Spawn
Ann Wagoner
Only 5 and a half hours until the Spawn HBO TV show tonight at
midnight! Check out the Spawn game at http://www.hbo.com/spawn
Ann
Scowling Jim Cowling
In article <337CAD...@tribeca.ios.com>, wag...@tribeca.ios.com wrote:
>Only 5 and a half hours until the Spawn HBO TV show tonight at
I suspect it'll last a single season, given the reviews, which range from
"mediocre" to "terrible".
-------
You must alter the domain in my email address from the.world to
islandnet.com to reply to this posting. I now receive an average of
35K in junkmail a day. This has to stop.
Scowling Jim Cowling...Writer/Atheist/Geek
http://www.islandnet.com/~scowling
-------
Enrique Conty
In article <5lj2bd$86c$1...@sanjuan.islandnet.com> scow...@the.world (Scowling Jim Cowling) writes:
>In article <337CAD...@tribeca.ios.com>, wag...@tribeca.ios.com wrote:
>>Only 5 and a half hours until the Spawn HBO TV show tonight at
>>midnight! Check out the Spawn game at <deleted>
>
>I suspect it'll last a single season, given the reviews, which range from
>"mediocre" to "terrible".
No, it'll only last 6 episodes. That's what the contract said. After
that, it's on to Bakshi's "Spicy City". And it wasn't nearly as bad
as you feared...
--
Enrique Conty
Software Cowhand
co...@cig.mot.com
http://www.mcs.net/~conty
Ollie T
I thought each episode was supposed to be 1 hr? Oh well, I thought is
was very good. Done just the way it should be. I bet the "experts" who
reviewed it do not even read the comic. And I heard that there will be
another 6 episodes next year.
Bill Tupperman
Let's hope you heard wrong. It was awful. The writing, acting,
animation, everything. It was, worst of all, boring. That is crime #1 in
a so-called suspense/action vehicle. Spawn the comic book is brilliant
by comparison. The only entertaining part was McFarlane's laughable
intro to the show.
Bill Tupperman
Enrique Conty wrote:
>
> In article <5lj2bd$86c$1...@sanjuan.islandnet.com> scow...@the.world (Scowling Jim Cowling) writes:
> >In article <337CAD...@tribeca.ios.com>, wag...@tribeca.ios.com wrote:
> >>Only 5 and a half hours until the Spawn HBO TV show tonight at
> >>midnight! Check out the Spawn game at <deleted>
> >
> >I suspect it'll last a single season, given the reviews, which range from
> >"mediocre" to "terrible".
>
> No, it'll only last 6 episodes. That's what the contract said. After
> that, it's on to Bakshi's "Spicy City". And it wasn't nearly as bad
> as you feared...
Yes, it was.
tn...@primenet.com
In article ,
scow...@the.world (Scowling Jim Cowling) wrote:
>
> In article , wag...@tribeca.ios.com wrote:
> >Only 5 and a half hours until the Spawn HBO TV show tonight at
> >midnight! Check out the Spawn game at
>
> "mediocre" to "terrible".
>
Actually its in production for a second season with a third approved as
far as the scrpt stage.
Tom
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
Enrique Conty
[Crossposted to r.a.animation]
In article <8649768...@dejanews.com> tn...@primenet.com writes:
>
>[HBO Spawn] is in production for a second season
>with a third approved as far as the scrpt stage.
Cool. Mind providing a reference for this news item? ^_^
Tom Nelson
In article <5mpe83$abr$1...@trotsky.cig.mot.com>, co...@rtsg.mot.com (Enrique Conty) wrote:
>[Crossposted to r.a.animation]
>
>In article <8649768...@dejanews.com> tn...@primenet.com writes:
>>
>>[HBO Spawn] is in production for a second season
>>with a third approved as far as the scrpt stage.
>
>Cool. Mind providing a reference for this news item? ^_^
>
Only me, I work on the show.
Vinny S. Veritas
Tom Nelson wrote:
> >>[HBO Spawn] is in production for a second season
> >>with a third approved as far as the scrpt stage.
> Only me, I work on the show.
Then allow me to personally chide you for helping to produce one of the
most meretricious pieces of shit HBO has ever seen fit to broadcast. It
was awful on every front: acting, writing (ooooh, cuss words. That must
mean it's "adult." Puh-leeeze), design (at least the comic book has/had
an original look; this series just had generic, stiff, unimaginative
character design and lousy, flat backgrounds), animation (again, stiff
as a board). Why on earth would anyone in a position of power greenlight
a crappy enterprise like this (especially a woman...this series was
totally gratuitous, what with Al's widow dressing more like a hooker
than a lawyer)? I'm not even dissing "Spawn" itself. The movie looks
pretty entertaining, but this series was the worst. HBO should be
embarrassed, not pumping out another season. It makes me sick how no one
seems to understand what quality is any more. Fuck it, people deserve
what they get.
Enrique Conty
In article <33AB60...@truth.net> "Vinny S. Veritas" <diog...@truth.net> writes:
>Tom Nelson wrote:
>> >>[HBO Spawn] is in production for a second season
>> >>with a third approved as far as the scrpt stage.
>> Only me, I work on the show.
>Then allow me to personally chide you for helping to produce one of the
>most meretricious pieces of shit HBO has ever seen fit to broadcast.
I liked it. Mind you, I'll be the first to admit
Spawn is certainly *NOT* for everyone, but I like it.
You hinted at the reason right at the Subject: line. Spawn:TAS is not
a superhero cartoon as it is a horror story. And as a horror story,
Spawn works... sure, the production values could have been better,
but you do what you can with what you have...
Kwesi Ako Kennedy
Enrique Conty wrote:
> I liked it. Mind you, I'll be the first to admit
> Spawn is certainly *NOT* for everyone, but I like it.
>
> You hinted at the reason right at the Subject: line. Spawn:TAS is not
> a superhero cartoon as it is a horror story. And as a horror story,
> Spawn works... sure, the production values could have been better,
> but you do what you can with what you have...
Maye it's because I've missed most of the first episodes but I'm
mercilessly in the middle of the road with Spawn. I don't really like
it but at the same time I really don't hate it because of the amont of
effort that is put into it shows from time to time.
While I do like the story and how they approach the main characters
(Sapwn, Wanda {put some clothes on girl! :') }, the detectives {who I
think get better every time I see them}, etc...) the animation of these
characters is not quite up to speed with what is trying to be
expressed.The looks of terror in the faces of those about to be killed
have more feeling than some of the less tense moments.
Maybe It's my short attention span but I often find myself getting
bored during episodes as well. The pacing of the few episodes I have
seen seem a little out of wack. The shocks are not quite that shocking
and the quite monents of terror are not verry terrible. I wanted to be
concerned for the kids in the last couple of stories but I really
couldn't feel any tension. It would be nice to see Spawn mix it up with
someone who is up to his level of power for a change.
Oh well, I watched last nights ep. and Violator revealed his true form.
Things may pick up a little now.
Kwesi "there's room for improvement" Kennedy
Matthew Milam
On 21 Jun 1997 12:44:47 GMT, co...@rtsg.mot.com (Enrique Conty) wrote:
>In article <33AB60...@truth.net> "Vinny S. Veritas" <diog...@truth.net> writes:
>>Tom Nelson wrote:
>>> >>[HBO Spawn] is in production for a second season
>>> >>with a third approved as far as the scrpt stage.
>>> Only me, I work on the show.
>>Then allow me to personally chide you for helping to produce one of the
>>most meretricious pieces of shit HBO has ever seen fit to broadcast.
>
>I liked it. Mind you, I'll be the first to admit
>Spawn is certainly *NOT* for everyone, but I like it.
>
>You hinted at the reason right at the Subject: line. Spawn:TAS is not
>a superhero cartoon as it is a horror story. And as a horror story,
>Spawn works... sure, the production values could have been better,
>but you do what you can with what you have...
>--
> Enrique Conty
> Software Cowhand
> co...@cig.mot.com
> http://www.mcs.net/~conty
One of the many reasons that Spawn works so well, is because it's not
a superhero story. Spawn is a story about a dead man who sold his soul
to the devil to come back to live, only to put himslef into the middle
of a war of good and evil in an attempt to reclaim a life that lead
him to nowhere.
It's so complex even i can't explain it.......
So don't crap on Spawn, whoever you were, I doubt any of us could do
better.
Matthew Milam (mmi...@super.zippo.com, matm...@ntr.net)
"Youuuu...doing that thing you doooooo....."-From the movie "That Thing you do!"
"You are a sick, preverted bastard"-Words around the line of a final message i got
from a die-hard Gargoyle fan after i discussed the sexual content of the show.
Tom Nelson
In article <5ogibv$4fa$1...@trotsky.cig.mot.com>, co...@rtsg.mot.com (Enrique Conty) wrote:
>In article <33AB60...@truth.net> "Vinny S. Veritas" <diog...@truth.net>
> writes:
>>Tom Nelson wrote:
>>> >>[HBO Spawn] is in production for a second season
>>> >>with a third approved as far as the scrpt stage.
>>> Only me, I work on the show.
>>Then allow me to personally chide you for helping to produce one of the
>>most meretricious pieces of shit HBO has ever seen fit to broadcast.
Thanks
>
>I liked it. Mind you, I'll be the first to admit
>Spawn is certainly *NOT* for everyone, but I like it.
>
>You hinted at the reason right at the Subject: line. Spawn:TAS is not
>a superhero cartoon as it is a horror story. And as a horror story,
>Spawn works... sure, the production values could have been better,
>but you do what you can with what you have...
Yep, thanks Enrique, season two will be done in japan, so (In theory) it
should look a lot better then the first season.
kingnothing
> So don't crap on Spawn, whoever you were, I doubt any of us could do
> better.
(I doubt that Ebert could direct a film, but I value his opinions)
I was expecting a more McFarlene-look to the series.
Brief reactions: The night scenes were, overall, successful. Visually,
they seemed to draw from Isner's The Spirit. The day scenes were often
awkward -disproportioned figures, compressed space, square cars.
The characters and dialogue were solid. Cog looked too much like Gandalf.
I hated the forced R scenes and language. I thought that it was more
coherent than the comic.
Though the series ended very well, there was something -overall- that has
kept from being too excited about it. I can't really put my finger on it,
but I was very enthused about the series before it began and and left only
with a feeling it was "good." Too high of expectations for a tv animated
series? probably. Still, I'm looking forward to the next round.
Enrique Conty
In article <5oqhbt$q...@nntp02.primenet.com> tnel@**NOSPAM**primenet.com (Tom Nelson) writes:
>
>Yep, thanks Enrique, season two will be done in japan, so (In
>theory) it should look a lot better then the first season.
Ooooo... what studio?
Tom Nelson
On 25 Jun 1997 14:37:33 GMT, co...@rtsg.mot.com (Enrique Conty) wrote:
>In article <5oqhbt$q...@nntp02.primenet.com> tnel@**NOSPAM**primenet.com (Tom Nelson) writes:
>>
>>Yep, thanks Enrique, season two will be done in japan, so (In
>>theory) it should look a lot better then the first season.
>
>Ooooo... what studio?
>
>--
Mad House.
Tom
Enrique Conty
In article <33b61517....@news.primenet.com> . writes:
>On 25 Jun 1997 14:37:33 GMT, co...@rtsg.mot.com (Enrique Conty) wrote:
>>In article <5oqhbt$q...@nntp02.primenet.com> tnel@**NOSPAM**primenet.com (Tom Nelson) writes:
>>>Yep, thanks Enrique, season two will be done in japan, so (In
>>>theory) it should look a lot better then the first season.
>>Ooooo... what studio?
This is, indeed, very good news! Looking forward to it...
Vinny S. Veritas
Enrique Conty wrote:
> >>Ooooo... what studio?
> >Mad House.
>
> This is, indeed, very good news! Looking forward to it...
You guys are aware that you still haven't changed the subject line of
this thread, aren't you? When I posted "the horror continues???" I
thought it was pretty obvious I meant it in the worst possible way. I
guess the fact that you continue this mutual stroke-fest helps explain
why you would like this series: you're idiots. Actually, fair is fair,
Tom has a mighty good reason if he's drawing a paycheck from this
drivel, but anyone else who would laud it is a twit. Spawn (the cartoon
show) is the bunk and that's all there is to it. Bad is bad, boring is
boring, dumb is dumb, and Spawn is all of the preceding.
Enrique Conty
In article <33B84A...@truth.net> "Vinny S. Veritas" <diog...@truth.net> writes:
>When I posted "the horror continues???" I thought it was
>pretty obvious I meant it in the worst possible way.
Yes, you did. And I replied to your post. Since you never replied to
my counterpoint, I assumed you had nothing else worthwhile to contribute
to the discussion.
The post you just made confirms my assumption. I mean, you're down to
throwing insults left and right... that may work for Tony Twist, but
such language has no place in a reasonable discussion between grown men.
Later...
Terrence C. Briggs
In a previous article, co...@rtsg.mot.com (Enrique Conty) says:
>In article <33b61517....@news.primenet.com> . writes:
>>On 25 Jun 1997 14:37:33 GMT, co...@rtsg.mot.com (Enrique Conty) wrote:
>>>In article <5oqhbt$q...@nntp02.primenet.com> tnel@**NOSPAM**primenet.com (Tom Nelson) writes:
>>>>Yep, thanks Enrique, season two will be done in japan, so (In
>>>>theory) it should look a lot better then the first season.
>>>Ooooo... what studio?
>>Mad House.
>
>This is, indeed, very good news! Looking forward to it...
>
>--
> Enrique Conty
> Software Cowhand
> co...@cig.mot.com
> http://www.mcs.net/~conty
>
Uh...if I told you Mad House also animated the debut
seasons of Wing Commander Academy and Street Fighter on the USA
Network, would the news be as good?
Might as well have stuck with Koko...
Peace to you.
Terrence "Then again, Mad House might be the perfect studio for a
Ninja Scroll-tyep spoogefest" Briggs :)
--
---------------------------------------------------------------
Terrence Briggs
Email: hm...@freenet.cleveland.edu
Matthew Milam
On Mon, 30 Jun 1997 20:07:22 -0400, "Vinny S. Veritas"
<diog...@truth.net> wrote:
>Enrique Conty wrote:
>
>> >>Ooooo... what studio?
>> >Mad House.
>>
>> This is, indeed, very good news! Looking forward to it...
>
>
>You guys are aware that you still haven't changed the subject line of
>this thread, aren't you? When I posted "the horror continues???" I
>thought it was pretty obvious I meant it in the worst possible way. I
>guess the fact that you continue this mutual stroke-fest helps explain
>why you would like this series: you're idiots. Actually, fair is fair,
>Tom has a mighty good reason if he's drawing a paycheck from this
>drivel, but anyone else who would laud it is a twit. Spawn (the cartoon
>show) is the bunk and that's all there is to it. Bad is bad, boring is
>boring, dumb is dumb, and Spawn is all of the preceding.
Now listen....we have lost about a thousand differnet cartoons due to
FCC and studio's unwillingness to commit to Animation. And your
calling this cartoon stupid, I think NOT.
Spawn gives me the passion to belive that Animation can be serious and
not a god damn laugh fest, The problem with you calling us stupid for
liking this cartoon is the same problem with people basing Power
Rangers: We read into it more than you do.
Spawn while it may be violent and have sex, has a way of controlling
it by giving purpose. Al Simmons is a dark man, and doesn't have a
whole lot of prespective except to shoot and kill. And why not, he was
a goverment assasin. The same goes for Chappel, Wynn, and Clown. All
of them have darker sides to them, some of them don't quite reveal,
some of them make it obvious. But that's what the show is about, the
dark side.
If we contiune to censor and unrealitize Television, writers will no
longer be able to write because they will be writing for the sake of 7
year olds.
Remember this Vinny, Animation has had a hard time in the 90's, and
what you say will make the studios smile, because your one of THEM.
(Why not join S. Carras?....he's just about the same)
Vinny S. Veritas
Enrique Conty wrote:
>
> Yes, you did. And I replied to your post. Since you never replied to
> my counterpoint, I assumed you had nothing else worthwhile to contribute
> to the discussion.
>
> The post you just made confirms my assumption. I mean, you're down to
> throwing insults left and right...
Wrong. If you were the intelligent person you pretend to be, you'd see
that between the condescension (mea culpa) and insults (re: opinions)
were valid points. "Spawn" is horrible on every level. You want me to
break it down into clear, concise, easily digestible nuggets? Fine, here
goes:
1) The animation: Without getting into a frame by frame analysis, it's
pretty obvious that massive corners were cut on this series (which is
fiscally understandable). That noted, it is stiff, lifeless, awkward and
uninspired. There are examples of limited animation that have faired
much better than "Spawn," in light of having had other strengths to draw
on (no pun intended). Something (in a completely different vein) like
"Rocky and Bullwinkle" is a perfect example. Were one to view that show
purely on the basis of the animation, one would be sorely disappointed.
But it had excellent writing, voice acting and character design. "Spawn"
doesn't.
2) The character/general design: See point number one. But to add to the
argument, if you look at the comic books, even though they are now sort
of generic by dint of the fact that McFarlane has co-opted his style to
a studio-load of other artists, they still have a "look." The series is
completely style-free. It's unoriginal, hackneyed and dull. Its
stylistic antecedents (junk like "Urotsukidoji" and other hate-filled
Japanimation, as well as the better done, but still torpid "Batman
Adventures") have been there and done that. The poorly placed, totally
unnecessary shadows that fall over everything and everyone in "Spawn"
are ridiculous. They are from no light source and are arbitrarily placed
to lend "dramatic effect." Because they are so badly executed (but
placed to keep up with the aforementioned Joneses), they lend nothing
but murkiness. Black generally doesn't look good in animation. It
deadens the visuals, whereas on paper well-spotted blacks can do magic.
The men in "Spawn" are all archetypes, not one straying into anything
even remotely original. All the women are stereotypical sluts. Wanda is
the tawdriest lawyer I've ever seen (general lawyer ethics
notwithstanding). Why is she gadding about in hooker-ware? Because the
artists involved are sexist morons. God forbid a woman should be dressed
with dignity. I suppose the backgrounds are workmanlike (but not awful).
The script/plot: Alan McElroy is an embarrassment. I was depressed to
see he also scripted the upcoming motion picture. I had held out hopes
that would be better (visually it will be), but the script will suck. He
is a horror hack ("Halloween 4"? Does the phrase "piece of shit" ring
any bells?). His dialogue is convoluted and awfully purple (prosaically
speaking). I forget the character's name, but the old man's narration
was grating, dopey and only there because the storytelling was so piss
rotten that the audience needed some hand-holding to get through it.
I've got no problems with so-called vulgar language, but having the word
"fuck" bandied about just because you can cheapens it. Yes, cheapens the
word "fuck." There's no shock value left to it, and it doesn't make crap
like "Spawn" more "realistic" just by inserting the odd "motherfucker"
and badly drawn tits into it (see points one and two).
I think I've made my point. If you don't agree with what I've said,
fine. But don't go writing that I have nothing to contribute.
Vinny S. Veritas
Matthew Milam wrote:
>
> Now listen....we have lost about a thousand differnet cartoons due to
> FCC and studio's unwillingness to commit to Animation. And your
> calling this cartoon stupid, I think NOT.
You mean you don't think. What's the FCC have to do with anything? They
haven't yanked animation off your screen, poor Arbitron numbers have. Q
ratings have. The FCC is not responsible for thousands of cartoons being
pulled off the airwaves. Enrique merely has bad (to be charitable, let's
say questionable) taste, but you sir, are a paranoiac moron. Studios
pass on product all the time, but not specifically animation. The
animation business is booming, clod. Without getting into what I do, I'm
in a good position to say with authority that I ought to know.
>
> Spawn gives me the passion to belive that Animation can be serious and
> not a god damn laugh fest,
What's wrong with laugh-fests? The world could use some more of that.
But for the sake of your argument, I'd say "Spawn" is fulfilling the
laugh-fest objective more impressively than it is living up to its
purported horror angle. I'd love a good, serious animated series, but if
"Spawn" is what they're offering, I'll keep waiting.
> The problem with you calling us stupid for
> liking this cartoon is the same problem with people basing Power
> Rangers: We read into it more than you do.
There's no deeper meanings in "Spawn." A turd by any other name would
smell as rank. Try reading some literature if you're looking for depth.
If you're reading messages in "Spawn" you need to broaden your cerebral
horizons.
>
> Spawn while it may be violent and have sex, has a way of controlling
> it by giving purpose. Al Simmons is a dark man, and doesn't have a
> whole lot of prespective except to shoot and kill. And why not, he was
> a goverment assasin. The same goes for Chappel, Wynn, and Clown. All
> of them have darker sides to them, some of them don't quite reveal,
> some of them make it obvious. But that's what the show is about, the
> dark side.
It's empty headed. You want dark, read James Ellroy's latest book.
"Spawn" has all the emotional center and depth of a microthin condom.
>
> If we contiune to censor and unrealitize
Buy a dictionary, please. Learn to write before you try tackling the
open debate forum.
Television, writers will no
> longer be able to write because they will be writing for the sake of 7
> year olds.
"Spawn" is for adults only in the chronological sense. In terms of
content, it's right on the money for develop-"mental" midgets. That's
your cue to look in the mirror.
>
> Remember this Vinny, Animation has had a hard time in the 90's, and
> what you say will make the studios smile, because your one of THEM.
LOL. You shouldn't be knocking laugh-fests, Matt. You're already writing
them.
Matthew Milam
You don't......
Matthew Milam
Pompous assholes are really taking over the internet....
Elder Perm Poom
In article <33BC80...@truth.net>, "Vinny S. Veritas"
<diog...@truth.net> wrote:
> What's the FCC have to do with anything? They
> haven't yanked animation off your screen, poor Arbitron numbers have. Q
> ratings have. The FCC is not responsible for thousands of cartoons being
> pulled off the airwaves.
Quite right, but wouldn't you say that studios' choice of projects
to greenlight has a lot to do with what we get to choose from? Why
do all animated shows look so similar. Why do innumerable knock offs
turn up when a show shows a tiny bit of success? That isn't the viewers'
choice. It's the choice of executives who tell us what we get to
watch.
> The
> animation business is booming, clod. Without getting into what I do, I'm
> in a good position to say with authority that I ought to know.
Booming in the sense of salaries paid, but certainly not from a
creative standpoint. Animation may be "hot" right now, but it
sure isn't good.
See ya!
Steve Worth
big...@spumco.com
%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%
Visit Spumco's Wonderful World of Cartoons:
http://www.spumco.com
and our newsgroup: alt.animation.spumco
%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%
Vinny S. Veritas
Matthew Milam wrote:
> Pompous assholes are really taking over the internet....
One more thing, Einstein: what does this do to strengthen your position
on the merits of "Spawn", or have you given up on your untenable
position? Since all you've done is ranted paranoiacally, with nothing to
back up your ridiculous claims against the studios (name some specifics)
and the FCC (could a conspiracy we are unaware of against non "laugh
fest" cartoons be brewing?), I can only assume so. And Enrique says I
stoop to name calling. Nourish some brains cells and get back to me.
Vinny S. Veritas
Matthew Milam wrote:
body copy deleted
> >I think I've made my point. If you don't agree with what I've said,
> >fine. But don't go writing that I have nothing to contribute.
>
> You don't......
This is a rebuttal? This is a rejoinder? You are simply too ignorant to
be reasoned with. People like you are the root cause of the problems
endemic to entertainment made available to the public. You can't
recognize mediocrity when its presented to you. Instead you embrace it.
Have you reread your previous response to my post? You are an
illiterate. Please enjoy "Spicy City." I'm sure your primitive mind will
delight in it wholeheartedly.
Vinny S. Veritas
Matthew Milam wrote:
> >LOL. You shouldn't be knocking laugh-fests, Matt. You're already writing
> >them
>
> Pompous assholes are really taking over the internet....
Somebody has to retrieve it from the mentally challenged. Did someone
help you look up "pompous"?
Matthew Milam
Listen you sorry ass SOB, I pratically don't give a fuck what the hell
you think. I like Spawn, that doesn't make me an asshole, jerk, or
whatever you may think about me. You wanna tell that to my face in
RL?
Do you?
Just let me know, because you seem to be really personally pissed off
at me over one simple cartoon.
Jérémy MANESSE
Wow. Isn't this what the FAQ nicely calls "flaming"? If it is, it isn't
pretty indeed. Peace, brothers.
Mufson - Laurie
Vinny S. Veritas (diog...@truth.net) wrote:
I've been following this thread for the last 10 or so messages, and at
this point I have but two observations:
1) Vinny is a preeminant asshole.
2) Michael is tired of having to indulge in Vinny's assininity.
And I say that with love, Vin, because I used to be somewhat like you.
Whenever communication breaks down between two people, and the one with a
bigger hard-on about proving he is in the know resorts to cheap insults
about your opponent's mind, since it is *obvious* that he just has not
developed the faculties to see just how enlightened you are.
I, for one, enjoyed Spawn:TAS, and I have been reading the comic since
issue #1. I found the series engaging, and the storyline put together a
plotline that was only half-resolved by the end, giving viewers something
to chew until season two. Yet at the same time, most of the episodes
stood alone in encapsulating a mood or a story. My father, a man in his
latter fifties, who does not particularly care for either animation or
comics, has been watching it on tape with me, and has enjoyed it. He is,
on the other hand, a great fan of mysteries.
As an amateur cartoonist myself, who has tried his hand at both comics and
animation, I also greatly enjoyed the style of Spawn, and I do believe it
broke a certain boundary in run of the mill TV animation. It resonated a
lot of Frank Miller's style, especially his Sin City series, yet I also
recognized certain homages to McFarlane's form (too bad he doesn't
actually use his form these days). The overt shadows may have seemed out
of place, but they did present the proper mood, since there is more terror
in an unseen threat than one you can size up with your eyes. Besides,
we're talking about a man back from the dead; who the hell cares about
shadowing once you've suspended your disbelief that far?
So, Vinny, am I some brainless schmendrick who doesn't know from
animation? Is my father, with a MBA from Johns Hopkins University in
Writing, unversed in the dynamics of story-telling? Are you the only one
who has it all figured out? Then by all means, Vin, draw me a cartoon.
But if I don't like it, I'll spit in your face as publicly as you have to
Michael.
Kenneth H. Applebaum
appl...@stu.beloit.edu
PS: I *am* looking forward to Spicy City, jackass.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DO NOT DIRECT E-MAIL REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE. THIS IS NOT MY ACCOUNT.
HERE'S AN IDEA: TRY POSTING A RESPONSE. SPAMMERS WILL BE WYRMED. DON'T
EVEN THINK ABOUT IT, VINNY.
Terrence C. Briggs
In a previous article, diog...@truth.net (Vinny S. Veritas) says:
>Matthew Milam wrote:
>
>> >LOL. You shouldn't be knocking laugh-fests, Matt. You're already writing
>> >them
>>
>> Pompous assholes are really taking over the internet....
>
>Somebody has to retrieve it from the mentally challenged. Did someone
>help you look up "pompous"?
>
Boy, this is rich. Picking fights with someone who must be
your mental inferior really elevates you, doesn't it? And now that
I've responded to your post and disagree with some of your stated
opinions, I must be your mental inferior, as well. I know, I know...
If you're ready to TALK, I'm more than willing. Only if
you promise to not dub me an "idiot" for possibly liking the show.
I'm not sure my "primitive mind" can take that. PEace to you,
and I sincerely mean that.
Terrence Briggs
Enrique Conty
In article <33BC7C...@truth.net> "Vinny S. Veritas" <diog...@truth.net> writes:
>1) The animation: Without getting into a frame by frame analysis, it's
>pretty obvious that massive corners were cut on this series (which is
>fiscally understandable).
So this is not really a complaint, since you understand the cause of it.
I liked the animation direction in the show, although unfortunately the
animation itself could have been improved...
>2) The character/general design: See point number one.
I'll disagree here. I like the way the color palette was used to set
certain recurring "themes" in the show. And besides, they couldn't
deviate too much from Mc Farlane's original designs...
>The script/plot: Alan McElroy is an embarrassment.
I'll give you that the writer deviated from McFarlane's original story,
he went the wrong way: cranking up the sex and language for their own
sake. I'm sure there were reasons for this, but I tend to think they
had all to do with marketability and none with stylistic goals.
Vinny S. Veritas
Matthew Milam wrote:
>
> On Sun, 06 Jul 1997 01:39:22 -0400, "Vinny S. Veritas"
> <diog...@truth.net> wrote:
>
> >Matthew Milam wrote:
You wanna tell that to my face in
> RL?
I'm not certain what RL stands for (real life I suppose), but you're
taking this waaaaaay too seriously.
> Just let me know, because you seem to be really personally pissed off
> at me over one simple cartoon.
I've been playing with you, champ, but I'll stop. You know, I was
probably barking up the wrong tree, but a hostile debate can be fun
sometimes. I thought I made some good points, but if anyone is getting
bent out of shape, it's you. You're no good at verbal sparring. You're
already threatening virtual violence (which is ridiculous) because you
can't hack it verbally. I retreat, okay? Consider the gauntlet picked
up. It's over.
Haschi Halef Omar
Jérémy MANESSE wrote:
>
> Matthew Milam wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 06 Jul 1997 01:39:22 -0400, "Vinny S. Veritas"
> > <diog...@truth.net> wrote:
> >
> > >Matthew Milam wrote:
> > >
> > >> >them
> > >>
> > >> Pompous assholes are really taking over the internet....
> > >
> > >Somebody has to retrieve it from the mentally challenged. Did someone
> > >help you look up "pompous"?
> >
> > you think. I like Spawn, that doesn't make me an asshole, jerk, or
> > RL?
> >
> > Do you?
> >
> > Just let me know, because you seem to be really personally pissed off
> > at me over one simple cartoon.
>
> pretty indeed. Peace, brothers.
I think its really funny the way there fighting. Milam is losing badly
cause he hasn't come up with one good argument. I liked Sapwn but Vinny
is kicking his butt in this falme. Long may it burn!!! It's the most
entrentaining thing on this group.
Jammer
Dan Zarin
Vinny S. Veritas wrote:
>
> Matthew Milam wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 06 Jul 1997 01:39:22 -0400, "Vinny S. Veritas"
> > <diog...@truth.net> wrote:
> >
> > >Matthew Milam wrote:
> You wanna tell that to my face in
> > RL?
>
> taking this waaaaaay too seriously.
>
> > at me over one simple cartoon.
>
> probably barking up the wrong tree, but a hostile debate can be fun
> sometimes. I thought I made some good points, but if anyone is getting
> bent out of shape, it's you. You're no good at verbal sparring. You're
> already threatening virtual violence (which is ridiculous) because you
> can't hack it verbally. I retreat, okay? Consider the gauntlet picked
> up. It's over.
(polite applause)
Terrence C. Briggs
I'd applaud too if I weren't so peeved. No I gotta retract that
psuedo-face-off I had started two days ago with this guy. I must have
been the climate in here, what with the trolling going on all over the
place in this NG lately...
Does this mean our fellow trolls could be playing around, too?
Stay tuned. Tuned off, that is. Peace and virtual truces to you...
Terrence "had my list of virtual insults ready, too" Briggs
Matthew Milam
On Wed, 09 Jul 1997 04:00:51 -0400, Haschi Halef Omar
<dschi...@khan.com> wrote:
>Jérémy MANESSE wrote:
>>
>> Matthew Milam wrote:
>> >
>> > On Sun, 06 Jul 1997 01:39:22 -0400, "Vinny S. Veritas"
>> > <diog...@truth.net> wrote:
>> >
>> > >Matthew Milam wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> >LOL. You shouldn't be knocking laugh-fests, Matt. You're already writing
>> > >> >them
>> > >>
>> > >> Pompous assholes are really taking over the internet....
>> > >
>> > >Somebody has to retrieve it from the mentally challenged. Did someone
>> > >help you look up "pompous"?
>> >
>> > Listen you sorry ass SOB, I pratically don't give a fuck what the hell
>> > you think. I like Spawn, that doesn't make me an asshole, jerk, or
>> > whatever you may think about me. You wanna tell that to my face in
>> > RL?
>> >
>> > Do you?
>> >
>> > Just let me know, because you seem to be really personally pissed off
>> > at me over one simple cartoon.
>>
>> Wow. Isn't this what the FAQ nicely calls "flaming"? If it is, it isn't
>> pretty indeed. Peace, brothers.
>
>I think its really funny the way there fighting. Milam is losing badly
>cause he hasn't come up with one good argument. I liked Sapwn but Vinny
>is kicking his butt in this falme. Long may it burn!!! It's the most
>entrentaining thing on this group.
>
>Jammer
You think it's really funny when someone personally insults you, even
if it's on a cartoon. Jeez, First i leave the Gargoyles IRC channel to
come back to what i thought was a resonable newsgroup. Then I get
pounded here.
It's like Gorebash (head of the station eight: Gargoyles web page)
telling me that the rest of his channel couldn't respect me because I
wasn't one of them. That and a slew of other comments such as "Fuck
you", "Are you stupid or just born that way?", "I know were your
parents live", "Your a failure", "If you had as many holes as you did
spouges, you'd be an asshole" I basically just left, i didn't feel
like mentally getting kicked in the butt all the time, and i don't
think most should either.
I guess i couldn't avoid the wrath of ignorance here....
Matthew Milam
On 9 Jul 1997 21:27:03 GMT, hm...@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Terrence C.
Briggs) wrote:
>
>In a previous article, danz...@worldnet.att.net.SPAMLESS (Dan Zarin) says:
>
>>Vinny S. Veritas wrote:
>>>
>>> Matthew Milam wrote:
>>> >
>>> > On Sun, 06 Jul 1997 01:39:22 -0400, "Vinny S. Veritas"
>>> > <diog...@truth.net> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > >Matthew Milam wrote:
>>> You wanna tell that to my face in
>>> > RL?
>>>
>>> I'm not certain what RL stands for (real life I suppose), but you're
>>> taking this waaaaaay too seriously.
>>>
>>> > Just let me know, because you seem to be really personally pissed off
>>> > at me over one simple cartoon.
>>>
>>> I've been playing with you, champ, but I'll stop. You know, I was
>>> probably barking up the wrong tree, but a hostile debate can be fun
>>> sometimes. I thought I made some good points, but if anyone is getting
>>> bent out of shape, it's you. You're no good at verbal sparring. You're
>>> already threatening virtual violence (which is ridiculous) because you
>>> can't hack it verbally. I retreat, okay? Consider the gauntlet picked
>>> up. It's over.
>>
>>(polite applause)
>>
>
> I'd applaud too if I weren't so peeved. No I gotta retract that
>psuedo-face-off I had started two days ago with this guy. I must have
>been the climate in here, what with the trolling going on all over the
>place in this NG lately...
>
> Does this mean our fellow trolls could be playing around, too?
>Stay tuned. Tuned off, that is. Peace and virtual truces to you...
>
>Terrence "had my list of virtual insults ready, too" Briggs
>--
>---------------------------------------------------------------
>Terrence Briggs
>Email: hm...@freenet.cleveland.edu
That's okay.....There's a woman on the Gargoyles IRC Channel (Angela)
who does just the same thing with me, I had to tell her how i
PERSONALLY felt.
Sorry about the whole fight, but i really don't need insults thrown at
me.
Scott A. Edwards
Mufson - Laurie wrote:
>
> Vinny S. Veritas (diog...@truth.net) wrote:
> : Matthew Milam wrote:
> : body copy deleted
> : > >I think I've made my point. If you don't agree with what I've said,
> : > >fine. But don't go writing that I have nothing to contribute.
> : > You don't......
> : This is a rebuttal? This is a rejoinder? You are simply too ignorant to
> : be reasoned with. People like you are the root cause of the problems
> : endemic to entertainment made available to the public. You can't
> : recognize mediocrity when its presented to you. Instead you embrace it.
> : Have you reread your previous response to my post? You are an
> : illiterate. Please enjoy "Spicy City." I'm sure your primitive mind will
> : delight in it wholeheartedly.
>
> I've been following this thread for the last 10 or so messages, and at
> this point I have but two observations:
>
> 1) Vinny is a preeminant asshole.
>
> 2) Michael is tired of having to indulge in Vinny's assininity.
Sorry Laurie, I had to post at this point because your starting to make
some really bad arguements.
First off, an asshole Vinny may be, but so what? He still presented
valid arguments -without- being an asshole and was told that his
opinions -still- didn't matter. Michael came across as the childish one
on this particular thread.
Second, your statement about dabbling in animation and your fathers MBA
in writing. Your basically arguing from credentials with this. While
credentials add authority to -what- you say, all your saying is that you
and your father like Spawn:TAS. Why? You never really responded to
Vinny's arguments. Does your father enjoy Spawn because of the human
drama, the tragedy of the character, the way he defines himself? Or
does he think Spawn has nothing going for it, but just basically enjoys
it. (It -is- possible for something to have no real qualities but still
like something).
I haven't seen an episode of Spawn yet (I don't get HBO). But what I've
seen of it doesn't make me want to rush out and get HBO either. I do
agree with Vinny on a lot of his arguments. Spawn breaks no ground in
animation techniques (Disney has thrown out more than these guys will
ever learn).
The problem is, Spawn is a poorly designed character, animation-wise.
Spawn (the comic) relies off of a wild mix of sharply contrasting colors
to help define the nightmarishness of the character. Switching him to a
flat color tone removes a lot of that emphasis from the character.
The Sex. Someone (Harrison Ford IIRC) once said "Show me a sex scene
and I'll show you two actors dying on film." I -really- don't need to
see two animated characters "dying" on film. It's just tossed in to
show you Spawn is more "adult" than Scooby-Doo.
The Story. I don't even care to know. The pieces of it I've seen, with
the plot synopses I've heard don't add up to a good piece of work.
Spawn could have a great story but the elements I've described would
still make it garbage in my eyes. Case in point. Barb Wire (With
Pamela Lee) actually had one of the best stories in existence - It was
Casablanca with gunfire and bared breasts. But it was still one of the
worst excuses for a movie ever.
Scott A. Edwards
Vinny S. Veritas
Mufson - Laurie wrote:
>
> Vinny S. Veritas (diog...@truth.net) wrote:
> : Matthew Milam wrote:
> : body copy deleted
> I've been following this thread for the last 10 or so messages, and at
> this point I have but two observations:
>
> 1) Vinny is a preeminant asshole.
Well, at least I'm preeminent. I'd hate to be just a run of the mill
asshole.
>
> 2) Michael is tired of having to indulge in Vinny's assininity.
So he should step off. It's just a cartoon, folks. I like arguing, so
this has been fun for me. Matt isn't up to it. You, on the other hand,
are definitely on equal footing. Kudos to you, young man. You are
articulate. That goes a long way with me. If Matt hadn't just sunk
himself with his benighted half-assed arguments (reread his posts;
they're as inarticulate and devoid of any merit as any you'll ever
read), I'd have let him be. He took the bait because he's not bright.
>
> And I say that with love, Vin, because I used to be somewhat like you.
It goes with the territory. The internet breeds this kind of discourse.
Sometimes it's elevated, but most of the time it's one creep (mea culpa)
shooting down another creep (Matt, take a bow).
> Whenever communication breaks down between two people, and the one with a
> bigger hard-on about proving he is in the know resorts to cheap insults
> about your opponent's mind, since it is *obvious* that he just has not
> developed the faculties to see just how enlightened you are.
Touché. See, you're a smart guy.
> As an amateur cartoonist myself, who has tried his hand at both comics and
> animation, I also greatly enjoyed the style of Spawn, and I do believe it
> broke a certain boundary in run of the mill TV animation.
Again, I wouldn't fault it if I didn't think it was just a shoddy
exercise. HBO is failing its audience with most of its original
programming. It is a very immature network, where tits and the
repetition of the word "fuck" mean mature. Like I said, it's just
disappointing.
It resonated a
> lot of Frank Miller's style, especially his Sin City series
I'd rather see a black and white animated version of Sin City. *That*
might be fun.
>
> So, Vinny, am I some brainless schmendrick who doesn't know from
> animation?
You are certainly not brainless (and anyone who uses the word
schmendrick in my book is all right). As for your knowledge of
animation, I have no idea. I toiled in the animation biz for many years,
so let me say this: in the words of Obi Wan, "you will never find a more
wretched hive of scum and villainy." How that has influenced my postings
I'm certain is not for the more benign, but I do have some insight as to
what I'm talking about. Granted, most of what Mr. Milam and I have been
indulging in, regarding our verbal pissing contest, is aesthetics. It's
all a matter of taste. He isn't wrong, I'm not right. It's all a matter
of opinion.
Is my father, with a MBA from Johns Hopkins University in
> Writing, unversed in the dynamics of story-telling?
No, but I'd think he could recognize a sloppy script when he saw one
being executed.
Are you the only one
> who has it all figured out?
Sadly, I imagine so. At least on this NG. It is edifying to read all the
bad reviews "Spawn" got, though. Critics might be maggots, but sometimes
even they get things right.
Then by all means, Vin, draw me a cartoon.
> But if I don't like it, I'll spit in your face as publicly as you have to
> Michael.
Come on. First off, the joker you're referring to is named Matthew (some
public defender you are). Second, it's all too serious. I AM more
articulate than old Matt, so I suppose I've been a bit of a bully. He's
too easy to jump on, so sue me. I was having some fun. If that makes me
an asshole, so be it. These newsgroups have been mighty dull. At least
it livened up a bit. Flame over.
> PS: I *am* looking forward to Spicy City, jackass.
As is your prerogative, cheap (but heartfelt) insult notwithstanding.
> DO NOT DIRECT E-MAIL REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE. THIS IS NOT MY ACCOUNT.
> HERE'S AN IDEA: TRY POSTING A RESPONSE. SPAMMERS WILL BE WYRMED. DON'T
> EVEN THINK ABOUT IT, VINNY.
I don't follow. Don't even think about what? I'm not being disingenuous,
I just don't know what you're referring to.
Matthew Milam
>Mufson - Laurie wrote:
>>
>> Vinny S. Veritas (diog...@truth.net) wrote:
>> : Matthew Milam wrote:
>> : body copy deleted
>> : > >I think I've made my point. If you don't agree with what I've said,
>> : > >fine. But don't go writing that I have nothing to contribute.
>> : > You don't......
>> : This is a rebuttal? This is a rejoinder? You are simply too ignorant to
>> : be reasoned with. People like you are the root cause of the problems
>> : endemic to entertainment made available to the public. You can't
>> : recognize mediocrity when its presented to you. Instead you embrace it.
>> : Have you reread your previous response to my post? You are an
>> : illiterate. Please enjoy "Spicy City." I'm sure your primitive mind will
>> : delight in it wholeheartedly.
>>
>> I've been following this thread for the last 10 or so messages, and at
>> this point I have but two observations:
>>
>> 1) Vinny is a preeminant asshole.
>>
>> 2) Michael is tired of having to indulge in Vinny's assininity.
>
First off, Who is Micheal?
Second....I was tried as hell of the insults. That's not being
immature, that's standing up for yourslef. Jeez, people now support
Jerks on the internet.
Scott A. Edwards
Matthew Milam wrote:
>
> On Wed, 09 Jul 1997 21:06:00 -0700, "Scott A. Edwards"
> <ma...@concentric.net> wrote:
>
> >Mufson - Laurie wrote:
> >> 2) Michael is tired of having to indulge in Vinny's assininity.
> First off, Who is Micheal?
I have no clue. I was merely responding to Laurie's post.
> Second....I was tried as hell of the insults. That's not being
> immature, that's standing up for yourslef. Jeez, people now support
> Jerks on the internet.
I do not support "Jerks" on the internet. I merely support their right
to be one. The "immaturity" I mentioned on this thread had less to do
with defending yourself than responding to Vinny's earlier closing
argument of "Don't go writing I have nothing to contribute" with "You
don't." -That- struck me as childish.
Scott A. Edwards
Matthew Milam
On Fri, 11 Jul 1997 18:52:18 -0700, "Scott A. Edwards"
<ma...@concentric.net> wrote:
Insullting people for liking Spawn is more childish than "You don't"
Scott A. Edwards
Matthew Milam wrote:
> >
> >I do not support "Jerks" on the internet. I merely support their right
> >to be one. The "immaturity" I mentioned on this thread had less to do
> >with defending yourself than responding to Vinny's earlier closing
> >argument of "Don't go writing I have nothing to contribute" with "You
> >don't." -That- struck me as childish.
> >
> > Scott A. Edwards
> Insullting people for liking Spawn is more childish than "You don't"
No, he made valid arguments challenging the way you view Spawn along
with his insults and that makes him a Jerk/Asshole.
I can understand the need to strike back when insulted (who doesn't?).
If you had merely refuted his arguments, I would have applaued. If you
didn't know how to refute his arguments and had stated "Gee Vinny,
you're arguments might be true - but Spawn still appeals to me" I would
have been impressed. Contrary to popular opinion, something -doesn't-
have to be new/innovative/never-been-done-before for you to like it.
Scott A. Edwards
Matthew Milam
Never mind.....and for those waiting for that essay on this
theard....forget it.
I've decided to throw in the towel, and not turn this into a "kick me"
fest. Vinny, your right.......I should just go watch Rocky and
Bullwinkle and maybe kiss Disney's rear end of "Let's not have any
seriousness".