Donomark Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 Why? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dread Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 It was terribly non-sensical (and not in a good way), the characters were all misrepresented, it was incessantly repetitive and incessantly repetitive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donomark Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 Alright. You're entitled to your opinion. I thought it was intriguing, extremely well drawn, entertaining and fairly engrossing. To each his own. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dread Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 Alright. You're entitled to your opinion. I thought it was intriguing, extremely well drawn, entertaining and fairly engrossing. To each his own. I also thought it was well-drawn. That's why it got a 1 and not a middle finger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koete Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 I thought it was alright. Like I posted earlier, Andy Kubert's art was phenomenal. My biggest problem with it was that the tribute aspect seemed repetitive after Grant Morrison had done the same thing with his run prior to WHTTCC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dread Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 I thought it was alright. Like I posted earlier, Andy Kubert's art was phenomenal. My biggest problem with it was that the tribute aspect seemed repetitive after Grant Morrison had done the same thing with his run prior to WHTTCC. But Morrison's was actually a story and not a badly formed pastiche. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 25, 2009 Report Share Posted July 25, 2009 I thought it was alright. Like I posted earlier, Andy Kubert's art was phenomenal. My biggest problem with it was that the tribute aspect seemed repetitive after Grant Morrison had done the same thing with his run prior to WHTTCC. But Morrison's was actually a story and not a badly formed pastiche. This is the sound of D.W. holding his tongue. I really liked what Gaiman did, but making an expensive hardcover out of it was definately a poor idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dread Posted July 26, 2009 Report Share Posted July 26, 2009 Also, welcome to the party Tom and Derrick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly Posted July 26, 2009 Report Share Posted July 26, 2009 I really liked what Gaiman did, but I'm such an unabashed whore for the guy that I hardly count. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom BITD Posted July 26, 2009 Report Share Posted July 26, 2009 Also, welcome to the party Tom and Derrick. Thank you...I have to go now and voicemail my wishes for your 100th episode, my friend..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dc20willsave Posted July 26, 2009 Report Share Posted July 26, 2009 I really liked what Gaiman did, but I'm such an unabashed whore for the guy that I hardly count. I'll second that. Gaiman could have self-inserted himself into American Gods and I would have believed it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slothian Posted July 27, 2009 Report Share Posted July 27, 2009 Also, welcome to the party Tom and Derrick. Thank you...I have to go now and voicemail my wishes for your 100th episode, my friend..... Huzzah! And when I looked at the episode teaser, I was assuming that Mike's vitriol was towards the Batman book. I haven't even read the Spiderman series in question (obviously) but I laughed along with the mention of "The Arachnite TM" without even knowing why! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sn4tcH Posted August 3, 2009 Report Share Posted August 3, 2009 2, harsh. I really feel like this wasn't a homage to the silver age, but a celebration of Batman in general. The point wasn't the "Death of Batman", but more about how the Batman legend has been reborn so many different ways. Look at it like every time a new artist or writer gets his hands on Batman, a new Batman is born. That's the central idea of the story, Batman has so many stories and interpretations, he's beyond just a comic character, he's made his way to Legendary status. Legends are told so many different ways, each one is like a new birth. This was simply the death of this particular Batman legend, and ends with a new legend being born. Mrs. Wayne: "You don't get to go to heaven or hell. You get to be Batman." Also, my response to Mikes take on Spider-man: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.