... I will say, the justification for the movie by fans is more off putting then the critics. They falsely reference DKR & Killing Joke as examples of Batman using guns & killing...yet no has cited 1 confirm kill by Batman.
I actually had a brief back & forth with a dude on Twitter who admitted to never reading DKR, "knows what happens" because Snyder stated Batman used guns & killed people throughout the storyline. This dude wound up tweeting Gerry Conway & accused him of being "some Batman 'fan' who does know the essence of the character".
Someone else tweeted the guy with a link to Gerry's Batman resume with the caption "yeah...just some Batman fan".
M
Wow! That's some idiocy there.
I am a fan of BvS (seeing it a third time tonight), but I don't think I've tried justifying the movie, yet.
One question/reframing of how to think about the killing: Is not killing more of a Batman thing or a Superman thing? Or maybe they equally hold to that standard?
... I will say, the justification for the movie by fans is more off putting then the critics. They falsely reference DKR & Killing Joke as examples of Batman using guns & killing...yet no has cited 1 confirm kill by Batman.
I actually had a brief back & forth with a dude on Twitter who admitted to never reading DKR, "knows what happens" because Snyder stated Batman used guns & killed people throughout the storyline. This dude wound up tweeting Gerry Conway & accused him of being "some Batman 'fan' who does know the essence of the character".
Someone else tweeted the guy with a link to Gerry's Batman resume with the caption "yeah...just some Batman fan".
M
Wow! That's some idiocy there.
I am a fan of BvS (seeing it a third time tonight), but I don't think I've tried justifying the movie, yet.
One question/reframing of how to think about the killing: Is not killing more of a Batman thing or a Superman thing? Or maybe they equally hold to that standard?
I'm not certain if Kent killed in the early/pulp days. I know Batman did & carried a handgun.
As for Batman using a gun, I think in the context of a film showing the protagonists mother being shot slow motion with a close-up on the gun, and a spotty history of Batman with guns in general, there should've been some kind of justification made for his overt and often use of a gun.
Also, I wonder if we should take the BvS discussions to here
In other topics for this thread, I have at least two stand out selections for best President in comics:
Just listening having read most of the forum comments. Great episode thus far, but Episode 1600? I was expecting another Uncle Sal surprise or something. I liked the comments about the Flash/Supergirl episode, about the Rebirth announcement etc. I'm all for keeping CGSers comments real and honest. I think there has been some negativity, but it's balanced by enthusiasm for things each of the CGS hosts DO like. I do sort of tire of repetition for hearing what the CGSers like or dislike, but as long as the show is interesting I will continue to listen. For me in Japan, it's like having old friends meet in my living room once a week to talk about comics and comics related stuff. //Gosh, I didn't even notice Murd's "gorilla lips" remark. I must be getting old or insensitive. // Back to Rebirth: I think the first wave of the DCBS Rebirth bundle is pretty cheap, almost a dollar per issue, if I recall. So, I'll try that first bundle, no problem! //Muddle the Murd: Hey, didn't Prometheus use that Crooked Man rhyme in Morrison's JLA? / Murd IS Mr. Excitement! Not muddled!/ Daredevil Season 2: Haven't seen it yet / BvS: As I've commented elsewhere, to me it was just so-so, I did like Affleck and Gadot, but the story was slow and some things just didn't make sense. In any case, I enjoyed all your comments! / Two and half hoots!
Loved the episode. Not a big fan of criticizing the Geek's negative perspectives on DC Rebirth that I see in the forum. I am a fan of the honest opinion and what has DC done lately to give us faith that this is not another waste of time. Great insight on DC movie. Looking forward to bigger Daredevil review.
I'd like to ask few questions in regards to the apology @Adam_Murdough issued on this episode of CGS. As I was reading PMIF #1, I also thought "Hey! When did Tombstone turn into a slouching gorilla?" So, now that I know my thoughts were incorrect and insensitive, onto my questions:
1. Not having read a lot of Spider-Man Comics, I did not realize the character was African American - Isn't he, ummmmm.... grey?
2. If you look at the new character model cdn.bleedingcool.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/CS-ZujPWEAQkLl2.jpg the facial structure, longer arms, sloping shoulders, etc... is reminiscent of some sort of ape. But since you cannot say that, how should I describe Tombstone's appearance so as not to offend anyone?
3. Would it be helpful if the Publisher listed the creator's ethnicity, political status, sexual orientation, etc... on the masthead, as well as next to each character?
4. If the creator and/or character were both white, would this discussion even be necessary?
I don't mean to start a firestorm here - just trying to figure out what the rules are. Any assistance is appreciated - thx.
Another great episode! I'm a bit confused about all the comments about negativity when an overwhelming proportion of the episode seemed positive to me, at least up to the Daredevil and Batman-Supes talk, which I skipped to avoid spoilers. Look forward to the Black Panther spotlight!! I also live the Priest run and just ready the Jungle Action run by McGregor, which I thought was also good. I have so many DC back issues and trades that I hear are great but have not read that I find little need to follow the current stuff, with the exception of Snyder's Batman and when I can get it cheap Darkseid War, or special events like Multiversity.
1. Not having read a lot of Spider-Man Comics, I did not realize the character was African American - Isn't he, ummmmm.... grey?
That's a point I raised in an earlier post regarding Sal Buscema's (and many other artists besides) depiction of Tombstone: he is typically drawn like an older Caucasian businessman with pointy teeth instead of the albino African-American that he is. Albino blacks don't have bleach-white skin, and they don't have crew cuts with bristly hair. I can understand the bleach-white skin because of the dramatic effect and to make it simpler on the colorists, but I've never understood the hair (which incidentally looks a bit like Sal's hair). Sanford made the brilliant compromise of giving Tombstone a conk hair style in his redesign.
2. If you look at the new character model cdn.bleedingcool.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/CS-ZujPWEAQkLl2.jpg the facial structure, longer arms, sloping shoulders, etc... is reminiscent of some sort of ape. But since you cannot say that, how should I describe Tombstone's appearance so as not to offend anyone?
To be completely honest, I can see where you would make the comparison, and I think it's a natural one to make just based on the basic silhouette of the design. But when I first saw the design, the image that immediately popped into my head was of an angler fish. The head, specifically the mouth and jaw, really reminds me of an angler fish, which is a deep-sea predator. And that's how I describe the overall design: a predator who is as likely to eat you alive as not. (For the record, I believe I also used the adjective "savage," which upon further reflection wasn't really a good choice of words either, and I apologize for that, but it further proves my point.) I think you could also simply go with gruesome.
3. Would it be helpful if the Publisher listed the creator's ethnicity, political status, sexual orientation, etc... on the masthead, as well as next to each character?
No. This has absolutely nothing to do with the creator. This has everything to do with being socially aware that our words might mean different things to different people. That's all.
4. If the creator and/or character were both white, would this discussion even be necessary?
If the character was white [EDIT: or Hispanic, or Asian], then no. If the creator was white [EDIT: or black, Hispanic, Asian, etc.], then yes, because the character would still be African-American. Again, this has nothing to do with the creator, but with how we communicate with others.
The rules are quite simple: 1) Think before you speak. 2) If you offend someone with the language you use, as might happen no matter your intentions, try to understand their point of view, and then respect their point of view by using different language the next time. In other words, listen to what others have to say, and don't dismiss them out of hand even if you think their argument has no merit. I think the old saying goes something like, in all things, treat others as you would have them treat you.
@nweathington, Thanks for your thoughts. My questions were serious to a point. However, you contradict yourself: In question #3 you say the creator has nothing to do with it, unless, as you point out in #4, he ( or she ) happens to be white and the character is African-American. I don't think Adam had any racial intentions to his comment, he was going by what he saw visually in a comic book, which is, after all, a visual medium. You can't control how and why every single person is going to interpret every word you say, especially in today's online world. I just feel Adam was somewhat bullied into an apology for the sake of extreme political correctness. Great point on the angler fish, though, which again goes to show how different people see things differently.
@nweathington, Thanks for your thoughts. My questions were serious to a point. However, you contradict yourself: In question #3 you say the creator has nothing to do with it, unless, as you point out in #4, he ( or she ) happens to be white and the character is African-American. I don't think Adam had any racial intentions to his comment, he was going by what he saw visually in a comic book, which is, after all, a visual medium. You can't control how and why every single person is going to interpret every word you say, especially in today's online world. I just feel Adam was somewhat bullied into an apology for the sake of extreme political correctness. Great point on the angler fish, though, which again goes to show how different people see things differently.
No contradiction, but I guess I didn't make my meaning clear. If Tombstone was white, this woud be a non-issue. But since Tombstone is African-American, [Edit: and because the language Adam used was and still is often used as a derogatory slur against African-Americans], it doesn't matter whether the artist was white, black, or any other ethnicity. The context of the offense in question was based on the character’s ethnicity, not the creator’s. [Edit: That is to say, no offense was taken from the artist’s design of the character. The offense was taken from Adam’s description of that design, specifically and solely because that character is an African-American character. Adam’s description would have caused no offense if Tombstone was of any other ethnicity than African-American.]
And I'm sure Adam had no racial intentions in his comment, nor did I in my use of “savage.” And, no, of course we can't control—nor should we— how every other person is going to interpret our words. All I'm saying is that when someone is offended by what we say, the absolute best thing we can do is communicate with that person to understand why so that we can communicate more effectively with one another going forward. And I don't see that as having anything to do with bullying or political correctness, but with simply trying to develop empathy for others so we can live in a more peaceful, cooperative society.
[Edit: And I should add that I hope Adam was not bullied, as that is just as negative a form of communication as the offensive language. But from Adam’s words, I got the impression that this was not the case.]
It may be a trying time to be a DC Comics fan - just like it was tough to be a Marvel fan not long ago - but I think anyone who likes getting hundreds of hours of free podcast entertainment has more than enough reason to celebrate this week :)
We all have opinions. We all have passions, and agendas. We might drive each other crazy from time to time. That's family. In the end, though, our common love for comics puts us all on the same page.
Congrats to all on #1600. Disappointed to read that some fans feel things have become negative- I disagree. I've been listening since the 600s (wow just realized I'm coming up on my personal thousand as a listener). I for one would stop if I felt that I wasn't getting the honest opinions I get on this show.
I hope that none of you on the show are swayed by any of this (I doubt that you would be).. I would never presume to tell you how to do your show, in order to suit me as a fan or listener. What you do and who is on the show has changed many times since I started listening. Some changes I liked and others I didn't, but overall, I still find things I enjoy and as such, I'm still listening. If another direction compels me to take a break or stop.. it is what it is. Who am I to post here and suggest that I know what's best for your show, or that my interests are more important than another listener's? You guys put in your own time and effort to produce it and offer it for free. Oh by the way, THANKS FOR THAT. ;)
I miss @brydeemer 's opinions on the show, and I love the addition of @wildpigcomics and it's great that both of those guys, who I find have perspectives and tastes most similar to my own, get checked and balanced by the others. I really respect that balance and all of your honesty.
Congrats on the long run. Keep doin' what you're doin'.
Finished it this morning. It was, overall, pretty positive. However, I think it's a bit funny that so many freaked out about my observing a recent trend toward cynicism when that's exactly how Chris described it himself.
I think that there was a huge amount of value in the initial review of the New 52. Books were read and commented upon. Same with the off the racks on Omega Men - everyone was wrong, but that's OK. That's what I enjoy hearing - honest reviews and discussion for good or ill.
Ultimately, I'm glad for the conversation that was had on the episode.
With everyone talking about how negative the episode was, especially when it came to the DC Rebirth discussion, I have an idea for a potential future episode. Top 5 current titles the Geeks are really digging. Do an episode where you sell a current title that you're really into. I'd love to hear what people are into these days.
With everyone talking about how negative the episode was, especially when it came to the DC Rebirth discussion, I have an idea for a potential future episode. Top 5 current titles the Geeks are really digging. Do an episode where you sell a current title that you're really into. I'd love to hear what people are into these days.
I like this idea, too, but I can already see the negative comments from people saying how tired they are of hearing about how great Saga is. ;)
Count me in as one of them to be honest. Quite frankly I don't get the Saga love. I tried the first volume and it just didn't grab me. There's quite simply a lot of current titles that are loved by the masses and I just don't get. Sex Criminals is another one. I like the art but the story doesn't grab me. Still, I'm curious as to what people are buying and why.
With everyone talking about how negative the episode was, especially when it came to the DC Rebirth discussion, I have an idea for a potential future episode. Top 5 current titles the Geeks are really digging. Do an episode where you sell a current title that you're really into. I'd love to hear what people are into these days.
That's a great idea. You should start a new topic for it. Would love to hear what the rest of the board has as their Top 5.
With everyone talking about how negative the episode was, especially when it came to the DC Rebirth discussion, I have an idea for a potential future episode. Top 5 current titles the Geeks are really digging. Do an episode where you sell a current title that you're really into. I'd love to hear what people are into these days.
I like this idea, too, but I can already see the negative comments from people saying how tired they are of hearing about how great Saga is. ;)
With everyone talking about how negative the episode was, especially when it came to the DC Rebirth discussion, I have an idea for a potential future episode. Top 5 current titles the Geeks are really digging. Do an episode where you sell a current title that you're really into. I'd love to hear what people are into these days.
I like this idea, too, but I can already see the negative comments from people saying how tired they are of hearing about how great Saga is. ;)
You forgot Sex Criminals and Lazarus
Give them another year or so, then we can include them.
With everyone talking about how negative the episode was, especially when it came to the DC Rebirth discussion, I have an idea for a potential future episode. Top 5 current titles the Geeks are really digging. Do an episode where you sell a current title that you're really into. I'd love to hear what people are into these days.
I like this idea, too, but I can already see the negative comments from people saying how tired they are of hearing about how great Saga is. ;)
You forgot Sex Criminals and Lazarus
There's a slight distinction. With Saga and Sex Criminals, at least, there's been some collective discussion. Chris has touched on Lazarus and it's status as a Rucka/Lark opus, but not given it the more detailed review discussion that the other two have enjoyed. I'd love to hear a Lazarus BotM.
I've thumbed through that Star Wars book at the comic store... it looks great and I'm looking forward to picking it up at some point.
I don't want to be pulled in by Rebirth, but I can already feel it happening. Getting the pre-New 52 Superman in there is a huge help. Too bad we couldn't also get the Marvel Family pulled back in from Convergence, too, though!
As for BvS, I thought it was alright. Didn't love it, thought it tried to do way too much, but it was alright. Wonder Woman was awesome, Batman was great, I like the look and performance of Cavill even if he's not written well, and Lawrence Fishburne and Jeremy Irons were criminally underused. Forget Justice League, where's my Perry White & Alfred team-up movie? :smiley:
There's a slight distinction. With Saga and Sex Criminals, at least, there's been some collective discussion. Chris has touched on Lazarus and it's status as a Rucka/Lark opus, but not given it the more detailed review discussion that the other two have enjoyed. I'd love to hear a Lazarus BotM.
Well, yeah, it's been at least *slight* discussion, at least because (if I'm not mistaken) both Sex Criminals and Saga had Book of the Month entrees. But mostly with those titles, as with Lazarus and anything Mark Waid is working on, we just hear some kind of routine praise that's without much depth.
Someone could put together a clip show of all the times that, say, Waid's DD has been discussed on CGS. It'd be two hours long and the only discussion of actual content would be literally two sentences mentioning that Foggy had cancer and that The Spot appeared. The rest is just... praise without any detail. "Mark Waid's Daredevil! AAAAGGGHH!!! SO GOOD!! Really enjoying it a lot! And the art!" over and over again.
I seem to remember that the old CGS crew, Deemer & Rios & co., used to casually mention what actually happened in the comics they read, and why such-and-such a creator was good. I even remember Deemer, while admitting that he basically knew nothing about art or writing, talking about how Walt Simonson was a great artist because he would do things like draw a horse's leg and hoof going out of the panel, or how Dave Sim was great because he knew how to use mostly silent issues of Cerebus to give the reader a real sense of how long it would really take to climb to the moon. Compare that to the last three years' worth of praise for Brian K. Vaughan, and CGS has not said a single thing about WHY he's so great. BKV's "range" is discussed, but never anything in the way of specific techniques or manipulations of actual story points.
Is this stuff not discussed much anymore because the current crew is too afraid of "spoilers"?
In this episode, when Dani hurriedly said "Oops, spoilers!" after acknowledging that "Elektra is an assassin", I nearly fell out of my chair in disbelief that you guys are now being this oversensitive about things. What is the point of talking about anything at all, then?
Whenever actual content is not being discussed, the podcast may as well be one long commercial. I have listened to CGS for like eight years, and I enjoy the podcast still, but the actual-content-vs-surface-level-fluff ratio has certainly been declining in recent years. I don't care if you guys are praising or condemning comics as long as you actually discuss the content rather than offering praise without any textual references or condemnation based on telepathic guesswork ("Didio wants to produce horrible comics").
If there’s one fundamental truth I’ve learned to embrace during my years in the classroom, it’s that one can never make every member of an audience happy all of the time. It’s simply impossible to accommodate every respective taste and perspective of an audience, let alone expect everyone to like you. Criticism is a fact of life, and any kind of public effort, whether it be teaching, podcasting, or politics, will inevitably draw a myriad of critical responses. Indeed, thoughtful, respectful criticism often provides insights that benefit the recipients and their efforts.
That said, experience also teaches that attempting to constantly placate the vicissitudes of criticism like some chastened employee snapping to attention in the wake of a negative evaluation only leads one down the slippery slope of compromising one’s integrity and sense of self. I understand and respect the criticisms clearly leveled at both me and Danielle in this particular thread. Nevertheless, I would be doing myself, her, and the show a disservice by continuing to submit to them in silence, as I disagree with them, and the tone in which they’ve been offered, in the strongest terms.
Being asked to join the cast three years ago was, quite frankly, a great honor for me. Regardless of how tough my professional and/or personal life can become during a given week, recording an episode with my castmates, who are family, is always a guarantee of safe haven. They have placed their trust in my knowledge and efforts, my character and discretion. Hence, they are the only people I answer to, and not as employers, but as family. We are all part of CGS because we love the comic book medium, and it is always our intention to celebrate the medium with all of the energy we can muster. I know the overwhelming majority of our listeners appreciate that fact, and respect the often prodigious efforts we undertake to make the show as entertaining, informative, and insightful as we can. Of course, a podcast that has run for ten years will inevitably experience change and turnover in subject, tone, and cast. Every member of the cast, past and present, brings certain strengths to the table. On a good day, those strengths complement each other; on other days, the dynamic may fall a bit flat for some listeners. That’s simply the nature of the beast when attempting to maintain the show in between the many demands of modern life.
It’s unfortunate, but inevitable and understandable, that some listeners will not take to the changes the show naturally experiences as the years unfold. While no form of entertainment seeks to alienate and lose any member of its audience, nor will we compromise who we are and what we do simply because certain individuals feel the need to express their criticism in the form of attacks that belittle, and even question the integrity, of our efforts. If the content and cast of our show no longer suits their taste and interests, the internet offers a wide variety of other comic-related programs to explore, and they are welcome to sample them with no hard feelings on our part.
Otherwise, I know I speak for all of my castmates when I say to our audience that we are honored by your ongoing enthusiasm for what we do, and we will continue to do our utmost to match your enthusiasm with our own.
We are all part of CGS because we love the comic book medium, and it is always our intention to celebrate the medium with all of the energy we can muster. I know the overwhelming majority of our listeners appreciate that fact, and respect the often prodigious efforts we undertake to make the show as entertaining, informative, and insightful as we can. Of course, a podcast that has run for ten years will inevitably experience change and turnover in subject, tone, and cast. Every member of the cast, past and present, brings certain strengths to the table. On a good day, those strengths complement each other; on other days, the dynamic may fall a bit flat for some listeners. That’s simply the nature of the beast when attempting to maintain the show in between the many demands of modern life.
It’s unfortunate, but inevitable and understandable, that some listeners will not take to the changes the show naturally experiences as the years unfold. While no form of entertainment seeks to alienate and lose any member of its audience, nor will we compromise who we are and what we do simply because certain individuals feel the need to express their criticism in the form of attacks that belittle, and even question the integrity, of our efforts. If the content and cast of our show no longer suits their taste and interests, the internet offers a wide variety of other comic-related programs to explore, and they are welcome to sample them with no hard feelings on our part.
Otherwise, I know I speak for all of my castmates when I say to our audience that we are honored by your ongoing enthusiasm for what we do, and we will continue to do our utmost to match your enthusiasm with our own.
I for one welcome Chris's raw take on the state of comics and entertainment and I appreciate all of their opinions whether I agree with them or not. I'm personally not going to be invested in an all-glowing comics review podcast. Nor am I interested in quelling the varied opinions simply because I don't agree with them. I tend to enjoy @wildpigcomics take more or less because of his retailer experience, though I grow weary of his effusive praise for Saga at times. I don't mind that we often disagree.
“I have never in my life learned anything from anyone who always agreed with me.” — Dudley Field Malone
If there’s one fundamental truth I’ve learned to embrace during my years in the classroom, it’s that one can never make every member of an audience happy all of the time. It’s simply impossible to accommodate every respective taste and perspective of an audience, let alone expect everyone to like you. Criticism is a fact of life, and any kind of public effort, whether it be teaching, podcasting, or politics, will inevitably draw a myriad of critical responses. Indeed, thoughtful, respectful criticism often provides insights that benefit the recipients and their efforts.
That said, experience also teaches that attempting to constantly placate the vicissitudes of criticism like some chastened employee snapping to attention in the wake of a negative evaluation only leads one down the slippery slope of compromising one’s integrity and sense of self. I understand and respect the criticisms clearly leveled at both me and Danielle in this particular thread. Nevertheless, I would be doing myself, her, and the show a disservice by continuing to submit to them in silence, as I disagree with them, and the tone in which they’ve been offered, in the strongest terms.
Being asked to join the cast three years ago was, quite frankly, a great honor for me. Regardless of how tough my professional and/or personal life can become during a given week, recording an episode with my castmates, who are family, is always a guarantee of safe haven. They have placed their trust in my knowledge and efforts, my character and discretion. Hence, they are the only people I answer to, and not as employers, but as family. We are all part of CGS because we love the comic book medium, and it is always our intention to celebrate the medium with all of the energy we can muster. I know the overwhelming majority of our listeners appreciate that fact, and respect the often prodigious efforts we undertake to make the show as entertaining, informative, and insightful as we can. Of course, a podcast that has run for ten years will inevitably experience change and turnover in subject, tone, and cast. Every member of the cast, past and present, brings certain strengths to the table. On a good day, those strengths complement each other; on other days, the dynamic may fall a bit flat for some listeners. That’s simply the nature of the beast when attempting to maintain the show in between the many demands of modern life.
It’s unfortunate, but inevitable and understandable, that some listeners will not take to the changes the show naturally experiences as the years unfold. While no form of entertainment seeks to alienate and lose any member of its audience, nor will we compromise who we are and what we do simply because certain individuals feel the need to express their criticism in the form of attacks that belittle, and even question the integrity, of our efforts. If the content and cast of our show no longer suits their taste and interests, the internet offers a wide variety of other comic-related programs to explore, and they are welcome to sample them with no hard feelings on our part.
Otherwise, I know I speak for all of my castmates when I say to our audience that we are honored by your ongoing enthusiasm for what we do, and we will continue to do our utmost to match your enthusiasm with our own.
If there’s one fundamental truth I’ve learned to embrace during my years in the classroom, it’s that one can never make every member of an audience happy all of the time. It’s simply impossible to accommodate every respective taste and perspective of an audience, let alone expect everyone to like you. Criticism is a fact of life, and any kind of public effort, whether it be teaching, podcasting, or politics, will inevitably draw a myriad of critical responses. Indeed, thoughtful, respectful criticism often provides insights that benefit the recipients and their efforts.
That said, experience also teaches that attempting to constantly placate the vicissitudes of criticism like some chastened employee snapping to attention in the wake of a negative evaluation only leads one down the slippery slope of compromising one’s integrity and sense of self. I understand and respect the criticisms clearly leveled at both me and Danielle in this particular thread. Nevertheless, I would be doing myself, her, and the show a disservice by continuing to submit to them in silence, as I disagree with them, and the tone in which they’ve been offered, in the strongest terms.
Being asked to join the cast three years ago was, quite frankly, a great honor for me. Regardless of how tough my professional and/or personal life can become during a given week, recording an episode with my castmates, who are family, is always a guarantee of safe haven. They have placed their trust in my knowledge and efforts, my character and discretion. Hence, they are the only people I answer to, and not as employers, but as family. We are all part of CGS because we love the comic book medium, and it is always our intention to celebrate the medium with all of the energy we can muster. I know the overwhelming majority of our listeners appreciate that fact, and respect the often prodigious efforts we undertake to make the show as entertaining, informative, and insightful as we can. Of course, a podcast that has run for ten years will inevitably experience change and turnover in subject, tone, and cast. Every member of the cast, past and present, brings certain strengths to the table. On a good day, those strengths complement each other; on other days, the dynamic may fall a bit flat for some listeners. That’s simply the nature of the beast when attempting to maintain the show in between the many demands of modern life.
It’s unfortunate, but inevitable and understandable, that some listeners will not take to the changes the show naturally experiences as the years unfold. While no form of entertainment seeks to alienate and lose any member of its audience, nor will we compromise who we are and what we do simply because certain individuals feel the need to express their criticism in the form of attacks that belittle, and even question the integrity, of our efforts. If the content and cast of our show no longer suits their taste and interests, the internet offers a wide variety of other comic-related programs to explore, and they are welcome to sample them with no hard feelings on our part.
Otherwise, I know I speak for all of my castmates when I say to our audience that we are honored by your ongoing enthusiasm for what we do, and we will continue to do our utmost to match your enthusiasm with our own.
Thanks for listening, and thanks for the support!
Best,
Chris Eberle
Chris,
I'd like to go on record saying that I thing you and Dannie have been a terrific addition to the crew and by no means was my observation above intended to suggest otherwise. There seems to have been, and it's visible on the forums as well, in uptick across the board in cynicism and apathy. I think that you, as a retailer, bring a sense of validation of that. What I'm missing, aside from the joy, is the substance behind the excitement or disappointment - the the recent review of The Discipline was exactly what I've been pining for (aside from the fjords).
Comments
I am a fan of BvS (seeing it a third time tonight), but I don't think I've tried justifying the movie, yet.
One question/reframing of how to think about the killing: Is not killing more of a Batman thing or a Superman thing? Or maybe they equally hold to that standard?
The basis for both has been
M
Also, I wonder if we should take the BvS discussions to here
In other topics for this thread, I have at least two stand out selections for best President in comics:
1. Not having read a lot of Spider-Man Comics, I did not realize the character was African American - Isn't he, ummmmm.... grey?
2. If you look at the new character model cdn.bleedingcool.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/CS-ZujPWEAQkLl2.jpg the facial structure, longer arms, sloping shoulders, etc... is reminiscent of some sort of ape. But since you cannot say that, how should I describe Tombstone's appearance so as not to offend anyone?
3. Would it be helpful if the Publisher listed the creator's ethnicity, political status, sexual orientation, etc... on the masthead, as well as next to each character?
4. If the creator and/or character were both white, would this discussion even be necessary?
I don't mean to start a firestorm here - just trying to figure out what the rules are. Any assistance is appreciated - thx.
The rules are quite simple: 1) Think before you speak. 2) If you offend someone with the language you use, as might happen no matter your intentions, try to understand their point of view, and then respect their point of view by using different language the next time. In other words, listen to what others have to say, and don't dismiss them out of hand even if you think their argument has no merit. I think the old saying goes something like, in all things, treat others as you would have them treat you.
And I'm sure Adam had no racial intentions in his comment, nor did I in my use of “savage.” And, no, of course we can't control—nor should we— how every other person is going to interpret our words. All I'm saying is that when someone is offended by what we say, the absolute best thing we can do is communicate with that person to understand why so that we can communicate more effectively with one another going forward. And I don't see that as having anything to do with bullying or political correctness, but with simply trying to develop empathy for others so we can live in a more peaceful, cooperative society.
[Edit: And I should add that I hope Adam was not bullied, as that is just as negative a form of communication as the offensive language. But from Adam’s words, I got the impression that this was not the case.]
It may be a trying time to be a DC Comics fan - just like it was tough to be a Marvel fan not long ago - but I think anyone who likes getting hundreds of hours of free podcast entertainment has more than enough reason to celebrate this week :)
We all have opinions. We all have passions, and agendas. We might drive each other crazy from time to time. That's family. In the end, though, our common love for comics puts us all on the same page.
I hope that none of you on the show are swayed by any of this (I doubt that you would be).. I would never presume to tell you how to do your show, in order to suit me as a fan or listener. What you do and who is on the show has changed many times since I started listening. Some changes I liked and others I didn't, but overall, I still find things I enjoy and as such, I'm still listening. If another direction compels me to take a break or stop.. it is what it is. Who am I to post here and suggest that I know what's best for your show, or that my interests are more important than another listener's? You guys put in your own time and effort to produce it and offer it for free. Oh by the way, THANKS FOR THAT. ;)
I miss @brydeemer 's opinions on the show, and I love the addition of @wildpigcomics and it's great that both of those guys, who I find have perspectives and tastes most similar to my own, get checked and balanced by the others. I really respect that balance and all of your honesty.
Congrats on the long run. Keep doin' what you're doin'.
It looks great!
I think that there was a huge amount of value in the initial review of the New 52. Books were read and commented upon. Same with the off the racks on Omega Men - everyone was wrong, but that's OK. That's what I enjoy hearing - honest reviews and discussion for good or ill.
Ultimately, I'm glad for the conversation that was had on the episode.
I don't want to be pulled in by Rebirth, but I can already feel it happening. Getting the pre-New 52 Superman in there is a huge help. Too bad we couldn't also get the Marvel Family pulled back in from Convergence, too, though!
As for BvS, I thought it was alright. Didn't love it, thought it tried to do way too much, but it was alright. Wonder Woman was awesome, Batman was great, I like the look and performance of Cavill even if he's not written well, and Lawrence Fishburne and Jeremy Irons were criminally underused. Forget Justice League, where's my Perry White & Alfred team-up movie? :smiley:
Someone could put together a clip show of all the times that, say, Waid's DD has been discussed on CGS. It'd be two hours long and the only discussion of actual content would be literally two sentences mentioning that Foggy had cancer and that The Spot appeared. The rest is just... praise without any detail. "Mark Waid's Daredevil! AAAAGGGHH!!! SO GOOD!! Really enjoying it a lot! And the art!" over and over again.
I seem to remember that the old CGS crew, Deemer & Rios & co., used to casually mention what actually happened in the comics they read, and why such-and-such a creator was good. I even remember Deemer, while admitting that he basically knew nothing about art or writing, talking about how Walt Simonson was a great artist because he would do things like draw a horse's leg and hoof going out of the panel, or how Dave Sim was great because he knew how to use mostly silent issues of Cerebus to give the reader a real sense of how long it would really take to climb to the moon. Compare that to the last three years' worth of praise for Brian K. Vaughan, and CGS has not said a single thing about WHY he's so great. BKV's "range" is discussed, but never anything in the way of specific techniques or manipulations of actual story points.
Is this stuff not discussed much anymore because the current crew is too afraid of "spoilers"?
In this episode, when Dani hurriedly said "Oops, spoilers!" after acknowledging that "Elektra is an assassin", I nearly fell out of my chair in disbelief that you guys are now being this oversensitive about things. What is the point of talking about anything at all, then?
Whenever actual content is not being discussed, the podcast may as well be one long commercial. I have listened to CGS for like eight years, and I enjoy the podcast still, but the actual-content-vs-surface-level-fluff ratio has certainly been declining in recent years. I don't care if you guys are praising or condemning comics as long as you actually discuss the content rather than offering praise without any textual references or condemnation based on telepathic guesswork ("Didio wants to produce horrible comics").
That said, experience also teaches that attempting to constantly placate the vicissitudes of criticism like some chastened employee snapping to attention in the wake of a negative evaluation only leads one down the slippery slope of compromising one’s integrity and sense of self. I understand and respect the criticisms clearly leveled at both me and Danielle in this particular thread. Nevertheless, I would be doing myself, her, and the show a disservice by continuing to submit to them in silence, as I disagree with them, and the tone in which they’ve been offered, in the strongest terms.
Being asked to join the cast three years ago was, quite frankly, a great honor for me. Regardless of how tough my professional and/or personal life can become during a given week, recording an episode with my castmates, who are family, is always a guarantee of safe haven. They have placed their trust in my knowledge and efforts, my character and discretion. Hence, they are the only people I answer to, and not as employers, but as family. We are all part of CGS because we love the comic book medium, and it is always our intention to celebrate the medium with all of the energy we can muster. I know the overwhelming majority of our listeners appreciate that fact, and respect the often prodigious efforts we undertake to make the show as entertaining, informative, and insightful as we can. Of course, a podcast that has run for ten years will inevitably experience change and turnover in subject, tone, and cast. Every member of the cast, past and present, brings certain strengths to the table. On a good day, those strengths complement each other; on other days, the dynamic may fall a bit flat for some listeners. That’s simply the nature of the beast when attempting to maintain the show in between the many demands of modern life.
It’s unfortunate, but inevitable and understandable, that some listeners will not take to the changes the show naturally experiences as the years unfold. While no form of entertainment seeks to alienate and lose any member of its audience, nor will we compromise who we are and what we do simply because certain individuals feel the need to express their criticism in the form of attacks that belittle, and even question the integrity, of our efforts. If the content and cast of our show no longer suits their taste and interests, the internet offers a wide variety of other comic-related programs to explore, and they are welcome to sample them with no hard feelings on our part.
Otherwise, I know I speak for all of my castmates when I say to our audience that we are honored by your ongoing enthusiasm for what we do, and we will continue to do our utmost to match your enthusiasm with our own.
Thanks for listening, and thanks for the support!
Best,
Chris Eberle
M
I'd like to go on record saying that I thing you and Dannie have been a terrific addition to the crew and by no means was my observation above intended to suggest otherwise. There seems to have been, and it's visible on the forums as well, in uptick across the board in cynicism and apathy. I think that you, as a retailer, bring a sense of validation of that. What I'm missing, aside from the joy, is the substance behind the excitement or disappointment - the the recent review of The Discipline was exactly what I've been pining for (aside from the fjords).