|
Post by Emmie on May 17, 2009 10:12:26 GMT -5
I'm more than happy to agree that we should stop doing a "versus" scenario.
It's undoubtedly a topic that is sure to raise ire but I don't think it should be floored unless the tone of the discussion becomes inflammatory. The problem here is that what started out as a qualitative measure devolved into bashing one over the other.
|
|
valyssia
Innocent Bystander
[Mo0:0]
Posts: 36
|
Post by valyssia on May 17, 2009 10:18:26 GMT -5
val: I think one thing we can agree on is that our "opinions" differ. You're going on the basic premise that you essentially don't like S8. I, however, do like it, art included. I prefer the feel of it. I'm not slighting "AtF"; as I said, totally different beasts. But I don't find S8 Hot Pocket-ish at all. However, I will say that I find "Aftermath" to taste rather like taffy... and taffy tastes really acrid to me, for some reason. And it extends beyond the the cover art. And even with the improvements that people are seeing (there are some mild improvements to me), it still reeks. I appreciate that. I've tried to maintain that this is a subjective thing. S8 just doesn't get it for me. The sad part is that doesn't keep me from buying the damned thing. I can excuse it by saying that the cover art as an art print is worth the 4 bucks IMO. But I'm not into the story. Speculating who Twilight is...not my thing. As for S6... I actually rather like it. It's not the most cheerful, and it's not the season I go to for a fun romp through memories, but other than "OMWF", I kinda like the last two eps of the season. And going on your bet, I actually find "NFFY" and "ToYL" to rank pretty high. "A Beautiful Sunset" is probably my favorite of the lot still, for it's simplicity and poignancy. I had actually forgotten A Beautiful Sunset. That was good standalone issue. I enjoyed it. So, out of 25 issues, there are 2 that I actually enjoyed. Statistically pretty bad. As for Jeanty's SMG likeness... methinks that you're judging it entirely on that cover image you posted. His Buffy is nowhere near that bulky in all other instances. And while he may not capture the photolikeness in the style of Chen, he manages to capture something that's so inherent to the character that it's always Buffy you're looking at. But art is subjective. I find that I like Jeanty's looser pencils to the more heavily lined work of say Cliff Richards or any of the Angel artists to date. Dimension can be added by the colorist... unless we're going with a black and white book. But personally, less is more. Kinda like a Rembrandt sketch. I've told you already, photo-likeness isn't the criteria I measure by. Jeanty just doesn't capture the characters IMO. His consistency panel by panel with new characters is downright poor. He makes me wonder who exactly it is I'm looking at and that bothers me. I recognized the image you posted as from Arkham Asylum, and I also remember enjoying that. But I also remember the Batman franchise being under DC. I know that's not the point you were making. The point is, as good as the art was, it's not suitable for a franchise comic. But here we are again, with art being a subjective matter. Batman was the other thing that immediately came to mind. It might've been a mistake to even bring it into the discussion. My point was that Batman is either really good (ex: The Dark Knight, Arkham Asylum the graphic novel) or really kitchy (ex: Batman Forever). I find the Buffy comics kitchy. They have about as much substance as theater popcorn. It wasn't meant to be an absolute, direct comparison. As Emmie says, it's kinda 'apples and oranges.' But it was a valid example. And there's not one damned thing wrong with the WB's Batman animated series. I've watched quite a bit of it. It has merit, but it is an entirely different thing from Arkham. Given the choice, I'll sit down and read that graphic novel yet again rather than watch an ep of the animated series. It's just a thing. I can get lost in stuff like that. Nothing I've seen from the Buffy DH franchise has caused me to get lost just looking at the subtleties of the art or story. I've actually stared at those teaser images from Fallen Angel: Reborn. There's nothing there but the raw art and I can't take my eyes off of it. It's good! Likewise, I love the newspaper compositions of the art for B&T. It looks different from across a room. You get the impression that you're looking at newsprint. Then you move in and the subtleties of the pen and ink start to pop. It's just killer. As for glaring retcons... erm... Angel's tattoo disappeared. Yes, some excuse was made up for it... but the same can be said for the Warren being alive thing. It's addressed in the lettercol of one of the "NFFY" books. Look, not gonna bash "AtF". But Warren's return doesn't ruin anything for me. That's a tattoo. Not exactly the same thing as the death of a character. Did Warren die? Well, if he appeared as the First we're guessing he did. It's so much easier for me to forgive a tattoo. Not even the same thing. One more thing...and please pardon the edit...people here keep saying that they believe that the many alt covers and different series are IDWs attempt to milk the franchise. I might agree if the majority of the material wasn't darned good. You don't have to buy all of the covers to enjoy the story. That's compulsory. I personally wouldn't mind just owning the HCs. They're nice. I myself, have a different definition of milking. Dark Horse recently released the first hard cover edition of Buffy S8 material. List price for The Long Way Home in HC: 50 bucks. That's double what IDW wants for an Angel HC. While the TPB are okay, they cost the same as the Angel HCs and they're maybe half as nice. Maybe. O.o Anyway...that's my .02. I like IDW and it's final. I'm out. Have a great day! Val
|
|
patxshand
Ensouled Vampire
Writer/director/Amy Acker's husband.[Mo0:0]
Posts: 1,918
|
Post by patxshand on May 17, 2009 14:23:46 GMT -5
Although I agree that the Buffy vs Angel thing is silly (and that I'm guilty of it as well). It annoys me a bit that Aftermath not working means that IDW is unworthy of the Angel title. So, Kelley Armstrong and Dave Ross (Who are both really talented, so it makes sense that they were asked... ) couldn't capture the Angel feeling. Sad, especially because it was the first arc after the offical ATF. But IDW has been very good for the fans and we got some amazing issues, covers and random arcs (Blood and Trenches) from them. Ats will never get the same thing Buffy gets, Whedon doesn't have the same investment in this series. Which also means that writers like Vaughn, DeKnight, Goddard, Petrie and Espenson, won't write for it. Brian Lynch writes amazing but he can't write it all, so IDW needs to search for new writers and there will probably be come great finds but also some writers that are not able to capture it. Nobody (fans, writers and IDW) wants bad arcs, but sometimes it happens. IDW does probably everything they can to make a good comic and the most people working on the Ats title, love the series so they certainly don't want to blow it. So let's give IDW a bit more time and don't judge it after the first arc they made after ATF. Epic post. And Val... I really disagree with a lot of the stuff you're saying. I'm sorry, I know we agree on the Angel title being by far the superior... but I still think Buffy kicks ass. And "most fans" didn't dislike Season Six. It's not my favorite, no, but it is still a good season for Buffy, and a great season by non-Joss standards. And the quality of a television season is never a fact, it's always an opinion. Unless we're talking Moonlight here. It's a fact that Moonlight is garbage.
|
|
Malsad
Descendant of a Toaster Oven
Attack Attack!
[Mo0:37]
Posts: 684
|
Post by Malsad on May 17, 2009 22:50:45 GMT -5
I was thinking about it and honestly all i relay want is for one a year every one that writes for the angel-verse and every one who is planed to, to get together, ether in person or via web cast and just tell each other what they are thinking about the series and to plan things out. Thats it just one day out of the year, plain and simple.
|
|
buffycomic
Common Vampire
Comic Guide to Buffy[Mo0:0]
Posts: 74
|
Post by buffycomic on May 27, 2009 11:30:00 GMT -5
My only problem with Angel at IDW versus Dark Horse is that IDW is more expensive. A book costs $4 there versus Dark Horse, where it is $3. Also the Trade Paperbacks are more expensive
|
|
patxshand
Ensouled Vampire
Writer/director/Amy Acker's husband.[Mo0:0]
Posts: 1,918
|
Post by patxshand on May 27, 2009 14:41:45 GMT -5
It's because IDW comics are a higher quality product, paperwise. They're also a smaller press. Dark Horse's comics are flimsy, while the IDW books are a lot thicker, both in the covers and the actual pages.
|
|
Hellbound Hyperion
Bad Ass Wicca
$20 per soul, no refunds[/B]
Dude, you just rescued a puppy![Mo0:18]
Posts: 2,268
|
Post by Hellbound Hyperion on Jun 11, 2009 22:22:41 GMT -5
Pardon me for intruding, but I was reading along and a particularly interesting quote grabbed me that I had to comment on: Angel 2x16 "Epiphany" Not having a grand plan is kinda the M.O. of Angel. I mean, sure we get plot arcs and character development and such, but the idea of Angel is to depict the futility of life, and then show us the kind of Champions who fight to maintain life in spite of its futility. That's how I've always seen it, anyway, and that's how Not Fade Away ended - the battle goes on, the work never ends. After the Fall had that same kind of ending (reminded me of a similar hospital visit to Gunn Angel made in Season Five, actually) - we take our licks and we keep going, 'cause that's all there is. So for keeping with the primary focus of Angel, I really enjoyed After the Fall. I can't say much for Aftermath, since I haven't had a chance to pick it up yet, but After the Fall was a fantastic end to Angel for me. Plus there was lots of Illyria, and I just can't resist that. (I hope I don't sound too argumentative, I just wanted to point out that the idea of Angel characters having a grand plan is kind of absurd considering Angel's epiphany, among other things.)
|
|
|
Post by Emmie on Jun 12, 2009 1:58:49 GMT -5
Not having a grand plan is kinda the M.O. of Angel. Except for the fact that the seasons all begin and end with a sense of full resolution, that character arcs mirror each other and counter symbolically, that the characters are actually in the same room together. Just look at the first and last episodes of Season 4 - from the Deep Down conflict with Angel and Connor and their visions of family to the final sacrifice Angel makes to give Connor a normal life in Home. To say that ANGEL doesn't go for grand plans - well, that misses the thematic and structural beauty that is ANGEL. It doesn't get grander than a vampire with a soul fighting for redemption who's implicated in a prophecy where he may or may not be evil. The Angel title is splintered. The self-aware character present in the TV show is not present in the Angel title because (for whatever reason) there's been a communication breakdown between writers - the misfired characterization of Kate, the bringing back of Cordy that lacked the epicness required to justify it, the fact that it's explicitly stated the PTB have no influence in Hell-A...except they now do according to Aftermath. In a 'verse that gives us the incredible years-long character progression of guys like Wesley, this self-aware grandness of planning - yeah, it's very much missed. And that's something that Joss brings to the table. The guy who planned Dawn's introduction counting down from 7-3-0. The title for who's writing after Lynch hasn't even been announced yet, though it's obviously in the works. /I feel the need to say sorry, feels like I've been saying this over and over again/broken record I think you might have misunderstood me, though. It's not that the character's have grand plans, but that the writers have grand plans for the characters. And these grand plans that will be encompassed in their long term characterization rather than being dropped because the writer in the title following this development just doesn't get it or chooses differently. I miss the grand plans and collaborative efforts that went in to creating ANGEL.
|
|
Hellbound Hyperion
Bad Ass Wicca
$20 per soul, no refunds[/B]
Dude, you just rescued a puppy![Mo0:18]
Posts: 2,268
|
Post by Hellbound Hyperion on Jun 12, 2009 3:01:44 GMT -5
OK, yeah, I get what you're saying. I didn't mean to imply that the writers don't have grand plans; what I mean was that the heart of ANGEL is about fighting for a good world, not because there's an end-all utopia to reach, but because it's worth fighting for. That of course is done with the grand planning that Joss is so eager to do - he always starts a show with a five-year plan for the characters, I love that - but part of writing for ANGEL is understanding that things will never be "good" or "right"; it's that you keep fighting that matters. (I was rather more cautious about reading After the Fall than I was reading Buffy Season Eight because, while Buffy still had a whole new set of tales to tell, I felt like Angel's part in the story was over in that alleyway with Spike, Illyria, and Gunn.)
I always tell people that my favorite Angel writer was Tim Minear. Of all the writers who worked on the show (other than Joss and Steven S. DeKnight, who are just amazing in their own right), I always felt that Tim just got Angel. He could work the ins and outs of each character without sacrificing plot/storytelling. That's what I miss about Angel from the comics - there's so many little plot details being told that it can be hard to tell what's part of the story and what's just "in character" for each character. I'm still not entirely sure I understand Angel's wariness of Wesley at the beginning of After the Fall, and I feel like the only two characters who really developed in all of the 17 issues are Gunn and Illyria. Nothing else really clicked for me.
But just so you know, I hear where you're coming from, and I would definitely say that the Angel continuation has been weaker than the Buffy continuation. Maybe the medium just isn't as easy a fit as Buffy?
|
|
Nina
Potential Slayer
[Mo0:0]
Posts: 141
|
Post by Nina on Jun 12, 2009 14:32:13 GMT -5
IDW not telling us who are the writers doesn't mean that there are no writers chosen. I guess that the writer for #26 needs to start writing any time soon, so there is probably already one and we'll hear it on the comic con. I don't see how that is bad planning, IDW never let us down when it was about planning anyway. Every month has at least one issue, sometimes even two. Everything was finsihed on time to be released on the promised date.
I think that it's a pity that there is no person who controls the story, I love it when there are hints and when the story is well planned. But at the same time, this is a comic, different medium and different kind of storytelling. I can't say that I prefer season 8's slow build up over a story that delivers every issue.
About the writing of the characters; ATF had maybe not the most exciting arc for the character Angel, at least he was written well. Which is something I can't say from the Angel in season 5, who was written in 80% of the episodes like a dull potato without depth, normal emotions or a person who asks himself ethical questions. Which is weird for a complex character who is always busy with being a good person or has a complex arc like in season 2. I agree that Tim Minear is by far the best writer for the character Angel. In almost all his episodes you see the defenition of Angel back; the vampire with a soul. Never the white knight, never dull and certainly always complex. I think that episodes like 'Reprise', 'Are You Now Or Have You Ever Been', 'Reunion' and 'Home' say enough, Angel did terrible things in those episodes but somehow you can see why he did it and how he got there. You can even feel bad for him in those episodes.
|
|
|
Post by Emmie on Jun 12, 2009 17:01:21 GMT -5
Nina, I think the very major hiccough that is Aftermath is evidence of why I'm concerned. Because while Lynch is back for the next five issues, presumably he'll be moving on after that. It's not the same as Joss committing to Season 8 and already having plans for Season 9. How can it be when the writer for over 2 years from now is unknown? How can the story even begin being broken when Lynch won't impose a story idea on his successor after his contribution? There is no unity of vision or collaboration between the writers. And while some successors to Lynch might be good enough to keep it together and make their work follow seeminglessly from what has come before, there are clearly writers who...don't (again, Aftermath).
This is why Aftermath...frankly, it's just bad. Lynch and (from what I understand) no input into this. The continuity between After the Fall and Aftermath completely fails in terms of maintaining tone, characterization and even the most basics of upholding the plot from AtF. There is a structural problem with the ANGEL title as a continuation of the TV show. And because this is the Whedonverse where longterm characterization is the bread and butter of the 'verse, there MUST be continuity of vision to accomplish this. Aftermath is proof that this does not exist. Maybe IDW will fix this. I frankly doubt it. And it saddens me. I'll be buying Lynch's comics coming up. I stopped buying Aftermath - it felt like a waste of my money. And when the new writer is announced, I'm going to be very cautious in buying it until I get a sense for what this writer will bring to the table.
|
|
The Night Lord
Wise-cracking Sidekick
The Long Kiss Goodnight
There can be no love. Only pain exists[Mo0:1]
Posts: 2,654
|
Post by The Night Lord on Jun 13, 2009 3:11:28 GMT -5
Well, that said, I have hope that the next arc after 'Aftermath' will pick up and be much better. I have faith in IDW that they've realized their mistake with Armstrong & Ross and therefore, will change things around for the better
|
|
Nina
Potential Slayer
[Mo0:0]
Posts: 141
|
Post by Nina on Jun 13, 2009 9:46:18 GMT -5
I would love to have some kind of showrunner on the Angel line. Believe me, all I want is good Angel stories and a brilliant planned big story would be fantastic. I'm not very familiar with the comicworld, but isn't was Joss does something that almost never happens? I doubt that it's a very well payed job to be the showrunner of a comicseries and from what I see and hear on the boards it's not even a nice job to have because 80% of the fandom only cares about the name 'Whedon'.
And again I want to point out that we only had one arc after ATF. Aftermath was a failure, sadly enough in both departments (writing and art). But there was some talking; Kelley didn't use Gunn, Illyria and Spike because she was asked not to. There is maybe not some grand vision, but there is some direction. Let's first see how issue 23 and 'Only Human' connect, and wait for at least one or two other arcs before making the harsh judgements. IDW showed that they learn from old mistakes or that they try to fix their mistakes. Maybe they will try harder to connect the different arcs in the future.
I notice how people are much easier with forgiving Joss Whedon and the other ME witers for their mistakes because they proved that they could do better in the past. IDW doesn't have that luxury, they need to deliver time after time because neither of the writers is really trusted by the fans. Aftermath was a bad arc, but 'The Girl in Question' was a bad episode as well. (should we run behind Goddard and DeKnight with rotten fruit? Or behind Marti Noxon after 'She'?) Not everything works, not everything goes right and that's why it's nice to give IDW some extra time. Maybe we need to adjust to another kind of storytelling and other unknown writers, but if it's good ... why not? The tv show is over, ME let Angel go and IDW keeps him alive and I'm grateful for that even if there will be bad arcs. Nice about the less planned version is that you can skip an arc and hop back on when it looks better.
|
|
|
Post by Emmie on Jun 13, 2009 12:26:39 GMT -5
Aftermath was a bad arc, but 'The Girl in Question' was a bad episode as well. (should we run behind Goddard and DeKnight with rotten fruit?) OT here but The Girl in Question was more an ill-timed episode than a bad episode. I can point you to some interesting meta commentary that shows evidence of this. The same can not be said for Aftermath. That's like comparing an ill-timed joke that's still very entertaining and meaningful to a complete trainwreck. Frankly, I don't see much more leeway being given to either side of the comics world. People are just as critical of Season 8. The difference here is that most people can't even be bothered to comment on Aftermath anymore. If they even bother to buy it and then feel that they'll mention it, they say "I have nothing to say and just plan on forgetting Aftermath happened". I've seen this commentary review of Aftermath A LOT.
|
|
Nina
Potential Slayer
[Mo0:0]
Posts: 141
|
Post by Nina on Jun 13, 2009 15:03:29 GMT -5
Well personally I can't see "The Girl in Question" as a joke but as a character destroying episode. The funny lines and Amy Acker's brilliant acting don't make up for the damage that is done to Spike and mostly Angel in that episode. I've no idea where Aftermath is about, I stopped after the second issue and don't even bother to read the reviews anymore. I will ignore it, which is sad but no big issue for me. While the episode 'The Girl in Question' still brings out a pretty strong and negative reaction which bothers me more. I prefer to forget an episode or arc that did nothing than remember one that seriously damages characters. (Lies My Parents Told Me, Touched, Provider and Empty places are other examples of episodes that make my blood boil in a bad way.)
But I guess that's something personal.
Season 8 also gets critical notes, I'm aware of that. But I don't want to know what would've happened when IDW 'forgot' that a character was dead (Hell, they got shit for forgetting Angel's tatoo) or gave characters new abilities like being able to drive (?) a submarine or used timetravel. I know that many people were critical about that, but somehow I expect more complaints when Whedon was not on board and that it was done by a random guy named Jimmy Jones instead. The name Whedon does miracles in this fandom. I even saw people say that they don't like Ats season 3 & 4 because Whedon did very little in those seasons. Or that season 5 is only worth watching because Whedon was fulltime on board on that one. Of course this is just a little part of the fandom that is this extreme, but Whedon can do very little wrong in this fandom.
|
|
|
Post by Emmie on Jun 13, 2009 23:11:47 GMT -5
Nina, I feel like this discussion has gone off the rails here a bit. My original point, to draw it back, isn't to hold up the worst of both ANGEL and BUFFY in the comics in comparison and see who's done worse. (Frankly, the fact that we as a fandom are largely ignoring the existence of Aftermath answers this question succinctly. No discussion needed.) My point was that the Whedonverse is built on a foundation of longterm characterication and, most importantly, collaboration. The fact that the M.O. for writers over at IDW appears to be working independently now (from what I can tell) - well this becomes problematic for maintaining both longterm characterization and longterm storytelling.
I'd rather not generalize things completely when it comes to Whedon being forgiven. There are VERY vocal factions criticizing him for Season 8 also. Not the point. The problems (which I've written about elsewhere) for Season 8 are different than the problems for IDW's ANGEL. Season 8 - lack of budget going to the writer's head, going a bit crazy with the storylines now that they literally can do anything. ANGEL - lack of continuity and collaboration between writers, lack of longterm "vision" of ANGEL, also numerous editing blunders, a fractured storyline, and so on.
I've vocally defended and criticized what I find worthwhile. This doesn't change my viewpoint that IDW is missing the point in how they're handling ANGEL. But that's my opinion as a huge fan of the Whedonverse who views characterization and vision as the hallmarks of the story. Their M.O. for creating the ANGEL story doesn't put these two pillars in proper prominence.
|
|
Nina
Potential Slayer
[Mo0:0]
Posts: 141
|
Post by Nina on Jun 14, 2009 8:54:06 GMT -5
I know what you mean, and I agree that IDW's Angel is lacking that. But I do think that you're a bit quick with making some big assumptions, we had two different writers until now for the Angel title, just two and the only thing that went really wrong was Angel not going back to the Hyperion in Aftermath while he was going back in After the Fall. Which is of course a stupid mistake but it can be fanwanked very easily as well.
That there is no big plan can be a terrible thing, but it doesn't have to. We're just two arcs in, which is too soon to judge it in my eyes. When IDW brings a good arc, with nice art and good writing and if the characters develop and feel like themselves, it doesn't have to be a disaster. For me season 8 has more problems than the unlimited budget. (sorry, I don't really want to go al Ats vs. BtVS again, I'm trying to explain something.) The story is well planned and there are ideas for the future and that's great but in the meantime the characters don't click for me, when Buffy killed Willow I didn't care at all, which is weird because we're talking here about Buffy killing Willow. Where I kind of felt for the Dragon being killed, to not even start about Connor's death which really moved me. Aftermath is a failure, but After the Fall was maybe not super layered and had no vision beyond the arc itself, but it worked for me better. The characters I loved where there, behaving and feeling like themselves.
I guess that IDW's Angel is really different from DH's Buffy. The one likes the one kind of story more and the other the other kind of story. You prefer the setup for season 8, I prefer the one for Angel. Doesn't mean that one of the two is wrong or should be changed. Nor that IDW is unworthy because it's not the same as DH. You prefer a well thought through story, I don't really care as much as you about that and prefer the character studies.
|
|
|
Post by Emmie on Jun 14, 2009 14:27:44 GMT -5
Nina, you can call it a quick assumption. But to me it's more an evaluation of the current lay of the land. The difference is that I'm not going to forever think this of IDW. If things turn around, I'll reevaluate.
Sorry, but the only thing that went wrong was Angel not going back to the Hyperion? I vehemently disagree on that one.
How can you prefer the one for Angel after Aftermath? The set-up for IDW's ANGEL title brought you Aftermath which you've said you're simply ignoring. So is it preferable to have a comic being brought to you in such a way that you'll get something you like, then something you find so awful that it's best to pretend it doesn't exist? I think you're perhaps taking the "see no evil" comics thing a bit too far. Aftermath and all its badness stands right next to After the Fall on the ANGEL title. We don't really get to ignore it even though we might want to. Not when it comes to discussing how IDW is making the ANGEL title.
|
|
vampmogs
Novice Witch
[Mo0:16]
Posts: 208
|
Post by vampmogs on Jun 17, 2009 2:51:38 GMT -5
Sorry to hop into the middle here but can I just ask a question? Will the next “arc” or “story” after Aftermath follow on from Armstrong’s story? Like Aftermath did with After the Fall? If it does then it’s practically impossible to ignore Kelly’s story if you want to follow the continuation of Angel’s series. Unless it really isn’t required reading.. Which probably isn’t any better when you think about it. Because if it’s a decent thought-provoking story it really should be essential you have to read it. Or it was a very pointless exercise. Does anyone know?
In regards to Whedon and the fandom, I think I have to disagree with you on that one Nina. I think if you go to somewhere like Whedonesque you may find that kind of mind-set more often, but not on most of the message boards I see. If anything I’ve seen a slight shift in some factions of this fandom being HUGELY critical on Joss’ work. In fact the impression I have got is that some fans have just decided to make it their mission to knock him down a notch after not liking all the praise he gets. Which is just as bad IMO as the people who are blinded by their adoration for his work. Obviously that's not everyone but I do get the impression some people have taken a very deliberate Anti-Joss sentiment because it bugs them that his work is so loved.
Back to the comics.... I think there's more pressure on comic writers to deliver the goods in the fandom. The same has happened with s8 when after Predators and Prey wasn't loved by the majority of people, fans start questioning their love for s8. It was one arc in one big story but it can really turn the mood around. If Retreat delivers I bet everyone will be a lot more positive about season 8 again. If this was on Tv that probably wouldn’t be the case. There’s a lot of average episodes in most seasons but people forgive them because a) they only have to wait a week until we get a new one and b) it’s television. A lot of the fan base didn’t read comics before season 8 or the Angel series so if it doesn’t deliver… it’s just another comic. I think that’s what has happened with Aftermath and the Angel series. Four months of a terrible story has really put a dampener on the enthusiasm for this series. If they managed to deliver in the next stories then I’m sure people’s interest will peak again.
|
|
|
Post by Emmie on Jun 17, 2009 3:03:43 GMT -5
Mogs, I think it has to do with the time factor and the cost. Season 8 when all is said and done will cost more than $120 to own all the issues, not including if you also buy the TPB's and any variants. That's more than enough money to buy all 7 seasons of BUFFY now. And then the month between issues. Fans are devoting more of their time and money to Season 8 than any season that's come before, so our expectations are high. It's a tough situation.
The issues following Aftermath seem to have little to do with it. 23 is about Gunn. 24 and 25 are about Drusilla. I'm not really sure what direction the main title is going in.
|
|