I really am not in the mood to respond. But,
BrainWilly is probably winning the argument we were having, and to deny him a chance to kick me when I am down would be unfair of me.
I'm acting like your statements are pointedly and purposefully slanted to the point of comedy. Like I said at first and will now repeat, you've somehow managed to twist "writer picked late artists" into "writer is spoiled ignoramus who doesn't care about his work."
Yeah, because that is when I am clearly doing. I'm purposefully slanting my arguments to make you look better and me look ******ed, for pleasure.
I wasn't saying that Whedon didn't care or that he was the worst of the lot. I was commenting on how arcs and runs written by Hollywood types seem to always, by "magic", run horribly late. And I think 14 months for a 6 issue storyline is horribly late. Sadly, Whedon's RUNAWAYS run became just another part of that rule.
I have no proof that he didn't try to nudge Ryan more. You have no proof that he did. Honestly I looked through some of his interviews and the latest one I found online was from Wizardworld, circa Jan. 2008. About the only bit that wasn't pure fluff to me was Whedon admitting, rather honestly, that he probably could never top Colossus' reveal in AXM #4 in that entire run.
The irony is that if you looked through my posts, besides to find examples of what an ignorant stupid ****** you think I am, I actually ADVOCATED for Whedon to go to RUNAWAYS. In the topic for them that used to be part of this forum, people asked which "A-List" writer would one suggest to replace Vaughan. I thought Whedon would match Vaughn's voice well for the characters. When I found out Whedon was a fan, it was even better. I even liked some of Whedon's first issues of the run more than other RUNAWAYS fans on that topic. But that became harder to do when the story proved more mediocre over time and got later, and later, and later. Months between issues dragged.
Despite all this, I considered the grade for the run B-.
Really, I don't care who was the late party. I just am irked that it took 14 months to get 6 issues of RUNAWAYS. Whether it was his fault or not, the reality is that Whedon's Marvel stories are 0-2 for anything resembling a normal schedule. Like "magic".
If Whedon is announced to do another run on a Marvel franchise, would it be unfair of me to presume it will run behind, too?
BrianWilly said:
Clever boy! Feel better now? To be honest, I've learned more about what you really think from these little attempts at sidetracking and ad hominem than I ever have from any of your wordy paragraphs or prose. I've just asked you how you could possibly know how Whedon thinks, and you've just told me that you can't.
No, maybe I can't. I'm wrong and you're right. I'm garbage and you're gold. I'm a slack jawed ****** who shouldn't even post on a MB and you deserve to be a mod. Care for more?
BrianWilly said:
I
know I'm right
, and am prepared to defend my arguments as intensely yet objectively as I can. I think you're unreasonable because you have a tendency to appeal to bias, preconceptions, and flat-out guesses at the worst when asked to defend your arguments. Do you think I keep using those words against you because I'm pulling them out of my fine ass?
You gave them to me. As it has happened before, so it happens yet again. How many sweeping mischaracterizations or too-broad assumptions have you made here in the scope of this conversation --all of which having been proven wrong with some simple search results or general knowledge about the subject -- and tried to pass them off as valid points? You
tell me upfront that you're making all these disparaging statements for the most part because Whedon fans liking Whedon annoy you, and then you get ********* when I think that is trolling at best and pathetic at worst?
Fine, I am a "pathetic troll". Feel proud of yourself for exposing this "secret truth"?
BrianWilly said:
I don't perceive one writer the same way as I do another writer, that's very true. On the other hand I also don't usually hold it as a personal affront and assume the worst of personality shortcomings when someone is not capable of laying golden eggs on command (especially, need I say yet again, if it wasn't his job to lay those eggs in the first place). The way you say it, it's almost like you hold Whedon and others' A-list statuses as some sort of unwanted defect that they have to overcome. If preconceptions take you that far, maybe it's time to reconsider those preconceptions.
Expecting an A-List creative team to deliver A-List Results I don't think is very unreasonable. Expecting even a mediocre shipment schedule for such a run would be the very least we can do.
So, I suppose Whedon just has poor luck with artists, then. Poor Whedon. Maybe his 3rd time will be the charm.
I suppose, in your opinion, I should have spent all this text tearing Ryan to pieces while merely bemoaning Whedon's overly-cluttered-with-characters, generic-adventure storyline that is once again getting rave reviews as if it was WATCHMEN. Fair enough.
BrianWilly said:
If you know for a fact that one single person caused the lateness, or was a primary instigator, then you would treat the primary instigator different than the partner that he dragged down. You'd probably even weed him out as the problem to be solved here. If you don't, or in fact overemphasize the culpability of the wronged party far beyond the instigator, then you are merely being petty and unreasonable. The end. You are attempting to paint this all out as some vague office mystery scenario where someone has to be chosen to take the fall for a failed project based on an imperfect awareness of what went down, except that you know for a fact exactly how it went down, who was more culpable, and who deserves the blame more. You know for a fact that Ryan dragged Whedon down, and yet you are trying to depict Whedon as the one more at fault here because I guess he should have tried harder or something. That is bass-****ing-ackwards! To hold the person responsible for a fault responsible for the fault, instead of the person not responsible for it, is such common sense and normative thinking that it actually annoys me that you could sit there and pretend not to understand it. Yes, that's right I said it, it honest-to-Buffy annoys me that you are being so dense about this.
On top of which, if you were the boss and you knew for a fact that one single person caused the lateness and you yourself as the boss did nothing to rectify it and in fact aggravated the situation, you have absolutely no room to chew out the remaining party...who incidentally is the only who actually did his job, of all the parties involved. You're trying to pass this off as Whedon having somehow cleverly weaseled his way out of some wriggly pitfall all the whilst shedding the blame on everyone but himself when, in reality, there was no pitfall. There was no weasling. Perhaps it truly doesn't work that way in real life and it's all actually just a corrupt cluster**** of unfairness and people getting wrongfully accused and pointed fingers always fingering the right target regardless of context...but that doesn't mean I have to endorse it. In fact, I fully mean not to. You've presented an imperfect description of the scenario, and while I won't claim mine is perfect, it at least it takes more things into account -- is more fair, in other words -- than yours.
You're always right, I am always wrong. Got it.
BrianWilly said:
What, you mean if you presented a situation more accurately as opposed to the sweeping misrepresentations that you've been dishing? Yeah, that'd be cool. And I'd probably be less critical, yes.
No, you wouldn't. In fact, because you so obviously have won the argument objectively, I expect you to throw this into my face every single time I get passionate about any topic. Whenever you disagree with me on any future points, you will throw this little argument into my face to banter me down. Dread is always wrong, in your eyes. No opinion of mine is ever valid.
BrianWilly said:
I'm getting a bit tired of proving your sweeping statements wrong over and over again.
This is a blatant lie. You love every minute of "proving" me to be an ignorant ******. I type long rants and reviews and that gives me a rep, and gives me a target. I'm not saying you're doing this because of that alone; you're equally passionate about your point, which you're probably right on. But to say that you don't enjoy humiliating me is absurd. Just tell the truth about it. "I know I have the advantage of facts, Dread, so I enjoy every moment where I shove them into your face, and will do so forever after." I like honesty.
BrianWilly said:
Maybe there was once a time where I would jump to Whedon's defense over even the tritest subjective statements, but if I did, I honestly don't recall them. In fact, let me go ahead and say that, to all concerned, I genuinely apologize if I ever blew a fuse over any subjective opinions anyone's ever had, however negative, about Whedon's work or talent. However, I do not and will never apologize for correcting anyone -- harshly if need be -- for their flat-out misrepresentations, imprecise assumptions, and audacious embellishments as far as I can tell, whether they intended to do so or not, regarding any writer and not just Whedon.
I have never seen you defend any writer as zealously as Whedon. He brings out the animal in your debate skills.
So, I suppose I am wrong about any of the points I may make about Whedon's stories, not his comics' schedules too, right?
BrianWilly said:
I never ***** when you presume that I like Whedon, and frankly the fact that you still think so says a lot. I ***** when you use that as an excuse to ignore what I have to say. How many times have you done just that, even now?
Me: "Whedon doesn't have an ego."
You: "You don't know anything because you never give him bad reviews!!!!"
That sort of illogical exchange would be nigh-
comical if it weren't for the fact that -- judging from the amount of times that you have droned that exact line -- you are being totally serious about it and honestly think that it has anything at all to do with...what did you call it? A "clean debate?" Please. This is not even the first time I've told you this, so you don't even have the thin excuse of ignorance that you did for the first, oh, dozen or so times that you did it. In fact, **** this ****, frankly let me just say this: if all our future interactions are going to consist of you pigeonholing my fandom out of some
pathetic way to dodge all those questions you can't or won't answer, please just let me know about it right now so I can go ahead and ignore you from here on out. Seriously.
It is your call. I've told you before we don't get along on the MB's, and we never will. I'll remember being out-debated and will NEVER forgive you. I'll probably be overly harsh whenever we disagree in the future. You, for your part, will make no qualms about beating me over the head with this argument whenever we disagree in the future, or you think I am "flying off the handle" about an opinion.
We don't discuss things often, and whenever we do, it turns into a fight. It is really your call. I know about life stresses and if this is too much, by all means set me to ignore. Seriously. Life's too short sometimes.
BrianWilly said:
Heh, I actually, honestly think that you didn't mean for that to sound as heinously childish as it did. Here, you get a retry on that one.
Don't lie. You always believe the worst about me. Always have.
BrianWilly said:
You seem to have made it some sort of mission to prove that my biases cripple me as much as your biases do. Hey, guess what? I'm not going to apologize for liking Whedon more than other writers, which you -- for Willow knows what reason -- seem to think is some sort of shameful handicap. But I will say that I try earnestly to keep a level mind about the subject of Whedon, and at the very least I won't say things about him that I know objectively not to be true. And that is not the case for you. From what I have seen and that you have all but proven to me over these last few exchanges, you seem to accept and even thrive on your biases. I'd like to think, and this honestly may just be wishful thinking on my part, that any habits that I do gather from being a fan of Whedon's junk informs and maybe even strengthens how I think as a person. Maybe even for the better, who knows. That's what art does. That's what we all wish from our favored creators, after all. You feel sorry for me that I like Whedon? Don't. What have you done lately with your bias, Dread, other than to vent your misinformed frustrations based on the justification that you don't like someone else's fandom...oh, hmm, how did you put it? "Screaming to a wall"? I'm glad that's working out for you.
The only thing I admit on my avatar is that Whedon is my favorite writer. I do not and will never admit -- because I don't believe -- that Whedon being my favorite writer renders me incapable of presenting an informed, coherent, and valid position on him. The fact that you think so, and have shown that you are incapable of thinking otherwise no matter what, has and always will be your problem and your problem alone. You see what you want to see.
I think you're more biased than you think about Whedon. Your posts show more emotion when you debate about him.
Maybe I have gone a bit overboard with this and Whedon for personal reasons, and I am sorry. But, this is meaningless. I once apologized to PhotoJones when I went overboard, and then later he used that against me to depict me as a psycho. You also will not care.
Congratulations on out-debating me, if only because I really don't care to argue from an unwinnable position. The irony is that I often do like reading your reviews and we do have some opinions that we agree on. It is just when we disagree, they become knock-down fights. You'll say it is entirely because I am a jack-ass, and maybe I am. I just don't like seeing bias or perceived bias I guess, and I overreact to it. I also don't like seeing privaleged parties "get a free pass", and when I see that too, I also get angry about it. Professionally, Whedon's late comics, whether his fault or not, make no difference.
Now, can everyone talk about another comic this week? It always seems the biggest debates and discussions come about comics I dislike or get negative with vs. comics I actually like, and then people will claim that negativity doesn't breed posting.
