ChrisBaleBatman
Legendary Hero
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2005
- Messages
- 19,677
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 56
It's happened before. Who's to say 3 or 4 issues down the line, everyone praises it?
Why do you keep reading them if they suck so much?The Batman said:yes...after three issues of suck, we should all expect the stories to become ten times better. As Dr.Evil would say "Riiiiiiiiight"
CrimsonMist said:i think it is.
It comes somtime while Year One is still in play, becuase the Red Hood incident just happened. Whether or not The Roman has the scars on his face or not will help alot to place it too. But's it's right after the Red Hood incident and before the end of Year One.
now, supposedly, Wagner is doing a mini-series retelling of The Monk, which i really want to see, becuase that 2-part series of the original story is one of my favorite Batman stories ever.
The Batman said:Damn ive gotta catch up.
Pretty much the only good batbook out there right now. Matt should be writing All Star Batman
MaskedManJRK said:I don't know, I think Miller's All-Star is more fitting with the old fourties comics. I mean, he was a crazy bastard in those. I mean, there weren't any "Goddamn Batman"s, but he did make a lot of comments like that, and DID KILL.
Really, Monster Men is a mixed bag. On one hand, it's cool that they're adapting these cool stories into continuity. On the other hand, reading those stories without the crazy bastard is...well...it's like watching porn without any nudity. What's the point?
CConn said:...that's sorta the point. That you don't need anything to be added to the character or have it be reinvented to write a good, enjoyable story. Too many people, I think, get caught up in this idea that great comics need to be these epic, revolutionary tales.
And maybe that's true for the legendary comics, but the ones that are really the most memorable, and enjoyable, are the classic, little throwback adventure stories.
That's what Monster Men is supposed to be. Not some revolutionary graphic novel, not some big character event, but rather a simple, fun story with a classic interpretation of the character. I really don't get how some people can't enjoy that...
What I'm saying is, I don't understand your reasoning. Like, say you said you didn't enjoy the story, I disagree, but it's understandable. Or even if you didn't enjoy this interpretation of the Batman; it's an understandable opinion, to me, at least. But to say you don't like it merely because there's no big event in it, I don't quite understand.New Shh! user. said:I do enjoy, but i don't give it a seconds thought between the time i finish reading one issue and when i buy the next. I don't think it has to be 'some revolutionary graphic novel' either, but my opinion of it is pretty justified. It wasn't like i was slating it.
I've explained my reasoning several times throughout the thread, including my last post.New Shh! user. said:Similarly i don't understand how you can call it Excellent, or whatever word you used in the first post.
MaskedManJRK said:I don't know, I think Miller's All-Star is more fitting with the old fourties comics. I mean, he was a crazy bastard in those. I mean, there weren't any "Goddamn Batman"s, but he did make a lot of comments like that, and DID KILL.
Really, Monster Men is a mixed bag. On one hand, it's cool that they're adapting these cool stories into continuity. On the other hand, reading those stories without the crazy bastard is...well...it's like watching porn without any nudity. What's the point?