BARBELITH underground
 

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


We3 #1

 
  

Page: 123(4)5678

 
 
Spaniel
20:33 / 27.08.04
Not reading any spoilers, me.

OCTOBER!!!!!!!
FUCKING QUITELY!!!!!

End of fanboy rant.
 
 
Triplets
20:35 / 27.08.04
Bigger cover here

And yes, whoever said Tinker was a girl, you're right.

Aww. Wouldn't hurt a fly.
 
 
FinderWolf
20:39 / 27.08.04
>> Then we'll get a nice big cyborg-animal-death-machine fight.

YEAH!

With chains, if we're lucky!

(That was dedicated to BioK9)
 
 
Triplets
20:40 / 27.08.04
Nice, big picture of a nice, big mastiff

Look like one of Zuul's dogs.

Weapon4 is either going to be the dog version of Seth from The Authority (notice how the We3 suits basically look like Seth anyway, minus the hundreds of penises?). OR, he'll be this ampflied-intelligence Brainiac 5 (Cainiac?) type dog running the whole Search and Destroy Operation himeself.
 
 
Mr Tricks
20:49 / 27.08.04
Gud DOG

I think BANDIT was reacting to that senator's reaction. The Senator was visably startled that the god spoke. As a result Bandit was seeking reassurance as to weither he did the "correct" thing when he replied (politeley) to the question asked of him. Any dog will do this sort of thing (mine does--minuse the language chip)

Yes the animals can be steared by joy sticks as the Rats where.

We4 is probably a military trained attack dog (mastive).

I figured the cat's bionic tail was designed to function in relation to it's new bionic mass and weight.

it's also facinating to me that the cover images have a bit of a more idealistic children's book illustration feel to it... reflecting their more innocent past.

Also if these animals where "found" people other than the original owners may not know their name. Hence refering to the dog as #1 rather than Bandit which is the name he would also respond to based on his upbringing.
 
 
Triplets
21:26 / 27.08.04
Yeah, but they could've just asked for his name

"1, what did your master name you?"
"NAME? NAME OF BAHN-DITT"

But they're called 1, 2 and 3 because they're not animals, they're ordinance. Like that masterpiece of cinema, Robocop:

Lewis: I just asked him his name.
Morton: Let me make something clear to you. He doesn't have a name. He has a program. He's product.
 
 
Spaniel
21:51 / 27.08.04
Now then, back to non-spoiler discussion.

Finder...

They can't survive more than a few days without their medication ["medication" is emboldened within the original text]

Do ya see what I'm getting at?
 
 
Triplets
22:33 / 27.08.04
Btw, can anyone tell me why Roseanne's keycard has the name Carol(ine?) Ashfor(d?) on it?
 
 
LDones
22:53 / 27.08.04
Robocop references are unto Strangers With Candy references. No Man may top them.

That keycard Carol(ine) Ash(ford)/Ander(s) signature bit is amusing. What's Frank on about there?

RobocopIsGudRUGud2?
 
 
CameronStewart
00:50 / 28.08.04
>>>That keycard Carol(ine) Ash(ford)/Ander(s) signature bit is amusing. What's Frank on about there?<<<

It MAY be that Quitely drew the page and named the character before the final script. Grant and I worked plot-first - or "Marvel Style" - on Seaguy, in which I would get a script broken down into panels but with only temporary rough dialogue, and he would complete the dialogue after reviewing the final artwork. It's possible that Grant named the character only after the art was finished, not noticing the teeny lettering on the card.

It seems unlikely, though - from reading the mini-interview with Quitely in the On The Ledge column it sounds like they got together frequently to plan all this stuff out.

Weird.
 
 
CameronStewart
00:54 / 28.08.04
Oh yeah, so even though I'm on the comp list and get all DC books for free, the new box doesn't arrive for around another 3 weeks, so I broke down and had to buy a copy of We3 today. Couldn't wait!

It's one of the most exciting (by which I mean creatively and emotionally stimulating) comics I've read in, like, forever. Or since the last Morrison/Quitely collaboration...
 
 
wicker woman
04:33 / 28.08.04
Gud DOG

I think BANDIT was reacting to that senator's reaction. The Senator was visably startled that the god spoke. As a result Bandit was seeking reassurance as to weither he did the "correct" thing when he replied (politeley) to the question asked of him. Any dog will do this sort of thing (mine does--minuse the language chip)


Yeah, I could buy that.

I figured the cat's bionic tail was designed to function in relation to it's new bionic mass and weight.

As far as the cat's tail goes, I figured it was more like a grenade launcher, or for planting explosives and such. None of the other animals seemed as directly equipped for something like that.

On the Senator, I don't think he really felt sorry for the animals at all. Perhaps on some base level he had a normal reaction to it, but I'd bet he was thinking more of public reaction to the standard cute n' fuzzy set being turned into a killing-machine trifecta.
 
 
miss wonderstarr
08:57 / 28.08.04
another question

What exactly do the animals shoot with? On the big splash there's about 50 bullets ripping the guy up. I can't see any obvious weapons on their outfits.
 
 
Spaniel
08:59 / 28.08.04
GUD DoG

I tend to think the dog is asking for reassurance and presenting us with a question about the moral status of Washington, that is finally answered by Bandit's serious demeanour when he asks the question for the final time.
It seems to me that at the end of the exchange Bandit is reassured that this isn't a particularly good guy (hence his piercing stare).
Of course none of this guarantees that Bandit understands moral concepts, just that he can sniff out a guy who doesn't have his best interests at heart.
 
 
Spaniel
09:01 / 28.08.04
Frankly, if what I've suggested itsn't correct then Morrison has wasted a lot of space presenting us with an entirely banal exchange that does nothing to forward the narrative.
 
 
Haus of Mystery
11:27 / 28.08.04
>>Oh man, has anyone read Timoleon Violeta Come Home? If George has we could be in a fucking world of everlasting hurt.

Seriously, saddest book of the 21st Century, and it's, natch, about a dog finding its way home.<<

Hey Kenneth! I know the author, Dan Rhodes. Used to work with him at Waterstone's. Heckuva nice guy, and handsome to boot.

Oh, and Kovacs, if you're gonna say ANYTHING about stuff you've heard about coming up in this book PLEASE put spoiler warnings up. Jeez.
 
 
FinderWolf
12:08 / 28.08.04
>> Yeah, but they could've just asked for his name

WHO IS NUMBER ONE!!!?

(Sorry, had to get the Prisoner reference in there)
 
 
Triplets
12:33 / 28.08.04
Kovacs, I assumed the weapons are concealed inside their exo-frames and fold out like some kind of destructive origami when needed.
 
 
Ganesh
14:43 / 28.08.04
It's called resonance, people. It's about Grant Morrison finding the poetry in the language of computer commands and being so intoxicated with its implications that he's using the terms without regard for the actual functionality of real computers. SAVE : CANCEL :: preservation : negation. Will the she SAVE the beastie-borgs or CANCEL their very existence?

S'what I said (only not as well). I do think it throws a slight glitch into an otherwise smooth narrative, but hey ho.

I wondered whether the medication mentioned was some sort of immunosuppressant, to stop the animals' bodies rejecting the mass of hardware?

I didn't think the rabbit came across as Superego, so much as anxious and quickfire - although rabbits are apparently creatures of routine (they apparently get stressed if you don't feed them at the same time each day, etc.)
 
 
Ganesh
14:52 / 28.08.04
Oh yeah, and I suspect that if there really is a Watership Mow-Down at the start of Issue 2, it'll also be carried out by No.2...
 
 
Spaniel
15:29 / 28.08.04
I wondered whether the medication mentioned was some sort of immunosuppressant, to stop the animals' bodies rejecting the mass of hardware?

Yeah, conceiveable but I doubt Morrison has forgotten Jurassic Park in this little set-up. The medicine could serve a dual function: immunosuppressant and control mechanism (a handy bi-product).
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
19:12 / 28.08.04
Love the way 2 took out that bird. One eye closed! Red dot! Shoot! Jump and catch! Hardcore. And how their numerical names combined with txt speak lead to odd exchanges like this:

3: "2 COME."

2: "2 WHERE?"

3: "2 HOME!"

2: "2 STAY."

Fucking great.
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
21:44 / 28.08.04
Fucking awesome. Yup, I think some tear-jerking is definitely in the offing. Love the way Quitely gets the animals' expressions so perfect, conveying all the emotion eithout any cutesy anthropomorphising.
 
 
chaos_15
01:53 / 29.08.04
amazing. beautifull. I've read it 5 times already and i'm still amazed.

I don't care for any other comic from now on. We3 is oficially my favorite comic ever.

Is anyone else geting excited about Ellis' run on Iron Man after reading this?
 
 
Triplets
01:57 / 29.08.04
Ellis is writing my favourite alcholic robot?

Fuck yes.
 
 
wicker woman
07:12 / 29.08.04
Watership Mow-Down

Heh.
 
 
goodkingwenceslaus
15:15 / 29.08.04
Hello everyone (especially all of you "gud dog" people!)-- just thought I'd let you know that I attacked this passage at length here:

http://ynot.motime.com/1093741019#330921

thanks,
Dave
 
 
--
15:29 / 29.08.04
I think it's interesting how survelliance has been playing a big part in GM's comics for some time now. It began towards the end of the millenium in "The Invisibles" in which the Outer Church agents were constantly harping on about cameras everywhere. Then in "The Filth" you had the cameras all over London, Feely under survelliance, LaPen, and so on. "Seaguy" of course had the giant eyeballs everywhere, and now in "We3" you have the very long sequence seen from the cameras. I'm not sure what it all means... Perhaps the epic shot of the animals breaking out of the facility is symbolic of an escape from this constant survelliance.

Regarding the comic itself, of the 3 3-issue comic series that Grant mentioned I was only wary of this one, not because I thought it would suck but because I'm a big animal person and something tells me that tragedy of some sorts will be inevitable in this one, so it'll probably be a tough read. The animals themselves are very cool looking, especially the bodysuits they wear. The whole thing is very well-designed and flows smoothly. It really is a cinematic experience. The artwork is very good. Upon first reading I found it fairly sterile but it seems each time I read it there's more and more emotion. I'm afraid I'll have to file that splash page of We3 escaping with my "Grant Morrison panels that make me teary-eyed" (see Crazy Jane & Cliff Steele's last image on Danny the Street in "Doom Patrol", the very last panel of "Animal Man", Feely descending into the subway at the end of "The Filth", etcetera).

My favorite character, perhaps unsurprisingly, is Tinker the cat (and I love her stereotypical cat anti-social behaviour exhibited when she meets the visiters). Bandit is sickeningly cute (esp. in the panel where he tilts his head and says "? R. U. 2?") and the rabbit is interesting (to me) because I don't really know much about rabbits, thus his character and motivations seem more interesting to me. For some reason I imagine him to talk like the Dwarf from "Twin Peaks". I love those survelliance panels where you see the animals, after realizing their restraints are off, prepare to attack... both cool and scary at once.

I like all these mini-series that GM is doing but I would like to see him return to a larger scale format one day... Something longer then 3 issues (or even the 13 issues of "The Filth"). "We3" seems like it'll be just the right lenght at 3 issues but other stuff he's done, such as "Seaguy", could definetly need more issues (hopefully that series will be continued).
 
 
Spyder Todd 2008
15:46 / 29.08.04
I like all these mini-series that GM is doing but I would like to see him return to a larger scale format one day...

Two words for ya, Sypha.
Seven. Soliders.
 
 
miss wonderstarr
15:56 / 29.08.04
I think it's interesting how survelliance has been playing a big part in GM's comics for some time now. It began towards the end of the millenium in "The Invisibles" in which the Outer Church agents were constantly harping on about cameras everywhere. Then in "The Filth" you had the cameras all over London, Feely under survelliance, LaPen, and so on. "Seaguy" of course had the giant eyeballs everywhere, and now in "We3" you have the very long sequence seen from the cameras. I'm not sure what it all means...

On a basic level, I'd say he simply realises that surveillance, panoptic control or whatever you'd like to call it is a significant part of our contemporary culture, from CCTV in every city centre to reality shows dominating TV schedules.

And I would add "zzz.Zenith.com" to your list: Zenith is being trailed by a miniature camera-drone for his own reality show.
 
 
miss wonderstarr
16:21 / 29.08.04
just thought I'd let you know that I attacked this passage at length here:

Personally I still feel the idea that Bandit is

a) asking himself or Mr Washington whether Mr Washington is morally "good"

OR

b) asking if God is a dog

are, to be polite, a step too far. I just don't think these interpretations are especially plausible or that it's necessary to force them onto this text to make it meaningful. I still feel the exchange, if Bandit's dialogue is "translated" into standard English, runs

"And how are YOU today?"

"I'm good. Are you good too, Mr Washington?"

[saying "I'm good" for "I'm fine" is just an Americanism. I don't see any need to complicate it further... Bandit is saying "yes, I'm very well thank you," not "I'm morally good, are you?" or more absurdly, "I'm God, are you?"]

"My God. It can't escape, can it?"

"Are you good, too?"

[Mr Washington didn't reply to the question. Bandit is confused and waiting for a reply. He's a dog not a philosopher. Look at the way he acts on the penultimate pages, sniffing around and deciding on a simple plan of action: it's dangerous here, we're going home now! These are animals with the mentality of what they are, armoured versions of domestic pets, given some ability to voice their thoughts.]

"This is astonishing. Good dog. GOOD dog."

"Good dog. Is good dog?"

[Bandit has to process what he hears to make sense of it. He repeats, he needs human reassurance. He's echoing back what he heard, then checking "am I a good dog?" He's not asking if he's morally good, or if Washington is morally good -- he's saying "did I do right, am I in favour, will I get a biscuit?" That's what dogs do. Bandit is just a normal dog, placed in an abnormal exoskeleton and controlled by humans when he's at work. He wants a pat on the head; he's not asking if God is a canine like himself. If nobody above was saying such a thing, I apologise, but I got the impression this dialogue was being interpreted this way.]

From the link above:

In the context of Morrison's career, I think it's pretty clear that this is a continuation of the "desentimentalization" of animals which really kicked into high gear with The Filth (which featured a hideous dolphin shrieking "don't patronize me!" and a chimp bound for hell)...

The whole backbone of the Filth was a man's compassion and love for his pet cat.
 
 
Triplets
17:15 / 29.08.04
BTW, is it wrong for me to want to see Weapon 4 as a exo-armoured killer chimpanzee from hell?

Kill for Clinton!
 
 
goodkingwenceslaus
17:37 / 29.08.04
"The whole backbone of the Filth was a man's compassion and love for his pet cat."

Right. But the cat was not depicted as an admirable being, or a moral one. Just a (hungry) loveable one.

Dave
 
 
Triplets
19:16 / 29.08.04
Hi Dave, do you have OCD?
 
 
Warewullf
19:57 / 29.08.04
Cheers for that, Kovacs. I was thinking exactly the same thing.
 
  

Page: 123(4)5678

 
  
Add Your Reply