Bobzenub's forum posts

#1 Edited by Bobzenub (120 posts) - - Show Bio

@Rixec: I've read every issue of the New 52 up until #12, including Blue Beetle (I don't have anything against Zero Month, it's just that I have some catching up to do with some other series I follow). All I'm saying is this: even if I put myself into the teenage mindset, the current Blue Beetle volume is very lacking on many departments that would make it an immersive read. I like Reyes as a character and there is nothing wrong with him here, but damn, the supporting cast just sucks... Both Paco and Brenda are like cardboard cut-outs from a high school sitcom. The plotting is fine, but the overall story and the motives/conflicts are quite shallow, and not only that, the plotline regarding the origin of the Scarab has basically landed at DC's cosmic line, because, let's be honest, they introduced it too early. What am I getting at is, the book had and still has potential, but somehow it cannot rise above the nuances that makes it generic. The main problem probably is that we are 12 issues in, and Reyes still wants to get rid off the scarab instead of embrace it and being a hero. It's like reading twelve issues of Spider-Man whose main goal is to revert the emblemic spider-bite.

#2 Edited by Bobzenub (120 posts) - - Show Bio

@Twentyfive: The first volume of Reyes-Beetle was fine (it started out slow though). Not great, maybe good, but fine describes it better, yet this current iteration of the character has been totally dull and tedious even compared to that... I would take Ted Kord anytime over this.

Also the JLI Annual was a major slap in the face for the fans who hoped they would revive somehow the buddy relationship between Booster and this Beetle. It's like DC deliberetly wants to burry everything that long-time fans loved about the pre-New 52 continuity and in return there is nothing but angst and unnecessary conflict, which I doubt newcomers appreciate that much.

#3 Posted by Bobzenub (120 posts) - - Show Bio

@Twentyfive: Ted Kord and Booster Gold had the best buddy team-ups in comic book history.

#4 Posted by Bobzenub (120 posts) - - Show Bio

Sorry, but regarding Anita Sarkeesian, she deserves every bit of trolling simply because she scammed thousands of gullible, downright stupid people out of their money.

#5 Posted by Bobzenub (120 posts) - - Show Bio

The Superman Annual was the most lackluster thing I have read all summer. It had the chance to tie all the seemingly directionless Daemonite crap together and it failed miserably. Also Lobdell must stop using thought bubbles. It's distracting, there is better ways to narrate, also Supes talking in his mind like an awkward teenager is really out of character especially considering what has been going on in Justice League. FFS he is more mature in Action Comics, which is supposed to tell events 5 years earlier than the book titled Superman.

#6 Posted by Bobzenub (120 posts) - - Show Bio

@Dernman: Okay, now I'm certain you were trolling all along. Flagged.

#7 Edited by Bobzenub (120 posts) - - Show Bio

@Dernman:

Nor I to repeat things over several times

I asked you to repeat your reason because your comments are generally full of typos/grammatical errors and you phrase your sentences like a grade schooler, who studies English as a second language at best. It is very time-consuming to decipher your grammar - I simply don't have the time nor patience to wade myself through each of your comments more than once.

Because it's not limited. You are simply making while speculations with no bases to fit a a discussion you have failed to prove over and over. At least try to make a plausible one with an actual basses in what we know.

See what I'm talking about? Also, the whole point of demonstrating how a problematic plotpoint could be resolved was to show you how stupid it is from your part to mark out one option as the only possibility.

There we have it...

Nice way of avoiding the question or even discuss it in a constructive manner. Again, why do you draw the line at 4 Lanterns? Untill you answer this, I have to assume you don't have any arguments whatsoever regarding this aspect of the discussion.

According to your earlier statement the rings have a certain criteria to choose a GL.

The Guardians dictated that criteria, they have the means and yes, the rights to change it as well, just as they did with the laws in the Book of Oa. And again, I have to point out the relativistic nature of the "may have been wrongly chosen" phrase here - we simply do not know yet how does this apply to the upcoming storyline.

I'll give it a try to put it on your level.

Again, you've failed to present your argument for why exactly it doesn't make any sense to you that there could be a 5th Earthern Lantern out there. As I predicted, you simply repeated your pseudo-argument in a fairly ad hominem manner.

I'm starting to thing you actually know you are wrong but are to stubborn to admit it. :p

Same thoughts on my part about you, with a slight difference: I'm more and more certain that you are actually enjoying this, hence the trolling.

#8 Edited by Bobzenub (120 posts) - - Show Bio

@Dernman:

Already said one of the reasons why.

Could you please repeat it? Quite frankly I don't have the patiance to search back and recheck every single comment of yours.

Not really because...

Oh, FFS, I demonstrated one plot option and I added that the possibilites are endless. The Masked Lantern easily could be an android, a clone or some other artifical creature posing as a human made by the Guardians. He could be a human who was somehow forced into working with the Guardians to help them with their scheme. Why are you so certain that Johns' imagination is just as limited as yours?

Because it simple doesn't make sense all the best choices are all coming from Earth. It doesn't make sense that out of all the races out there billions and billions of aliens it's Earth people that are always the best choice.

Again, WHY? FFS, these are comic books, the genre is space opera, why do you draw the line at 4 Earthern Lanterns and dismiss the option of 5 and why the hell do you insist upon such an artifically defined level of plausibility? This is beyond nitpicking. If you are serious with this, I don't understand why the hell do you read GL comics in the first place.

No it couldn't. According to what you said there is a certain criteria that makes a right or wrong choice.

The Guardians tried to tamper with the Ring to choose someone they originally intended, but somehow their attempt failed and Ring has chosen the Masked Lantern instead. Again, this is just one plot option from plenty other I and Johns could think of.

I already did several times.

Okay, let's assume I'm a special person. Please quote the exact sentence here you have a problem with from my first comment and refute it in the simplest manner you are capable of, unless of course it would be another variaton of the dumbfounded and unbacked "it doesn't make sense".

#9 Edited by Bobzenub (120 posts) - - Show Bio

@Dernman:

Because it doesn't make sense for another human to be the best candidate yet again.

Why?

If the guardians tampered with it to choose a candidate to make the humans look bad it wouldn't make sense because it would leave them with another human to deal with.

Not necessarily. If they tampered with the selection programing of the Masked Lantern's Ring, they could've just as easily built in a self-destruction device as a failsafe which then could be easily turned off by the Guardians just by thinking about it, maybe even killing the Lantern with same thought. And that's just one option. The possibilites are endless.

If the ring chose the candidate itself not only would it note make sense simply for the fact that it doesn't make sense for yet another human to be the best candidate

Again, why doesn't it make sense? The Ring chooses by the merits of willpower in one particular Sector, not by how the new Lantern would fit into the rest of the Corps or by what was the species of previous candidates.

Which you yet again are ignoring the fact that he was WRONGLY CHOSEN.

The "wrongly chosen" could easily mean he was chosen against the will of the Guardians. Also he MAY have been wrongly chosen, the sentence in the article is in conditional mood.

I can't understand why you can't deal with that simple truth or the fact you original post was wrongly presented.

Please, show me exactly where was I wrong in my first comment, because at this point, I'm almost certain I've been trolled here.

#10 Posted by Bobzenub (120 posts) - - Show Bio

@Dernman:

Something of which isn't exclusive to Humans.

What matters is who is the best candidate for being a Green Lantern - if the Guardians have not been tampering with the Rings' original programing. If this is the case, none of your factors matter - the Ring has chosen another human and that's it.

I don't understand why can't you deal with this option.