BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Underground > Comic Books >

New X-Men #142

  
  

Page: 12(3)45

 
 
raggedman
11:24 / 09.06.03
just had a thought about the stripper/dancer
if she's telepathic and making men see what they want to see then Scotts projecting the jean clone/goblin queen/fire stuff on her but he's finding it unarousing because he can't believe in it. which is a nice gloss on his relationship with emma also didn't madylene end up looking like that in something called inferno? i wasn't reading x men at that point but remeber seeing the cover.
 
 
Persephone
11:58 / 09.06.03
One of my favorite lines was QQ saying, "Get telepathy, Retarda."

Still I think I would have liked for Sebastian Shaw not to be telepathic, but to rely on his girls... then we could've been working with the whole pimp dynamic, where he's the muscle & his girls are the talent and what that means.
 
 
Mr Tricks
16:54 / 09.06.03
EXACTLY Persephone,

I just don't buy the "oh by the way I'm telepathic now" logic to SHAW especially when he mentions all his dancers. If he WAS telepathic why mention the dancers at all... for scott's benefit? why would he bother?

SHAW is exactly the type of person that would use another's skill and take the credit for what it accomplishes. IF he want's to distroy Sabertooth's mind that's what he'll do... if it means using any number of telepaths to do it it makes no difference to him. I like the HAMMER analogy...

Anyway, I don't think it matters how that dynamic is read in either direction, as I doubt it'll factor into the rest of the story arc. We'll probably have it cleared up when Esme joins as Shaw's new white...er, princess?
 
 
diz
17:01 / 09.06.03
Still I think I would have liked for Sebastian Shaw not to be telepathic, but to rely on his girls... then we could've been working with the whole pimp dynamic, where he's the muscle & his girls are the talent and what that means.

i would've liked that, too. however, it's just not what happened in the issue at hand.
 
 
Mr Tricks
18:14 / 09.06.03

i would've liked that, too. however, it's just not what happened in the issue at hand.

Sezzzzzz you!!!
 
 
grim reader
20:40 / 09.06.03
Today I bought New X-men #142, story by Grant Morrison. The cover bears the title 'Assault On Weapon Plus - 1 of 4'. It opens with a leatherclad mutant lapdancer dancing for Scott Summers aka Cyclops, trying to turn him on with her shenaniganspeak. Cyclops replies with "It's just your job to create a fantasy...you're not my girlfriend and all we're really sharing here is some weird financial transaction which is helping you through college".

I was confuzzled when I read this.

There are 21 pages of adverts in this comic. There are 22 pages of story plus the cover. One page of story is taken up with a product placement for Jack Daniels, which also appears on a later page. That leaves the advert to story ratio at 23:20 (or 1.15), counting the product placement pages as adverts. Counting the 'Previously in X-men...' page as page one, pages 5, 7, 9, 11, 13 all contain adverts - thats five times turning the page to see an advert on the right side of the comic. 16-17 is double page spread advert. 19, 21, 23, 25, 27, also have adverts, so thats another five pages of adverts on the right side of the comic, followed immediately by a 4-page block from page 29 to 32, then 35, 37 and 41 (the inside back cover) and also the back cover contain adverts. There's also an advert on the inside front cover. The product placements have wolverine on page 22 with a bottle of Jack Daniels and later we see Cyclops drinking Jack Daniels on page 33.

There are three actual double spreads devoted to story, two devoted to adverts.

Page 26 (a story page) reflects the image of page 27 beautifully, and I believe that some of this was intentional. Becky also reckons page 22 (the one with Wolverine pushing Jackie D's) also reflects the advert on page 23. The product placement is certainly intentional.

10 of the adverts were pushing an Incredible Hulk product of some sort, and they were more obtrusive than usual, being always on the right page, when they weren't on double spreads. The story is really bad, it reads like something from a summer special by some fill-in writer. It contains none of the Grant Morrisony goodness that I paid for. Also, it is pretty obvious from the story pages that they were designed to reflect the advertising; the incredible hulk reflecting a blatent product placement also reflected that angry feeling when you see such an obvious advertorial ploy.

I had to think about what Morrison is playing at here. I don't believe the man who wrote the Invisibles wants me to drink Jackie D's. Maybe he does. I prefer to think he's laying down a challenge to us not to accept this shit. And it is shit. Shit shit shit shit shit. The story is shit. The art is ok, but the bit i paid for, the bit with the story by the man whose name carries the whole New X-Men thing, was shit. Did i mention it was shit?

I'm taking this back to the shop and getting my £1.80 refunded. For £1.80 I could go buy a shot of Jack Daniels. But I'm not going to. I'm going to keep my money till next month's New X-Men and I'll buy that, and get another refund if it is shit. I encourage anyone who has bought this to do the same. And if you haven't bought it, I suggest you do, then take it back for a refund.
 
 
Matthew Fluxington
21:20 / 09.06.03
Grant Morrison, and every other writer and artist working at Marvel or DC, has NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ADVERTS IN THE COMICS. Having adverts in the comics is a fact of mainstream commercial comics publishing, and has been so since the beginning. The idea that the pages/story was designed to suit the advertising that would be inserted in the comic book is ludicrous, they would never really know what the ads would be. Get a fucking grip, man. It may help to be informed before you come up with these moronic conspiracy theories.

I'd definitely say that #142 was probably one the most Grant Morrison-y NXM comics to date, but maybe not if your idea of Grant Morrison at the top of his game is, say, the more wretched and convoluted issues of the Invisibles. If you're there for the humanity of the characters, this issue delivered. If you want quasi-mystical hocus pocus, you may have to wait til Phil Jiminez comes back, that storyline may satisfy your needs.
 
 
Mr Tricks
21:53 / 09.06.03
besides . . . Sebastian Shaw isn't telepathic!!!
 
 
diz
21:57 / 09.06.03
besides . . . Sebastian Shaw isn't telepathic!!!

as my mom would say - you're cruisin' for a bruisin', mister! =)
 
 
Suedey! SHOT FOR MEAT!
21:59 / 09.06.03
Whine whine whine. Is it all fanboys do? It doesn't matter if they're x-fanboys (Morrisson is ruining the X-men!!!!1111) or grant-boys (waaaah! Where's my morrisson goodness! These corporates are taking away his talents and telling him what to write!!!!111111), it's all the same noise to me.

Sigh. Maybe he does want you to go drink some Jack Daniels. Or maybe he's just writing a character who *would do that*.

Or maybe, just maybe, he is making a challenge to us not to accept this shit. Don't accept it! Don't accept this corporate shite!

However, it's entirely possible that he just wrote an issue you didn't like and there's no actual reason behind it. Who can say tho, eh? Who can say?
 
 
grim reader
22:11 / 09.06.03
Ah, the proverbial Flux. Are you really Andrew Avery in disguise, or is that a conspiracy theory too far?

Erm, about the adverts. Alan Moore, for one, can affect the advertising in his ABC line, pushing them all to the back. Why wouldn't they know what the ads would be? They know in advance on TV, as it allows for better product placement; also, most ads were for marvel products, so that makes it even easier to predict what adverts are coming up. I'm more than happy to bow to others' superior knowledge of the comics advertising biz, but a month to prepare a comic suggests that a writer (especially one as skilled in magic bullshit as Morrison) might just possibly be able to get hold of advanced knowledge.

Perhaps I'm not right about the ads in X-men being reflected in the story, but there;s certainly more of them than usual. I pull, at random, issue 138 of the New X men; 11 pages of adverts. My beautiful assistant is now pulling other back issues out of a hat; in #135, eleven adverts; in #133 eleven adverts; #132 twelve adverts; #119 twelve adverts. A huge leap up in the latest issue, to double what it was in these issues.

The Jack Danial's thing (with the mispelling) suggests to me it isn't a true product placement, and I can't see Morrison advertising these fuckers for free; i think perhaps he's commenting on the excessive advertising in this issue, and going O.T.T. with it to make a point. If you're happy to eat this shit, more power to you. I feel Morrison is saying to us, "are you really going to put up with this shit for much longer?" I don't know much about Morrison outside his comics and a handful of interviews I've read, but I can't imagine this issue went out without some real thought going into that Jack Danial's thing. And the fact that the adverts are all far more eye catching and better executed than the actual art in the story. I also get the impression he takes his art seriously, and thus might be more than a little pissed off with the amount of advertising he's being asked to scribble his stories onto the back of.

Humanity of the characters? Dear lord, that man fires energy bolts from his eyes (from another dimension, so my girlfriend tells me). That one has huge claws. The girl dancing can transform herself into any woman by reading men's desires and is really quite fat and ugly.

And yes, i love the quasi-mystical hocus pocus and the more wretched and convoluted issues of the Invisibles. What can I say? There's a reason I regard myself a GM fan.

'Why are they so rude?' asks my girlfriend. As I said, the proverbial Flux.

I want my £1.80 back.
 
 
Suedey! SHOT FOR MEAT!
22:20 / 09.06.03
Some points.

1. This is MARVEL.
2. Grant Morrisson, I should think, wrote this script months ago. (You know, so someone has the time to draw it?)
3. "Humanity of the characters? Dear lord, that man fires energy bolts from his eyes (from another dimension, so my girlfriend tells me). That one has huge claws. The girl dancing can transform herself into any woman by reading men's desires and is really quite fat and ugly." Well, one must question, why are you even bothering to read the X-men? You do know what they are, right?
4. Why must grant be commenting on "excessive advertising"; advertising which he probably knows nothing about, in an X-men comic? You know, something which is decidedly mainstream.
 
 
grim reader
22:35 / 09.06.03
Why am i bothering to read the X men? Perhaps because I enjoy it. I don't particularly sit down with a comic and think, 'hmmm, now for a dose of humanity'.

Perhaps you're right about Morrison's foreknowledge, or lack thereof, as I said, I'll bow to anyone with superior knowledge. Even if Grant never intended the message which I've picked up on, I'm still right about excessive advertising; it has shot up to double.

I find it amazing that no review I've read of this comic mentions the advertising (i've searched a few other sites, too). Didn't any of you notice you've been bombarded with twice as much advertising as usual? Normally I tolerate it, because I love comics enough to put up with it (I hate TV enough not to). But this really was taking the piss, especially given the Jackie D reference which, yes, I know, you're insisting was entirely incidental.

Perhaps just a natural convergence of forces telling me not to put up with this shit then, rather than the man himself? The point is, I've picked up that this is shit.
 
 
Kit-Cat Club
22:47 / 09.06.03
I noticed there was more advertising than usual - just assumed it was Marvel trying to hype the Hulk film and some ducious computer game, so it didn't really bother me as I don't care very much about them either way... It's not like they truncated the story to jam it in. Glue the offending double spreads together with Pritt Stick?

Of course, the principal problem could be that you just didn't get on with the story or Bachalo's art, but that's a different matter really, isn't it?
 
 
Suedey! SHOT FOR MEAT!
23:30 / 09.06.03
calvin: I was commenting more on the fact that I find it odd for you to be reading an X-men comic when you claim to find no humanity in the characters, and seemingly nothing beyond their various mutant powers.

For me, that just seems to be missing the essential point of the comic.

Maybe it was just the way you put it.
 
 
grim reader
23:33 / 09.06.03
Having re-read it, making an effort not to allow the adverts to influence my reception of it so much, I don't find the story any worse than his other X-men stuff; i won't try and compare to the others any more fully than that, though, as I don't feel I can really judge this issue properly. The excessive advertising has pissed me off, and does affect my reception of the story. I rarely get this way with advertising in comics, parhaps because the only other titles I've been getting recently/regularly are Promethea and perhaps Tom Strong now and again, where they nicely put all the ads in the back so Moore can get on with his story telling. Otherwise, i get TPB's, and i think I'll now wait for the New X-men in that form. Has the advertising really affected my enjoyment of the story, or am i fair to have said the nasty things i did about it? I don't know. I still want to know where he's coming from with the Jackie D's thing. It seems like a knowing nod, feels like a knowing nod, i hope to god it is a knowing nod, but its probably not, ok. I'm still taking it back. If I'd wanted to see all those pictures of the hulk, I'd've bought a copy of a hulk comic and not X men. It interfered with my enjoyment of the story, the same way advertising in cinemas affects my enjoyment of the film, to a lesser or greater extent depending on the particular adverts. I think I'll start being more bloody minded about adverts in future. Starting with refusing to accept this comic. With that much advertising it should be free.

I think I might be going insane. When i reread it, I started suspecting Morrison of inventing that Mary Jane novel and the Trouble comic; 'A Story That Couldn't be Told in the Marvel Universe!'. I think I'd be able to handle Morrison having invented these a lot better than being told they really exist. Please, tell me they don't seriously market this stuff. That implies people read them!
 
 
Mr Tricks
23:37 / 09.06.03
Meanwhile....
as my mom would say - you're cruisin' for a bruisin', mister! =)

that's mister Tricks to you bub...
 
 
grim reader
23:44 / 09.06.03
Hi Suedehead, nice name BTW. All i was saying was that I don't go looking for humanity, or if i do, then I'm not consciously looking for humanity. I'm looking for entertainment primarily, and if i get something deeper, then that's a bonus. I'm not particularly fussed about their special powers; it's all just ink and paper, after all. Perhaps I do enjoy humanity in characters; i don't know, i've never analysed this particular aspect. What i look for is stuff that makes me go 'wow! I want to write that!' or just get me on a bit of a high. I can't say I get particularly fussed about individual characters, but rather about what they represent and the way they interact in whatever symbol scheme they're being thrown into this time.

I think it was partly just the way i put it, yes. My humanity comment was a bit facetious, and was more about giving off the old 'fuck off' vibes to someone i felt was being a bit of a twat.
 
 
Matthew Fluxington
02:19 / 10.06.03
Alan Moore, for one, can affect the advertising in his ABC line, pushing them all to the back.

He's in a very different position with the ABC comics. He own those characters, and those comics don't sell too much, and DC is willing to make the compromise. Grant Morrison, on the other hand, is writing The X-Men, Marvel's flagship comic. He's genuinely lucky to have a say in what stories he gets to write about in New X-Men, there's just no way that he's going to have a hand in the adverts.

Advertisements in Marvel and DC comics have nothing to do with the content of the individual comics and issues - ads are sold in a package deal that includes every comic in the line for the month. The number of ads in New X-Men will be the same in Amazing Spider-Man, The Incredible Hulk, and Uncanny X-Men. They will be the same ads, too. In the same places, unless there is some special reason to move the ads (read: double page art spreads).

Why wouldn't they know what the ads would be?

Because it is of no concern to the writers/artists. It's not up to them.

They know in advance on TV, as it allows for better product placement;

But advertising in tv and comics have very little in common. Apples and oranges, man.

also, most ads were for marvel products, so that makes it even easier to predict what adverts are coming up.

If you pay attention, very few of those ads were for Marvel products, most of them are for products by other companies with licensed Marvel characters. Marvel really doesn't do many in-house ads anymore, though DC does. There are a lot of Hulk ads because the film is coming out that month, and there are a lot of tie-ins. This is not complicated.

I'm more than happy to bow to others' superior knowledge of the comics advertising biz, but a month to prepare a comic suggests that a writer (especially one as skilled in magic bullshit as Morrison) might just possibly be able to get hold of advanced knowledge.

I'm sure that if he asked, he could find out about some of the advertising, but it really wouldn't mean anything. He couldn't do anything about it, and if he tried to say "well, I want to do a magic spell with the video game ads because I'm a wizard!," he would just get laughed at.

The Jack Daniels thing is product placement, but it's tremendously subversive. I'm shocked that no one has made a big deal about this yet - this would NEVER have been done back in the day. For an entire issue to show heavy binge drinking in a vaguely positive light, and then give a very specific product placement from the most popular character among children is definitely in questionable taste for a comic about what are still essentially children's characters.

The bottom line: if you seriously can't handle advertisements, you're just going to have to quit reading individual monthly corporate comics or learn to tune them out like everyone else. You've definitely got to stop living in this irrational fantasy land in which franchise comics written and illustrated by freelance creators without advertisements or with total creative control.
 
 
houdini
02:28 / 10.06.03

To be fair, my own ability to "tune out" ads in comics has gravely deteriorated of late. I remember going back to old X-Men comics and being quite surprised to find that there were ads throughout them. I really don't remember them being there as a child. It was a lot like when I watched Red Dwarf for the first time in donkey's years about a month ago and was shocked to discover it had a laugh track.

I think it's my inability to tune out modern ads that has driven me to my Big Decision: When 'Cerebus The Aardvark' finishes in another year or so then I will stop buying monthly comics. They're too expensive, they're too fragile, they're a pain in the ass to loan out to people. Trades are cheaper, sturdier, ad-free and easy to loan. And the days of the argument "if you don't buy the monthlies then there won't be any trades" are pretty much dead, even with smaller outfits a la Fantagraphics (assuming they survive their $80k crisis) getting product into bookstores in a big way.

All that said, I thought nXm #142 was pretty topping. Great dialogue from Logan, good treatment of Scott. Bachalo's nowhere near Jimenez in my personal artistic canon, but I felt he did a pretty good job compared with what I'd been expecting. My only real point of negativity was, "God, not Fantomex again."

The guy's like Gambit with a personalitectomy. And that's saying something.
 
 
Matthew Fluxington
02:47 / 10.06.03
And the days of the argument "if you don't buy the monthlies then there won't be any trades" are pretty much dead,

Oh really.

Then why can't I get, say, the Legion Lost series in a trade paperback form?

Sales on individual issues is a major factor in determining whether or not a comic is collected as a book. This won't be changing any time soon, particularly at DC Comics, which is the #2 company in the industry.
 
 
El Gato Was Right: the t-shirt
02:51 / 10.06.03
Alls I know is I have a fierce and inexplicable hankering for some Jake Danials...




...whatever the fuck that is.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
08:58 / 10.06.03
%Perhaps Logan should have ordered a nice bottle of organic, fair trade bourbon from the Hellfire Club cellar? That would have been totally out of character and nonsensical, but it would mean I felt less betrayed by Grant Morrison, a man who has never portrayed alcohol or brand consumption in a positive light before, and certainly not in The Invisibles!%
 
 
Simplist
15:56 / 10.06.03
I think it's my inability to tune out modern ads that has driven me to my Big Decision: When 'Cerebus The Aardvark' finishes in another year or so then I will stop buying monthly comics.

Heh. I recently made the same "big decision" re:NXM, it being the only monthly I've been buying for the last year or so (I was getting The Filth too, but bagged about halfway along a decided to wait for the book) I plan to stick with NXM through #150 then switch to trades exclusively except for the odd eccentric miniseries from a smaller publisher who may not ever collect it. I find they supply a much more enjoyable reading experience generally, for all the usual reasons (better paper, sturdier, no ads, more actual story in one place, etc.), not to mention they're often slightly less expensive than the monthlies would've been. The only thing I'll miss is following message board discussions as each issue is released (as I hate spoilers), but I could stand to spend less time staring at this screen in any case.
 
 
Matthew Fluxington
16:04 / 10.06.03
See, I think that New X-Men is more and more geared towards being read as single issues, which is one of the best things about it. I understand the desire to have everything in one place, but in the case of New X-Men, I feel that half of the fun would be removed. You're supposed to be anxious to get to the next issue, it's meant to be an episodic serial, not a graphic novel.
 
 
Mr Tricks
16:08 / 10.06.03
anyone remember those old school...

"continued on the page after next" thing they used to place at the bottom of comic pages before the ads?

when was the last time you saw one of those?
 
 
grim reader
16:40 / 10.06.03
I returned my copy of New X-Men #142 today, with no problems at all. The staff of Newcastle's Forbidden Planet were polite and saw my point immediately and agreed that the advertising was excessive. I'm really glad they didn't take advantage of their position as the only comic shop in the city, and refuse me my refund. Yay for FP staff. They're nothing like the fat bloke from the Simpsons.
 
 
grim reader
16:49 / 10.06.03
I heard a proverb that went something like...I'm sure that if he asked, he could find out about some of the advertising, but it really wouldn't mean anything. He couldn't do anything about it, and if he tried to say "well, I want to do a magic spell with the video game ads because I'm a wizard!," he would just get laughed at.

Perhaps. But then, thats a pretty shit vocabulary to use for magic, for those particular ends anyway.

The Jack Daniels thing is product placement, but it's tremendously subversive. I'm shocked that no one has made a big deal about this yet - this would NEVER have been done back in the day. For an entire issue to show heavy binge drinking in a vaguely positive light, and then give a very specific product placement from the most popular character among children is definitely in questionable taste for a comic about what are still essentially children's characters.

Yes, I hope that something like this really is the case. He's shown himself to be too intelligent a writer in previous works for me to accept the simplest explanation, which is just that he's either got an ad deal, or wanted to advertise his fave product for free.

The bottom line: if you seriously can't handle advertisements, you're just going to have to quit reading individual monthly corporate comics or learn to tune them out like everyone else. You've definitely got to stop living in this irrational fantasy land in which franchise comics written and illustrated by freelance creators without advertisements or with total creative control.

Yes, thanks for 'the bottom line', Flux. I'd already come to that conclusion myself. I'm not sure what that last sentence means, but i understand it's some sort of childish attack. Do you fancy coming back into a fantasy land with recognisable grammar so i can at least childishly respond?
 
 
Matthew Fluxington
16:49 / 10.06.03
You do realize that the advertising is an important source of revenue that in part pays the wages of the creators and keeps the comics in steady publication, right? "Excessive advertising" = good thing for the creators and the company. They could use MORE advertising, really. It'd bring the cover price down a bit, probably.
 
 
grim reader
16:53 / 10.06.03
That proverb about you being a wanker really is true. Are you serious? I'd kind of hope that fans of Morrison would have the imagination to see how a non-corporate-controlled world might work, or even just be preferable.
 
 
Matthew Fluxington
17:00 / 10.06.03
Calvin, I think your position in all of this can be best summed up in two words: mindblowingly unreasonable. Or, alternatively: staggeringly unrealistic. Here you are, shooting your mouth off about all of this without even the slightest grasp on how advertising works in comic books, somehow convinced that a freelancer would be granted control over the advertising. This is like thinking that the fry cook at your local McDonalds has some say in how McDonalds is advertised in his area. Worse, it like believing that that fry cook would be allowed to manipulate the advertisements if he asked so that he could create some kind of sigil because he fancies himself a mystical shaman. Let's be realistic, okay?

Something to think about: since Chris Bachalo drew the damned thing, it may very well have been his idea to do the Jack Daniels product placement. He's the guy who went out of his way to render it so accurately, after all.
 
 
Matthew Fluxington
17:09 / 10.06.03
I'd kind of hope that fans of Morrison would have the imagination to see how a non-corporate-controlled world might work, or even just be preferable.

How thick are you?

This isn't about dreaming of a non-corporate world, this sub-conversation in this thread is dealing with the reality of Morrison working for a corporation with massively popular franchise characters.

I'm not the guy who gave Grant Morrison the idea to work for corporations. If you're so annoyed by Morrison's decision to work for the companies, take it up with him. The overwhelming majority of his writing to date has been for corporations. It's not as if he's a guy who has spent much time working for the little guy, or has done much of anything in the DIY realm. He's maybe not the best guy to cite as a hero if you're going to be spitting out anti-corporate rhetoric in a converation about comic books.
 
 
grim reader
17:20 / 10.06.03
And you appear to be making the argument that McDonald cooks are great, and we should welcome more adverts for McDonalds. Thats a shit argument. And not just normal advertising, either, but advertising that you can't escape from when you 'consume' the product. At least at Mackie D's I can shut my eyes to get away from the yellow arches and plastic clowns. Not that I'd put myself in that position anyway.

And I'm not making any cliams to being 'realistic'. Most of the world is made up of fiction, even the 'real' stuff.

Something to think about: since Chris Bachalo drew the damned thing, it may very well have been his idea to do the Jack Daniels product placement. He's the guy who went out of his way to render it so accurately, after all.

Thanks, never really thought about it, and I'm not familiar with his other work.

Why are you being so condescending? What gives you the right to think you're capable of summing up my arguments, in however many words? I've already said I know nothing about how ads work in comics, and you've responded in a spirit of twatness not as one who wants to share relevant information. Did you stop to think that perhaps I'd've liked to have learnt the details of the comics industry with someone willing to be friendly, rather than someone who is a tit?
 
 
Matthew Fluxington
17:48 / 10.06.03
*bangs head against brick wall*

I made no value judgement about the McDonalds fry cook. The analogy is this: Grant Morrison is a work for hire freelancer. It is irrelevant whether or not his work is of artistic merit in this analogy. Grant Morrison has no more say in the corporate/advertising decisions than a McDonalds employee, or the checkout girl at Walmart, or the night manager at Kinkos. They do their job, and that is it. If the advertisements in the comic books that he writes were an important thing to Mr. Morrison, then perhaps he would choose not to work for Marvel and DC.
 
 
diz
18:52 / 10.06.03
Why are you being so condescending?

why are you such a fucking twit? i hate to descend to this level, but my God, everything you've said in this thread gives me the impression that you're a 15-year old boy who just listened to Never Mind the Bollocks for the first time last week and has been practicing his punk-rock sneer in his parent's mirror since then. you're obsessing over really petty bullshit, but you're acting like you're out there manning the barricades by yourself in your lonely crusade against The Man.

get over it. corporate comics have corporate advertising. if you can't deal with that, don't read corporate comics. if you can deal with that, then do so and quit your bitching.
 
  

Page: 12(3)45

 
  
Add Your Reply