I dig it. I was wondering how they were going to handle the scale pattern of Aquaman's costume and how to make it look not silly. The gladiator-esque gauntlets and the tattoos are a neat way to handle it. He's definitely looking intimidating but that could ultimately be a good thing. We don't have much concrete information on the DC movies to come but I was quite pleased with Man of Steel. Marvel has the comedy-infused saturday morning brand of superheroes locked down. It's probably for the best that DC is carving out their own tone and aesthetic. Packing in jokes and primary colors would just be aping a thing their biggest competitor has down to a science and putting more white noise in an already saturated market. Going a more earnest, dramatic route is probably in their best interest to find their own audience and offer something that Marvel isn't already offering.
roboadmiral's forum posts
Admittedly, the hipster in me wishes my four were a little more eclectic but whatever. They're still all brilliant books and I certainly would not be the comic reader I am today without them. Also they kick off my weird obsession with elderly superheroes.
Oh man. I was wondering what was up when I saw how rough he was looking at San Diego Comic Con. At first I figured that he was just getting on in years, but he's definitely not that old. I certainly hope whatever treatment they have him on works out.
For me as a black comic book fan, I love it when there are black characters getting attention and are important to the stoties. However, I feel like white characters always get the spotlight and are usually more important and play a pivotal role In comics more than black characters. When it comes to popularity, that's even worse. Storm is the only black character that can keep up with the likes of Wonder woman, catwoman or even her team mate Jean Grey!
There's a lot of white popular characters I love, but the writers need to stop making white characters the center of the universe and start to also focus on the black characters.
Even if you're white, do you agree? And if you're black, do you disagree?
I'm not sure you fully understand the assertions you're making here. The first problem you seem to have is that the most popular black characters are not as popular as the most popular white characters. That's just people's personal preferences. How do you expect that dynamic to be changed? People like what they like, its not a thing that can be dictated to them.
The second problem seems to be that you want writers to focus more on black characters. For a lot of comics that doesn't work. Batman, Spider-Man, the Flash aren't the central characters of their comics because they're white. They're the central characters because the books they're in are about them. It'd be pretty weird to have the monthly Batman comic be about someone other than Batman, white, black, or hispanic. The counterpoint might be that there should be more comics with black protagonists. The problem there is: who is making these comics? Is editorial going to go to writers and artists demand they change the race of the protagonist of a story they may have been working on for months or years? That sounds like a very arbitrary abridging of creative freedom.
You're dissatisfied with the place of blacks in comics. The next critical questions is: What do you want done about it?
I'm quite excited. David Ayer's a great pick for director. Gritty, violent, high-intensity stuff with morally grey characters is his bread and butter. Anyone not familiar with him should check out Street Kings and End of Watch. I'm quite pleased with the casting, most of them have a fair deal of experience with the sort of archetypes they're playing and are all competent actors. I'm very interested to see what Jared Leto's Joker is like and in what capacity he'll be involved in the Squad's shenanigans (member, antagonist, interested third party?) If I have a complaint I'm a bit disappointed with Harley Quinn. To be clear I don't have a problem with Margot Robbie cast as her, I'm sure she'll do fine in the role. I just find the character to be extremely nerve-grating and would be more happy if she weren't in it even though I knew she was pretty much guaranteed once they announced the movie. Other than that though, I'm very optimistic.
Actually the first hour or so of Guardians has a lot of structural problems. It's just a series of contrivances and location-hopping to get the characters together and get through the necessary exposition.
Why are Rocket and Groot (two wanted criminals) hunting for bounties on a crowded public street a few minutes away from the headquarters of the Nova Corps? So a ruckus can be caused and they can all be arrested. And a ruckus is really all it is. No major property damage ensues, it all takes place within about 100 square yards, why are they getting trucked off to a maximum security prison?
Because that's where Drax is and the script says that Drax is on the team. So they go to this most horrible of horrible space-prisons, which turns out to be a place of precisely zero tension, because as Rocket proudly pronounces as soon as they're incarcerated, they'll be out in no time. They then proceed to break out with minimal effort and travel to the giant floating space head (which looks wicked cool and super interesting).
Unfortunately it doesn't get to be wicked cool or super interesting because they're only there to talk to the Collector so the audience can get an exposition dump about what exactly the Infinity Stones are. Then there's an explosion caused by an extra and the Collector--a space being of great wealth and power who's evidently a big enough deal be played by Benicio del Toro and get the after-the-credits stinger in Thor 2--is out of the movie never to return despite the thing he was ready to pay a for fortune for be absconded with and his generally shady nature. Then Ronan arrives, all hell breaks loose and the movie actually gets a plot rather than a series of contrivances.
Not that Guardians is a bad movie, it's just not as brilliant as many contend it is.
As long as the new mega-dino doesn't have tentacles or multiple mouths and looks like an actual dinosaur, I'm on board. It's the next logical step for the series really. The underside of the Jurassic Park story was always that it was all just a industrial genetics race, and that Jurassic Park was only a manifestation of it to turn a profit in the process. Once you can make dinosaurs that already existed and contain them (the problem of the first movie) the next thing to do to continue making progress is to see if you can make new things.
I'm suspecting those raptors at the end that seem to be hanging out with Chris Pratt are special genetically modified ones to make them obedient or something so he can use them as 6-foot bloodhounds. If you can make new dinosaurs, there's no reasons you can't fiddle with old ones.
I think doing as you described it is probably the best way to handle it. Make it as naturalistic as possible. I would say let it be an element of the book and an open one but perhaps not the constant focus of the plot (there can of course be sub-plots where it crescendos more into the spotlight), but that's just my opinion. I would also say focus more on the relationship part than the homosexual part. Not that it should be ambiguous that they're gay but that it should just be a given and the growth and development of the relationship, the same as a heterosexual pairing might get, should be what's focused on. The audience will know the leads are gay, they won't need repeated painstaking reminders.
Anywho, that's my two cents. I hope it helps. Best of luck.
NEXTwave is brilliant but with iffy sales under Warren Ellis and Stuart Immonen, its almost sure to tank with a less talented team. Besides, despite featuring continuity Marvel characters, the book was obscure enough that Ellis and Immonen got to run it like an indie comic, and the book minus the creative team (its doubtful they'd get Ellis and Immonen back) kind of defeats the purpose.