ForgotPassword?
Sign Up
Search this Topic:
Forum Jump
Posts: 2776
Aug 10 11 4:04 PM
Golden Age
Melkorjunior wrote:...I'd argue that Watchmen is simply Moore riffing (albeit brilliantly) on other people's work, it had the advantage of being first: it was revolutionary, not in content but in style. Before Watchmen comics were universally regarded as kiddie stuff and the very idea of a moody, noirish thriller starring superheroes was brand new to the general public.
Posts: 1238
Aug 10 11 4:07 PM
Posts: 1239
Aug 10 11 4:09 PM
Modern Age
Posts: 4692
Aug 10 11 4:12 PM
BillyBatson4360 wrote: Melkorjunior wrote: ...I'd argue that Watchmen is simply Moore riffing (albeit brilliantly) on other people's work, it had the advantage of being first: it was revolutionary, not in content but in style. Before Watchmen comics were universally regarded as kiddie stuff and the very idea of a moody, noirish thriller starring superheroes was brand new to the general public. In point of fact, Watchmen was not the first. Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns was out earlier. That was that mini-series/graphic novel that broke the ground of being "moody & noirish" and touched off a multitude of imitations. Watchmen was second to the marketplace. A great work, but not the pioneering work.
Melkorjunior wrote: ...I'd argue that Watchmen is simply Moore riffing (albeit brilliantly) on other people's work, it had the advantage of being first: it was revolutionary, not in content but in style. Before Watchmen comics were universally regarded as kiddie stuff and the very idea of a moody, noirish thriller starring superheroes was brand new to the general public.
BillyBatson4360 wrote: In point of fact, Watchmen was not the first. Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns was out earlier. That was that mini-series/graphic novel that broke the ground of being "moody & noirish" and touched off a multitude of imitations.
Aug 10 11 4:14 PM
Melkorjunior wrote: Snapleshacks, seriously: Chill out, man.
Aug 10 11 4:21 PM
Aug 10 11 4:25 PM
Posts: 14425
Aug 10 11 11:53 PM
Melkorjunior wrote:Take it as me not wanting to argue with someone who's spent the whole thread coming off like a hysterical girl at a Beatles concert in 1964.
Aug 10 11 11:58 PM
AussieStu wrote:Melkorjunior wrote:Take it as me not wanting to argue with someone who's spent the whole thread coming off like a hysterical girl at a Beatles concert in 1964.... how is mum?
Posts: 471
Aug 16 11 8:26 PM
sfcityduck wrote:famac wrote: sfcityduck - he threw down the wager - are you going to take him up it? And I find the Tea Bagger stuff insulting. Famac,The point of my post is not to predict the outcome of the appeal, it is to properly discuss the issues. As an attorney, I know how difficult it is to predict the outcome of a case, and how often judges get it wrong. I've lost appeals I should have won and won appeals I should have lost. So, no, I'm not going to bet on an outcome, especially when I haven't read the appellate briefs on which the outcome will be based. This appeal could have several stages, and it will be a long time, possibly years, before it is over.I also don't make gentlemen's bets with folks who aren't gentlemen. Binecon has repeatedly insulted me and my profession. On that note, I find it curious you feel a need to note that you feel "insulted" by a comment not directed to you, but make no comment on Binecon's rudeness to me. Seems to me that Binecon's unprovoked insults are motivated by some long past political animosity, as I can't otherwise explain his insult that at some other point my analysis has offended him. Hard for me to believe that my love of Barks or EC could have offended anyone. I agree that there is no place for political animosity on this board. The fact I apparently pegged Binecon accurately is suggested by his lack of alternative explanation for his animosity. No further need for me to waste time on this.
famac wrote: sfcityduck - he threw down the wager - are you going to take him up it? And I find the Tea Bagger stuff insulting.
Famac,The point of my post is not to predict the outcome of the appeal, it is to properly discuss the issues. As an attorney, I know how difficult it is to predict the outcome of a case, and how often judges get it wrong. I've lost appeals I should have won and won appeals I should have lost. So, no, I'm not going to bet on an outcome, especially when I haven't read the appellate briefs on which the outcome will be based. This appeal could have several stages, and it will be a long time, possibly years, before it is over.I also don't make gentlemen's bets with folks who aren't gentlemen. Binecon has repeatedly insulted me and my profession. On that note, I find it curious you feel a need to note that you feel "insulted" by a comment not directed to you, but make no comment on Binecon's rudeness to me. Seems to me that Binecon's unprovoked insults are motivated by some long past political animosity, as I can't otherwise explain his insult that at some other point my analysis has offended him. Hard for me to believe that my love of Barks or EC could have offended anyone. I agree that there is no place for political animosity on this board. The fact I apparently pegged Binecon accurately is suggested by his lack of alternative explanation for his animosity.
No further need for me to waste time on this.
Share This