Is PREACHER a good horror comic?
Ringo
The cover artwork looks very interesting and one girl on a few covers
looks a little like Elisabeth Schue.
Never picked it up, mostly because the main guy on most covers is always
lighting a cigarette. I'm not impressed by smoking and don't think it's
"kewl" or anything. But I was told some of the issues dealt with the
mythology of the "Divine Family" (explored previously in ANAMNESIS)
and the Secrets of the Knights' Templar.
--
Ringo
Ken Dreger
Horror comic? Not really. I mean it more explores the American
Puritan identity and has a bit of a "dark" humor to it but as to being
something a horror fan would like? IMO, no.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
'A Week in Review', comic news, and other self-involved trite:
http://www3.bc.sympatico.ca/kdreger
Joachim
pu...@nospam.nospam says...
50/50 horror and comedy.
--
Joachim
www.digitaledge.no
"What are you, a Mormon?" "Yes, I'm a Mormon. That's why
I just smoked a packet of Newports and drank three vodka tonics."
WideScreenPig
It kicks all kinds of arse right up until the final issue, which must
stand as the all-time blockbuster of last-minute narrative fumbles,
rendering 66-odd nigh-flawless issues, plus tons of great sidetrack
stories, utterly and completely pointless. Garth Ennis, a fine
writer, ultimately lacked the conviction he so effectively imbued his
characters with, denying them the memorable exit they all deserved.
__________________________________________
WideScreenPig
"I will not be pushed, filed, indexed, briefed,
debriefed or numbered. My life is my own."
Ringo
> It kicks all kinds of arse right up until the final issue, which must
> stand as the all-time blockbuster of last-minute narrative fumbles,
> rendering 66-odd nigh-flawless issues, plus tons of great sidetrack
> stories, utterly and completely pointless. Garth Ennis, a fine
> writer, ultimately lacked the conviction he so effectively imbued his
> characters with, denying them the memorable exit they all deserved.
Yes, I think I know what you mean. This also happened to MILLENNIUM. The
third season of that made no sense.
--
Ringo
Shiflet
Ringo wrote in message ...
>Just curious. I've seen this in the comic stores.
>The cover artwork looks very interesting and one girl on a few covers
>looks a little like Elisabeth Schue.
>
>--
> Ringo
I got behind on it, but every issue I've read(~1-40) is *excellent*.
Danny Shiflet
"We plan ahead, that way we don't have to do anything right now"-Valentine,
Tremors
Ringo
> Horror comic? Not really. I mean it more explores the American
> Puritan identity and has a bit of a "dark" humor to it but as to being
> something a horror fan would like? IMO, no.
It sounds very interesting. Is the art inside the comic as good as the
covers?
--
Ringo
Ringo
> I got behind on it, but every issue I've read(~1-40) is *excellent*.
Sounds good. I think I'll order the entire collection from Mile High. My
little town has nothing in terms of comics shops. One has to drive some
15 miles to get to the nearest. Haven't read any good new comics in a
while. And gave up on Batman after they "re-invented" everything. At
least they did that after completing the Rhas-Al-Gul storyline...only
went back to Batman for the one time he faced Predator.
--
Ringo
Robert Lee
<MPG.1504b528d...@news.supernews.com>:
No, the art's pretty pedestrian for most issues, actually. The story's
what's kickass, although I thought it ran out of steam way before the end,
actually.
--Robert
--
"Also, it pixelates the genitals of a dead native, which is
totally unacceptable."
hbrandt
> what's kickass, although I thought it ran out of steam way before the end,
> actually.
Oh, man. I disagree. The art by Steve Dillon conveys expressions
beutifully. The final storyline was executed nicely and the cinematic,
poetic, elegiac final issue #66 was perfect. Of course, if you were
*only* looking for "kickass", it really wasn't that.
/hal, who loved everything about PREACHER except the Arseface subplot
Adam Dolan
although it does have horror elements. Honestly, I'm not sure _what_
I'd classify it as. It's a blend of satire, black comedy, horror,
fantasy, spaghetti western, and macho action story, with some very vivid
characters. My personal favorite comic series. In case you didn't
know, it actually just ended recently. (The planned story arc was
competed, PREACHER having been intended as long form limited series a la
Babylon 5.) Boy, do I miss it!
Joe Bob says check it out. Start at the beginning with GONE TO TEXAS.
One caveat: it's not for the easily offended, or even the not so easily
offended.
"Some folks have a strange idea of entertainment" - Jason Lives:Friday
the Thirteenth, Part VI
Sean_Walsh
news:94ml9t02v501cdksc...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 26 Feb 2001 16:52:53 -0500, Ringo <pu...@nospam.nospam> wrote:
>
> >Just curious. I've seen this in the comic stores.
> >The cover artwork looks very interesting and one girl on a few covers
> >looks a little like Elisabeth Schue.
> >
> >Never picked it up, mostly because the main guy on most covers is always
> >lighting a cigarette. I'm not impressed by smoking and don't think it's
> >"kewl" or anything. But I was told some of the issues dealt with the
> >mythology of the "Divine Family" (explored previously in ANAMNESIS)
> >and the Secrets of the Knights' Templar.
>
> It kicks all kinds of arse right up until the final issue, which must
> stand as the all-time blockbuster of last-minute narrative fumbles,
> rendering 66-odd nigh-flawless issues, plus tons of great sidetrack
> stories, utterly and completely pointless. Garth Ennis, a fine
> writer, ultimately lacked the conviction he so effectively imbued his
> characters with, denying them the memorable exit they all deserved.
Really? I thought that was a *great* issue. Just as good as the 65 before
it. :)
Might I ask how you would've ended the series? Just curious, as I can't even
think of another way to effectively end that series (perhaps more detail on
the Saint of Killers part, though...)
Sean
:)
--
"Crime yes! Criminals no!"
New Gods Library: http://fastbak.tripod.com
Homepage: http://www.mponte.com/sean
Ringo
> Might I ask how you would've ended the series? Just curious, as I can't even
> think of another way to effectively end that series (perhaps more detail on
> the Saint of Killers part, though...)
Make sure you include spoiler alerts, though. Thanks...
--
Ringo
_______________________________
"Ching-hye-chaka-lay, suckers!"
- Christine Baranski
Eric Gimlin
> > the art's pretty pedestrian for most issues, actually. The story's
> > what's kickass, although I thought it ran out of steam way before the end,
> > actually.
> Oh, man. I disagree. The art by Steve Dillon conveys expressions
> beutifully.
Amen. It's been suggested Dillon only has one female face he draws,
and there is some truth to that. But the range of expressions he
manages on that face are truly incredible.
> The final storyline was executed nicely and the cinematic,
> poetic, elegiac final issue #66 was perfect. Of course, if you were
> *only* looking for "kickass", it really wasn't that.
I loved the final issue. It certainly wasn't what you would have
expected after #65, but it ends the series perfectly.
Eric Gimlin
Ken Dreger
Lee) wrote:
>Ringo <pu...@nospam.nospam> wrote in
><MPG.1504b528d...@news.supernews.com>:
>
>>Ken Dreger says:
>>> Horror comic? Not really. I mean it more explores the American
>>> Puritan identity and has a bit of a "dark" humor to it but as to being
>>> something a horror fan would like? IMO, no.
>>
>>It sounds very interesting. Is the art inside the comic as good as the
>>covers?
>>
>
>No, the art's pretty pedestrian for most issues, actually. The story's
>what's kickass, although I thought it ran out of steam way before the end,
>actually.
I would have to disagree as well. Steve Dillon (as well as Quintely)
have an art style that is masterful when it comes to expressing human
emotion and brutality (perfect for Preacher). The story area that is
probably considered the weakness is the "Salvation" arc which explores
the inner struggles of each character but is foundational to the final
arc.
Ken Dreger
It is an excellent series and I can promise you that you'll quickly
become a fan of both Garth's writing and Dillon's art. As for horror
I guess it would depend on your definition of horror - for me good
horror is psychologically terrifying, which doesn't happen very often
(Psycho, The Changeling, and the Exorcist etc). I would say Preacher
is more of a drama with a horror spin to it solely based on the
subject matter more than an actual attempt to be a horror comic.
Mattbrad1485
get the trade paperbacks. I would also recommend Sandman. In my humble opinion
it was the greatest comic series of all time.
WideScreenPig
wrote:
SPOILERS FOR THE FINAL ISSUE OF PREACHER
I would have left Jesse dead, or at the very least given his miracle
return a bit more juice, and potentially saved it for the end of the
issue, not the first panel. I certainly wouldn't have revived Cassidy
- his little "deal", while smile-inducing in the short term,
_completely_ undermines what, to me, was his greatest and most moving
transformation as a character in the preceding issue.
His acceptance of his nature and choice to walk off to his death was
an incredibly powerful moment and a great exit for the character. But
now, seen in retrospect, it becomes just another empty Cassidy
gesture, with no weight or meaning behind it, because he knows he's
getting away with it.
The same problem exists in the resolution of the Jesse/Tulip story.
Throughout their relationship, the central conflict has been Tulip's
inability to trust Jesse to stay and commit completely to her. He
leaves, he comes back, he promises to never ever do it again, she
takes him back, he does it again. There's nothing in the final scene
between the two of them that says any of this has changed, except that
this time Jesse says "I promise to never ever EVER do it again."
So in other words, we've got a character-based story with three
characters who are not significantly changed by the events that have
gone on around them. Jesse's still a good-ole boy straight arrow,
Tulip's still Tulip, and Cassidy's still just a selfish liar. I know
I know, he's not a vampire anymore -- but he was never really defined
by his vampirism; it merely exacerbated tendencies already within him.
If anything, his getting rid of his vampirism at this point is only
going to make him worse because not only has he not suffered
consequences for his transgressions, he's actually been rewarded for
them.
Which begs the question: if no one's changed by the end, why the hell
did we bother with the story at all? Victory without sacrifice or
change is hollow at best. As I said before, Ennis lacked the
conviction of his characters. So intent was he on a "happy ending"
for his alter-egos (especially Cassidy) that he abandoned what made
them so special in the first place. By letting them off the hook, he
robs their noble sacrifices of meaning, and thus betrays them.
Endings are tricky things - they have to put the point on the whole
affair, sum up what it's all been about, show how things are not what
they were before. PREACHER fails miserably at this - the final issue
would have been fine were it any other issue but the last, but as an
ending it just doesn't work at all. ROMEO & JULIET has an ending.
CASABLANCA has an ending. BLAKES 7 has an ending. PREACHER just has
a stop. And with the buildup and sheer issue-to-issue quality of
PREACHER, a stop just don't cut it.
Perfect world ending for me: leave Jesse dead, leave Cassidy dead.
Let their ends define their lives. For the love of Christ _show_ the
final showdown between the Saint and his maker. Let Tulip finally
understand Jesse (his letter to her was heart-wreenching - again a big
moment spoiled by having him return) and be tragically left to her own
devices - the world needs another Angel of Death now; I thought she'd
fit the bill perfectly.
Everybody seems to love the ending of PREACHER because these great
characters get to live on, and you can imagine them going on happily.
But without some sort of definition, something to define them finally,
their quality and greatness as characters is diminished.
WideScreenPig
Lee) wrote:
>Ringo <pu...@nospam.nospam> wrote in
><MPG.1504b528d...@news.supernews.com>:
>
>>Ken Dreger says:
>>> Horror comic? Not really. I mean it more explores the American
>>> Puritan identity and has a bit of a "dark" humor to it but as to being
>>> something a horror fan would like? IMO, no.
>>
>>It sounds very interesting. Is the art inside the comic as good as the
>>covers?
>>
>
>No, the art's pretty pedestrian for most issues, actually. The story's
>what's kickass, although I thought it ran out of steam way before the end,
>actually.
>
>--Robert
I must humbly disagree, Robert. Dillon's art is simple and
economicalm but hardly pedestrian. His ability to portray the most
subtle nuances of facial expression is matchless in his field - he
could sometimes portray what might have taken a page of dialogue in a
single stroke. He has a great eye for detail, and let's not forget
those groovy blown-off half-heads.
Larry Stanley
<pu...@nospam.nospam> wrote:
I think it is probably one of the best long running comics in history.
Each issue was well done, and well drawn. The humor sometimes slapped
you in the face while the horror often times was outshined by what
happened around it.
But the horror was there, and it is well worth the time and effort to
either track down the back issues, or just get the trade paperbacks.
If you have a problem finding the trades, let me know, and I can help
out there.
Trust me. Give this one a shot.
LArry
--
LArry Stanley
The Ultimate Fanboy
Editor PCU
http://home.earthlink.net/~penguin2000/homepage_pcu.htm
Always accepting reviews, comments, amature art, fan fiction, news info
Sean_Walsh
news:MPG.15049a2b7...@news.supernews.com...
> Never picked it up, mostly because the main guy on most covers is always
> lighting a cigarette. I'm not impressed by smoking and don't think it's
> "kewl" or anything.
No offense, but this reason, compared to other reasons as to why people
didn't like/pick up PREACHER, is the coolest... ;)
> But I was told some of the issues dealt with the
> mythology of the "Divine Family" (explored previously in ANAMNESIS)
> and the Secrets of the Knights' Templar.
The Divine Family (the lineage of Jesus) is dealt with...I can't possibly
explain without spoiling, but it's...something else...
As for the Knights' Templar...I forget how that's deal with, exactly...
Spoiler space
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Is that what the Grail basically is/resembles?
Dennis McLaughlin
wrote:
[excellent critique of Preacher #66 snipped]
Nicely done. You've swayed me. I did enjoy the final issue when I
first read it, but you're absolutely right: as a final issue, it's far
too conservative. The characters, especially Cassiday, are denied any
opportunity for genuine dramatic resonance. Maybe Garth ought to pull
out Campbell's "Hero of a Thousand Faces" and give it a reread
sometime...
--
[Exit pursued by a Bear]
Dennis McLaughlin
denn...@rcnchicago.com
Ken Dreger
wrote:
>On Tue, 27 Feb 2001 01:48:32 GMT, "Sean_Walsh" <wals...@hotmail.com>
I agree and I disagree with you. I agree that, with Cassidy knowing
that he would be reborn, that it cheapens his sacrifice but then again
his sacrifice to Jesse was also symbolic. He also gave up his
vampirism, which was an incredible power base for him - it allowed him
to be who he was with no real cost since he survived pretty much any
behaviour. Likewise, Cassidy's rebirth is symbolic of his inner
change (this is arguably why he's no longer a vampire as well since
his outer self represents his inner self).
Ken Dreger
wrote:
>On Tue, 27 Feb 2001 01:48:32 GMT, "Sean_Walsh" <wals...@hotmail.com>
I agree and I disagree with you. I agree that, with Cassidy knowing
Shiflet
Ringo wrote in message ...
>
>> I got behind on it, but every issue I've read(~1-40) is *excellent*.
>
>Sounds good. I think I'll order the entire collection from Mile High.
In trade paperback, or single issues? The first several don't come cheap
IIRC... Personally, I prefer the TPBs, you can read through 6 or so issues
without putting anything down.
>only went back to Batman for the one time he faced Predator.
He's faced them twice now...
>--
> Ringo
WideScreenPig
<denNOni...@rcInCANTchTAKEicANYagoMORE.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 27 Feb 2001 04:17:14 GMT, WideScreenPig <ws...@home.com>
>wrote:
>
>[excellent critique of Preacher #66 snipped]
>
>Nicely done. You've swayed me. I did enjoy the final issue when I
>first read it, but you're absolutely right: as a final issue, it's far
>too conservative. The characters, especially Cassiday, are denied any
>opportunity for genuine dramatic resonance. Maybe Garth ought to pull
>out Campbell's "Hero of a Thousand Faces" and give it a reread
>sometime...
<WSP chalks up another convert to the Cult of #66 Sucks>
Thanks. Spread the word, brother...
WideScreenPig
wrote:
>Ringo <pu...@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
>news:MPG.15049a2b7...@news.supernews.com...
>> Never picked it up, mostly because the main guy on most covers is always
>> lighting a cigarette. I'm not impressed by smoking and don't think it's
>> "kewl" or anything.
>
>No offense, but this reason, compared to other reasons as to why people
>didn't like/pick up PREACHER, is the coolest... ;)
>
>> But I was told some of the issues dealt with the
>> mythology of the "Divine Family" (explored previously in ANAMNESIS)
>> and the Secrets of the Knights' Templar.
>
>The Divine Family (the lineage of Jesus) is dealt with...I can't possibly
>explain without spoiling, but it's...something else...
"HUMPER DI-DO!!!!!!!"
>As for the Knights' Templar...I forget how that's deal with, exactly...
>
>Spoiler space
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>.
>Is that what the Grail basically is/resembles?
>
>Sean
>:)
They're based more closely on the modern secret societies outlined in
HOLY BLOOD & THE HOLY GRAIL, though viewed through Ennis' singular
POV.
Ringo
> But to each his own, and I do like the comic a lot...only mainstream comic
> I've liked in forever.
Hmmmm......Sandman wasn't too bad. BTW, just let me know if you have
anything to add to my e-mail to you. If not I can stop checking that
damn web-based mailbox although I only half-expected a reply...
--
Ringo
WideScreenPig
Lee) wrote:
>WideScreenPig <ws...@home.com> wrote in
><dc9m9t046hednirme...@4ax.com>:
>
>>I must humbly disagree, Robert. Dillon's art is simple and
>>economicalm
>
>'sat some kinda crazy Canadian word?
Number One on the WSP Typo List; I'm still getting used to my new
keyboard, and the comma's a smidge closer to the "M" key than I'm used
to. That or my fingers have inflated.
WideScreenPig
>Shiflet says:
>> In trade paperback, or single issues? The first several don't come cheap
>> IIRC... Personally, I prefer the TPBs, you can read through 6 or so issues
>> without putting anything down.
>
>I've bought the first two TPB's this morn, "Gone to Texas" and "Until
>the End of the World". I've read "Gone to Texas" and started the first
>couple pages of UTEOTW. Will have to finish tonight after work. I'm very
>impressed and while I have yet to read the intro by overrated one-trick-
>filmmaker Kevin Smith, it's obvious now where the inspiration for his
>"Dogma" came from. And they call ME unoriginal. It's fakers like that
>who give copying a bad name. ;-)
Then be sure to steer clear of his run on DAREDEVIL, which shamelessly
apes Frank Miller's work.
>Preacher is excellent on all levels. It has a couple small problems in
>the script but who cares, it's first rate entertainment, right up my
>alley. I look forward to reading the rest of the series. The deaf guy in
>the comics store I went to (he's gotta be deaf, he speaks by shouting; I
>was originally irritated by this but then I realised that's his normal
>speech pattern) told me the final TPB is due out this summer. So by
>then I should probably have the whole collection. I just lap it up, it
>really is my kind of storytelling with excellent characters. The visuals
>sure look like they'd have have inspired "John Carpenter's Vampires"
>some.
>
>> >only went back to Batman for the one time he faced Predator.
>>
>> He's faced them twice now...
>
>Thank you for letting me know. I will look into this and buy it if I can
>find it in TPB or back issues. Predator is even higher than Aliens in my
>book and I would love to see a Predator 3 or Predator vs. Aliens film. I
>bought all the toys some 7 years ago, still have them somewhere.
>Also I ran across a APE NATION series about that same time, but never
>read it. It crossed "Alien Nation" with "Planet of the Apes", two of my
>fave series. But I never saw it again.
>Then it got really ridiculous, I think Robocop versus Terminator was the
>last straw. BTW, I hear there was something called Robocop: Prime
>Directives, but haven't a clue what it is and if it's out on video. I
>think I'll go check it out. Didn't like Robocop 2 but 3 and the tv
>series were alright since there was a lot more dark humour...
Er, ROBOCOP: PRIME DIRECTIVES is my show, Ringo. Our Canadian
national premiere is this coming Sunday. Should hit tv stateside
around June. And it's tailor-made for people who "didn't like ROBOCOP
2 or 3".
Ringo
> Then be sure to steer clear of his run on DAREDEVIL, which shamelessly
> apes Frank Miller's work.
Whose run on Daredevil? Smith's? But does he ape well or badly?
See, I'm not like some of the alt.horrorians who hate aping. I have no
complaints if something is copied if it's well copied. You might say
that Fulci copied his own other works often, and that Lamberto Bava
copied Argento, and Argento copied Leone. It's the end product that
matters. Tonino Valleri copied Leone and Peckinpah to a T in MY NAME IS
NOBODY and no one would deny him his originality in putting the formula
together.
Yet I ape Criswell to a point where I had people thinking I was him
trolling under a different name and Criswell himself said several times
that I was damn good at it, yet these people just concentrated on the
fact that I was copying his style. Some crimes al...er, never mind. The
high point of this was when I posted here a legitimate e-mail from
Criswell explaining why he's not onlinme and I got the reply of "oh how
I miss the original". That vindicated everything.
> Er, ROBOCOP: PRIME DIRECTIVES is my show, Ringo. Our Canadian
> national premiere is this coming Sunday. Should hit tv stateside
> around June. And it's tailor-made for people who "didn't like ROBOCOP
> 2 or 3".
Hated 2, liked 3. If you wrote it I am pretty sure it will be good
stuff. I say this because studios seldom let a fan work on a property.
Studio heads are all retards. Fans do the best work. I just read that
Battlestar Galactica is coming back without the original cast. I can see
Universal just wants to make a fast buck instead of getting a hot
franchise to last forever. Fuck them.
--
Ringo
WideScreenPig
>WideScreenPig says:
>> Then be sure to steer clear of his run on DAREDEVIL, which shamelessly
>> apes Frank Miller's work.
>
>Whose run on Daredevil? Smith's? But does he ape well or badly?
Badly badly badly. It starts off well enough, but before the halfway
mark you realize that Smith is trying to recreate the feel of Miller's
work by simply doing what Miller did, again - but without any of the
innovation or characterization. It was simply a case of "I remember
how powerful it was when Bullseye killed DD's girlfriend, so what I'LL
do is... have Bullseye kill DD's girlfriend! Yeah, that'll be fuckin'
GREAT!" But he adds nothing new to the mix, and there's no emotional
impact beacuse, well, Miller already did it. And when he did it, he
really MEANT it.
It's all fine and good to want to emulate your influences, but look at
it this way: Miller is influenced by Jack Kirby, but his work is
"Frank Miller". You can sense the influence, but the final product is
more than just that, because he brings his own vision to the equation.
Smith is influenced by Frank Miller, but his work is "Frank Miller but
sort of watered down and not as good". It's like drinking your own
piss - strangely familiar, but not at all pleasant.
I like fans and fanboys just fine, but they don't often create so much
as they merely replicate, which ain't the same thing, sweetheart. I
realize that it's their way of paying tribute to the things they love,
and that's great, but they're giving nothing back by simply repeating
what has come before. It's just a snake swallowing its own tail, a
closed, undynamic system that can only wind down into mediocrity.
Smith's whole career seems to be based on aping other people to a
lesser or greater extent. Which is a shame, because it seems to me
that he could be a real original if he had a little more confidence in
his own point of view and relied a little less on copping lines from
Alan Moore's run on SWAMP THING and referencing STAR WARS every
twenty-three seconds.
Weirdly, I think his script for SUPERMAN LIVES is fucking amazing -
precisely because he doesn't feel the need to constantly subreference
everything in the world. The character and his universe are already
one great big culture bomb; as a result, he wrote a really dramatic
and moving story that stood on its own merits. Ironic, huh?
>See, I'm not like some of the alt.horrorians who hate aping. I have no
>complaints if something is copied if it's well copied. You might say
>that Fulci copied his own other works often, and that Lamberto Bava
>copied Argento, and Argento copied Leone. It's the end product that
>matters. Tonino Valleri copied Leone and Peckinpah to a T in MY NAME IS
>NOBODY and no one would deny him his originality in putting the formula
>together.
As noted above, it's all about bringing your own voice into the mix.
>Yet I ape Criswell to a point where I had people thinking I was him
>trolling under a different name and Criswell himself said several times
>that I was damn good at it, yet these people just concentrated on the
>fact that I was copying his style. Some crimes al...er, never mind. The
>high point of this was when I posted here a legitimate e-mail from
>Criswell explaining why he's not onlinme and I got the reply of "oh how
>I miss the original". That vindicated everything.
While I do wish you'd work on your own schtick a little more (if only
because I think you have enough personality that you don't need to
bogart someone else's), I can still differentiate a Criswell post from
a Ringo post most of the time. But it's your business, dude. If Cris
doesn't have a problem with it, why should the rest of us?
>> Er, ROBOCOP: PRIME DIRECTIVES is my show, Ringo. Our Canadian
>> national premiere is this coming Sunday. Should hit tv stateside
>> around June. And it's tailor-made for people who "didn't like ROBOCOP
>> 2 or 3".
>
>Hated 2, liked 3. If you wrote it I am pretty sure it will be good
>stuff. I say this because studios seldom let a fan work on a property.
>Studio heads are all retards.
Too true.
>Fans do the best work.
As noted in Rant Part A above, not necessarily true. I'm a fan, but I
got the ROBOCOP job because I was a professional writer. The fact
that I was also a fan was icing to the producer. It meant that I and
my writing partner were able to look at the script, in part, as a fan
and say "what would we want to see here", but we also applied things
like "structure", "dramatic tension", "dialogue" and
"characterization" to the mix. As a result we made some choices we
wouldn't have made we been fans-only, but ones that, I think,
ultimately made for a better piece of film.
A lot of fan scripts (and there are A LOT of fan scripts) are written
without working knowledge of how films actually get made, or even how
stories are properly told. Instead, you get 120 pages (and sometimes
much, much, MUCH more) of "then this cool thing happens and wouldn't
it be so COOL if..." - the written equivalent of being cornered by a
complete stranger who knows "exactly what went wrong with BATMAN &
ROBIN" and wants to tell you how HE would have done it - and then
proceeds to give you a panel-by-panel description of someone else's
comic book.
There's this one cat - whose name escapes me, Peter something - who
has made a goddam career out of writing these things . He wrote a
completely-unsolicited draft of ALIENS VS. PREDATOR that was
essentially a blow-by-blow re-telling of the Dark Horse comic with
three or four arbitrary changes. Did the same thing with FREDDY VS.
JASON and who knows what else. But he has not, to my knowledge,
produced ONE SINGLE ORIGINAL PIECE. A monkey could re-type the ALIENS
VS. PREDATOR comic, and it wouldn't have a sense of all the work that
went on behind it - the structuring, the pacing, the
characterization, the differentiation of dialogue, all the invisible
stuff that you only notice when it's NOT working.
>I just read that
>Battlestar Galactica is coming back without the original cast. I can see
>Universal just wants to make a fast buck instead of getting a hot
>franchise to last forever. Fuck them.
(SHAMELESS NAME DROP ALERT) Y'know, I had dinner with Richard Hatch a
buncha months back, and his enthusiasm in trying to get a BATTLESTAR
revival off the ground was infectious. He talked about having met
Bryan Singer at a recent con (this was right around the time of
X-MEN's release) and was surprised to find that Singer was a big fan
of the show.
Hatch had produced an absolutely dynamite BG revival trailer, paid for
out of his own pocket, in an attempt to get Universal to pull their
heads their asses and realize they were sitting on gold mine.
Needless to say, they had no clue... until Golden Boy Singer said to
them last week "Hey, what about a BATTLESTAR revival?" Suddenly it
was the greatest idea in the world. Do you think anyone gave Hatch a
call?
Fuck those guys. Fuck them in the ear. With a great big elephant
dick.
Rant endeth.
Ringo
> It's all fine and good to want to emulate your influences, but look at
> it this way: Miller is influenced by Jack Kirby, but his work is
> "Frank Miller". You can sense the influence, but the final product is
> more than just that, because he brings his own vision to the equation.
> Smith is influenced by Frank Miller, but his work is "Frank Miller but
> sort of watered down and not as good". It's like drinking your own
> piss - strangely familiar, but not at all pleasant.
I completely understand the sentiment although I've never been on the
receiving end of a GS (Golden Shower) myself. ;-)
Smith doesn't do a whole lot more than to ape better works. When he
tries something more daring and personal like "Chasing Amy" it works a
lot better than crap like "Dogma". I didn't believe "Dogma" for a
second. I think Linda Fiorentino didn't even realise what kind of a
movie she was in. Everyone else was strutting around going "hey ain't
this kewl, I'm in a Kevin Smith movie". No, it ain't.
I do remember instances of Miller copying other sources, and
particularly one Daredevil story which was a modern day retelling of
"High Plains Drifter". Interesting little story where a "jus' passin'
by" Matt Murdock is mistaken with the ghost of some guy the town had
seen die whipped by bycicle chains. Yes, Miller does a good job bringing
his influences into his work, but if I remember well, he's at his best
when giving us his own vision.
> I like fans and fanboys just fine, but they don't often create so much
> as they merely replicate, which ain't the same thing, sweetheart. I
> realize that it's their way of paying tribute to the things they love,
> and that's great, but they're giving nothing back by simply repeating
> what has come before. It's just a snake swallowing its own tail, a
> closed, undynamic system that can only wind down into mediocrity.
Ouroboros.
> Weirdly, I think his script for SUPERMAN LIVES is fucking amazing -
> precisely because he doesn't feel the need to constantly subreference
> everything in the world. The character and his universe are already
> one great big culture bomb; as a result, he wrote a really dramatic
> and moving story that stood on its own merits. Ironic, huh?
Even more ironic that 1) It was never produced and 2) That was one
script I'd actually like to see made into a film. But fuck, shit, no way
with hook-nosed Nicholas Coppo.., er, Cage. Fuck that noise, I want to
see SUPERMAN, not some bullshitting bearing the famous name. At one
point Ol' Nick was even saying he wanted to change the uniform...he can
kiss my ass. Here's hoping Sam "Not funny anymore" Raimi can pull a good
job on Spider-man.
> As noted above, it's all about bringing your own voice into the mix.
I do, but again, some of the people here can't see it.
> While I do wish you'd work on your own schtick a little more (if only
> because I think you have enough personality that you don't need to
> bogart someone else's), I can still differentiate a Criswell post from
> a Ringo post most of the time. But it's your business, dude. If Cris
> doesn't have a problem with it, why should the rest of us?
Thanks for the vote of confidence. I really hope he's okay with it.
He's already re-assured me twice that he had no problem with it, but who
knows, maybe I overdid it. I just can't wait for him to be back and
either chew me out or carry on as usual...
> As noted in Rant Part A above, not necessarily true. I'm a fan, but I
> got the ROBOCOP job because I was a professional writer. The fact
> that I was also a fan was icing to the producer. It meant that I and
> my writing partner were able to look at the script, in part, as a fan
> and say "what would we want to see here", but we also applied things
> like "structure", "dramatic tension", "dialogue" and
> "characterization" to the mix. As a result we made some choices we
> wouldn't have made we been fans-only, but ones that, I think,
> ultimately made for a better piece of film.
Well, obviously you are professionals, I never meant
to say you weren't. But being pros doesn't keep you from being fans,
now.
> A monkey could re-type the ALIENS
> VS. PREDATOR comic, and it wouldn't have a sense of all the work that
> went on behind it - the structuring, the pacing, the
> characterization, the differentiation of dialogue, all the invisible
> stuff that you only notice when it's NOT working.
The internet is making life harder in Hollywaste. Used to be, all
a production company felt they had to do to avoid a lawsuit was reject
unsolicited scripts unread. Now it's much harder because fans are
posting their own fan work on the web. How does a studio head prove to a
jury that he didn't rip off someone else's work that he read onliner
first before making a similar movie?
>
> (SHAMELESS NAME DROP ALERT) Y'know, I had dinner with Richard Hatch a
> buncha months back, and his enthusiasm in trying to get a BATTLESTAR
> revival off the ground was infectious. He talked about having met
> Bryan Singer at a recent con (this was right around the time of
> X-MEN's release) and was surprised to find that Singer was a big fan
> of the show.
Richard Hatch is cool. I have been reading the updates on his campaign
to get the revival going since 1996. I haven't seen his trailer but I
think someone definitely should leak it to the web. It's said to be
simply amazing.
> Hatch had produced an absolutely dynamite BG revival trailer, paid for
> out of his own pocket, in an attempt to get Universal to pull their
> heads their asses and realize they were sitting on gold mine.
> Needless to say, they had no clue... until Golden Boy Singer said to
> them last week "Hey, what about a BATTLESTAR revival?" Suddenly it
> was the greatest idea in the world. Do you think anyone gave Hatch a
> call?
From what I read on richardhatch.com the phone never once rang.
> Fuck those guys. Fuck them in the ear. With a great big elephant
> dick.
Fuck them with the ANAL INTRUDER (as shown in TOP SECRET starring Val
Kilmer)
> Rant endeth.
As rants go this was pretty good and informative. Thank you.
--
Ringo
Jeremy R.
>without putting anything down.
>
Amen, especially with "Until the End of the World" (second story arc). There's
a hell of a cliffhanger in there, and I can't even begin to fathom how you
regular readers managed to wait 4-6 weeks for the next issue.
>>only went back to Batman for the one time he faced Predator.
>
>
>He's faced them twice now...
Unfortunately, it's actually been three times. Of course, I'm still waiting for
Batman vs. Killer Klowns from Outer Space, but hey, that's just me.
By the way, have any other Preacher fans checked out the Ennis/Dillon Punisher?
Good stuff, and I never liked the character whatsoever. can't wait for the
regular series to start in June.
Jeremy
IM me at tenebrae99
"You look at that boy. Way he talks, way he handles himself, he reckons he's a
goddamned hero...an' heroes is always fun." -- Jody, "PREACHER: The Good Old
Boys"
Jeremy R.
>around June. And it's tailor-made for people who "didn't like ROBOCOP
>2 or 3".
Is it going to be syndicated, or will it run somewhere on cable, like Showtime
or Sci-Fi Channel, for example?
Jeremy R.
>filmmaker Kevin Smith, it's obvious now where the inspiration for his
>"Dogma" came from
To be fair, Dogma was advertised way back at the end of Clerks, which was
released long before Preacher started.
Also, give his Daredevil run a shot.
>The visuals
>sure look like they'd have have inspired "John Carpenter's Vampires"
>some.
If someone in Hollywood would put down the crack pipe and film Ennis' script
(which is supposed to be quite faithful -- anyone know for sure?), Carpenter
would be an excellent choice to direct IMO.
Now, if only they could get Arseface off his promotional tour for
Hannibal...(side note to the Pigster: when I first saw Oldman, I couldn't get
your comment out of my head.)
Jeremy R.
>job on Spider-man.
>
After seeing Shadow of the Vampire, I'm convinced that even if the rest of the
movie blows goats (that's not copyrighted, right?), Dafoe should steal the show
as the Goblin.
Dave Doty
"Jeremy R." wrote:
> To be fair, Dogma was advertised way back at the end of Clerks, which was
> released long before Preacher started.
Not only that, but neither its structure nor its themes resemble those of
Preacher, nor is there much resemblance between any of the characters of one or
the other.
The resemblance between the two is it uses the metaphysical structures of
Christianity in a story that criticizes it. Which hardly began with Preacher.
Hell, I did it back in high school in the 80s in my "angry adolescent" phase.
Dave Doty
WideScreenPig
>> Should hit tv stateside
>>around June. And it's tailor-made for people who "didn't like ROBOCOP
>>2 or 3".
>
>Is it going to be syndicated, or will it run somewhere on cable, like Showtime
>or Sci-Fi Channel, for example?
Deal's apparently been signed, but I'm not allowed to say until we get
the go-ahead from their publicity department. I'll let you know as
soon as I can.
WideScreenPig
>If someone in Hollywood would put down the crack pipe and film Ennis' script
>(which is supposed to be quite faithful -- anyone know for sure?), Carpenter
>would be an excellent choice to direct IMO.
Apparently (and this is from a company that was going to produce it,
at one point) Ennis' script is a bit of a whitewashed version - most
of the really good rude stuff has been excised. And sadly, the only
director who has been attached to the project is Rachel Talalay, who
hit her creative peak when she was still doing the accounting for Bob
Shaye at New Line. Her resume includes such genre-redefining films as
FREDDY'S DEAD: THE FINAL NIGHTMARE, GHOST IN THE MACHINE and TANK
GIRL, so she's a PERFECT fit for PREACHER, don'tcha think? (groan)
It'll be right up there with HELLBLAZER... er, sorry, CONSTANTINE, to
be directed by the thoroughly useless Tarsem, he of THE CELL and
nothing else.
Someone shoot me now.
Robert Lee
<20010228011704...@ng-co1.aol.com>:
>Amen, especially with "Until the End of the World" (second story arc).
>There's a hell of a cliffhanger in there, and I can't even begin to
>fathom how you regular readers managed to wait 4-6 weeks for the next
>issue.
Try to imagine what it was like to wait between the eleventh and twelth
issues of Watchmen--and that last issue was delayed by over a month, too.
When it finally came in, I sat down on some stairs in an alley behind the
comics shop and read it twice.
--Robert
--
"Also, it pixelates the genitals of a dead native, which is
totally unacceptable."
Bauknin
In article <20010228011704...@ng-co1.aol.com>, teneb...@aol.com
wrote:
<< By the way, have any other Preacher fans checked out the Ennis/Dillon
Punisher?
Good stuff, and I never liked the character whatsoever. can't wait for the
regular series to start in June. >>
That "Punisher" run was fantastic. Ennis is doing "Just A Pilgrim," which
comes out in March. From the stuff I've seen, it looks like it will be
quality. -Doug
Bauknin
In article <3A9AFF...@NOmilehigh.net>, hbrandt wrote:
<< Oh, man. I disagree. The art by Steve Dillon conveys expressions
beutifully. The final storyline was executed nicely and the cinematic,
poetic, elegiac final issue #66 was perfect. Of course, if you were
*only* looking for "kickass", it really wasn't that.
>>
No truer words spoken. -Doug
Bauknin
In article <f07m9t4k5oovbgejf...@4ax.com>, WideScreenPig wrote:
<< SPOILERS FOR THE FINAL ISSUE OF PREACHER
I would have left Jesse dead, or at the very least given his miracle
return a bit more juice, and potentially saved it for the end of the
issue, not the first panel. I certainly wouldn't have revived Cassidy
- his little "deal", while smile-inducing in the short term,
_completely_ undermines what, to me, was his greatest and most moving
transformation as a character in the preceding issue.
His acceptance of his nature and choice to walk off to his death was
an incredibly powerful moment and a great exit for the character. But
now, seen in retrospect, it becomes just another empty Cassidy
gesture, with no weight or meaning behind it, because he knows he's
getting away with it.
The same problem exists in the resolution of the Jesse/Tulip story.
Throughout their relationship, the central conflict has been Tulip's
inability to trust Jesse to stay and commit completely to her. He
leaves, he comes back, he promises to never ever do it again, she
takes him back, he does it again. There's nothing in the final scene
between the two of them that says any of this has changed, except that
this time Jesse says "I promise to never ever EVER do it again."
So in other words, we've got a character-based story with three
characters who are not significantly changed by the events that have
gone on around them. Jesse's still a good-ole boy straight arrow,
Tulip's still Tulip, and Cassidy's still just a selfish liar. I know
I know, he's not a vampire anymore -- but he was never really defined
by his vampirism; it merely exacerbated tendencies already within him.
If anything, his getting rid of his vampirism at this point is only
going to make him worse because not only has he not suffered
consequences for his transgressions, he's actually been rewarded for
them.
Which begs the question: if no one's changed by the end, why the hell
did we bother with the story at all? Victory without sacrifice or
change is hollow at best. As I said before, Ennis lacked the
conviction of his characters. So intent was he on a "happy ending"
for his alter-egos (especially Cassidy) that he abandoned what made
them so special in the first place. By letting them off the hook, he
robs their noble sacrifices of meaning, and thus betrays them.
Endings are tricky things - they have to put the point on the whole
affair, sum up what it's all been about, show how things are not what
they were before. PREACHER fails miserably at this - the final issue
would have been fine were it any other issue but the last, but as an
ending it just doesn't work at all. ROMEO & JULIET has an ending.
CASABLANCA has an ending. BLAKES 7 has an ending. PREACHER just has
a stop. And with the buildup and sheer issue-to-issue quality of
PREACHER, a stop just don't cut it.
Perfect world ending for me: leave Jesse dead, leave Cassidy dead.
Let their ends define their lives. For the love of Christ _show_ the
final showdown between the Saint and his maker. Let Tulip finally
understand Jesse (his letter to her was heart-wreenching - again a big
moment spoiled by having him return) and be tragically left to her own
devices - the world needs another Angel of Death now; I thought she'd
fit the bill perfectly.
Everybody seems to love the ending of PREACHER because these great
characters get to live on, and you can imagine them going on happily.
But without some sort of definition, something to define them finally,
their quality and greatness as characters is diminished. >>
You make some valid and interesting points, and you have an interesting
interpretation of what went on. And while I might not agree with all of it, it
does raise some points of thought.
Let's use your assumption that the characters didn't change. Not that I agree
with that, but we'll go with it for this discussion. In a sense, that almost
makes the story even more powerful. Here, after all the crap that has happened
to them, after all they have been through and seen, they still can't change
their stripes. The very nature of man is a stationary as it is pointless.
Cassidy may be getting away with it again ... because he can, and he exploits
it and always will.
Jesse ... well, who knows if he'll keep his promise. That's been the problem
all along now, and we all know what happens when you go back with a liar. You
get what you deserve.
If your interpretation is right, there is a subtle sadness to the whole damn
thing, making it all that more touching.
I tend to accept the ending on its face value. After all, this was just a new
version of the Western, and we all know how they ended. -Doug
Bauknin
In article <260220012120542484%ufb...@uearthlink.net>, Larry wrote:
<< I think it is probably one of the best long running comics in history.
Each issue was well done, and well drawn. The humor sometimes slapped
you in the face while the horror often times was outshined by what
happened around it.
But the horror was there, and it is well worth the time and effort to
either track down the back issues, or just get the trade paperbacks.
If you have a problem finding the trades, let me know, and I can help
out there.
Trust me. Give this one a shot.
LArry >>
Larry,
You've been a great supporter of this series. I've turned at least two people
onto it a week. The only thing better humanitarian act I could do would be to
open fire in a mall on Black Friday. At least "Preacher" is a little
healthier. -Doug
Bauknin
In article <m7bo9tcvla8q1g97j...@4ax.com>, WideScreenPig wrote:
<< It's all fine and good to want to emulate your influences, but look at
it this way: Miller is influenced by Jack Kirby, but his work is
"Frank Miller". You can sense the influence, but the final product is
more than just that, because he brings his own vision to the equation.
Smith is influenced by Frank Miller, but his work is "Frank Miller but
sort of watered down and not as good". It's like drinking your own
piss - strangely familiar, but not at all pleasant. >>
Let's not forget how much "Lone Wolf and Cub" influenced Miller. Simply
incredible. -Doug
Jeremy R.
>comes out in March. From the stuff I've seen, it looks like it will be
>quality. -Doug
>
I'm still desperately tracking down issue 3. It's the only one I need in the
series.
Just A Pilgrim looks great. My comic shop gave me the preview issue for free
(has the opening pages and interviews with Ennis and Carlos Ezquerra).
Jeremy R.
>issues of Watchmen--and that last issue was delayed by over a month, too.
>
Another one that I was glad to have caught in TPB form.
>When it finally came in, I sat down on some stairs in an alley behind the
>comics shop and read it twice.
A few years back, I found a copy of Dark Knight Returns at a used bookstore. On
the ride home, I was reading it so intently that I didn't realize that a car
had almost collided with the passenger side (where I was sitting).
Jeremy R.
>the go-ahead from their publicity department. I'll let you know as
>soon as I can.
>
Great. The reason I mentioned those two specifically is because my company does
their closed captioning (I think we still do, anyway).