Hallow Thorn
Bad Ass Wicca
Oh and You're Welcome
[Mo0:0]
Posts: 2,306
|
Post by Hallow Thorn on Dec 19, 2009 0:30:56 GMT -5
I picked my up today. I really enjoyed it. I just wish that they focus on a smaller core group: Angel, Connor, Gunn, Illyria and James. Write Kate out kill Dez off and leave Spike and BG for his own series. I really love the art this time.
|
|
patxshand
Ensouled Vampire
Writer/director/Amy Acker's husband.[Mo0:0]
Posts: 1,918
|
Post by patxshand on Dec 19, 2009 12:15:50 GMT -5
My review is up: buffyversecomics.blogspot.com/2009/12/crown-is-passed-down.htmlWow, haven't popped in here in a loooong time. I definitely hear what some of you are saying on the scene in the Hyperion, but calling it "pathetic" leans toward hyperbole. It wasn't great, not at all, but there were a lot of funny one-liners. It wasn't even my biggest issue with the, heh, issue. Get it, it's a pun, because I have an issue... with an issue? MUAHAHAHA CLEVERNESS. But no. Also, congrats to IDW for the sales! Didn't really expect anything else with such a big name on the book. Anyway, I'm going to try to have Buffyverse Comics update more regularly now... but we'll see how that goes. |
|
|
|
Post by wenxina on Dec 19, 2009 12:47:13 GMT -5
I definitely hear what some of you are saying on the scene in the Hyperion, but calling it "pathetic" leans toward hyperbole. I rather call it leaning towards a personal opinion... and that wasn't even my opinion, considering I quit after Brokeback Drusilla's two-parter. |
|
Paul
Ensouled Vampire
[Mo0:34]
Posts: 1,173
|
Post by Paul on Dec 19, 2009 12:50:47 GMT -5
uk.comics.ign.com/articles/105/1055978p1.htmlIGN gave it a very mediocre review but I disagree with some of their opinions. For one thing, they have serious prejudice against Connor and his use in this story, ignoring the great development and surge of popularity he's experienced recently. I hated Connor on the show as well, but I got over it. So should IGN. I also disagreed with their claims that Denham is the best artist on the Angel book; granted I've only seen a few preview pages but he's not a patch on Urru and Messina IMO. They do make the same point that some here have made; that the characters' voices mesh together. I'll have to read the issue to comment on that. I do agree with their Spike/Wolverine comparison, so if the issue is as Spike-centric as they make out, that might put me off. I definitely hear what some of you are saying on the scene in the Hyperion, but calling it "pathetic" leans toward hyperbole. Sorry to be a bitch Pat but you are the guy who recently gave S8 1/10 while at the same time giving Boys and Their Toys 10/10, so... glass houses.
|
|
|
|
Post by Wyndam on Dec 19, 2009 13:03:49 GMT -5
uk.comics.ign.com/articles/105/1055978p1.htmlIGN gave it a very mediocre review but I disagree with some of their opinions. For one thing, they have serious prejudice against Connor and his use in this story, ignoring the great development and surge of popularity he's experienced recently. I hated Connor on the show as well, but I got over it. So should IGN. I agree, when someone completely misses the mark for Connor's purpose in this issue and arc as a whole, it is hard to take the review seriously. I've never liked IGN's comic book reviews anyway, especially when it comes to Buffyverse comics as I'm not really sure a lot of them really "get" the Buffyverse or are even truly fans of it. which is kind of funny considering I use IGN as my primary site for gaming news/reviews. |
|
|
|
Post by hitnrun017 on Dec 19, 2009 16:16:29 GMT -5
I definitely hear what some of you are saying on the scene in the Hyperion, but calling it "pathetic" leans toward hyperbole. Considering the quality of the dialogue (not just the characters, but the flow of conversation) was quite the opposite of what I was expecting, I'd say "hyperbole" isn't the right word to use. |
|
patxshand
Ensouled Vampire
Writer/director/Amy Acker's husband.[Mo0:0]
Posts: 1,918
|
Post by patxshand on Dec 19, 2009 17:45:54 GMT -5
I definitely hear what some of you are saying on the scene in the Hyperion, but calling it "pathetic" leans toward hyperbole. Sorry to be a bitch Pat but you are the guy who recently gave S8 1/10 while at the same time giving Boys and Their Toys 10/10, so... glass houses. Let's be a bit more specific. I gave "Retreat part IV" a 1/10, because it went against everything I thought the Buffyverse was about and, quite frankly, sucked. I have Angel #26 a 10/10 because I thought it was hilarious, true to the characters, and just fantastic. I've given both the Angel and Buffy title, on separate occasions, bad marks. Both titles have rocked, and both have sucked. Just call 'em how I see 'em! Or, er, read 'em. |
|
Paul
Ensouled Vampire
[Mo0:34]
Posts: 1,173
|
Post by Paul on Dec 19, 2009 18:41:31 GMT -5
Sorry to be a bitch Pat but you are the guy who recently gave S8 1/10 while at the same time giving Boys and Their Toys 10/10, so... glass houses. Let's be a bit more specific. I gave "Retreat part IV" a 1/10, because it went against everything I thought the Buffyverse was about and, quite frankly, sucked. I have Angel #26 a 10/10 because I thought it was hilarious, true to the characters, and just fantastic. I've given both the Angel and Buffy title, on separate occasions, bad marks. Both titles have rocked, and both have sucked. Just call 'em how I see 'em! Or, er, read 'em. Don't get me wrong, your reviews were fair and I mostly agreed with them, but I found the scores to be highly exaggerated. Boys was a fun little story with a nice bit of development for Spike, but it just doesn't have the depth or emotional impact to score full marks. You're basically saying it's perfect, which none of the Buffyverse comics have been. Similarly, though I share your frustration with "Retreat", it's not bad enough to warrant 1/10. Viewed in comparison to comics like Ultimatum and Spider-Man: One More Day, which totally rape the respective franchises, "Retreat" is a perfectly acceptable storyline. Even most of the old Buffy comics are worse than "Retreat" because their production values were just so poor (amateurish art and dialogue) and the plot was forgettable rubbish. So yeah, whereas your reviews are usually well-written, I think there's a bit of fanboy-bias to the scores sometimes. |
|
|
|
Post by Emmie on Dec 19, 2009 21:35:19 GMT -5
Heh. Well yeah, Angel #26 was true to the 'verse. It copied and recycled 'verse mythos for the story. Kinda hard for it to not be within continuity in that regard. For my own part, Angel #26 loses huge marks for a lack of original phlebotinum. The Angel comics aren't homages to the series - that's something a fan writes. The Angel comics, if they wish to be viewed as canon, must pick up the torch of being original. I'll say it again - "Spin the Bottle" and "Tabula Rasa" are very similar episodes - same type. But they didn't regurgitate phlebotinum. Similarly, Dollhouse is being called the "Restless" episode, but it's phlebotinum is of course wholly original to that 'verse.
So sure, IDW will do homage works for "A Hole in the World" and "Smile Time" and "Not Fade Away". But when it comes to the series, originality is the name of the game. So bring it.
I'll also add that the most hilarious stories of the 'verse also turned out to be the most tragic - look at the endings of "Tabula Rasa" and "Spin the Bottle". The comedy only goes so far. So there needs to be some emotional heart behind the comedy to give it punch and tether it to the 'verse's reality, to its heart. And likewise, while "Boys" was nice development for Spike, it didn't do much for anyone else - uneven characterization progression then.
So yeah, not perfect. Perfection - 10/10 - should be making you bow down to greatness. A 10/10 should be something that fandom almost universally agrees was the best thing EVER. Like "The Body" or "Restless" or "Selfless" or "OMWF" or "Passion". I'm not really sure we've seen a perfect comic yet in the Buffyverse. We've had some 9/10's, but I'm not sure we've witnessed sheer perfection.
I'll also add that the sheer perfection 10/10's need to have some kind of emotional resonance (not just giving the audience chuckles). There should be powerful emotion inspired by the story like the gut-punch on Buffy's face when all her memories return in "Tabula Rasa" and then Willow and Tara break up and Giles leaves. Or the "were we in love?/we were" tragic ending of "Spin the Bottle" and the grim harbinger of the Beast awakening that Lorne the narrator reveals to us.
|
|
|
|
Post by Wyndam on Dec 19, 2009 22:10:49 GMT -5
I don't want to speak for Pat, but I don't think he means "Perfection" when he gives a 10/10 score. Everything has flaws, and anyone that says otherwise is being extremely naive (even when someone says something is perfect, they can't truly mean it, not 100%). We're just arguing semantics now which just gets messy as it is all subjective (the best comic book in the world according to someone is pretty much guaranteed to be someone elses least favorite comic), especially when it comes to review scores. The worst flame wars on the internet usually revolve around reviews scores (usually video games), but basically all I want to say is that Pat didn't mean "Boys and Their Toys" was perfect, just that it succeeded in everything he wanted it too. But again, I'll let Pat explain it because they are his reviews.
|
|
|
|
Post by Emmie on Dec 19, 2009 22:35:44 GMT -5
Well, a numeric rating like 10/10 goes beyond subjective personal opinion. Because you're trying to objectively express how good it was. And in doing so, you have to take into account the flaws. I think "Boys" has some significant flaws that make it impossible for it to get a 10/10.
10/10 is the highest points possible to be given. A 10/10 imo should be awarded when there is no room for improvement. And often, points are subtracted for flaws. So...
Like I said above, comedy is at its best when it has some emotional heart to it. Toss on the fact that its recycled phlebotinum and it's still not coming up to the level of 10/10. And if I can so easily pick out a few flaws - well, it puts the review's rating scale into question.
I'd say the closest we've been to 10/10 has been "A Beautiful Sunset" and "AtF 17". Both had stellar art and quality heart amidst the bursts of humor and character development.
What I guess I'm saying is that a 10/10 rating shouldn't be tossed around. It's hard to take the ratings of the reviews seriously when "Boys" gets a 10/10 when it's the issue that left me frustrated over the uneven characterization (apparently only 1 character gets to shine at a time) and gritting my teeth over the recycled phlebotinum (Ex. of recycled phlebotinum, see: Spike's chip - except the chip actually was by necessity a long term phlebotinum).
A rating scale of giving an issue 10/10 - that should be saved for the truly best of the 'verse. And when it's not (like I think it wasn't in this case) it calls the ratings scale into question. Because it's such a huge divergence from what the audience was expecting from a 10/10 (which does imply perfect - how many papers have you gotten 100% on and they've written "Amazing! Except for this and this and this and this and this and this...").
|
|
|
|
Post by Wyndam on Dec 19, 2009 22:51:26 GMT -5
But again, this is all subjective. Flaws to you aren't flaws to someone else. A 10/10 to someone is a 1/10 to someone else. This is where I get annoyed, especially when phases like "it put's the review's rating scale into question" are used because I find that to be incredibly disrespectful to the reviewer. Discrediting a reviewers personal opinion because of a differing opinion goes against the entire system of reviews and scales in the first place. In the end of the day, a review is a review and a number is just a number, there is never a consensus or a set of guidelines that has to be followed. Heck, I even know some reviewers that review (with a numerical scale) based purely on the enjoyment factor of a particular media, and not how many flaws it has or what it gets "right." These types of arguments get extremely messy though (as all arguments based around opinions do) so this is the last time I'm even mentioning it, because that's not what this thread is even about.
|
|
|
|
Post by AndrewCrossett on Dec 19, 2009 22:55:27 GMT -5
I just got the issue.
I didn't hate it, but it seemed a bit awkward. I think because it was trying hard to be a "jump aboard" issue where all the characters basically step forward and explain who they are.
It's a big cast... too big for most writers, but Willingham is very well experienced in dealing with huge casts. He seems to be more or less OK with the characters voices, and he is obviously very familiar with Jossverse backstory, even dropping inside jokes. ("I thought you'd be taller.")
I predict this series will get a lot better with the introductions out of the way.
I'm glad they kept Dez. I like her.
|
|
|
|
Post by Emmie on Dec 19, 2009 22:57:29 GMT -5
How this is any different than you saying you don't trust IGN for their Buffyverse reviews because you feel they have a bias you disagree with? Are you insulting IGN by not valuing their opinion? Or is it because we know Pat so we can't disagree with him to his face? If anything, this is me being honest. And if Pat responds, he can bat his own corner most adeptly. As for insulting reviewers, well I don't mean it as an insult (Yo, Pat, you so ugly...!  ). But like Paul above, I value more what Pat has to say in his reviews than his numeric rating. Because while I can agree with much of what he has to say, I disagree with the rubic he uses for his ratings scale. As it's subjective, it comes down to which argument is the most potent, I suppose. 10/10 is all the points possible to be received. But if I can show some significant problems with the issue that could have been improved upon, by rights that's calling the rating into question. Which is again my personal opinion. But I find it a more salient argument that "Boys" deserves a 9/10 for being very entertaining than a 10/10 when it clearly has some serious flaws. A story with serious flaws doesn't deserve a 10/10. 10/10 in the Buffyverse means its the best it could be for the 'verse. And that by all rights, it stands proud next to the (imo) masterpieces that have come before. Was "Boys" as good as "Passion", "Restless", "The Body" or "Not Fade Away"? Or are we saying that these comics can never be as good as those and so we've lowered our standards so that "Boys" gets the same rating as "The Body"? I actually find the idea that "Boys" is as good as "The Body" to be insulting. When the 'verse has masterpieces in its coffer, only the masterpieces get 10/10 ratings. Because the greatness that came before raised the bar that high. |
|
|
|
Post by wenxina on Dec 19, 2009 23:09:19 GMT -5
But again, this is all subjective. Flaws to you aren't flaws to someone else. A 10/10 to someone is a 1/10 to someone else. This is where I get annoyed, especially when phases like "it put's the review's rating scale into question" are used because I find that to be incredibly disrespectful to the reviewer. Discrediting a reviewers personal opinion because of a differing opinion goes against the entire system of reviews and scales in the first place. In the end of the day, a review is a review and a number is just a number, there is never a consensus or a set of guidelines that has to be followed. Heck, I even know some reviewers that review (with a numerical scale) based purely on the enjoyment factor of a particular media, and not how many flaws it has or what it gets "right." These types of arguments get extremely messy though (as all arguments based around opinions do) so this is the last time I'm even mentioning it, because that's not what this thread is even about. Perhaps we should go back to Paul's original post on this matter, and perhaps mine too. Paul commented on Pat's comment that calling the dialogue "pathetic" was hyperbolic, saying that perhaps Pat was also guilty of such hyperbole. My comment was that perhaps it's all subjective and therefore falls under "personal opinion". Pat had every right to rate S8 #29 the way he did, hyperbole or not. But falling under this whole "respect personal opinion" umbrella, Pat doesn't get to call E's opinion that Willingham's dialogue was "pathetic" hyperbole. ETA: As far as I know, Emmie, I've never seen Pat post a rubric for his final numeric rating, which is why I, like both you and Paul, value the written part more than the final grade. |
|
|
|
Post by Wyndam on Dec 19, 2009 23:10:25 GMT -5
I don't like IGN's comic reviews because they generally miss the mark on very key issues (such as not getting past their dislike of Connor and accepting him as a well developed character with a lot of potential). No one that is as entrenched in the Buffyverse as those on Buffy forums and sites have gone "Eh, Connor...Really?" yet, which is why I'm taking issue with IGN (as well as issues with past reviews). I've already said IGN is one of my favorite websites, but their comic reviews just plain suck. And again, using numerical systems as a basis of comparison is perhaps the messiest part of this whole argument. There are so many elements that go into a reviews numerical score, usually more than can even be written and established in a review. You might compare Pat's review of "Boys" to "The Body" and find it insulting, but Joe Schmoe in Arkansas might consider "Boys" to be the best piece of Buffyverse fiction ever created. It's just impossible to even argue this, because everyone perceives this stuff differently. So that's why I've got to stop, because it just goes around and around. But falling under this whole "respect personal opinion" umbrella, Pat doesn't get to call E's opinion that Willingham's dialogue was "pathetic" hyperbole. Pat was just expressing his own opinion about Ethan's opinion. Like I said, around and around. |
|
|
|
Post by wenxina on Dec 20, 2009 1:16:01 GMT -5
But falling under this whole "respect personal opinion" umbrella, Pat doesn't get to call E's opinion that Willingham's dialogue was "pathetic" hyperbole. Pat was just expressing his own opinion about Ethan's opinion. Like I said, around and around. I know what Pat was doing, and that it goes round and round. But, Pat did start it, Paul called him out on it. In short, Ethan's opinion is a valid as Pat's "1/10". If one is contestable, so is the other. As long as we all remember to respect one another, we're all good. |
|
patxshand
Ensouled Vampire
Writer/director/Amy Acker's husband.[Mo0:0]
Posts: 1,918
|
Post by patxshand on Dec 20, 2009 3:30:34 GMT -5
Definitely, Wexi. My bad, Ethan. Love you lots.
For me, 10/10 isn't perfection. Because some comics just work in different ways. It's very much based on what the issue is trying to do, what it's building on, etc. #26 is a 10/10 for me because it literally had me laughing with every single line, and I also dug the character development. Also, while the repetition of the "Halloween" thing bothered Emmie, I loved it. Of all the things Joss is so, so amazing at, the one things he is bad at is consistent mythology. From vampires facial hair to nature of Hell and Evil and souls... a lot of it is inconsistent. Which is why I love the fact that the same object is being used again, because it just makes the 'verse--in my opinion--seem realer. To me, it always seemed false when something so big and important would be mentioned by Giles or discovered in research, and then never mentioned again. One of my favorite parts about that issue was that they were using the same method "Halloween" used.
#27, I dug quite a bit less. Hence my 8/10 for that. The comedy didn't work as well, and there were less character moments. It was still solid and still good, but it didn't do everything it tried to do. #26 did.
And that is the best way I can explain my grading system. Definitely take the text over the number, because the number means something different every time. "A Beautiful Sunset" and AtF#17 are both 10/10s, but they're TWICE as good as Angel #26... because they try for bigger, more epic things. Also, because those are probably two of the best comics I've ever read. For me, if those were the standard for a 10, even an average issue would have to be a 1 or a 2.
|
|
|
|
Post by hitnrun017 on Dec 20, 2009 13:36:41 GMT -5
Definitely, Wexi. My bad, Ethan. Love you lots. Haha. It's totally fine. "Pathetic" was a bit too harsh anyways. |
|
|
|
Post by VampSlayer on Dec 21, 2009 22:25:22 GMT -5
Just read this issue.
I read a bit of Aftermath, and hated it. Like, hated it a lot. Period.
I really, really liked this issue. Connor's thoughts were pretty spot on, IMO.
I think Kate was written pretty well, from what we saw. I loved her in the show, and I hope to love her now. I loved seeing her reminded of her past with Angel; Talking about how he meets a girl, and spends days with her, and repeats that he can't be with her. Loved that.
Spike was great! ;D Illyria is hard to write for, but they managed to write her lines 'so-so'.
... And George is there becausssssssse... He wanted to be near Spike? o.o
-Sigh- ... Dez and James... I still think Dez is really lame. And James is okay, I guess. Does he still have wings?
And I loved Angel's thoughts near the ending! His situation is way interesting. Also, must say that I enjoyed the Eddie short. ^.^ ((Did Eddie turn that guy into diamond, and smash him???))
Overall, I enjoyed this very, very much. I've finally gotten the comfort needed, since Aftermath was pretty bad.
|
|
