patxshand
Ensouled Vampire
Writer/director/Amy Acker's husband.[Mo0:0]
Posts: 1,918
|
Post by patxshand on Feb 7, 2009 2:50:07 GMT -5
I'm trying to find this snark, so I typed in Allie's name in search on my page... Oh, I think I might have found the snark you thought you saw. Was it the "breezed through Buffy" line? Because if that's what you meant, it's kinda just true. Not meant at ALL in a snark way. Dark Horse is the third biggest comic publisher there is. It's right after Marvel and DC, who have a CRAZY amount of titles. So does Dark Horse. My point with the "breezed through" wasn't to be like "Scott Allie talks really fast > !!!" or "Scott Allie doesn't want to chat Buffy > !!!" because that's obviously not true. My point was that Scott Allie had a million other books to cover, and had to talk about them. It was only one line in the thing to explain why I missed who he announced as writer of the one-shot. Or was it the "I didn't stick around for the whole time" bit? Well, that was because, as stated above, Allie had a million books to talk about, none of which I knew about, and Anthony Ficaro who [plug] plays DRAKE on WHATZ GOOD STUDIOS [/quote] really wanted neon colored energy drinks, which I promised we would get in-between the Buffy news and the Angel news. Plus, I pulled him out of GTA gaming session to get the Buffy news in the panel, and he knows nothing about comics, so instead of boring him and me with news of many many titles we don't know about, we left and got energy drinks. They were not tasty. I'm really stretching it here... well, all of these were huge huge stretches to me, but maybe I'm oblivious to the things I say, could be why people look at me oddly when I give them the finger... (kidding)... okay, stretching it, but do you mean how I referred to IDW as the big stuff? If so, that's only because they announced like eightteen things. Dark Horse has been, until now, 100% focused on Season Eight on the Buffy front--which, let me clear the air, I don't think is a bad thing at ALL--so they would naturally have fewer things to announce. Me calling IDW the big stuff isn't "Dark Horse sucks (even though I love your comics, post nice things about everyone involved, and repeat how much I love your comics ad nauseum) and IDW ROOLZ!" It's just to say "the big announcements" were over at IDW. And on a personal level, meeting the IDW people was "the big stuff" for me, Pat Shand, as a person. Had Whedon been there, or had I gotten a chance to meet with more of the Buffy people, the entire thing would have been "big stuff." Other than that and the explanation of Allie's remarks and his apology, I don't even think the guy is mentioned. I was going to go into Allie in the next post with Jeanty and Andy Owens when I post my Buffy: Season Eight stuff with the scanned sketch Georges did for me, but I guess I'll say it here. I wanted to meet Allie to a) clarify who wrote the issue he talked about and b) get something signed. But the Dark Hose booth was uber busy, and Allie was talking to someone he knew for a while. I hung by for a bit, but they seemed to be having a conversation and were actually friends outside of Comic Con, so I didn't wanna be a skeeve, and I left. Came back later, he wasn't there. I really truly hope that explains anything you might have perceived as snark, because it wasn't intended. I don't wanna talk about the post HERE any further, Emmie, but if you truly think there's something I should change here, please please PM me and tell me. I'd hate people to think I was being a dick when my only intention was to make a post about my wonderful day at Comic Con. So no, I don't dislike Scott Allie. Even wanted his autograph. He also has nice hair that I sorta want to touch. PS: Did it again!
|
|
patxshand
Ensouled Vampire
Writer/director/Amy Acker's husband.[Mo0:0]
Posts: 1,918
|
Post by patxshand on Feb 7, 2009 3:15:58 GMT -5
Going for a record here: triple post. This will be my last post in the thread, because I'm gonna start saying the same things over and over and that doesn't get pretty. I sort of had to defend a review/report of mine which was 100% about a happy day, so that was upsetting, but now to get back to the main topic of the thread. Does canon matter? To some people. To a lot of people. I'll always take it into consideration, and I do think there is a solid, official story that counts. However, when it comes down to it, I really just want to enjoy the book. I'd take a great Angel book that wasn't canonical over a bad canonical one any day, and the same with Buffy. I put a lot of Buffy trades like Jane Espenson's "Haunted" next to Season Eight on my shelf, because I consider it to be part of how I see the official story. Some people very much don't, that's totally fine. (Oh, Ring of Fire, too. Great, great book) So yeah. Canon is important to a lot of people, but quality of story is vital, I think. As long as we get stories as good as Buffy: Season Eight, Angel: After the Fall, and Spike: After the Fall have been, I think we're set. With all three titles looking to become on-goings, there is more than enough room for people to read all of 'em, read only what appeals to them, or do whatever they want. It's all up to the reader. So I'll try to end my contribution to this thread on the most positive note possible. I love Buffy: Season Eight, love the team involved. I love Angel: After the Fall, love the team involved. I'm sure I'll be able to say the same for the Tales of the Vampires 6/09 one-shot (seriously, they're crazy talented www.vasilislolos.com/ and the writer is also quite hot: www.estrigious.com/becky/index.htm) as well as the upcoming Spike series. I consider all these to be the official story, but also recognize now that some don't. Annnn that's fine. I love all the comics from both these companies, I loved meeting the assorted talent behind both comics at Comic Con today, and overall, I had a great day. And the Buffyverse is thriving in a huuuuge way. Peace!
|
|
|
Post by wenxina on Feb 7, 2009 11:32:12 GMT -5
Xi (who unfortunately has no interest in articulating his thoughts on this topic, not interested in this fight) has some pretty interesting points on how AtF is already out of continuity with Season 8. I was actually arguing against it, but there certainly is some weight behind his argument. I thought I already voiced my opinion on how AtF and S8 are already potentially out of continuity. It's on page one of this thread, if anyone's interested. But to sum it up: After the events of AtF, sure Angel and Spike are heroes, but everyone else in LA remembers that other vampires=not so good. And since Aftermath apparently will have Angel as some kind of celebrity (from a cover I saw... I'm not keeping up with spoilers, so I could be dead wrong), the fact that people accept him as such must mean that it's also accepted that the events of AtF weren't caused by a city-wide acid trip. Meaning that vamps/demons would not be tolerated (possibly to the point of witch hunts). Meaning that it's absolutely ludicrous that Harmony would be filming in LA, even a year or so later. Of course, right now, I'm discounting the fact that stuff may happen between Aftermath (and anything else that follows) and S8 that will reconcile these two continuities. But for me, right now, it seems like we're traveling out of sync here. I will emphasize that this is strictly my opinion, and in no way conclusive, even to me, as mentioned above. This also doesn't discount my enjoyment of AtF thus far. And yes, my fears of the crazy fracturing of the 'verse is mainly speculative, but based on my observations above. I'm not too concerned about the Angel story going out of wack, just that the Angel series is already deviated from the canonical Buffyverse (IMO, of course). Actually, up to #16 (which I thought was very-well written, pencilled, inked, colored, the whole production just came together perfectly), all seemed good in the Buffyverse. But Angel as celebrity just tosses a curveball that I'm not willing to try to fanwank into continuity until I see the outcome of said series.
|
|
|
Post by Emmie on Feb 7, 2009 11:57:50 GMT -5
Sorry, Xi. Didn't mean to speak for you, only meant to say that you weren't interested in arguing the point.
My problem with the lack of unifying force is that the 'verse is also now separate from the Buffy side. This makes it a uniquely different and more difficult situation than Star Wars. There's no unifying force for both sides, but at least with the Buffy side there's one guy keeping it all together. If there were an equivalent guy on the Angel side, it'd be easier to keep things in line.
I just see this as moving further and further away from each other (as Xi says) and splitting the 'verse into actual different dimensions - Angelverse and Buffyverse - because they cannot keep in continuity with each other.
The view of Angel is being limited to just Angel. Except Angel is part of a greater 'verse including Buffy. And if they're not working concurrently, you might as well say that Angel and his gang returned to a slightly different dimension without shrimp at the end of AtF.
This situation is different because Buffy has gone global versus the old status quo of Buffy in her city, Angel in his. Never the twain shall meet. Buffy's literally taking over world save-age on a global scale so it's a bit unreasonable to expect Angel and Co. to not come across those events. Yet how will those be included? Will they simply be ignored?
The time gap between NFA and the beginning of Season 8 give IDW some leeway to get their game together but eventually they need to get their stories straight.
|
|
Paul
Ensouled Vampire
[Mo0:34]
Posts: 1,173
|
Post by Paul on Feb 7, 2009 12:34:22 GMT -5
Wow, this thread really took off while I was sleeping! Regarding the After the Fall/ Season Eight continuity, I can tolerate the plot holes so long I feel each series is on track quality-wise and they don't blatantly contradict one another. I mean, Angel season four and Buffy season seven don't really sync up all that well... how come Sunnydale didn't succumb to Jasmine's influence? I fanwank that the power cuts in Sunnydale meant the Scoobs couldn't see her on TV, but the timelines don't really mesh. But I can let it slide because, continuity quibbles aside, both seasons were very much on track with regard to the overall series' themes. Okay, but does a series really need an overarching theme to be worthwhile or even good? Does some sort of theme need to be shoehorned into the plot, just cuz? Does it really need one to work? When it comes to Angel, I really just care about the characters and how their stories progress. If I don't learn a life lesson from it, well I will survive. I have to disagree strongly with this, Wyndam. The themes and subtext in Joss Whedon's writing has always been what separates the Buffyverse from any other supernatural/sci fi series. The layered writing is where all the quality stems from, and what makes Buffy and it's spin-offs so special. If you don't care about that, then you might as well be watching Charmed. Wyn, I'm glad the lack is not bothering you. But that's not the case for every reader. And it wasn't a question of a good plot and good character moments. But what sets the Buffyverse apart for me is that it goes so much deeper than that with the themes and explorations of greater meaning. The kind of stuff that inspires Slayage academic papers and meta-analysis, rather than just the surface analysis of the plot. The Buffyverse has always had layers of meaning, rich and deep. I care about that. I think it's part of what makes it great. Plus the unity of the journey. That plots are set years ahead of time and still find a huge payoff - how is this possible with no unifying vision? I don't think it is possible. It's very exciting to have all these different stories, but some of us are worried that it's going to ultimately degenerate the Angel side of the 'verse into the contradictory nature of Marvel or DC. Couldn't have put it better myself.
|
|
|
Post by Wyndam on Feb 7, 2009 12:43:13 GMT -5
Okay, but does a series really need an overarching theme to be worthwhile or even good? Does some sort of theme need to be shoehorned into the plot, just cuz? Does it really need one to work? When it comes to Angel, I really just care about the characters and how their stories progress. If I don't learn a life lesson from it, well I will survive. I have to disagree strongly with this, Wyndam. The themes and subtext in Joss Whedon's writing has always been what separates the Buffyverse from any other supernatural/sci fi series. The layered writing is where all the quality stems from, and what makes Buffy and it's spin-offs so special. If you don't care about that, then you might as well be watching Charmed. Yeah, I admit that looking back on my post, I was a little one sided, because I do of course care about the themes of both shows. The point I wanted to make is that we haven't had any evidence yet that the Angel comics won't be just as layered in subtext as the show was, just because Joss isn't directly involved. Brian created one of the more concise, layered (in terms of character developments), and rich stories I have ever read in After the Fall, and I just didn't understand why Emmie was saying that the overarching themes of the show wouldn't be following the comic, when all we have gotten so far is quality writing and structure. Brian loves both shows, understand how they worked, and continued Angel's story better than anyone else probably could (hell, maybe even better than Joss could have). So my post was a little too one sided in my expression that I wouldn't care about the themes as long as the story was good, and from what we have gotten so far in the last 16(20) issues, is that nothing has been sacrificed. Okay I swear that's it this time from me, I just really needed to clarify the point I tried to make earlier.
|
|
|
Post by wenxina on Feb 7, 2009 14:19:54 GMT -5
Sorry, Xi. Didn't mean to speak for you, only meant to say that you weren't interested in arguing the point. Hey, no problems here. I didn't misunderstand your intent. But hey, rewriting my argument in a more succinct manner helped organize thoughts, so it's not a big deal. But yeah, methinks that unless something else new comes to this discussion, I'll be back out for a bit. ;D
|
|
El Diablo Robotico
Ensouled Vampire
Robo Pimp-Daddy
"Surely you have heard about our great victory over the Devil's Robot."[Mo0:3]
Posts: 1,199
|
Post by El Diablo Robotico on Feb 7, 2009 14:49:26 GMT -5
I read the first few posts of this thread, and the ones on page 3, but don't have the patience to read all the ones in the middle. So if this has already been said by someone, forgive me for being redundant. Basically, canon matters to me for the simple fact that if it's not canon, I have no real interest in reading it. The farthest outside of canon I've gone is "Asylum" and "Shadow Puppets", because no one could come to a real consensus on whether they are or aren't. But I'm not a comic book guy, so if I have the urge to read a non-canon "Buffy" or "Angel" story, I'd rather pick up one of the novels. I agree with Emmie in most of the concerns she's raised about these new "Angel" titles, especially the unknown amount of involvement in their stories by Joss and the cost involved in having to buy so many to stay current. And I'll add to that the confusion of trying to keep track of them all. S8 and AtF you've got one title each that you have to buy every month. But now there's "Aftermath", "Blood and Trenches", an Illyria miniseries, a Drusilla miniseries, an ongoing Spike series, a Gunn one-shot... It's too much, and too poorly organized. Given their questionable canonicity, I just don't have the energy to keep track of so many. I'll finish AtF, and probably read "Aftermath", since it's only 6 issues, but that might be the extent of it...
|
|
|
Post by Wyndam on Feb 7, 2009 15:02:45 GMT -5
I agree with Emmie in most of the concerns she's raised about these new "Angel" titles, especially the unknown amount of involvement in their stories by Joss and the cost involved in having to buy so many to stay current. And I'll add to that the confusion of trying to keep track of them all. S8 and AtF you've got one title each that you have to buy every month. But now there's "Aftermath", "Blood and Trenches", an Illyria miniseries, a Drusilla miniseries, an ongoing Spike series, a Gunn one-shot... It's too much, and too poorly organized. Given their questionable canonicity, I just don't have the energy to keep track of so many. I'll finish AtF, and probably read "Aftermath", since it's only 6 issues, but that might be the extent of it... The official line of Angelverse comics really isn't this complicated though. I don't think there is any question that Blood & Trenches and the Fallen Angel collaboration are NOT canon. They are purely for entertainment purposes only. So if you are only interested in reading the official continuation then all you have is: Angel/Spike: After the Fall ----> Aftermath ----> Gunn/Drusilla issues ----> Next unnanounced arc that should begin in November. No concrete official word yet if the Gunn/Drusilla issues follow directly after Aftermath (they will possibly be #24-26), or if Gunn's story is covered in Drusilla's arc or not, but for now, it looks like 3 issues. But the Gunn and Drusilla issues are not new mini-series that we will have to buy along with new Angel issues, they are a part of the Angel story line. And then we have the new Spike series as well, running concurrently with Angel. While I completely get that adding on a new series may be too much for people to afford, the order and continuation really isn't that difficult to keep track of, imo. Especially if you are only interested in buying the official Angel continuation (so that leaves out titles like Smile Time, Not Fade Away, Blood & Trenches, Illyria/Fallen Angel crossover).
|
|
Hallow Thorn
Bad Ass Wicca
Oh and You're Welcome
[Mo0:0]
Posts: 2,306
|
Post by Hallow Thorn on Feb 7, 2009 15:19:20 GMT -5
Canon matters to me. All I really see as Canon are: The Origin - Fray - Tales of the Slayers and Tales of the Vampires - Buffy the Vampire Slayer Season Eight - Angel and Spike: After the Fall - Aftermath- Spike series - Gunn and Drusilla issues... I hope the 'Angel' comics are only short issues and fit in one TPB per Story. And what is this 'Fallen Angel: Reborn' Illyria spin-off ? :unsure: how many are there going to be now?
|
|
|
Post by Emmie on Feb 7, 2009 16:59:56 GMT -5
Angel/Spike: After the Fall ----> Aftermath ----> Gunn/Drusilla issues ----> Next unannounced arc that should begin in November. While I completely get that adding on a new series may be too much for people to afford, the order and continuation really isn't that difficult to keep track of, imo. Sorry, but I think the fact that these stories are being piled on top of each other is the problem we're addressing here. The concurrence of the stories is making them separate stories rather than one large story of the canon set. Also just noticed that the Gunn series is actually supposed to bridge the time between AtF and Aftermath rather than come post-Aftermath as I've quoted you as saying (according to Pat, unless I misunderstood that info). I've posted before on the problematic nature of where Spike:AtF fits into AtF and when it's supposed to read. I don't even remember when it was released in reference to the AtF issue at the time. Nor is it clear to other fans reading AtF (only starting now) on when they should be reading S: AtF. S:AtF spoils you for the Gunn-vamp reveal in AtF, for example.
|
|
|
Post by Wyndam on Feb 7, 2009 17:12:43 GMT -5
Angel/Spike: After the Fall ----> Aftermath ----> Gunn/Drusilla issues ----> Next unannounced arc that should begin in November. While I completely get that adding on a new series may be too much for people to afford, the order and continuation really isn't that difficult to keep track of, imo. Sorry, but I think the fact that these stories are being piled on top of each other is the problem we're addressing here. The concurrence of the stories is making them separate stories rather than one large story of the canon set. Also just noticed that the Gunn series is actually supposed to bridge the time between AtF and Aftermath rather than come post-Aftermath as I've quoted you as saying (according to Pat, unless I misunderstood that info). I've posted before on the problematic nature of where Spike:AtF fits into AtF and when it's supposed to read. I don't even remember when it was released in reference to the AtF issue at the time. Nor is it clear to other fans reading AtF (only starting now) on when they should be reading S: AtF. S:AtF spoils you for the Gunn-vamp reveal in AtF, for example. The stories aren't being piled on top of each other though. We have very little information about the 3 post-Aftermath issues, only that they will feature Gunn and Drusilla. Brian said at the IDW panel that Spike and Angel would both be dealing with Drusilla, and she directly relates to their story. It is all continuous, not a hodgepodge of of different, unrelated stories. Post-Aftermath so far involves 3 issues, one dealing with Gunn post-After the Fall, and 2 where Drusilla makes an appearance in the main storyline (my guess is to kick off the next arc that *should* start in November). Again, this seems like another example of assuming too much out of little information. This news we're getting is no different than getting new Buffy news. In regards to Gunn's issue possibly taking place before Aftermath, again it is not a big issue. It happens all the time in nearly every entertainment medium. The Tales of the Slayers issue coming out later this year will most likely be taking place in the past, same with how The Chain jumped around from the past to the present. In both BtVS and AtS, we jumped around from the past to the present in many, many episodes (mostly dealing with Angelus, Spike, Darla, and Drusilla). In Lost Season 2, the episode The Other 48 Days was based entirely on past events. It happens everywhere and I could give examples all day long. This is a non-issue for me. And in regards to S:AtF, you of course read the issues in the order they have come out, initially, but with re-reads you read them in chronological order. That's how comics work. Fans that are first reading the series are smart enough to do their research and will most likely read A:AtF before S:AtF, or in the correct chronological order, or in whatever order they choose. The story isn't hampered in any way no matter what order it is read in. EDIT: To show the relation to the Buffy set up: Angel/Spike: After the Fall (Arc 1) ----> Aftermath (Arc 2) ----> Gunn/Drusilla issues (Arc 3) ----> Next unannounced arc that should begin in November (Arc 3/4 - warrants further information). TLWH (Arc 1) ----> NFFY (Arc 2) ----> WatG (Arc 3) ----> TOYL (Arc 4) etc., etc. Both series continue on in a continuous format. The Gunn and Drusilla stories will not be unrelated to Angel's story in any way, they are a part of the main story, I don't see any sort of pile on, whatsoever.
|
|
|
Post by Emmie on Feb 7, 2009 17:28:24 GMT -5
And in regards to S:AtF, you of course read the issues in the order they have come out, initially, but with re-reads you read them in chronological order. That's how comics work. Fans that are first reading the series are smart enough to do their research and will most likely read A:AtF before S:AtF, or in the correct chronological order, or in whatever order they choose. The story isn't hampered in any way no matter what order it is read in. How is a person completely new to the series supposed to know this? Only we the fans who have been here from the beginning would know explicitly when it's best to read each story first. IDW has not made that clear on where each story fits together. That message is very unclear. I feel sorry for people who hear about After the Fall and never realize how essential Spike:AtF is to it. There's a lot of people who bought AtF who never bought S:AtF. S:AtF had way lower sales. Think about that. That means there are going to be a lot of people who only buy Aftermath but don't buy the Gunn one-shot, not realizing that it's essential to understanding Gunn's position/situation in Aftermath. Splitting the titles means that people aren't buying all the canon story because it's being spread too far and too wide. Consolidation is key. Do you see how splitting up the canon into multiple different titles is confusing to the readers? Based on sales, people are forced to pick 'n choose what they want to buy, not realizing that the stories are in fact connected. With Season 8, I know that I need to read #16 in order to understand #17. The stories are being put out there in a disorganized fashion. Put it under one title if it's the sole continuation or just have an Angel title and a Spike title. I'm okay with Spike having his own spinoff (esp. with it being written by Lynch) but keep it clear what they are. Have the Drusilla 2-parter as part of Spike's official mini-series and have Gunn's one-shot as part of Aftermath prelude or AtF epilogue sequence. Organize it and put it together. Keep it clean and simple.
|
|
|
Post by Wyndam on Feb 7, 2009 17:43:10 GMT -5
And in regards to S:AtF, you of course read the issues in the order they have come out, initially, but with re-reads you read them in chronological order. That's how comics work. Fans that are first reading the series are smart enough to do their research and will most likely read A:AtF before S:AtF, or in the correct chronological order, or in whatever order they choose. The story isn't hampered in any way no matter what order it is read in. How is a person completely new to the series supposed to know this? Only we the fans who have been here from the beginning would know explicitly when it's best to read each story first. IDW has not made that clear on where each story fits together. That message is very unclear. I feel sorry for people who hear about After the Fall and never realize how essential Spike:AtF is to it. There's a lot of people who bought AtF who never bought S:AtF. S:AtF had way lower sales. Think about that. That means there are going to be a lot of people who only buy Aftermath but don't buy the Gunn one-shot, not realizing that it's essential to understanding Gunn's position/situation in Aftermath. Splitting the titles means that people aren't buying all the canon story because it's being spread too far and too wide. Consolidation is key. Do you see how splitting up the canon into multiple different titles is confusing to the readers? Based on sales, people are forced to pick 'n choose what they want to buy, not realizing that the stories are in fact connected. With Season 8, I know that I need to read #16 in order to understand #17. The stories are being put out there in a disorganized fashion. Put it under one title if it's the sole continuation or just have an Angel title and a Spike title. I'm okay with Spike having his own spinoff (esp. with it being written by Lynch) but keep it clear what they are. Have the Drusilla 2-parter as part of Spike's official mini-series and have Gunn's one-shot as part of Aftermath prelude or AtF epilogue sequence. Organize it and put it together. Keep it clean and simple. A person completely new to the series, who just reads A:AtF will still get the complete story. While it is true that we get a deeper understanding of where Spike's head is at in A:AtF by reading S:AtF, it is not necessary to read S:AtF to "get" A:AtF. Spike's series was always going to have lower sales, because it is a spin-off (of a spin-off, when looking at the Angel series as a whole), again, that's just how comics work. Lower sales figures does not automatically mean people are picking and choosing or are confused about what to buy. Comic sales for every single series across the market dwindle over time, and that is especially true for spin-offs. As for the new stories, again, we have absolutely no evidence that they will not be organized and consolidated like they are supposed to be. I am just guessing here, but Gunn's issue will probably be #24, and Dru's 2-parter #25-25. Until we learn more, what we have received so far seems very clean and simple to me. We are learning new details about the next chapter of the main Angel series. Dru's upcoming issues are very similar to Oz's upcoming arc. A past character is coming back and will directly relate to the events of the main story. There are no new titles being developed here in regards to the Gunn and Dru stories, they are just the next chapters of Angel. Not getting what the concern is here, even with Gunn's issue possibly dealing with the past. It is a story structure that has been around for years and years and years.
|
|
|
Post by Emmie on Feb 7, 2009 18:07:00 GMT -5
See, I'm confused by this. I thought Gunn's story was definitely not #24 since it happens before Aftermath.
And they're calling them mini-series...and Drusilla's story is part of Spike's I thought. See, I'm already more confused after talking to you.
|
|
|
Post by Wyndam on Feb 7, 2009 18:20:50 GMT -5
Nope, they are not mini-series. Not at all. Everyone assumed (including myself, when I first made the threads), that they were because we had barely any information about them. After reading the various reports around the web about the IDW panel, Brian's various updates, and then the video at Buffyfest, I think it is clear at this point that the Gunn and Drusilla stories will be a part of Angel's story after Aftermath. There are no Gunn: Before Aftermath or Drusilla: After Aftermath mini-series, they are 3 of the next issues in Angel's post-Aftermath continuation. It was definitely confusing at first, but I hope I helped clear it up for now. This is sort of what happens when information is initially released anyways (especially since we won't be seeing these issues until the Fall), but I am sure that we won't be out buying a Gunn issue and the next Angel issue on the same day. At this point, a lot of it is guesswork, but we have gotten some good information so far since those initial reports. EDIT: Now I understand where a lot of your argument has come from now. I would be questioning the series as well if we were getting 2 new mini-series as well as a new Spike series. Gunn/Dru issues are a part of the main series though, so there are no worries there.
|
|
patxshand
Ensouled Vampire
Writer/director/Amy Acker's husband.[Mo0:0]
Posts: 1,918
|
Post by patxshand on Feb 7, 2009 20:26:35 GMT -5
Also just noticed that the Gunn series is actually supposed to bridge the time between AtF and Aftermath rather than come post-Aftermath as I've quoted you as saying (according to Pat, unless I misunderstood that info). It was said that the Gunn thing would be explained in an issue, maybe one of the Drusilla centric ones. I'm guessing it'll be a page worth, or even just a line to explain what happened. Don't know the specifics as of yet, but it wasn't implied that it would be a bridging issue.
|
|
|
Post by Emmie on Feb 7, 2009 21:14:16 GMT -5
Also just noticed that the Gunn series is actually supposed to bridge the time between AtF and Aftermath rather than come post-Aftermath as I've quoted you as saying (according to Pat, unless I misunderstood that info). It was said that the Gunn thing would be explained in an issue, maybe one of the Drusilla centric ones. I'm guessing it'll be a page worth, or even just a line to explain what happened. Don't know the specifics as of yet, but it wasn't implied that it would be a bridging issue. Which explains my confusion. I thought you'd told me (the first time I'd heard of it) that there would be a Gunn one-shot that explains Gunn's situation between AtF and Aftermath and that it would bridge the two.
|
|
|
Post by Wyndam on Feb 7, 2009 21:26:35 GMT -5
It was said that the Gunn thing would be explained in an issue, maybe one of the Drusilla centric ones. I'm guessing it'll be a page worth, or even just a line to explain what happened. Don't know the specifics as of yet, but it wasn't implied that it would be a bridging issue. Which explains my confusion. I thought you'd told me (the first time I'd heard of it) that there would be a Gunn one-shot that explains Gunn's situation between AtF and Aftermath and that it would bridge the two. Here's what Brian says in Buffyfest's IDW panel video: "So we're going to do an issue dealing with what happened to Gunn and why Gunn is where he is. We're kind of showing his direction for the upcoming months." To me, that sounds like a full issue devoted to Gunn, not something that will be explained in one of the Drusilla/future issues. Before he said this, while talking about the Dru stuff, he says that his new stuff falls in line with Angel's current story. We just need more info.
|
|
|
Post by CowboyGuy on Feb 7, 2009 21:51:39 GMT -5
Here is my short and simple thought about canon:
Canon is nice, but not required. What would you rather have, a canon tale or a non-canon story? We'd all choose canon. We all would choose Season 8 over Queen of the Slayers. Canon is only important when there are other options to choose from. Before Season 8 came about, I thought Queen was alright...I jumped at any story by any writer about what a post Season 7 might be. And upon the arrival of Season 8, nothing else mattered because we all knew that this was Joss' story. His official continuation.
Joss has given the "go ahead" to IDW, and that is good enough for me. All I ask for are stories told in a linear time-line that continue the story, as well as do justice to what came before it. I would hate for the Buffyverse to turn into DC or Marvel...multiple origins, timelines, etc. To me that is epic fail.
Now, I am overjoyed and so thankful that Joss plays at the center of Season 8 and that he is hands on with it. But if he didn't I wouldn't be that bothered. I just love that talented artists and writers and running with this and putting out great stories.
|
|