Jump to content


Board Moderators
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by mormont

  1. Not sure the Marshal Law omnibus is still in print. The rights are a bit complicated, it was published in several different venues. I like ML but I'll always prefer the pure, unbridled weirdness of his Nemesis work. It had a unique tone, sort of a cross between Giger and Edward Gorey. Way out there, but also never taking itself too seriously. https://beyondthebunker.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/pat-mills-nemesis.jpg ETA - 2000AD tribute here: https://2000ad.com/news/kevin-oneill-1953-2022/
  2. Sad news: Kevin O'Neill has passed. The US audience may be less familiar with his work, unless they've read League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. This is because, famously, the Comics Code Authority rejected O'Neill's artwork as just inherently unsuitable for children. His proudest boast. We've lost a lot of iconic British artists recently but this is a big one.
  3. To be fair, even at the time I felt those scenes could be read as him bluffing her: he really wanted to go but wanted to appear that he did not. He resists, but in the end agrees when he could still have maintained that resistance. I can find no reliable source saying that they have.
  4. If indeed Amazon are looking to retool the show and sideline the current showrunners, I wouldn't assume the emphasis is going to be on retcons that make it fit better with LOTR canon. That might please some folks here but it's going to be marginal at best in terms of improving ratings, and will cause as many problems as it solves. Instead it's more likely to focus on pacing, dialogue, plotting and such, areas where the show was inconsistent and where a more experienced hand is required.
  5. It's a shame Cavill is leaving, but not a surprise. Getting him for this role in the first place was notable, getting him to stay for three seasons more so. Hemsworth isn't as big a name (well, it's a bigger name... I should say, he's a lower profile actor, though he has co-starred with Schwarzenegger and Stallone) but at the same time it could be a lot worse. |it would be nice if folks could praise Cavill without writing off Liam Hemsworth sight unseen. Also, I wouldn't say the TV series is 'schlock' but then again, the books aren't anything other than well written fun fantasy either. They're not great literature or anything. (I'm reminded of a former boarder who used to look down on most such books but praised the Witcher to the heavens.) Getting to four seasons isn't bad at all. Getting three seasons out of a bona fide movie star is great.
  6. In the interests of good taste, and the fact that folks that know GRRM personally peruse the forum, let's put the actuarial tables away, please.
  7. To me he sounds more or less the same as he's sounded any time he answered similar questions in the last couple of decades: first about AFFC, then ADWD, now TWOW. Which is frustrated by the writing problems, tired of answering the question only to have his answers dissected and used to criticise him, aware of how desperately his readers want an answer he doesn't have, somewhat guilty that he can't give them one, and frustrated again because it's a question he asks himself every day. Compare this to any of those previous interviews and you'll see very little difference. As for passion, I think we can do the man the respect of believing him when he repeatedly says he still has it.
  8. A lot of writers don't really know how to write a steamy romance featuring two characters who're already married when the story begins. Sad, but true.
  9. I'm not 100% sold on this casting, though I do really like Yahya as an actor. I'm interested to see where they go with it though.
  10. Do women not use gendered insults? I think it's quite common for them to do so. We all exist in the same society, we all are vulnerable to the same biases. I think it's undeniable that: - Western society has for hundreds of years belittled and dismissed women by infantilising them: treating them as and yes, calling them, children or names that suggest childishness and immaturity. - Western society has for hundreds of years regarded the 'ideal' woman as nurturing, caring, patient, and wise while the 'ideal' man is dynamic, forceful, brave, and powerful. Just as men who don't fit that ideal get dismissed in terms that suggest femininity, women who don't fit that ideal get dismissed in terms that suggest childishness. Folks, let me know if any of the statements above are wrong. But there are literally volumes of research, entire fields of study, suggesting that they are correct. So, 'brat' may not be an explicitly gendered term. But I think it's fair to say that the reaction to a character like Galadriel in this show is coloured by gender bias when the main thing that arouses anger is that she's rude to people (not that she really is: the worst you can really say is that she's sometimes a little impatient, but only in ways that are normal for male protagonists with a similar role) and that gets her labelled as 'immature' and a 'brat'. Sometimes those people are correct. And if people were using those terms, I wouldn't give them any weight either.
  11. That in itself is interesting. Why would one do that, do you think? And the point that there are male characters who are described as 'brats' is, well, beside the point. Nobody ever said there weren't. I said that the term is a go-to for male critics of a certain type of female character. And it is. The bar for applying it is far lower than in the case of male characters. It gets applied to a broader range of female characters, in a more blanket way, for far less cause, to the point where it's virtually a gendered insult these days, like 'bitch'. There are male characters who're described as 'bitchy'. But that doesn't invalidate the idea that the term is a gendered insult - and that it is, as a criticism, one that can safely and pretty much always be dismissed as insubstantial. As should 'brat'.
  12. Indy is absolutely not an 'iconic' character in the sense that is meant here. In fact he has most of the qualities people complain about in show-Galadriel: he's brash, immature, impulsive and flawed. (Not that I necessarily agree that show-Galadriel is immature.) Same with Holmes. Mary Poppins isn't the lead. Character growth is about change, but it does not follow that all change is character growth. Gandalf the White is, in personality, just Gandalf the Grey dialled up a bit: more powerful, wiser, etc. He still isn't lead character material. I've never known people who were millennia old. What is their age-appropriate maturity level? And again, many older people don't have age-appropriate maturity. And how, exactly, is show-Galadriel immature? Because as I've noted before, it's an unfortunate fact that 'brat' is the go-to insult for a particular type of female character that goes against the grain. It was the go-to insult for Dany, for Sansa, for Rey - diverse characters, none of whom fit the descriptor at all, but all of whom ruffle the feathers of a certain segment of fandom by refusing to fit in a box. You rarely if ever hear it about male characters who behave in similar ways. I would suggest that there's a cultural bias at play here: one that infantilises women who aren't stereotypically 'female' in showing patience, kindness, and forgiveness, and who instead act in ways that compel action due to their character flaws. Sure, Galadriel is driven by revenge for centuries and her better judgement is sometimes overcome by that drive. It can make her abrasive, impulsive, or unwise. But why does that make her a 'brat' and not John Wick?
  13. Good lord, that sounds awful. There's a reason Gandalf isn't the lead character. He doesn't work as one. 'Iconic' characters don't. That conflict with the Balrog is cool and all, but it isn't character growth. If Galadriel was written as this guy prefers, she would have to be a supporting character, not the lead. Jackson-Galadriel could never be a lead character. All that serenity and wisdom is great but contemporary audiences would find it too far from the storytelling they understand. So would the writers, in all probability. Just because you have an idea doesn't mean you have a workable story.
  14. It's not a theory. I'm pointing out that your theory, which is that Marvel haven't done/won't do an R-rated Punisher movie because they haven't 'got the balls', is undermined by the fact that they've repeatedly made R-rated Punisher properties. (And for that matter by the fact that they seem to be adapting 'Born Again' for Daredevil.) There are plenty of things that I have the balls to do, that I may even have done in the past, but that I choose not to do because it's not particularly beneficial for me to do them in a particular context. Marvel have tried hard in the past to get R-rated Punisher material over. They're not unwilling to do it. They just, presumably, recognise that it wouldn't work particularly well in the MCU. You don't have to go to other boards to see those comments, even. It's the actor who stood in for CGI Hulk Jen on set.
  15. There are three R rated Punisher movies, and two series of Netflix Punisher, plus he featured heavily in DD. I understand that these aren't MCU movies, but the argument that Marvel don't have the 'balls' to make one is pretty silly. What they don't have is a desire to include R rated material in the mainstream MCU, probably because they (rightly) conclude the market for that isn't large enough. Much as I enjoyed the take Netflix had on the Punisher himself, it can't be denied that the series was pretty dour and bleak. It also, in common with most Punisher media adaptations, veered away from putting him in a costume or embracing any superhero trappings, which with a protagonist like Frank who has no powers or other superhero stuff going on means you're just making another grim and gritty action franchise, and there's no shortage of those on the market already. More successful ones. Trying to crowbar that into the MCU doesn't really serve any significant market segment.
  16. Both, of course. The clear strategy for Phase 4 is diversity. Not just in terms of the leads but in terms of style. The films have been safer, but the message overall is, we think we can make as many different kinds of story work on screen as we do on the page. They don’t do the experimental stuff in The Avengers comics, and so don’t expect it in The Avengers films either, but as She-hulk shows! they’re willing to try it. Feige is smart. He knows he can have his cake and eat it too.
  17. I think the main reason for that was that it took the major content creators a minute to realise that, unlike cinema and traditional broadcast TV, the advantages of vertical integration in streaming made it worthwhile.
  18. Yes. From statements Netflix have made we can imply that they consider a 'household' to be people who primarily live at the same address, but they haven't actually said so explicitly in their terms and conditions as far as I can see.
  19. This is the issue, for sure. Netflix don't actually clearly define what a 'household' is. That ambiguity was fine and indeed beneficial when they were expanding but if they want to really go after password sharing, they need to have a robust public definition of what they mean. And that is inevitably going to cause them bad publicity.
  20. I'm also absolutely against ads in a product I already paid for. And I think you'll struggle to find anyone who doesn't mind that. Otherwise free products, I'm watching the ads to pay for: that's fine. I understand that. But don't double dip. Don't ask me for a subscription and then make me watch ads. On Squid Game, that didn't 'just explode'. Netflix promoted it in a canny way so it seemed like that, and then it snowballed. They've done this several times, sometimes to greater or lesser effect, but this is their promotion model - basically, trying to present particular shows as shows that suddenly everyone's talking about, in the vein of the first series of Stranger Things. Hiding their actual viewing figures helps here: best information available suggests Squid Game wasn't as far ahead of other Netflix shows as you might think. But it got the show talked about, and it made Netflix look like a place you can find hidden gems.
  21. For sure. Particularly no. 1 on your list. His appearances in the book just screamed 'protagonist' to me: I was expecting him to be the lead POV in the next book even before reading Wert's quote.
  22. I don't think it's that uncommon to set a fantasy novel within one city? Anyway, I really enjoyed this one too, but I felt it had a slow start. The strength is the character work, as so often with Abraham, and a nicely judged sense of life among the lower classes in a fantasy city.
  23. I'm really sorry to hear this. We never met in person, but she was a major presence on the board back in my first few years and someone whose voice I always respected.
  24. Great last episode. What a wonderful series this has been. It has absolutely raised the bar for TV sci-fi and has been a terrific adaptation of the books. And as I said before, I am weirdly proud of the showrunner and writers for sticking by their story and not trying to cludge together some version of the last series that races to the end of the novels and does them a disservice in the process. There's more to story than plot. We didn't get to the end of the plot, but we would have had to sacrifice everything else for that to happen. What we got instead was better.
  25. I think the key to Tanaka and Teresa is the climactic scene with Duarte. Recall that Teresa is the first to try to physically separate him from the station, but Tanaka is the one who actually does it. Teresa and Tanaka are there to contrast one another. Teresa is Duarte's actual daughter, his chosen heir, the one person who (until now) he's had a human connection to, but she rejects his ideology, rejects the protomolecule and the destiny he sets out for her, runs away and spends the book making human connections with James and the crew. Tanaka is Duarte's metaphorical daughter, someone who was with him from the beginning and bought into his fascist ideology, and who spends the book rejecting human connections. Tanaka only cares about her independence and views human interactions through a lens of power dynamics (including that final confrontation), while Teresa has genuine compassion for her father. That's why Tanaka can succeed at severing Duarte's connection to the station (and thus to the rest of humanity) while Teresa cannot. But the cost to Tanaka of asserting her independence is her life. That's a theme we see throughout the book - the benefits of human connections weighed against the importance of being an individual. It's humanity's individualism (contrasted with the collectivity of the protomolecule builders) that saves them from the Goths long enough for that scene to even take place. And it's Holden's individual decision and self-sacrifice that saves humanity in the end as well, and that's even called out as ironic in the text, given his professed beliefs. Anyway, to get to that we have to spend a bit of time with both characters and while I agree the school diversion could have been cut or at least replaced with something else, I think it worked OK for me. It's really setting up that later conflict: Teresa is saved in the school scene because of her connections to the crew, while Tanaka fails because she doesn't work with her team, she just tells them what to do.
  • Create New...