|
|
Post by vikingspawn on Oct 15, 2013 20:33:46 GMT -5
There's a pretty cool 5 part documentary series about comics on PBS starting tonight: www.pbs.org/superheroeswatching Steranko years now...  |
|
|
|
Post by Defiant1 on Oct 16, 2013 0:37:21 GMT -5
There's a pretty cool 5 part documentary series about comics on PBS starting tonight: www.pbs.org/superheroeswatching Steranko years now... I probably won't watch it. The youtube clips on the site you sent me to actually bored me. The Joe Q segment irritated me. He rambles on about how much creative content they have to release a month and I kept thinking... 1) Marvel has watered down the creative content and delivers less than it ever has. 2) Creating stories is more like reinventing the wheel. The bulk of the storytelling process is established. Only the finishing touches are new. The who, the what, the where, the motive, and unique dialogue is just fill in the blank. Defiant1 |
|
|
|
Post by gowaltrip on Oct 16, 2013 4:45:07 GMT -5
There's a pretty cool 5 part documentary series about comics on PBS starting tonight: www.pbs.org/superheroeswatching Steranko years now... I probably won't watch it. The youtube clips on the site you sent me to actually bored me. The Joe Q segment irritated me. He rambles on about how much creative content they have to release a month and I kept thinking... 1) Marvel has watered down the creative content and delivers less than it ever has. 2) Creating stories is more like reinventing the wheel. The bulk of the storytelling process is established. Only the finishing touches are new. The who, the what, the where, the motive, and unique dialogue is just fill in the blank. Defiant1 It used to be so layed out at one time that it looked like some of the stories could write itself and all you had to do is keep the formula going and make sure there was something coming next. At one point it could have almost seemed that any of us could have stepped in and wrote the next issue. Of course I kid, but im sure back in the day if 10 issues were read by us in a row and they asked one of us to step in for 1 issue, Im sure we could have laid out a reasonable plot that kept.all the ongoing subplots moving. I dont think I could stomach watching Quesada brag or talk about how complicated things are myself either, if that is what he is doing. The way things have been done since his days of being in charge I wouldnt want any part of trying to plot whatever the next story arc is going to be. They keep trying to make events and crossovers and mini series with some kind of shock and awe to it that to me they've made the process a lot harder than it needed to be by ignoring what worked so well for the previous 30 years. I could sit through Steranko segments but Joe Q would probably make me turn the channel to something else. |
|
|
|
Post by vikingspawn on Oct 16, 2013 9:11:53 GMT -5
I started watching the middle of episode two covering the '59-79 years last night. It was pretty good so far for what I was expecting from PBS. They had Stan lee and Neal Adams interviews covering the historical stuff of the '70s. Comic pages in HD of Nick Fury with Steranko talking over it. They seem to be focusing each episode by the decades. |
|
|
|
Post by Defiant1 on Oct 16, 2013 16:25:30 GMT -5
I probably won't watch it. The youtube clips on the site you sent me to actually bored me. The Joe Q segment irritated me. He rambles on about how much creative content they have to release a month and I kept thinking... 1) Marvel has watered down the creative content and delivers less than it ever has. 2) Creating stories is more like reinventing the wheel. The bulk of the storytelling process is established. Only the finishing touches are new. The who, the what, the where, the motive, and unique dialogue is just fill in the blank. Defiant1 It used to be so layed out at one time that it looked like some of the stories could write itself and all you had to do is keep the formula going and make sure there was something coming next. At one point it could have almost seemed that any of us could have stepped in and wrote the next issue. Of course I kid, but im sure back in the day if 10 issues were read by us in a row and they asked one of us to step in for 1 issue, Im sure we could have laid out a reasonable plot that kept.all the ongoing subplots moving. I dont think I could stomach watching Quesada brag or talk about how complicated things are myself either, if that is what he is doing. The way things have been done since his days of being in charge I wouldnt want any part of trying to plot whatever the next story arc is going to be. They keep trying to make events and crossovers and mini series with some kind of shock and awe to it that to me they've made the process a lot harder than it needed to be by ignoring what worked so well for the previous 30 years. I could sit through Steranko segments but Joe Q would probably make me turn the channel to something else. My friend hosted a party that Steranko attended. I've seen him a lot, and had a lot of opportunities to talk to him or meet him. I've never felt inclined. Of the comic "legends", his impact on my collecting is very small. His work is interesting, but it never excited me. Defiant1 |
|
|
|
Post by Defiant1 on Oct 19, 2013 10:22:24 GMT -5
I started watching the middle of episode two covering the '59-79 years last night. It was pretty good so far for what I was expecting from PBS. They had Stan lee and Neal Adams interviews covering the historical stuff of the '70s. Comic pages in HD of Nick Fury with Steranko talking over it. They seem to be focusing each episode by the decades. I wasn't going to watch the show, but I sat down in the kitchen to eat and flipped on the TV. The first episode was on. I was a captive audience. The plate held me there and I watched the whole episode. It was really just derivative of things I've heard and seen elsewhere. I kept thinking "how old is this?" because there are quite a few interviews with people who are now dead. Defiant1 |
|
|
|
Post by vikingspawn on Oct 21, 2013 19:39:08 GMT -5
I started watching the middle of episode two covering the '59-79 years last night. It was pretty good so far for what I was expecting from PBS. They had Stan lee and Neal Adams interviews covering the historical stuff of the '70s. Comic pages in HD of Nick Fury with Steranko talking over it. They seem to be focusing each episode by the decades. I wasn't going to watch the show, but I sat down in the kitchen to eat and flipped on the TV. The first episode was on. I was a captive audience. The plate held me there and I watched the whole episode. It was really just derivative of things I've heard and seen elsewhere. I kept thinking "how old is this?" because there are quite a few interviews with people who are now dead. Defiant1 I started watching the first episode today and I know what you mean. This series seems to get better when it gets into the 1970s era. |
|
|
|
Post by Defiant1 on Oct 21, 2013 20:44:38 GMT -5
I wasn't going to watch the show, but I sat down in the kitchen to eat and flipped on the TV. The first episode was on. I was a captive audience. The plate held me there and I watched the whole episode. It was really just derivative of things I've heard and seen elsewhere. I kept thinking "how old is this?" because there are quite a few interviews with people who are now dead. Defiant1 I started watching the first episode today and I know what you mean. This series seems to get better when it gets into the 1970s era. A different installment was on the next day and it rambled on about Wonder Woman and the Bionic Woman TV show. I felt that it was overdramatic with it's assertions. I flipped it off and left the room. I was disappointed that it didn't provide new info for anything between 1946 and 1954. It all seemed cliche and rehashed. Defiant1 |
|
|
|
Post by vikingspawn on Oct 22, 2013 21:27:16 GMT -5
I started watching the first episode today and I know what you mean. This series seems to get better when it gets into the 1970s era. A different installment was on the next day and it rambled on about Wonder Woman and the Bionic Woman TV show. I felt that it was overdramatic with it's assertions. I flipped it off and left the room. I was disappointed that it didn't provide new info for anything between 1946 and 1954. It all seemed cliche and rehashed. Defiant1 I finished the whole thing now. As a whole, it's nothing all that mindblowing that the average long time comic fan already knows. When they got to the Wedding of Spiderman annual segment, I was hoping to see a Shooter interview added in there or something. Seems like they rushed through the entire history and by the 2000s they only focused on the movies. |
|
|
|
Post by Defiant1 on Oct 22, 2013 21:57:01 GMT -5
A different installment was on the next day and it rambled on about Wonder Woman and the Bionic Woman TV show. I felt that it was overdramatic with it's assertions. I flipped it off and left the room. I was disappointed that it didn't provide new info for anything between 1946 and 1954. It all seemed cliche and rehashed. Defiant1 I finished the whole thing now. As a whole, it's nothing all that mindblowing that the average long time comic fan already knows. When they got to the Wedding of Spiderman annual segment, I was hoping to see a Shooter interview added in there or something. Seems like they rushed through the entire history and by the 2000s they only focused on the movies. Yeah... that would not appeal to me. It seemed to shift from a documentary about comics to a documentary about TV and movies. Defiant1 |
|
