Vanilla Forums has been nominated for a second time in the CMS Critic "Critic's Choice" awards, and we need your vote! Read more here, and then do the thing (please).
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

The Invincible Thread!

1235728

Posts

  • SmurphSmurph Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    I really hope Kirkman is building up to a big finale or some major change. If Invincible just kills Conquest and then goes back to normal super hero duties while grieving for Eve, that would be a rip off.

  • wirehead26wirehead26 Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    I just read the 10th trade, and Holy Shit is Oliver a psycho. I guess Kirkman is paying tribute to Kid Miracleman in the character.

    What is best in life?
  • Spectre-xSpectre-x Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    wirehead26 wrote: »
    I just read the 10th trade, and Holy Shit is Oliver a psycho. I guess Kirkman is paying tribute to Kid Miracleman in the character.

    I sincerely doubt Kirkman is that clever.

    I used to like Invincible a whole bunch, but for a good while now Kirkman's shortcomings as a writer have been becoming more apparent in the comic and I hardly enjoy it at all anymore. The man is realy incredibly, incredibly immature.

    Sig_link_image.jpg
  • SatanIsMyMotorSatanIsMyMotor Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Wait, what do you mean by "immature"?

    steam_sig.png
  • CadeCade Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    I think he means that blood, guts and death means immaturity.

    Can't say I exactly agree with that but as most comic fans are conditioned for no one to ever really die, seldom get hurt or recover in the span of a page or two with nary a cut, wound, or bit of blood it's easy to tell that they're going to take some getting their brains splattered to heart and call it immature since we all know that blood and guts mean immaturity right?

    Or so that's what people like to say.

  • mattharvestmattharvest Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Cade wrote: »
    I think he means that blood, guts and death means immaturity.

    Can't say I exactly agree with that but as most comic fans are conditioned for no one to ever really die, seldom get hurt or recover in the span of a page or two with nary a cut, wound, or bit of blood it's easy to tell that they're going to take some getting their brains splattered to heart and call it immature since we all know that blood and guts mean immaturity right?

    Or so that's what people like to say.

    I'm not speaking for anyone else, but when I say Kirkman has become somewhat immature with regards to violence, it's that he no longer seems to appreciate what makes death, violence and gore meaningful.

    Look at our recent discussion of the topic: because he keeps escalating the levels of death, violence and gore, we've gone from the first arc (where unshaded red, back-lit silhouettes and other subtle signs were shocking and appalling) to Lil' Sociopath punching the Mauler's jaw through his temporal lobe in full visceral detail. Where the violence used to surprise us because it was so different from 'normal' superhero comics, it's now so banal in his own series that a non-gory episode would be stunning.

  • SatanIsMyMotorSatanIsMyMotor Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    So banal that it has spurred multiple pages of debate. Sorry, I just don't buy it.

    steam_sig.png
  • psycojesterpsycojester Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    yeah but it was multiple pages of debate about how tedious and unnecessary this is entire arc is.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • mattharvestmattharvest Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    So banal that it has spurred multiple pages of debate. Sorry, I just don't buy it.

    What does one thing have to do with the there? How does the existence of debate mean, automatically, that one particular side is right and the other wrong?

    By your own logic there, I could say "So mature that it has spurred multiple pages of debate. Sorry, I just don't buy it."

  • SatanIsMyMotorSatanIsMyMotor Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    That would be true if I said "So immature that it has spurred multiple pages of debate. Sorry, I just don't buy it."
    I was referencing you saying it was banal. If something is banal it, by nature, would not spur debate. Either way, I'm not going to argue semantics for a number of posts.
    Ultimately, nothing has changed in Invincible and as such I don't understand why so many people are turning on it. It's been completely steady all the time.

    There seems to be this innate need in people to shit on things once they think it has become too popular.

    steam_sig.png
  • Spectre-xSpectre-x Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    The comic has changed, though. Gore and such is much, much more common and it has lost its impact and it's become dull and bland. He keeps killing more and more characters and it's very obvious tat he thinks he's terribly clever for doing all of this shocking, shocking stuff.

    And I mean immature in the sense that, from his interviews and writing style he comes across as an enormous, petty douchebag. He is basically an annoying comics fan who got a job in the industry. The kind of fan who would have a debate with other, similar fans about which female x-man has the greatest tits.

    Sig_link_image.jpg
  • SatanIsMyMotorSatanIsMyMotor Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    We're going to have to respectfully disagree about the comic changing because I really don't feel that it has.
    I don't follow Kirkman much in interviews but I don't see how he comes off as a douchebag in his writing. In fact I think Walking Dead and Invincible have some of the most mature writing in the space right now.

    steam_sig.png
  • mattharvestmattharvest Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    We're going to have to respectfully disagree about the comic changing because I really don't feel that it has.
    I don't follow Kirkman much in interviews but I don't see how he comes off as a douchebag in his writing. In fact I think Walking Dead and Invincible have some of the most mature writing in the space right now.

    Point of clarification regarding the series changing: you don't think the gore-level has escalated? You don't think he's now out of human characters to ground Mark? You don't think he's spending more time (in sheer pages) showing gore as opposed to characterization?

    I mean, I'll repeat: I still enjoy it, and still think it's a good book. There's a long distance between me and bashing on the book like you're talking about. However, I think Kirkman has become immature in his writing in Invincible (I can't talk about his other stuff, since I don't follow it).

  • JordynJordyn Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    While it's certainly taken a lot longer to get to this point, Invincible kind of has me feeling like Walking Dead eventually did when I started reading that. It seemed worthless to bother trying to form any sort of attachment or connection with a character because they were likely to die soon anyway. Even thinking about how I've been reading the book the past few months, I realize I've been distancing myself from all the characters and that's really not how I should be reading a book.

    I'm not ready to drop it quite yet. He did ask in the letters section to give him one more issue and I'm willing to do that. I just hope that this simply a low point for the book and not a sign of how things will continue.

    thumbsupguy-1.jpg
    JordynNolz.com <- All my blogs (Shepard, Wasted, J'onn, DCAU) are here now!
  • SatanIsMyMotorSatanIsMyMotor Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    We're going to have to respectfully disagree about the comic changing because I really don't feel that it has.
    I don't follow Kirkman much in interviews but I don't see how he comes off as a douchebag in his writing. In fact I think Walking Dead and Invincible have some of the most mature writing in the space right now.

    Point of clarification regarding the series changing: you don't think the gore-level has escalated? You don't think he's now out of human characters to ground Mark? You don't think he's spending more time (in sheer pages) showing gore as opposed to characterization?

    I mean, I'll repeat: I still enjoy it, and still think it's a good book. There's a long distance between me and bashing on the book like you're talking about. However, I think Kirkman has become immature in his writing in Invincible (I can't talk about his other stuff, since I don't follow it).

    I think they got a new artist who draws things differently. I don't think the violence has really escalated. To me what makes the violence jarring, and this has always been the case, is the juxtaposition of cartoonishness with gore.
    As for human characters, it's just natural that they'd move somewhat into the background. The book is called Invincible because it's focused on Mark. There are only two "humans" in Mark's life that have ever had anything to do with the book - his mom and William (not counting Cecil here because he's essentially a super as well).

    steam_sig.png
  • MatriasMatrias Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    As someone who just bought and ready every issue of Invincible in the space of a week, I felt the whole experience was pretty consistent.

    3DS/Pokemon Friend Code - 2122-5878-9273 - Kyle
  • PantheraOncaPantheraOnca Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Spectre-x wrote: »
    The comic has changed, though. Gore and such is much, much more common and it has lost its impact and it's become dull and bland. He keeps killing more and more characters and it's very obvious tat he thinks he's terribly clever for doing all of this shocking, shocking stuff.

    And I mean immature in the sense that, from his interviews and writing style he comes across as an enormous, petty douchebag. He is basically an annoying comics fan who got a job in the industry. The kind of fan who would have a debate with other, similar fans about which female x-man has the greatest tits.

    probably rogue.


    :-p

  • JordynJordyn Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    The artist didn't change (well, not since way back when it changed from Walker to Ottley). The coloristdid.

    thumbsupguy-1.jpg
    JordynNolz.com <- All my blogs (Shepard, Wasted, J'onn, DCAU) are here now!
  • kdrudykdrudy Registered User
    edited July 2009
    Between the cover and preview pages I almost don't even want to give it the one issue. I will, and possibly it will make me want to continue, but those aren't doing anything to help.

    tvsfrank.jpg
  • SatanIsMyMotorSatanIsMyMotor Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    See, that looks totally badass. I'm actually going to suggest that the people complaining actually make good on their threats of stopping with the series. Perhaps you'd be interested in some My Little Pony comics? (I kid, I kid)

    But honestly guys - that is fucking awesome and far cooler than the typical "WAH RAGE NOW I WILL WIN!!!" and then they do.

    steam_sig.png
  • Robos A Go GoRobos A Go Go Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    I'm going to get some My Little Pony stickers and put them over that girl's caved-in face, because apparently that's the point where things start to get disturbing for me.

  • psycojesterpsycojester Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Well at least Conquest didn't put her in a refrigerator, thats all i'm saying.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • SatanIsMyMotorSatanIsMyMotor Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Well at least Conquest didn't put her in a refrigerator, thats all i'm saying.

    It isn't over yet!

    steam_sig.png
  • Venkman90Venkman90 Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    It looks like Mark is going to pick Conquest apart by fighting dirty, dirtier than the older, stronger guy is used to fighting. Expect more gore as Mark rips off his genitals, hyper extends his joints, gouges out at least one eye and generally tears him apart in an orgy of blood and violence.

  • Dr. FrenchensteinDr. Frenchenstein Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    INVINCIBLE NUT PUNCH

  • psycojesterpsycojester Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    INVINCIBLE NUT PUNCH

    Not violent enough, that'll be the big shock cover for the next issue. Mark standing triumphant with Conquests severed cock and balls in his mouth, while Conquest kneels screaming in the background a torrent of blood and gore cascading from between his legs.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • werehippywerehippy Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Ahh Invincible. I remember when I thought you were a great young teen book.

  • GreenGreen Stick around. I'm full of bad ideas.Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Am I the only one interested in how Mark's going to develop as a result of Eve's death?

    I mean it upset me, but honestly I think I might prefer this new direction over "they love each other" continuing status quo.

    IsaacSig.png
    3DS: 3007 8087 2767 | Nintendo ID: AngryFrog
  • Robos A Go GoRobos A Go Go Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    I'd be interested in seeing Mark's personality develop following the death of a girlfriend if that sort of thing wasn't so common in comic books. Kirkman could have Mark respond in a very original way, of course, but I think if he was striving for originality he wouldn't have played into such a famous trope by fridging Eve in the first place.

  • mattharvestmattharvest Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Okay, so that preview showing not only Mark biting a chunk out of Conquest's shoulder, but showing the gorey, visceral details of the muscle - the striations of flesh, etc. - is a perfect example of pointless gore. It could have been far better accomplished by showing it in silhouette, etc. There was nothing added by making it so detailed.

  • SatanIsMyMotorSatanIsMyMotor Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Okay, so that preview showing not only Mark biting a chunk out of Conquest's shoulder, but showing the gorey, visceral details of the muscle - the striations of flesh, etc. - is a perfect example of pointless gore. It could have been far better accomplished by showing it in silhouette, etc. There was nothing added by making it so detailed.

    Disagree. I like the visceral feeling. I don't think putting it in silhouette would've accomplished anything. It's a knock-down, drag-out, to the death battle. It should be gory, powerful, shocking, etc.

    steam_sig.png
  • psycojesterpsycojester Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Okay, so that preview showing not only Mark biting a chunk out of Conquest's shoulder, but showing the gorey, visceral details of the muscle - the striations of flesh, etc. - is a perfect example of pointless gore. It could have been far better accomplished by showing it in silhouette, etc. There was nothing added by making it so detailed.

    Disagree. I like the visceral feeling. I don't think putting it in silhouette would've accomplished anything. It's a knock-down, drag-out, to the death battle. It should be gory, powerful, shocking, etc.

    Yeah, but at this point it just feels like tired, trite and overplayed gorn because the author has run out of ideas.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • mattharvestmattharvest Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Okay, so that preview showing not only Mark biting a chunk out of Conquest's shoulder, but showing the gorey, visceral details of the muscle - the striations of flesh, etc. - is a perfect example of pointless gore. It could have been far better accomplished by showing it in silhouette, etc. There was nothing added by making it so detailed.

    Disagree. I like the visceral feeling. I don't think putting it in silhouette would've accomplished anything. It's a knock-down, drag-out, to the death battle. It should be gory, powerful, shocking, etc.

    But how is it shocking anymore at all? How is it powerful?

    I tradewait, so I can't do a page count, but it appears that an overwhelming majority of the pages in the last few issues are just gore. I mean, how long can you be shocked for? How long can it remain powerful?

    How long would it have to go before you got bored of the gore? Before it became gratuitous? Or would it always be powerful and shocking for you?

  • SatanIsMyMotorSatanIsMyMotor Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Honestly I don't see how scaling back would ever be shocking. I think they need to continue raising the bar.

    steam_sig.png
  • Robos A Go GoRobos A Go Go Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Honestly I don't see how scaling back would ever be shocking. I think they need to continue raising the bar.

    The scaling back wouldn't be shocking, but it would allow the next violent moment to be shocking rather than run of the mill for the title.

    I mean, how much further can you raise the bar without getting into Crossed territory? Eventually Kirkman will just have a hyper-violent book with nowhere else to go in that respect.

  • mattharvestmattharvest Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Honestly I don't see how scaling back would ever be shocking. I think they need to continue raising the bar.

    Honestly, that tells me a lot about your conception of storytelling, that you think scaling back - being more subtle, more careful - would never be shocking.

    That sort of reasoning ignores centuries of artistic developments in every form of storytelling, from comics to books to movies and whatever else, where people have shown that your story can be just as shocking, as powerful, as surprising with less gore than with more.

    Gore is a tool for shocking, powerful storytelling. It is absolutely, positively not the only one. It is absolutely, positively not the only way for Invicible's storytelling to get more shocking, more powerful.

    Moreover, I imagine Kirkman would be rather insulted if you said to him you thought that in order for his series to be interesting that it has to ratchet up constantly. No writer I've ever met would be happy about that. It implies that the only tool they have for compelling storytelling is that shock-and-awe element you're stuck on.

    You know what's shocking? Killing off Eve. Know what would have been just as shocking as killing her off in a gorey, gooey fashion, showing her face smashed in? Killing her off at all! She's served as Mark's primary human foil for the entire series. Virtually every emotional development he's had, has been with her (there are like, two or three important moments with his mom and Oliver respectively). She's the lynch-pin of him as a human. Killing her in any fashion would be powerful and shocking. There is no way any competent writer would need the gore.

    Moreover, you didn't answer the question: at what point does added gore stop adding value, to you? Are you suggesting that it would always be more interesting for you to have more gore? Do you actually believe that?

  • psycojesterpsycojester Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Honestly I don't see how scaling back would ever be shocking. I think they need to continue raising the bar.

    Ladies and gentlemen, i give you Ultimatums target audience.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • SatanIsMyMotorSatanIsMyMotor Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Honestly I don't see how scaling back would ever be shocking. I think they need to continue raising the bar.

    Honestly, that tells me a lot about your conception of storytelling, that you think scaling back - being more subtle, more careful - would never be shocking.

    That sort of reasoning ignores centuries of artistic developments in every form of storytelling, from comics to books to movies and whatever else, where people have shown that your story can be just as shocking, as powerful, as surprising with less gore than with more.

    Gore is a tool for shocking, powerful storytelling. It is absolutely, positively not the only one. It is absolutely, positively not the only way for Invicible's storytelling to get more shocking, more powerful.

    Moreover, I imagine Kirkman would be rather insulted if you said to him you thought that in order for his series to be interesting that it has to ratchet up constantly. No writer I've ever met would be happy about that. It implies that the only tool they have for compelling storytelling is that shock-and-awe element you're stuck on.

    You know what's shocking? Killing off Eve. Know what would have been just as shocking as killing her off in a gorey, gooey fashion, showing her face smashed in? Killing her off at all! She's served as Mark's primary human foil for the entire series. Virtually every emotional development he's had, has been with her (there are like, two or three important moments with his mom and Oliver respectively). She's the lynch-pin of him as a human. Killing her in any fashion would be powerful and shocking. There is no way any competent writer would need the gore.

    Moreover, you didn't answer the question: at what point does added gore stop adding value, to you? Are you suggesting that it would always be more interesting for you to have more gore? Do you actually believe that?

    Jesus, as much as I appreciated having you make unfounded conclusions about my "conception of story telling" you can kindly turn right around with your all-mighty attitude, shut off your computer, and go find somebody who gives a damn about your ridiculous assumptions. Kirkman has committed to a certain type of storytelling and, currently, that involves a lot of gore. It would seem completely out of place for him to all of the sudden scale things back - especially in the midst of this arc. In no way did I say gore was the ONLY thing that makes the series interesting. However, I love the fact that this is one of the only books that portrays battles as being what battles should be - insanely violent. I sincerely doubt Kirkman would have an issue with that.

    Yes, killing Eve is shocking in and of itself. That being said, she died violently - which is exactly what would've happened in that situation. To me, having her turn into cosmic energy or get punched through time would be a cop-out. She had to die and she had to die in a big way. The gore is being used as a vehicle for the story and as such it has value.

    My point this entire time is that Invincible has ALWAYS been extremely violent and I'm finding it profoundly annoying that everyone is acting like the book has taken this 180 degree turn.

    steam_sig.png
  • UltaruneUltarune Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
Sign In or Register to comment.