As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

The Invincible Thread!

1246728

Posts

  • Me Too!Me Too! __BANNED USERS regular
    edited June 2009
    I'm going with the second one chief

    Me Too! on
  • DJ EebsDJ Eebs Moderator, Administrator admin
    edited June 2009
    And to everyone else, this is a discussion forum, so people are going to come in and give opinions on things regardless of whether or not they like it. You have a valid point in that if you don't like something, you shouldn't be supporting it with your money, but you can't use that point to end a discussion either.

    DJ Eebs on
  • kdrudykdrudy Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    I'm surprised people read it and can't see that there are issues with it at this point. I mean he gets shit on more then Peter Parker these days it seems like. That isn't fun.

    But I said I'd give it one more issue to see where this goes, I gave it to X-Factor after the baby bullshit and I got Layla so it worked out, maybe Kirkman will surprise me.

    kdrudy on
    tvsfrank.jpg
  • BostonGanglerBostonGangler Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    Why on Earth would you drive to the comic book store and pay $2.99 or $3.99 every month to read something that you're not enjoying? At that point you're basically paying for the book for the sole purpose of complaining about it. I know that personally, if I'm not enjoying a series, I just stop buying it. I think that sends a much better message to the creators and the company than complaining about it on a message board and continually helping out the title's sales.

    I'm not saying that I don't have the occasional complaint about books that I enjoy, but if you have a serious problem with a title and you're not getting any enjoyment from it anymore then quit picking it up.

    Wait, so you exchange money only for goods and services that you want and derive value from? What the HELL is that about, and what are you going to call this newfangled philosophy of yours?

    That might read sarcastically, but I actually don't mean it that way at all. I actually just noticed over in the 6/24 releases thread that what I'm basically doing is paying money for a bunch of comics that I flat-out don't enjoy reading. I don't know what it says about human beings (or me personally) as creatures of habit, but it's weird to step back and think about. Anyways, after that epiphany, I think I'm going to drop about a third to half of the comics that I'm currently reading.

    Not to get too much into the Marvel $3.99 thing, which I don't have nearly as much of a problem with as many seem to, I will say that it probably helped the realization that I'm paying for a lot of stuff that I don't like come sooner.

    I'll give Invincible a little longer, since enjoying a comic for 50+ issues probably means I owe it the benefit of the doubt on a bad arc, but I'm not going to wait around reading something that (IMO) kinda sucks for too much longer.

    BostonGangler on
  • Robos A Go GoRobos A Go Go Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    Yeah, I don't think you can just dismiss factors like being invested in the characters, regardless of what terrible things happen to them, and basic customer loyalty.

    Robos A Go Go on
  • DisDis Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    I hope they keep Rex and Eve DEAD.
    And I want more ROBO action.

    Dis on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • WildcatWildcat Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    Why on Earth would you drive to the comic book store and pay $2.99 or $3.99 every month to read something that you're not enjoying?
    But dude, if I stop now I won't have a complete run.

    Wildcat on
  • psycojesterpsycojester Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    Wildcat wrote: »
    Why on Earth would you drive to the comic book store and pay $2.99 or $3.99 every month to read something that you're not enjoying?
    But dude, if I stop now I won't have a complete run.

    For every 10 good issues Kirkman earned 1 crap issue worth of good grace.

    psycojester on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • Dr. FrenchensteinDr. Frenchenstein Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    I kind of like how invinvible has progressed. This kid who always had this ideal of how superheroes and supercriminals act (i think Titan had a diatribe about how he didn't get why anyone would want to be a hero, as a criminal, you bust shit up, steal stuff, and eventually get caught but you're never in any real danger b/c the heroes aren't out to kill you. plus no prison can really hold you anyways.), and as more and more of his friends and colleagues die he's realizing that this isn't an "invinvicble punch!" kind of world after all. everyone doesn't have his compunction against killing. I'm interested as to where Kirkman takes this, considering how viltrumites are so quick to anger, and this is the maddest Mark has ever been. Considering he's trying to reign oliver's tendencies in, and now this, how can he cope?

    I guess i can see where people are pissed with the ramp up in violence lately, but it has been happening since Ultimate Vol 3.

    Dr. Frenchenstein on
  • mattharvestmattharvest Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    But complaining about a book being violent when it has always been violent and then being all "You've changed man" and "Kirkman must like fucking dead puppies" is stupid. Not just kind of stupid, but REALLY stupid.

    So yes, if you don't like it - don't buy it. Or retroactively don't buy it because the book hasn't changed one iota.

    Well, there is a middle-ground here. While the series has always been violent (arguably in the extreme), there is a very clear and easily documented difference in HOW it's been violent.

    Look back at that fight between Omni-Man and Invincible: all the blood is just solid red. When he killed the team, there was gore (i.e. organs), but it was rather understated, all things considered. If I remember correctly, the artist commentaries in the trade talk about making it less visceral (literally) than originally drawn.

    Then, look at Oliver killing the Mauler twins. Look at the jawbone tearing through the top of the skull. Look at how all the blood has more depth, more shape, more realism.

    I think it's very clear that the nature of the violence presented has changed somewhat. That doesn't make it bad, but it's a valid target for commentary or criticism.

    mattharvest on
  • BostonGanglerBostonGangler Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    But complaining about a book being violent when it has always been violent and then being all "You've changed man" and "Kirkman must like fucking dead puppies" is stupid. Not just kind of stupid, but REALLY stupid.

    So yes, if you don't like it - don't buy it. Or retroactively don't buy it because the book hasn't changed one iota.

    There's a flip-side to that argument, certainly. I have absolutely no problem with violence in comics. I doubt many of us do. I think it adds to Invincible that people are at the risk of dying. It can happen, and it can happen suddenly and violently. It makes it all mean more, and it further establishes the insane risk that these guys take by doing what they do. It serves a purpose and advances the story.

    When half of the supporting cast gets massacred in an orgy of guts, one after the other, just for the purpose of setting up a bad guy and making Invincible really, really mad, it's just... meh. Okay, you just killed the supporting cast and achieved little to nothing.

    Gore is fine- doesn't bother me at all- but to keep me entertained it needs to be part of a meaningful story progression. And something good might come out of this story, which is why I'm not dropping it yet, but I get more skeptical with each issue like this.

    BostonGangler on
  • psycojesterpsycojester Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    I'm fine with Gore when its advancing the plot and developing character, i was arguing for it when Oliver killed the Mauler Twins, but atm it just feels like its shockvalue Gore for the sake of Gore.

    psycojester on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • DJ EebsDJ Eebs Moderator, Administrator admin
    edited June 2009
    The big problem I have with it is that a scene like that should be shocking, but it isn't. It's just more of the same. Shock comes from contrast, and there isn't any in this case.

    DJ Eebs on
  • DisDis Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    Sex and Violence sells.
    Would you have sex with a Giant Insect?
    Refering to Omni-man and Oliver's mom.

    Dis on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • DeMoNDeMoN twitch.tv/toxic_cizzle Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    Dis wrote: »
    Sex and Violence sells.
    Would you have sex with a Giant Insect?
    Refering to Omni-man and Oliver's mom.

    To be fair that insect was damn sexy.

    DeMoN on
    Steam id : Toxic Cizzle
    *TyCart*_banner.jpg
  • Me Too!Me Too! __BANNED USERS regular
    edited June 2009
    The big problem I have with it is that a scene like that should be shocking, but it isn't. It's just more of the same. Shock comes from contrast, and there isn't any in this case.

    This sounds vaguely like my argument that people aren't complaining that this issue is so violent, it's that it's constantly so violent

    Me Too! on
  • KyleWPetersonKyleWPeterson Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    Invincihill.jpg

    KyleWPeterson on
  • JordynJordyn Really, Commander? Probing Uranus. Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    But complaining about a book being violent when it has always been violent and then being all "You've changed man" and "Kirkman must like fucking dead puppies" is stupid. Not just kind of stupid, but REALLY stupid.

    So yes, if you don't like it - don't buy it. Or retroactively don't buy it because the book hasn't changed one iota.

    Well, there is a middle-ground here. While the series has always been violent (arguably in the extreme), there is a very clear and easily documented difference in HOW it's been violent.

    Look back at that fight between Omni-Man and Invincible: all the blood is just solid red. When he killed the team, there was gore (i.e. organs), but it was rather understated, all things considered. If I remember correctly, the artist commentaries in the trade talk about making it less visceral (literally) than originally drawn.

    Then, look at Oliver killing the Mauler twins. Look at the jawbone tearing through the top of the skull. Look at how all the blood has more depth, more shape, more realism.

    I think it's very clear that the nature of the violence presented has changed somewhat. That doesn't make it bad, but it's a valid target for commentary or criticism.

    Um, the colorist did change not too long ago. And while I'm sure a lot of people didn't notice, when the change happened the colors did get just generally darker. And he has the tendency to give things more shading and depth than Crabtree really liked to. I preferred Crabtree, but not because of a gore thing, I just felt like his actual choice of colors gave the book a really cool feel.

    Jordyn on
    thumbsupguy-1.jpg
    JordynNolz.com <- All my blogs (Shepard, Wasted, J'onn, DCAU) are here now!
  • BostonGanglerBostonGangler Registered User regular
    edited June 2009
    Jordyn wrote: »
    But complaining about a book being violent when it has always been violent and then being all "You've changed man" and "Kirkman must like fucking dead puppies" is stupid. Not just kind of stupid, but REALLY stupid.

    So yes, if you don't like it - don't buy it. Or retroactively don't buy it because the book hasn't changed one iota.

    Well, there is a middle-ground here. While the series has always been violent (arguably in the extreme), there is a very clear and easily documented difference in HOW it's been violent.

    Look back at that fight between Omni-Man and Invincible: all the blood is just solid red. When he killed the team, there was gore (i.e. organs), but it was rather understated, all things considered. If I remember correctly, the artist commentaries in the trade talk about making it less visceral (literally) than originally drawn.

    Then, look at Oliver killing the Mauler twins. Look at the jawbone tearing through the top of the skull. Look at how all the blood has more depth, more shape, more realism.

    I think it's very clear that the nature of the violence presented has changed somewhat. That doesn't make it bad, but it's a valid target for commentary or criticism.

    Um, the colorist did change not too long ago. And while I'm sure a lot of people didn't notice, when the change happened the colors did get just generally darker. And he has the tendency to give things more shading and depth than Crabtree really liked to. I preferred Crabtree, but not because of a gore thing, I just felt like his actual choice of colors gave the book a really cool feel.

    The change to FCO for coloring has definitely shown, that's for sure. Normally I don't notice when the colorist changes, but it was a pretty stark difference in this case. Hadn't really considered that that might have been part of why the most recent gorefest seems like overkill, though.

    BostonGangler on
  • doctorcludoctorclu Registered User new member
    edited July 2009
    This has been a great thread on the latest Invincible comic. I have agree, this comic has strirred in me a lot of feelings, and to that degree it has been a success. Mind you what I feel is frustration.

    I felt this frustration at some point when I was collecting the Flash series. Wally had been through a lot, and just when he was going to get married... his memory was wiped, and even his wedding was messed with. His wife to be was locked away somewhere, and Flash barely knew she existed. At that point I said "I'm done!!" Never went back to that comic.

    And I've said this on many review sites, but seeing Eve bite it, well, the first thing I did was write a letter to the letter column and mail it off to Kirkman. Said something to the effect of,

    "Just read Invincible #63 and it was a good read. Looks like Eve is going to buy the farm. Well if that is the case I wanted to let you know how much I've enjoyed this series. With Eve going I will probably find this a good place to step off. Been fun though. Have fun working for DC Comics."

    Yeh liked Eve. You see, gore and Invincible. You see, the Global Guardians dying, that was to progress the story along. The old heroes are dead, long live the new heroes!! Then villians ate it, which was ok.

    But Eve? Eve was supposed to be one of the fun elements in this story. A grounding element for the Invincible character.

    But yeh like my experience with the Flash, I feel there has been too much done with no break to the character, and after a while of that happening, and characters you've come to care about getting trashed, I feel the same way I did with the strung out Flash story arc.... "NEXT!!!" :)

    doctorclu on
  • Me Too!Me Too! __BANNED USERS regular
    edited July 2009
    To be fair, Wally lost his memory for a reason, it lasted a short while, and we got some great stories from it

    Me Too! on
  • ShortyShorty touching the meat Intergalactic Cool CourtRegistered User regular
    edited July 2009
    So I just read the first nine trades of Invincible.

    I was less than impressed.

    It's so derivative, and the conversational tone of all the writing is not why I read superhero comics.

    Shorty on
  • ZampanovZampanov You May Not Go Home Until Tonight Has Been MagicalRegistered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Shorty wrote: »
    So I just read the first nine trades of Invincible.

    I was less than impressed.

    It's so derivative, and the conversational tone of all the writing is not why I read superhero comics.

    Go back and read it as if it just wants to be a fun comic.

    Zampanov on
    r4zgei8pcfod.gif
    PSN/XBL: Zampanov -- Steam: Zampanov
  • doctorcludoctorclu Registered User new member
    edited July 2009
    Me Too! wrote: »
    To be fair, Wally lost his memory for a reason, it lasted a short while, and we got some great stories from it

    I'm sure but at the time so much had happened it was like "OH COMMON!!!" :) And did he get married afterward? Not important really since this is an Invincible thread and I brought this up only to say the feeling this reminded me of.

    doctorclu on
  • mattharvestmattharvest Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Shorty wrote: »
    So I just read the first nine trades of Invincible.

    I was less than impressed.

    It's so derivative, and the conversational tone of all the writing is not why I read superhero comics.

    I think you completely misunderstand the point of Invincible. It's supposed to be more "realistic" in the sense of how people actually would react to these situations. How a teenager - who's been told all his life he might eventually get superpowers - would actually interact with his peers (including other teenage superheroes), would actually fight crime, etc.

    It's not a superhero comic. It's a comic that happens to include superheroes. As a result, it's used to send up classical superhero motifs.

    mattharvest on
  • doctorcludoctorclu Registered User new member
    edited July 2009
    Hey I LOVED the Invincible story, but Eve was a big part of that for me. Part of the atmosphere, the interaction. Without her, I doubt I could read any more of this.

    It's like when I was watching Corpse Bride... sure the story is narrated by a living man (Johnny Deep's character) and we get to see all this through his eyes, but then we see through him the character of the Corpse Bride who is fun, down to Earth, and so on. And as much as I've love to revisit how that whole story and world was presented, when the Corpse Bride flies off into a bunch of moths, I say sadly "What is there left to visit? My reason to be in this story just flew away."

    And with Eve getting very likely killed off I feel the same. Sure this story was narrated by a teenage boy, but every so often we got to see this other down to earth loving friend that made all the horrors worth it somehow. And with her gone, to me, what's the point anymore?

    doctorclu on
  • KiwiKiwi Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    doctorclu wrote: »
    Hey I LOVED the Invincible story, but Eve was a big part of that for me. Part of the atmosphere, the interaction. Without her, I doubt I could read any more of this.

    It's like when I was watching Corpse Bride... sure the story is narrated by a living man (Johnny Deep's character) and we get to see all this through his eyes, but then we see through him the character of the Corpse Bride who is fun, down to Earth, and so on. And as much as I've love to revisit how that whole story and world was presented, when the Corpse Bride flies off into a bunch of moths, I say sadly "What is there left to visit? My reason to be in this story just flew away."

    And with Eve getting very likely killed off I feel the same. Sure this story was narrated by a teenage boy, but every so often we got to see this other down to earth loving friend that made all the horrors worth it somehow. And with her gone, to me, what's the point anymore?

    So are you done right now, or are you going to give the next issue a shot?

    I'm really bummed that she's dead, but now that it's happened a part of me isn't really convinced that she is. (You can thank watching years of tv for that skepticism.)

    Even if it sticks, I'd hope that Kirkman makes it really frikkin worth it.

    Kiwi on
  • TeriferinTeriferin Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Normally I like comic book death's to stick.

    For this one I'll make an exception.

    Teriferin on
    teriferin#1625
  • SatanIsMyMotorSatanIsMyMotor Fuck Warren Ellis Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Shorty wrote: »
    So I just read the first nine trades of Invincible.

    I was less than impressed.

    It's so derivative, and the conversational tone of all the writing is not why I read superhero comics.

    I think you completely misunderstand the point of Invincible. It's supposed to be more "realistic" in the sense of how people actually would react to these situations. How a teenager - who's been told all his life he might eventually get superpowers - would actually interact with his peers (including other teenage superheroes), would actually fight crime, etc.

    It's not a superhero comic. It's a comic that happens to include superheroes. As a result, it's used to send up classical superhero motifs.

    I think I disagree. Invincible is very much so a superhero comic - maybe not so much in the beginning but very much so now.

    Saying this guy doesn't get it is kind of silly. If he doesn't like it he doesn't like it. Not the end of the world.

    SatanIsMyMotor on
  • mattharvestmattharvest Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Shorty wrote: »
    So I just read the first nine trades of Invincible.

    I was less than impressed.

    It's so derivative, and the conversational tone of all the writing is not why I read superhero comics.

    I think you completely misunderstand the point of Invincible. It's supposed to be more "realistic" in the sense of how people actually would react to these situations. How a teenager - who's been told all his life he might eventually get superpowers - would actually interact with his peers (including other teenage superheroes), would actually fight crime, etc.

    It's not a superhero comic. It's a comic that happens to include superheroes. As a result, it's used to send up classical superhero motifs.

    I think I disagree. Invincible is very much so a superhero comic - maybe not so much in the beginning but very much so now.

    Saying this guy doesn't get it is kind of silly. If he doesn't like it he doesn't like it. Not the end of the world.

    Fair enough; I guess what I mean is that I wouldn't want him to not enjoy it because he was expecting something out of the comic that it wasn't supposed to give.

    Look at, say, Aliens. It's a brilliant movie (I think we'd all agree, generally) but it would be unfair to go into it expecting it to be the same kind of movie as Alien. If you did so, you'd think it was missing something and, because of the preconception, you might miss a really amazing movie.

    I think Invincible is the same way: if you go into it with the wrong idea of what it's going to be, you can miss out.

    mattharvest on
  • KyleWPetersonKyleWPeterson Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Did anyone notice this from Invincible #58?

    jkjkk.jpg

    KyleWPeterson on
  • DeMoNDeMoN twitch.tv/toxic_cizzle Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    haha, that's great.

    DeMoN on
    Steam id : Toxic Cizzle
    *TyCart*_banner.jpg
  • CadeCade Eppur si muove.Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    I totally missed that the first time.

    Know what? I liked the issue, yes it was bloody, yes someone did die but if you read the title then you know it happens, it doesn't matter if you like them or not. One of the problems I've had with comics but grown use too was how some puny little human could go up against a Supermanesque power, be slapped around and be almost none the worse for wear.

    Kirkman goes against this, he pretty much shows what happens when you do send one type of hero up against something they really are unprepared for or not a match for. The end result is pretty much what you expect when the restraints are taken away. I find that refreshing. I know some are not going to be happy since what happened and I'm rather sad to see the person go(if they indeed really are dead and isn't this a trick) but life goes on and other people will come and go as well. That's happened in comic books for the longest time, the only difference here is that yes it was pretty damn brutal and bloody. Maybe the average comic fan is conditioned after so many years not to expect such things or maybe they're conditioned to think hahaha, no one really gets hurt and if they die, well they'll be back in six months(one if your Magneto) but again Kirkman kinda goes against this and that's sorta what Invincible is about in a way. It's not your average comic book nor does it follow the nothing can't really happen safety net that almost all comics use, I rather wish more comics would do this instead of keeping the status quo.

    Yes people are going to get upset, people are going to be sad, and as one guy pointed out his girlfriend cried! Doesn't anyone think that's amazing. That's the kind of passion comic books can tap into by telling a story and if you can do such things then damn the writer *IS* doing a good job. Mind you those are the negative emotions but they can easily just as well tap into the positive ones as well, if one decides to stick with the book or not is up to the person to decide but I for one look forward to what happens for good or ill.

    I'm sure there will be some dark days and some stories that just make you want to pump your fist and say fuck yeah.

    For me that's what being a comic fan is all about. Not everyone cups of tea though and that's understandable.

    Cade on
  • BostonGanglerBostonGangler Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Cade wrote: »
    I totally missed that the first time.

    Know what? I liked the issue, yes it was bloody, yes someone did die but if you read the title then you know it happens, it doesn't matter if you like them or not. One of the problems I've had with comics but grown use too was how some puny little human could go up against a Supermanesque power, be slapped around and be almost none the worse for wear.

    Kirkman goes against this, he pretty much shows what happens when you do send one type of hero up against something they really are unprepared for or not a match for. The end result is pretty much what you expect when the restraints are taken away. I find that refreshing. I know some are not going to be happy since what happened and I'm rather sad to see the person go(if they indeed really are dead and isn't this a trick) but life goes on and other people will come and go as well. That's happened in comic books for the longest time, the only difference here is that yes it was pretty damn brutal and bloody. Maybe the average comic fan is conditioned after so many years not to expect such things or maybe they're conditioned to think hahaha, no one really gets hurt and if they die, well they'll be back in six months(one if your Magneto) but again Kirkman kinda goes against this and that's sorta what Invincible is about in a way. It's not your average comic book nor does it follow the nothing can't really happen safety net that almost all comics use, I rather wish more comics would do this instead of keeping the status quo.

    Yes people are going to get upset, people are going to be sad, and as one guy pointed out his girlfriend cried! Doesn't anyone think that's amazing. That's the kind of passion comic books can tap into by telling a story and if you can do such things then damn the writer *IS* doing a good job. Mind you those are the negative emotions but they can easily just as well tap into the positive ones as well, if one decides to stick with the book or not is up to the person to decide but I for one look forward to what happens for good or ill.

    I'm sure there will be some dark days and some stories that just make you want to pump your fist and say fuck yeah.

    For me that's what being a comic fan is all about. Not everyone cups of tea though and that's understandable.
    I agree that it's a cool premise, but it's one that's already been used more times than I can count off the top of my head. We get it. That's what happened to Rex Splode, it's what happened to the original Global Guardians, etc. etc. etc. Part of why I didn't like it happening to Eve was a) she *should* have been able to put up a fight, and b) it's just rehashing the same plot threads, points, and over-the-top violence that have already been done repeatedly just within this arc. And in the process it took away an awesome supporting character.
    I'm all for people dying in comics. I think it should happen more. But this has just devolved into an Ultimatum-type blood orgy, and that's stupid.

    BostonGangler on
  • CadeCade Eppur si muove.Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    I agree that it's a cool premise, but it's one that's already been used more times than I can count off the top of my head. We get it. That's what happened to Rex Splode, it's what happened to the original Global Guardians, etc. etc. etc. Part of why I didn't like it happening to Eve was a) she *should* have been able to put up a fight, and b) it's just rehashing the same plot threads, points, and over-the-top violence that have already been done repeatedly just within this arc. And in the process it took away an awesome supporting character.
    I'm all for people dying in comics. I think it should happen more. But this has just devolved into an Ultimatum-type blood orgy, and that's stupid.

    Reponseathon!
    She might have been able to put up a better fight true, but you got to remember she had just waken up after being out cold for two days, her leg if not legs were broke and who knows what else there was. Mind you it could have been a trick as some think which would make sense since she was in no state to really be going out like she was. However if that was her and she did go out in that condition thinking in a straight forward manner might not be the easiest thing in the world if she was in any pain and let's face it......she was up against a threat that just beat the ever loving snot out of Invincible, on her best day against such a threat she'd likely die. The odds for that are very good. With her being in the state she was, well....we saw what happened.

    Is it too much? I don't know. I believe that the violence as a whole is spread out pretty well, even if it seems to have picked up some in the last year, again these are costumed heroes and villians or whatever you want to call them that most of the time DO want to kill one another. The comic isn't like where that silly rascal Joker does some dastardly deed, gets foiled by Batman, gets sent to jail and everyone laughs at the wacky adventure. Invincible is more "real" as it were and Kirkman fully jumps into that.

    Cade on
  • BostonGanglerBostonGangler Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Cade wrote: »
    I agree that it's a cool premise, but it's one that's already been used more times than I can count off the top of my head. We get it. That's what happened to Rex Splode, it's what happened to the original Global Guardians, etc. etc. etc. Part of why I didn't like it happening to Eve was a) she *should* have been able to put up a fight, and b) it's just rehashing the same plot threads, points, and over-the-top violence that have already been done repeatedly just within this arc. And in the process it took away an awesome supporting character.
    I'm all for people dying in comics. I think it should happen more. But this has just devolved into an Ultimatum-type blood orgy, and that's stupid.

    Reponseathon!
    She might have been able to put up a better fight true, but you got to remember she had just waken up after being out cold for two days, her leg if not legs were broke and who knows what else there was. Mind you it could have been a trick as some think which would make sense since she was in no state to really be going out like she was. However if that was her and she did go out in that condition thinking in a straight forward manner might not be the easiest thing in the world if she was in any pain and let's face it......she was up against a threat that just beat the ever loving snot out of Invincible, on her best day against such a threat she'd likely die. The odds for that are very good. With her being in the state she was, well....we saw what happened.

    Is it too much? I don't know. I believe that the violence as a whole is spread out pretty well, even if it seems to have picked up some in the last year, again these are costumed heroes and villians or whatever you want to call them that most of the time DO want to kill one another. The comic isn't like where that silly rascal Joker does some dastardly deed, gets foiled by Batman, gets sent to jail and everyone laughs at the wacky adventure. Invincible is more "real" as it were and Kirkman fully jumps into that.
    Fair enough, based on her previous injuries I can buy that she'd get absolutely wrecked. I guess what really gets to me is that pretty much the entire supporting cast is being killed at the same. Don't get me wrong: I think that it can be good to kill off supporting characters to advance the story and the main characters in meaningful ways. I just think that, if the goal was to kill all of these characters off, it could have been paced a lot better. Killing Eve now pretty much guarantees that Rex's death is meaningless in terms of developing Mark as a character or the plot line as a whole, since anything that could come about from his death could be more relevantly applied to Eve's death.

    BostonGangler on
  • CadeCade Eppur si muove.Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Fair enough, based on her previous injuries I can buy that she'd get absolutely wrecked. I guess what really gets to me is that pretty much the entire supporting cast is being killed at the same. Don't get me wrong: I think that it can be good to kill off supporting characters to advance the story and the main characters in meaningful ways. I just think that, if the goal was to kill all of these characters off, it could have been paced a lot better. Killing Eve now pretty much guarantees that Rex's death is meaningless in terms of developing Mark as a character or the plot line as a whole, since anything that could come about from his death could be more relevantly applied to Eve's death.

    Well.............
    Once the storm calms down some, if it calms down at all that is since Kirkman isn't known for that much without something big happening again just as fast I'm sure we'll see some of what's been going on hitting Mark hard, he just hasn't had a break to really cope and deal with everything yet. When he does, that guy is going to be hit harder than anything done to him yet. He hasn't had the time to emotionally deal with anything yet. Eve getting killed kinda in a way reminds me of what some people must have went through when Gwen Stacy died in Spider-Man, can you imagine how those people must have felt? I'm sure much of the replies here would be similar to what they would have said if they had the net at the time in some regards. But yeah, wait and see, like I said we haven't really seen Mark deal with everything once the dust settles. Mind you don't expect that to last long as the next threat will be around the corner quick enough, if nothing else hope that some are right and that Eve's death was faked so that Mark would get mad enough to kill the threat towards humanity.

    Cade on
  • ShortyShorty touching the meat Intergalactic Cool CourtRegistered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Shorty wrote: »
    So I just read the first nine trades of Invincible.

    I was less than impressed.

    It's so derivative, and the conversational tone of all the writing is not why I read superhero comics.

    I think you completely misunderstand the point of Invincible. It's supposed to be more "realistic" in the sense of how people actually would react to these situations. How a teenager - who's been told all his life he might eventually get superpowers - would actually interact with his peers (including other teenage superheroes), would actually fight crime, etc.

    It's not a superhero comic. It's a comic that happens to include superheroes. As a result, it's used to send up classical superhero motifs.

    I think I disagree. Invincible is very much so a superhero comic - maybe not so much in the beginning but very much so now.

    Saying this guy doesn't get it is kind of silly. If he doesn't like it he doesn't like it. Not the end of the world.

    Fair enough; I guess what I mean is that I wouldn't want him to not enjoy it because he was expecting something out of the comic that it wasn't supposed to give.

    Look at, say, Aliens. It's a brilliant movie (I think we'd all agree, generally) but it would be unfair to go into it expecting it to be the same kind of movie as Alien. If you did so, you'd think it was missing something and, because of the preconception, you might miss a really amazing movie.

    I think Invincible is the same way: if you go into it with the wrong idea of what it's going to be, you can miss out.

    I was expecting it to be better than it was; to be fair, it was built up a lot by people both on the internet and in person. Jordyn made it sound like the second coming of Batman.

    Shorty on
  • BalefuegoBalefuego Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    doctorclu wrote: »
    Me Too! wrote: »
    To be fair, Wally lost his memory for a reason, it lasted a short while, and we got some great stories from it

    I'm sure but at the time so much had happened it was like "OH COMMON!!!" :) And did he get married afterward? Not important really since this is an Invincible thread and I brought this up only to say the feeling this reminded me of.

    You're not talking about the Geoff Johns arc where The Spectre erased Wally's secret identity from everyone's memory (including his own) are you? Because Wally married Linda like back in 1999, years before Johns ever came on the book.

    Balefuego on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • JordynJordyn Really, Commander? Probing Uranus. Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Shorty wrote: »
    Shorty wrote: »
    So I just read the first nine trades of Invincible.

    I was less than impressed.

    It's so derivative, and the conversational tone of all the writing is not why I read superhero comics.

    I think you completely misunderstand the point of Invincible. It's supposed to be more "realistic" in the sense of how people actually would react to these situations. How a teenager - who's been told all his life he might eventually get superpowers - would actually interact with his peers (including other teenage superheroes), would actually fight crime, etc.

    It's not a superhero comic. It's a comic that happens to include superheroes. As a result, it's used to send up classical superhero motifs.

    I think I disagree. Invincible is very much so a superhero comic - maybe not so much in the beginning but very much so now.

    Saying this guy doesn't get it is kind of silly. If he doesn't like it he doesn't like it. Not the end of the world.

    Fair enough; I guess what I mean is that I wouldn't want him to not enjoy it because he was expecting something out of the comic that it wasn't supposed to give.

    Look at, say, Aliens. It's a brilliant movie (I think we'd all agree, generally) but it would be unfair to go into it expecting it to be the same kind of movie as Alien. If you did so, you'd think it was missing something and, because of the preconception, you might miss a really amazing movie.

    I think Invincible is the same way: if you go into it with the wrong idea of what it's going to be, you can miss out.

    I was expecting it to be better than it was; to be fair, it was built up a lot by people both on the internet and in person. Jordyn made it sound like the second coming of Batman.

    Shorty, we certainly have different tastes in comics. I thought you knew that.

    And while I still enjoy Invincible, I don't look forward to it the way I used to. I honestly feel a little lost with comics right now. DC has killed a lot of my favorites, only a few of my favorite writers have books coming out right now, and everything feels just kinda dreary as fuck. I've been wrapped up in my Showcase books and trying to figure out what other old stuff I haven't read that I could pick up.

    Jordyn on
    thumbsupguy-1.jpg
    JordynNolz.com <- All my blogs (Shepard, Wasted, J'onn, DCAU) are here now!
Sign In or Register to comment.