SimonM7's forum posts

#1 Posted by SimonM7 (108 posts) - - Show Bio

For me, Spider-Man 3 is rushed, overstuffed, and subsequently has to essentially hack the script to jump to the plot points it needs to get to. EVEN SO, I get more feels from something like the Sandman "birth" than the entirety of Amazing and Amazing 2 combined. The sensibilities of Raimi's trilogy and how they are conveyed are simply more compatible with me. I totally understand that "emo parker" and the dancing is an extension of the already pseudo 60s style that those movies apply to everything, and it's a Grease/John Travolta-esque interpretation of "bad boy". It simply doesn't bother me at all. Is it a bit too Raimi and too out there to apply to a blockbuster movie? Probably.

Forcing Venom on the movie ripples through the entire thing, cutting short plot threads that should've been elaborated on - introducing plot points that never quite gel or make sense. It's crippled, compromised - but there's still a coherent message in the movie that shines through if you let it, and that has value to me.

It sure looks comic booky when Amazing Spidey punches a thing, though. And he quips! I just never really put as much stock into that as a lot of people do, I suppose.

#2 Posted by SimonM7 (108 posts) - - Show Bio

I'm partial to a good origin story, so for me it's Spider-Man at the top. In fact, you could pretty much put them in order of.. appearance, and you have my list.

Spider-Man, Spider-Man 2, Spider-Man 3, Amazing Spider-Man, Amazing Spider-Man 2.

#3 Posted by SimonM7 (108 posts) - - Show Bio

"Overrated" is such a fundamentally flawed moniker to use in this context. It wouldn't be so highly regarded if it lacked the appropriate merits. It did a remarkable job of making a legitimate crime epic out of what's widely regarded as a pretty silly premise, and the themes are impressively weighty for a movie regardless of origin.

Do you have to love it because of that? Of course not. If the question is whether someone loves it as much as everyone seems to, I think that answer is less obvious.

#4 Edited by SimonM7 (108 posts) - - Show Bio

Here you go Katzman. Sorry for the somewhat rushed 'shop, but I sped up when I realised what I was wasting my friday night doing. :D

#5 Posted by SimonM7 (108 posts) - - Show Bio

Proportions are completely bonkers in that image.

#6 Posted by SimonM7 (108 posts) - - Show Bio

How is it that a book with wonderful covers have such irritating interior art? I just can't get used to it.

That's spot on; it's irritating. I don't mind stylised or minimalist, but something about Pulido's stuff just reads as nonchalant to me. The Hawkeye Annual was probably more than 50% silhouettes (which are creeping in above, too), and it just came across like an artist wanting to avoid drawing stuff.

#7 Edited by SimonM7 (108 posts) - - Show Bio

I gotta develop some sort of stockholm syndrome relationship with Pulido's style, because I really want to keep reading this and I have a really hard time with his E.T faces and rushed inks.

Although to be fair, inks look better in this than in #1 and the Hawkeye annual.

#8 Posted by SimonM7 (108 posts) - - Show Bio

This actually looks kinda awesome. The covers/preview art looked really flat and angular and weird, but the interiors are much more dynamic. It sucks that Alejandra got short changed, though.

#9 Edited by SimonM7 (108 posts) - - Show Bio

I love that we have a Black Widow book, I love that it's Hawkeye-esquely separate from the rest of the Marvel universe, and I love that Phil Noto is making it gorgeous. Although my interest in reading on hasn't been diminished, I have to admit I was a bit disappointed in #3.

The voice over should theoretically make us feel closer to Natasha - giving us a window into who she is. It's a problem, then, that the voice over feels equal parts shallow/generic, equal parts arrogant. Especially three issues in, her refering to herself with lofty imagery and bold, poetic statements is starting to become a little off-putting.

I do enjoy the idea of her way of adapting to every situation being the very thing that forces her to move on from attachments and a sense of peace, but the way it's conveyed feels heavy handed, and it's making her out to be really self-centred and pompous. When her inner monologue is followed by "tending the yard!" or "doing some housecleaning", and they connect her self-analysing inner voice to how she expresses herself in "reality"... I mean that's the sort of Jersey Shore people you want to punch.

All that said, I still really enjoy this book. Boy it's pretty. Natasha has a grace and a sadness and a steely resolve to her appearance that kinda finally does justice to the idea of her. I can't wait for the next issue, but by the same token, I hope it moves out of the prologue-esque area it's currently treading a bit of water in.

#10 Edited by SimonM7 (108 posts) - - Show Bio

Pulido's art bugs me, but it's less about the style and more about the finish.

I love minimalist and/or pop art styles. I think the likes of Samnee and Aja and Allred do *incredible* work on their respective titles, and they're joyous exercises in less is much, much more. There's amazing craft in Samnee's backgrounds, in his use of shadows - there's incredible presence in Allred's characters' eyes, and a disarming quality in his almost naive poses and body language. The latter powers Aja's art, as well, with an almost cinematic flow across pages, each sequential pose seamlessly woven into the next. There's palpable effort - a sense that everything about their styles is deliberate and carefully applied.

Pulido can draw people however he likes. Wide, fish-eyed faces is all well and good. What really gets to me, however, is an unshakable sense that a lot ends up looking one way or another because of who cares.

The Hawkeye annual was especially gruelling for me, because it was basically 50% silhouettes. Artistic choice? Mayyybeeeeee....? I didn't feel that way. I felt like it was a quick way to skip drawing stuff. Because uggghhh...; drawing stuff, right? When we DO get drawings, they look like this:

This is a panel from the Hawkeye Annual. What bothers me isn't that it's not perfectly photo realistic, it's that it looks like even the style attempted is compromised by this must only take 2 minutes to draw and ink. I'm almost insulted by the Hydra guy's hand.

I just get the impression that the one drawing it doesn't feel it's worth spending time and effort doing, and so I'm overwhelmed by a desire to echo the sentiment and put the comic down. I pulled through because I love Hawkeye and I love Matt Fraction's writing, but it was truly agonising to see Pulido silhouette his way through almost the entire story, creating a crippling disconnect between the writing and what was going on.

You can google Pulido and find pages from comics prior that look completely fine. I can take or leave his style, but it's much harder to swallow this seemingly new-found nonchalance. I find it so much more irritating than an art style I truly hate, but you can tell that the artist is *trying*.

And I'm sure people will tell me to just *not read this* if it bothers me so much, and you're right. I probably won't. That sucks, though, because I was stoked about a new She-Hulk book.