MuyJingo's forum posts

#1 Edited by MuyJingo (1554 posts) - - Show Bio

I'm just going to copy and paste my comments from Tony's review here, as I think they apply:

This entire arc has been forgettable, at least IMO. I'm glad it's over.

I know some people like it, but I can't see the appeal at all. I mean, this was such an amazing opportunity to update and improve upon Batman's origins...and instead we got something that was just mediocre.

I'm trying to judge it as it's own thing and not compare it to say, Year One, but even then....there are no memorable or stand out moments, and there really isn't anything that defines these adventures as Batman's origin. If these stories were not called Zero Year and were just flashbacks not given any special treatment, it wouldn't make a difference.

That I think, is the biggest flaw of Zero Year. Compare to Year One (dammit...), where you have a focus on Gordon just as much as Bruce. It slowly shows the corruption in the city at all levels, it shows the good men who are trying to figure out how to solve it, and finally it shows the revelation of a legend being born. Not a single hint of an aspect of that is present in Zero Year.

For as much praise as Snyder gets for "treating the city like a character", Year One fleshed out the city far, far more, by showing the effect on the characters who live there. Year One showed the city much better than Snyder has been able to, and it's much easier to see how everything that happened after followed sort of naturally after Year One. The same cannot be said for Zero Year.

I've been saying this from the start: get rid of Snyder, get rid of Capullo.

#2 Posted by MuyJingo (1554 posts) - - Show Bio

The most interesting thing to me is that the cowl looks soft, indicating he may be able to easily remove it and that it is tied to the cape....which is how it should be.

#3 Edited by MuyJingo (1554 posts) - - Show Bio

Absolutely not. I'd bet my small fortune on it.

I elaborated on this more in another post, but there is nothing in Zero Year that defines the evolution of Bruce into Batman. The Zero Year stores could simple be some early adventures in LofDK. There is nothing particularly memorable about it.

For me, Year One has the moments of Bruce being inspired (which ZY tried to update and failed), confronting Falcone, showing the city from the perspective of Gordon, Batman escaping the SWAT...a bunch of amazing moments. Really, what comes to mind when you think of Zero Year, now that it's over?

What moments truly make you go wow, and that you are going to be remembering a decade from now? I can't think of a single one. That, to me, is why it won't be a classic. It's simply not that good.

#4 Posted by MuyJingo (1554 posts) - - Show Bio

Capullo to me has some good stuff...but on the whole I think he is amazingly overrated. A lot of his art is scratchy, not "gritty", just scratchy. It looks unfinished. I prefer Kubert, Gleason, Daniels and at the moment loving Manapul. I really, really don't see the appeal of Capullo.

Hell, in the final issue of Zero year there is one angle of Bruce's face that is just so badly drawn I was amazed it was allowed to be published. It's like bad 90's art, out of place amongst all these very pretty 2010's art.

#5 Posted by MuyJingo (1554 posts) - - Show Bio

@redwingx said:

@joshuadbr said:

I'm curious, isn't one of Captain Marvel/Shazam's powers supposed to be wisdom? Why doesn't the writer ever use that? I mean, why doesn't any writer ever use that?

Why does Superman need JLA when he can stop most threats by himself.

He can't. Or, shouldn't be able to, not when the threats are well written.

#6 Posted by MuyJingo (1554 posts) - - Show Bio
#7 Posted by MuyJingo (1554 posts) - - Show Bio

I have a "history" of it now, do I? Well, now you're just plain lying, my man.

If there's any sort of "history," it's no more of a "history" than most people have on this website. And that "history" is called not always wanting to get into an elaborate debate with someone. That's it. Nothing more, nothing less. People have every right, if they so choose, to leave a quick comment or opinion in fun without having to back it up with "evidence." History or no history. Whether the person on the receiving side chooses to take that as "negating their opinion" is up to them, but it just sort of tells me that that person probably wasn't too secure in his/her stance to begin with.

Look, bottom line: if you're not going to be honest, please don't comment. I'd like to be friends with you here on the Vine as well, and I do consider you one, but I have a low tolerance for mudslinging and general dishonesty, and both are things that you've displayed here.

Beyond that, I've said all I'm going to say on the matter.

I find your comments hypocritical. Which is disappointing. For all your talk of not liking mudslinging, you tend to sling first.

The history I refer to is not simply stating your opinion, this is a forum, that is to be expected. No, it's that you state it in such a way to call other people wrong, or that is reasonable interpreted to mean you are calling someones opinion wrong, even if that is not your intention.

I absolutely agree that you and anyone should be free to leave an opinion without being obligated to corroborate or elaborate on it. However, the opinions you leave are that someone else's opinion is invalid (again, that is how it is reasonable interpreted even if it is not your intention), then I think in that case some elaboration on why you think that, while not necessary, would certainly be polite. Good netiquette if you will.

From your replies it is obvious that you don't seem to think there is a problem, so I'm probably wasting time even typing this, but it's worth a shot. I personally can't be bother to engage with you any further since discussing things with you has yet to be constructive, since your arguments are simply that I'm wrong without ever expanding on why. See the MotP vs UtRH thread for the most recent example of this behavior.

As such, I'll be adding you to my greasemonkey script to filter out forum users who detract from the positive experience that this place should be. As I've previously said, I'd love to discuss some of this stuff with you in more detail, but it seems we can't communicate in a constructive way (you accuse me of lying, I see you as arrogant etc...we have a clash, not necessarily the fault of either), so until that is addressed there seems to be little point. You can PM if you wish to discuss things further.

Oh, and as for the BS accusation that I'm lying? I'd be happy to quote examples of you doing so from the last several years, but I don't think it would make a difference. I don't really need to anyway, enough people are familiar with the exact behavior I refer to, as are you.

#8 Posted by MuyJingo (1554 posts) - - Show Bio

@muyjingo said:

Intimating that someone is arrogant is mudslinging plain and simple. You might want to leave responses like that at the door. They only damage your credibility, man.

As for everything you said, I appreciate your opinions and your right to express your opinions. I didn't suggest yours or mine were "right" or "wrong," nor am I inclined to convince you of anything. An observation was simply being made, and I'm pretty sure I said "that's fine" a couple of times. And please don't misunderstand, there was never any intent on my part to debate the merits of this story with you. If there was, you would have known it.

At any rate, I apologize for any offense caused. Grace and peace.

I'm was not intimating anything, I was directly calling you arrogant. You have a history of simply telling people that they are wrong without ever feeling the need to clarify or elaborate on why, even when people show you that same, basic courtesy. I'd be much more concerned with your own credibility given that history of behavior, rather than the credibility of someone calling you out on it.

In any event, I apologize. It's more than likely a communication issue, peoples personalities often come across differently on-line due to the inherent limitations of the written medium. For my part, you seem to have a habit of simply negating what people say, which many people would reasonably interpret as you telling them wrong, yet you seldom elaborate on why.

In your first reply to me, you negated what I said, and them simply called me contrarian, which I think is insultingly reductive. You need only look at the discussion on this issue in this thread and others to see many, many people share my opinion. Batman is a character I love, and my favorite character in comics. While I have a fairly specific idea of how that character should b e portrayed and don't tend to like alternate interpretations, that doesn't mean I'm unable to see other peoples takes as valid.

Simply negating what people say won't lead to a productive discussion. If you don't want your negations to be taken as telling people they are wrong (which is the reasonable interpretation), it may well be worthwhile to add a note that you disagree, or that your opinion differs, rather than simply stating that someones opinion is not the case.

I'd much rather us be friends who respect each others contrasting viewpoints then consider the other someone to avoid. For what it's worth, I'd still like to discuss/debate this arc/issue with you if your interested.

#9 Edited by MuyJingo (1554 posts) - - Show Bio

@omnicrono said:
@muyjingo said:

I pretty much feel the same way with you somehow thinking it's a good arc, let alone 'awesome'.

Yet, you can't be surprised. In our conversations it's become apparent we have pretty different ideas of what makes a good Batman story, what the character should be, etc..

I would say that is apparent, yes. Does that mean Zero Year was a "mediocre" story? No.

And for the record, my "awesome" was aimed at this review, not the Zero Year story. Though I do think the story was pretty awesome as a whole. Certainly far from mediocre, or a "yawn." Pretty sure you are going to be in the small minority with that view. But that's fine. As is also becoming apparent, you seem to be the kind of person who likes to take the contrarian stance. Which is also fine.

You really, really need to check your arrogance. You seem like a reasonably smart guy, with some interesting alternate viewpoints (to me at least), which I think could lead to some very interesting, very fleshed out discussion from which the community would only benefit.

Instead, you insist your subjective viewpoints are objectively correct, and try to correct people who disagree with you. Thing is, neither of us is ultimately right or wrong, although often a better argument will prevail for one view over another.

As for taking the contrarian stance...again, get over yourself. I don't like Snyder's run, I don't like the Nolan movies, and I think MotP was a subpar movie. That's not a contrarian stance, it's an opinion. Perhaps a slight minority opinion, but one nevertheless shared by many people. If you want to be taken seriously, I might help to actually make an argument once in a while instead of just insisting that you're right and throwing out meaningless accusations.

I've given my reasons why I think the arc is mediocre. Why don't you give some reasons as to why you think it's not, instead of just insisting that it isn't?

#10 Edited by MuyJingo (1554 posts) - - Show Bio

@omnicrono said:

@muyjingo said:

This entire arc has been forgettable, at least IMO. I'm glad it's over.

I know some people like it, but I can't see the appeal at all. I mean, this was such an amazing opportunity to update and improve upon Batman's origins...and instead we got something that was just mediocre.



Wow. That's really all I can say in response to this. Just... wow.

I pretty much feel the same way with you somehow thinking it's a good arc, let alone 'awesome'.

Yet, you can't be surprised. In our conversations it's become apparent we have pretty different ideas of what makes a good Batman story, what the character should be, etc..