abundance of anime movies, and anime being very popular in that beautiful country.  
 
 I think you are mixing up words here.  Whether its streaming where you watch it when you're not authorized to do it or downloading it and keeping the movie when you're not supposed to, it is still wrong, is it not?  
  
 IF you are streaming a movie via the movie company that released the movie itself or via an authorized site that works in conjunction with the same movie company then that is great.  
 
Again, however, I am talking about when you are doing it, whether its "streaming" or "downloading"  via a source that is not authorized,  that is taking money away from the movie company and other people.   
 
 I think we've exhausted this subject and like the other user, I suggest you direct your comments and defend your actions to G-Man, because he's the one who initially brought this up and honestly knows a lot more than I do regarding this matter.  I say this because that way I can learn from you and G-Man more details, OK?
Posted by Grimoire

Guess so. lol

Posted by Dekanah

the art for the new arc of spidey is horrible. absolutely horrible.
 
and no offense to the lady, but the Spidey growing up is a part of the development of the character, and keeping him in this juvenille state while he's more mature in every other thing he's in is a bad move.
 
I don't know, I just really don't like the series anymore, it went from awesomeness that was Shed to the crap that was OMIT. and now this.

also, how do you call the latest green lantern issue good when it drops everything that happened up to that point for a completely unrelated story that doesn't have much if ANY bearing on the main story.

Posted by datarez

Re: Brightest Day talk - I don't know. When G-Man was saying he thought people wanted the Spiderman relationship problems all I could think about was that the girl problems in the movies were the worst parts.  People were pretty vocal about that. I don't know why they (Marvel) would think this would be a good thing to continue kicking through the storylines in the book.  Wow and then later on hearing the drama of Osborn/Spiderman soap opera sounds like a mess.
Posted by DropSolo

Really quickly, great show. 
Detail-y comic nerd details : Buddy and Ellen Baker have a very happy powered/not powered marriage. So did Barry and Iris Allen. Other characters include Jay Garrick, Alan Scott, Wally West and Ralph Dibney are all still happily married to non powered individuals. I just don't understand Quesada's reluctance to have Peter married in the current story-lines. There really is  a lot you can do there, I agree, Quesada seems to want the title to go back to 1968. I'm waiting for Harry's relapse into LSD or De Whitman to turn up sane and alive.
Second nit-picky thing : i remember reading a few times that The Avengers DO pay a stipend provided by The Maria Stark Foundation. Maybe Peter is too proud to cash the cheque? 
Again, great show!