|
Post by brentlambert on Jul 9, 2011 10:40:23 GMT -5
Selfish people tend to only think of themselves and don't make good teammates. Tension springs from moar than bickerin! It comes from different beliefs, different lifestyles, different hobbies. U'd end up with Glee and not the Rolling Stones analogy compared to the Beatles analogy that the Avengers are. Well I think Nev wasn't so much referring to selfishness but the celebrity concept of the title. The Astonishing team are celebrities not just as a team, but on an indivdual basis as well. What happens when Jean books the team for a photo shoot in London on the same day Jubilee has an interview in Tokyo? Stuff like that is what I think he was getting at more than selfish bickering.
|
|
|
Post by bryancrd09 on Jul 9, 2011 21:14:43 GMT -5
Celebrity's are selfish types, and bicker. Look at bands that were thrown together and fell apart - New Kids On The Block, New Edition, etc.
If u are wantin' a group like that, then u'd wanna follow that kinda mold with the bad boy, the pretty boy, etc. Or in this case, the bad boy/girl, etc, etc.
|
|
|
Post by brentlambert on Jul 10, 2011 12:26:35 GMT -5
Celebrity's are selfish types, and bicker. Look at bands that were thrown together and fell apart - New Kids On The Block, New Edition, etc. If u are wantin' a group like that, then u'd wanna follow that kinda mold with the bad boy, the pretty boy, etc. Or in this case, the bad boy/girl, etc, etc. I think that's summing celebrities up a bit too stereotypically IMO. I would rather not see Scott fall into that sort of simplistic story telling and he hasn't so far.
|
|
|
Post by bryancrd09 on Jul 10, 2011 13:48:00 GMT -5
Simplistic stories can still be deep. Brian Jacques made a career out of a makin' simplistic yet deep stories with engaging characters. I guess I don't flow with the Wildcats 3.0 vibe of this book. Not a fan of Joe C.
|
|
|
Post by Derrick on Jul 10, 2011 20:26:28 GMT -5
Celebrity's are selfish types, and bicker. Look at bands that were thrown together and fell apart - New Kids On The Block, New Edition, etc. If u are wantin' a group like that, then u'd wanna follow that kinda mold with the bad boy, the pretty boy, etc. Or in this case, the bad boy/girl, etc, etc. I think that's summing celebrities up a bit too stereotypically IMO. I would rather not see Scott fall into that sort of simplistic story telling and he hasn't so far. An amazing amount of celebrities use their fame, money and status to do a lot of good in the world. You'll hear way more about Kim Kardashian's wedding than you'll hear about the excellent work Charlize Theron does in her native South Africa to combat the rampant plague of AIDS. Know why? Because it's the public that would rather see X-rays of Kim Kardashian's ass than read about Charlize Theron visiting the AIDS wards of hospitals. The point I'm trying to make is that we hear more about the negative aspects of celebrities and their lifestyle than the positive because it's those negative aspects that keep E! and TMZ and PEOPLE magazine and related media in business.
|
|
|
Post by brentlambert on Jul 11, 2011 9:38:00 GMT -5
Simplistic stories can still be deep. Brian Jacques made a career out of a makin' simplistic yet deep stories with engaging characters. I guess I don't flow with the Wildcats 3.0 vibe of this book. Not a fan of Joe C. Simplistic stories can be good, but more often than not simplistic characters aren't IMO. People are contradictions and I'd like to see that instead of the X-Guys being pushed into stereotypical behavior.
|
|
|
Post by bryancrd09 on Jul 11, 2011 9:56:57 GMT -5
I think that's summing celebrities up a bit too stereotypically IMO. I would rather not see Scott fall into that sort of simplistic story telling and he hasn't so far. An amazing amount of celebrities use their fame, money and status to do a lot of good in the world. You'll hear way more about Kim Kardashian's wedding than you'll hear about the excellent work Charlize Theron does in her native South Africa to combat the rampant plague of AIDS. Know why? Because it's the public that would rather see X-rays of Kim Kardashian's ass than read about Charlize Theron visiting the AIDS wards of hospitals. The point I'm trying to make is that we hear more about the negative aspects of celebrities and their lifestyle than the positive because it's those negative aspects that keep E! and TMZ and PEOPLE magazine and related media in business. Yah, but same celebrities are druggies, alcholics, etc. That ain't stereotypical behavior. That's just life. They cheat on loved ones, they believe in causes that affect a great many people negatively. Fer example, Arnold is a big Republican dick, and he bankrupted California 'cause he gave enormous tax breaks to his friends. Celebrities aren't exactly good people just 'cause they do charity work. That stuff is only to help them maintain a good rep fer whateva movie, album, or such they are coming out with. It's the whole noblesse obliges they adhere to.
|
|
|
Post by scottenkainen on Jul 11, 2011 10:14:59 GMT -5
I like the celebrity angle. I also like reading about heroes who are genuinely good, heroic people. If I want to read about characters who look like heroes, but don't act like them, I'd be reading Marvel or DC's current titles.
|
|
|
Post by bryancrd09 on Jul 11, 2011 11:15:45 GMT -5
I like the celebrity angle. I also like reading about heroes who are genuinely good, heroic people. If I want to read about characters who look like heroes, but don't act like them, I'd be reading Marvel or DC's current titles. Eh, whateva's. If I wanted to read about celebrity heroes. I would have read the old Avengers stories. I jus can't see the X-Men as celebrities anyways. Not with a class war goin' on between the working poor, middle, and upper class.
|
|
|
Post by brentlambert on Jul 11, 2011 14:18:08 GMT -5
An amazing amount of celebrities use their fame, money and status to do a lot of good in the world. You'll hear way more about Kim Kardashian's wedding than you'll hear about the excellent work Charlize Theron does in her native South Africa to combat the rampant plague of AIDS. Know why? Because it's the public that would rather see X-rays of Kim Kardashian's ass than read about Charlize Theron visiting the AIDS wards of hospitals. The point I'm trying to make is that we hear more about the negative aspects of celebrities and their lifestyle than the positive because it's those negative aspects that keep E! and TMZ and PEOPLE magazine and related media in business. Yah, but same celebrities are druggies, alcholics, etc. That ain't stereotypical behavior. That's just life. They cheat on loved ones, they believe in causes that affect a great many people negatively. Fer example, Arnold is a big Republican dick, and he bankrupted California 'cause he gave enormous tax breaks to his friends. Celebrities aren't exactly good people just 'cause they do charity work. That stuff is only to help them maintain a good rep fer whateva movie, album, or such they are coming out with. It's the whole noblesse obliges they adhere to. It seems like you're letting alot of personal bias seep in here, which is never good in writing. And really, if you use the media to let you tell all the story about a person then that's just wacky. Because I doubt they ever even give 10% of what anybody really is.
|
|
|
Post by Derrick on Jul 12, 2011 0:35:40 GMT -5
An amazing amount of celebrities use their fame, money and status to do a lot of good in the world. You'll hear way more about Kim Kardashian's wedding than you'll hear about the excellent work Charlize Theron does in her native South Africa to combat the rampant plague of AIDS. Know why? Because it's the public that would rather see X-rays of Kim Kardashian's ass than read about Charlize Theron visiting the AIDS wards of hospitals. The point I'm trying to make is that we hear more about the negative aspects of celebrities and their lifestyle than the positive because it's those negative aspects that keep E! and TMZ and PEOPLE magazine and related media in business. Yah, but same celebrities are druggies, alcholics, etc. That ain't stereotypical behavior. That's just life. They cheat on loved ones, they believe in causes that affect a great many people negatively. Fer example, Arnold is a big Republican dick, and he bankrupted California 'cause he gave enormous tax breaks to his friends. Celebrities aren't exactly good people just 'cause they do charity work. That stuff is only to help them maintain a good rep fer whateva movie, album, or such they are coming out with. It's the whole noblesse obliges they adhere to. Might as just as well say that all writers are selfish, arrogant pinheads with more ego than talent who only care about their own point of view and nobody else's.
|
|
Scotti
Junior Member
"We have to do more than that, Logan. We have to astonish them."
Posts: 50
|
Post by Scotti on Jul 12, 2011 0:38:30 GMT -5
An amazing amount of celebrities use their fame, money and status to do a lot of good in the world. You'll hear way more about Kim Kardashian's wedding than you'll hear about the excellent work Charlize Theron does in her native South Africa to combat the rampant plague of AIDS. Know why? Because it's the public that would rather see X-rays of Kim Kardashian's ass than read about Charlize Theron visiting the AIDS wards of hospitals. The point I'm trying to make is that we hear more about the negative aspects of celebrities and their lifestyle than the positive because it's those negative aspects that keep E! and TMZ and PEOPLE magazine and related media in business. I think Derrick mentioned a very great point right here. People prefer to hear about the drinking and sleeping around and rumor mongering and gossip mill stuff it seems. That is why we have E and TMZ and all that stuff. Yet people with celebrity can do a great many things. This sort of dynamic is the sort of thing I want to tackle in this series. While people will focus on Jean and Scott's divorce (as a reporter did in the last issue) or love lives or any other rumors, the X-Men will be seeing to sick children or helping rebuild homes ruined in storms or donating money and time to hospitals or any number of other things. While they are celebrities in a sense, that isn't the main idea in the book. These are the Avengers of the mutant world. They are the biggest hero team of mutants. The Avengers and Fantastic Four are pretty much celebrities within the world of the Marvel Universe. We've seen in stories that there are toys and comics and such of them within the Marvel Universe itself. In real life if there was such a team they'd be instant celebrities. Therefore it makes sense that there would be celebrity surrounding the X-Men as they go about trying to do what heroes do and save people. There will be big adventure of them going against the likes of the Mandarin or Khan or the Wrecking Crew and many other groups. They will be heroes doing heroic things. Yet there will be human moments too as that is what they are. I don't plan to make this book as dark as some current comic books as it just doesn't fit that way in my mind. There is no problem in my mind with darker books if they fit the character and the vibe of the series. This one does not fit that area. Yet it won't just be old school heroes go in, heroes fight, heroes win the day all the time style stories. They will have problems and weakness and such as to me that is what builds the book. Pure heroic stories have their places for sure, but that is not what Astonishing X-Men will be. So I totally understand if this is not someone's cup of tea when it comes to reading stories here.
|
|
gavin
Junior Member
winter is coming
Posts: 78
|
Post by gavin on Jul 24, 2011 5:41:28 GMT -5
I like that this title generated discussion, then Astonishing X-Men lost a character to gain two. We writers love our inflation hahah.
|
|