RPatrick's forum posts

  • 29 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
#1 Posted by RPatrick (30 posts) - - Show Bio

I usually trade-wait, but I picked up the new Hulk and Fantastic Four, and really dug them both. Waid is probably the most consistently great comic book writer working today, and the direction he seems to be trying to take Banner in seems like it could yield some good stories. Fraction is in "hit" mode (a la 'Hawkeye' and 'Iron Fist') with Fantastic Four, though I really get the feeling that his run will read better in collected form. I kind of get/like the direction he's going, but I want to read the full first arc to be sure.

Great art on both.

#2 Posted by RPatrick (30 posts) - - Show Bio

"Yesterday's X-Men" I suppose would refer to Bendis' All-New X-men...I can't believe they had it planned out that far ahead!

Additionally, "Steve's Vision" and some of the hints given in Fraction's Invincible Iron Man would all seem to have been building up to this event... I guess they either had the event plotted out three years-plus in advance, or they had originally scheduled it for earlier and other stories were made a priority which led to its being postponed. Either way, I kind of like the long, slow burn leading up to this, as opposed to an out-of-nowhere event like Fear Itself, where the threat just kind of appeared out of the ether.

#3 Posted by RPatrick (30 posts) - - Show Bio

I'm looking forward to this. Ten-issue main story in three months? Sold. Only ten or so tie-in issues, none of them essential? Even more sold. I hope this is the format most events take from here on out...I can't stand when they get extended to the point where they take up half the year, and then three months later it's summertime again, and time for the next event...

But ten issues in three months seems about right for me. Though, I feel like this will probably read a lot better in trade form, as do most of Bendis' bigger stories. The art team(s) sounds great, though. I'm glad Brandon Peterson is finally getting some recognition and better gigs...his style has really improved from what it used to be.

All-in-all, sounds like it could be a good time...I'm on board.

#4 Posted by RPatrick (30 posts) - - Show Bio

@Grey56 said:

@RPatrick said:

The "farce of NOW?"

They have, what, like 5 or six books out, and you're calling it a "farce?"

(Most of those books, by the way, having been getting good reviews...)

And you're griping about everything Marvel's done since ONSLAUGHT??? That was a decade and a half ago! If you haven't liked Marvel's output for the past 15 years and are still reading their stuff, then you, my friend, have a problem that you need to deal with...

Delightful. Well now that you've been so kind as to grace your opinion I feel as if I should do away with the pleasantries by saying first; I'm not your friend. That having been attended to - I imagine I could begin my summary inquisition of your statements by saying who the hell asked you for your opinion as I so often do. Instead - I'll tell ya sir, it seems funny that your sole line of justification for getting salty about my assault on the Marvel NOW! line is that it has garnered some good 'reviews'. Am I then to infer that simply because something receives a good 'review' it should forfeit the source of my ire - even when the source pre-dates the new product ?

You see, I'll help you as you don't seem to be able to understand my Onslaught reference, I have been mad at Marvel since that time - and for indiscretions on their behalf many times since then. In fact, I didn't start giving Marvel any of my paycheck again until 3 years had passed since the dubious 'Heroes Reborn' abortion was removed from the womb. However, does the fact that something occurred over a decade ago even remit the atrocity of an event ? Every December 7th, we honor the Arizona - and this year marks 71 years since that time. Marvel has been sallying out bad story after another for the last 15 years - but the reality is that without an objective (read data driven or empirically driven) barometer from the public - people will eat manure and smile about it if the media tells them its good. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment - read that if you want an example that is now over 30 years old.

I am furious with Marvel for a lack of creative ingenuity which has resulted in what amounts to now the 3rd god forsaken restart of the main titles within 5 years. Maybe you've been hibernating. Maybe you don't have the chronological reference to understand because you haven't been reading or collecting for as long as I have. The larger conceit is I could care less if you or anyone else is empathetic to that cause as its my money and time which is being reduced to side-show material. Hopefully that milieu is understandable - but alas if not.

Perhaps then you'll begin to understand when someone with more time/money/emotion invested becomes rather upset over the creative disembowelment of the very things we enjoy. The titles you're referencing are a farce http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/farce?s=t - that's the literal definition for you in case you were curious. They are a joke of what the original teams have been, both in spirit and in character representation. I don't care that someone repackages guano with a pretty little bow and sprayed it with perfume to remove the scent. It's still fecal matter.

I continue to perpetuate Marvel via my subsidy the same way I remain a member of my society and stay married; there are many elements I love but others which drive me crazy. And since I sense (look'ee there a pun) that you may not know that dissent is the most efficacious tool for change for those willing to rebuild and Not completely tear down the institution - I'm speaking out. I hope you've enjoyed this lesson in voicing one's opinion and the purpose behind it. While arresting the next civil disobedient I come across - I may think of you. Or maybe I'll think of how bad Onslaught was again....

Well now. Seems to be a bit of an overly-aggressive reaction, but hell, I'll run with it.

As to who asked me my opinion, well, no one did, specifically. But it's a message board...it's literally designed to be a forum where people share their thoughts and opinions.

I got your Onslaught reference. Loud and clear. Message received. However, Onslaught and Heroes Reborn were not "atrocities", they were comic-book storylined that weren't well- received. To compare them with the Arizona going down is a bit...extreme. I mean, I take comics as seriously as the next guy, but this is a bit much. Besides, they were stories told, like I said, over a decade ago. I have gotten over their mediocrity, and not re-read the back-issues since then (although some of the Onslaught stories had fairly good art... Joe Mad was on his game, back then, and Andy Kubert shone brightly as well.)

It's also fairly ludicrous to say that Marvel books have been objectively bad since that point, as you seemed to imply, and that people who have read any of the books and enjoyed them were, in effect, "eating manure and smiling," as you so eloquently overstated. If they read them and liked them, and you read them and didn't, it's not because those people in the first group drank the kool-aid and are too dumb to realize that they're consuming something horrible...it's just that their tastes are different than yours. Your opinion, while valid and not without merit, may not be the opinion of others.

Like I said earlier...if you're so consistently disappointed by Marvel's creative output (or "disemboweling," as you seem to think of it) just stop wasting your time and money on the product. That simple. There are PLENTY of other books out there, both by big name publishers and indepentent creators that may be more to your taste. And if you yearn for the good ol' days of Kirby, Romita, Lee, Thomas, etc... guess what? Their old books are still out there. You can read them again, and enjoy them just as much as you did the first time. If you think the current creative teams are a "joke of what the original teams have been," well, that's because the original teams are from 50-plus years ago, and time marches on. Different audience, different time. Though, if you're looking for a more old-school representation of Marvel favorites, I'd suggest Waid's Daredevil run, Millar and/or Hickman's Fantastic Four arcs or some of the Slott-era Amazing Spider-Man. While modern enough, those books seem to have the older-Marvel sensibility (Hickman's Fantastic Four, in particular, takes Kirby-style big-ideas and runs with them in a really fun and engaging way.)

I would say though, that you seem to think that bitching and moaning about Marvel is going to make the slightest bit of difference ("...dissent is the most effacious tool for change...") but then you continue to give them your money and read the books. Given Marvel's more corporate way of thinking, I would imagine that they are of the mind that people vote with their pocketbooks. So you may come onto messageboards and say Marvel's been putting out bad story after bad story for a decade and a half, yadda yadda, but then you spend X amount of money on their output every week/month/whatever. Marvel doesn't care if you like the books so long as you're buying. I mean, I'm sure they would prefer that you enjoy yourself, but when it comes down to it, I'm sure that they'd rather have someone like you, who so blatantly resents them yet continues to give them money, than someone who downloads the books illegally and enjoys them immensely.

With that out of the way, I want to add that the entire tone of your post is unnecessarily condescending and inappropriately so. You don't need to be overly-intellectual or needlessly demeaning and patronizing in order to make a point. I get why you voiced your opinion "and the purpose behind it." Odd, then, that you would open your remarks by asking me who the hell asked me mine...or, at least, making a show of not asking me ("I imagine I could begin my summary inquisition of your statements by...")

Well...rant over. I think I'm going to go read a comic book.

#5 Posted by RPatrick (30 posts) - - Show Bio

@MarvelGrey said:


One of the worst "creative teams" ever. Give me Liefeld on art and Kevin Smith on scripting duties over this mess, thank you Quesada for a jumping off point. I'm glad i'm done with marvel except X-Factor.

Don't you think you should maybe wait for reviews and/or read the first couple of issues before you pass such dismissive judgement? My God...comparing Liefeld and Bachalo is like comparing apples to rocks.

#6 Posted by RPatrick (30 posts) - - Show Bio

@Grey56 said:

@DMC: Pardon my momentary lapse of semantic description.

Dear Marvel,

Stop doing events. Or Crossovers. I don't care what Axel says. He's also the same talking head whom tried to snow me into believing the farce of NOW! not being an answer to the New 52 as a marketing strategy. Also - the next time you have an itch that turns into your next creative endeavor ? Stop. Many thanks from those of us still grumbling about the garbage you put us through post Onslaught.

The "farce of NOW?"

They have, what, like 5 or six books out, and you're calling it a "farce?"

(Most of those books, by the way, having been getting good reviews...)

And you're griping about everything Marvel's done since ONSLAUGHT??? That was a decade and a half ago! If you haven't liked Marvel's output for the past 15 years and are still reading their stuff, then you, my friend, have a problem that you need to deal with...

#7 Edited by RPatrick (30 posts) - - Show Bio

@DJ1107 said:


Do me a favor & Shut the hell up you twat. You argument of what wrong with Marvel simply translates to "Everything was better in MY day" Like an average fanboy who doesn't know what he's talking about.. The whole "Make it more like the movies" is Bullshit outside of Nick Fury Jr. Nobody else in the Marvel universe is like their movie counterparts Galactus isn't a giant cloud & The X-men have more traditional costumes. Clearly you haven't even read any books Marvel has right now. I don't know if you know this but there's a little book called Daredevil written by Mark Waid it hasn't done much except WIN AN EISNER AWARD & DID SOMETHING INTERESTING WITH A ONCE ONE NOTE CHARACTER! There's also 2 books called Captain Marvel & Hawkeye. Both are currently dominating in terms of writing & art & guess what Niether are using anything from the movies. So why don't you do all of us a favor & go back to DC & read a universe where the continuity is as screwed as it could be You F***ing twat.

Now that, friends, is how you make an argument! Name-calling, profanity, horrendous grammar and a typically fanboy-ish sense of needing to totally lose one's mind in defense of comic-books. Well done, sir.

That being said, I agree with just about everything you said (if not how you said it.) Marvel should not be looking back to the 70's, as direwolf said they should be doing. I, for one, am enjoying Marvel's new way of approaching their two biggest franchises, the Avengers and the X-Men. It seems forward-thinking, at least from a storytelling standpoint. They're doing something that really hasn't been done before, that is, folding two franchises together in a kind of vendiagram kind of way. They're still separate, but in places (Uncanny Avengers, Sunspot and Cannonball on the main Avengers team, etc,) they overlap in a progressive and complimentary way.

As to direwolf's questioning of whatever happened to Chris Claremont's run on Uncanny and Frank Miller's run on Daredevil...well, they're still there. They still exist. But that was 20-30 years ago. Time to move on. I would argue that Waid's Daredevil run (so far) rivals Miller's. Hickman's FF run (Waid's, too) rivals Byrne's. Morrison's New X-Men rivals Claremont's (I would even say Morrison's is superior, most especially because he never once mentions the "focused totality of my psychic powers," or whatever else terribly dated dialogue Claremont later became known for .) David's Hulk rivals, well, everyone else who has ever written Hulk, honestly. And Bendis' Ultimate Spider-Man and the Slott-era Amazing Spider-Man are as good as the character has ever been.

Some people are judging the books before they even read them, as is evidenced by direwolf's tirade against Marvel NOW!, which is unfair and shortsighted. (Incidentally, the Hulk is not a cyborg, and the Thor with an eyepatch is a future-version, so relax, direwolf...your characters have not been altered nearly as dramatically as you seem to think they have been.)

These characters have been around for 5 decades. I see no problem in trying some new types of stories with them. It's better than re-hashing the same themes and adventures that we've seen before. We will see what works and what doesn't. Personally, I'm excited for the Avengers books, the new X-books (with the exception of the two X-Forces, which seems redundant to me,) and am more than willing to give them a shot, especially given the talent involved.

#8 Posted by RPatrick (30 posts) - - Show Bio

Got an account a few months ago. I have posted sporadically before, but have decided to take a more active role in the discussion.

I dig the variety in the forums. The topics are wide-ranging and, for the most part, worth active discussion.

Some quick gripes, though...

1) In the Marvel forums, so many people are just so...bitter. And it's not just how bitter they are, it's how they express it, oftentimes in quick, dismissive non-sentences ("Queseda sux...!" "i despise bendis" "to many avengers books!") with little-to-no explanation. Which brings me to my next gripe...

2) People here need to figure out how to properly utilize the English language. I can understand the odd mis-spelled word, the odd misuse of punctuation, but my God, the line has to be drawn in the sand somewhere. No one will take what you have to say seriously if you express what's on your mind with the grammar skills of someone who dropped out of school at age 9. ("There," "their" and "they're" are all different words, friends. There is a difference between "to" and "too." Also, one begins the first word of a sentence with a capital letter, generally. )

I don't mean to come of as a malcontent. That is not at all the case. Quite the contrary, I dig the site and the forums, and look forward to contributing to discussion and debate.

#9 Posted by RPatrick (30 posts) - - Show Bio

@cameron83 said:

@jimroote99 said:

i hate the hulk with a passion. theres nothing to like about him, hes just a boring push over that marvel displays as unbeatable because he has the most ridiculous and over hyped abilities


He just needs to be written well.

A character being "boring" is not the character's fault...it's his/her writers'.

I'm kind of confused by your characterization of the Hulk as a "push over." I'm combing through my brain to figure out how that comment possibly applies to Banner, but I'll admit, I'm at a loss.

#10 Posted by RPatrick (30 posts) - - Show Bio

@John Valentine said:

@McKlayn said:

@AgeofHurricane said:

And if i may add, the ANXM preview doesn't look that much appealing. Typical Bendis hogwash holding a large cast of characters and no discernible voice amongst themselves, and then, the usual 'gob-smacking' plot device to help move the 'story' forward until it reaches its climax by issue 5 or something.

Yeah, would suggest not picking that up if you favor substantial characterization.

Let's not forget the perpetual array of interlocking speech bubbles, a dialogue between one or more characters repeating the same thing.

Exhibit A -

Bendis wholeheartedly makes me sick.

Also im pretty sure that example of Bendis work is well not his work, i am pretty sure it is almost word for word the remake of the original X men issue where they debut Unus the Untouchable, Beast and Bobby save some kids they go all "you mutie freaks" hank gets pissed and leaves the team becomes a professional wrestler, finds out that the wrestling Champ (unus) is a mutant being recruited by magneto, the x men try to beat him but cant he makes some device that keeps him from turning off his shield so he cant eat or drink. Begs them to fix him and promises not to be evil if they do.

So yea can't really hold that against him

Yes! Yes it is! I didn't realise this before now.

Nice catch. Bendis has done his homework.

As to the complaining about Bendis' dialogue, if you look at it as kind of a combination of the speech patterns Aaron Sorkin and David Mamet use in their screenplays/plays/films, you can see where Bendis gets his style. If you watch an episode of 'The West Wing,' or 'The Newsroom,' oftentimes it seems as though the characters were just funnels for whatever happened to be on Sorkin's mind that particular week. Once you look a bit deeper, though, the little inflections of the actors and tiny nuances of the wording help to keep the characters distinct and unique.

The trick is to look at the art as the "actors..." it is the prism that takes the Bendis dialogue and fractalizes it into individual voices.

Now, completley backing off dialogue-theory and back into fanboy-mode...

I wonder if Bendis has any plans for Apocalypse. Aaron is using him in Wolverine and the X-Men, and seems to have plans for him, but Bendis used him for a particularly good issue of Avengers (right after "Seige") and seemed to be having fun with him. Now that he's in the X-Sandbox, I'm intrigued to see what he does with the X-villains.

  • 29 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3