From: friedman@ganymede.cis.ohio-state.edu (Mark "Crimson" Friedman)
Subject: Re: CYBER FORCE #1
Organization: NAIVE - New And Improved Virtual Environment
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 02:20:26 GMT

In article <22880@galaxy.ucr.edu> zeus@watserv.ucr.edu (Zeus) writes:
>Mark "Crimson" Friedman writes
>-->In article <1992Oct11.215611.4468@cs.unca.edu> mcmahan@cs.unca.edu (Scott  
>McMahan -- Genesis mailing list owner) writes:
>-->I did read it again...and it still left a sour taste in my mouth.
>-->Maybe it's the fact that everyone *must* display their powers in the
>-->first issue: it's in their contract!  ;-)
>-->
>
>Do us all a favor and DON'T read anymore - period.

Bite me, pasty-boy.  HINT: ;-) denotes jesting in a wry vein.  Don't
tell me the concept of *sarcasm* goes over your head.  It's simply
cliche at this point.  Thusly I can make fun of it, despite it being
neccesary to the story.  I'd like you to know that one *can* spot
flaws in comics and still enjoy them.

But don't you wonder *why* I read the book three times?  It's because
I wanted to make an *informed*, *studied* analysis of it.  However,
your defense gives no evidence that you gave the book more than a
cursory examination.  Either that, or you're trying to relate too many
feelings at one time than your limited vocabulary can handle.  Get a
thesaurus and some logic skills and maybe we can talk productively.

>Hey, SPARKY!  It's a comicbook not reality.  If a guy has four arms -
>it's ok.  If they were all symmetrical - you'd be screaming that it's
>the Liefeld-MLF-Guy rip-off!

Eat me, wanker.  It's the idea of have *three* of the arms on one side
of his torso: this puts him out of balance and in the end,
*realistically*, he'd most likely end up with back problems.  I hope
he has a good chiropractor: he's gonna need one.

I frankly don't care about whasshisname Forearm or Spiral or whoever,
simply because they can attain balance and mobility.  Yeah, I can
handle a suspension of disbelief, but this crap just violates common
sense...which you seem to lack. (natch)

>-->
>-->>Well, the coloring *is* better than anything I've seen! And the art is  
>leaps
>-->>and bounds above the rest of comicdom. 
>-->
>-->Ho ho!!!  Hee hee!!!  HAHAHAhahaha...you're kidding, right?  Leaps
>-->and bounds?  Wow, you *really* like this book, eh?
>-->
>
>Well, judging from that little comment I assume you must be color-blind.

Blow me, dickweed.  If ya woulda read the original post *carefully*
you would've noticed that I gave the coloring *very* high praise.
You're just a regular No-Context-Wonder, ain'tcha?

I *DO* object to "leaps and bounds": that's just bullshit.  It's not
like Silvestri revolutionized comic art, moron.  Anyone on this
newsgroup will tell you that: CF #1 is no mega-marvellous innovation!
It may be *good*, but there's no way in hell it's *that* good.

>-->>Even ElfQuest, the original B&W comic, is now in color! Time marches
>-->>on, and things change. 
>-->
>-->But is it *better*?  [This is philosophy, so we needn't discuss it at
>-->this very moment...]
>-->
>-->>Well, lower your standards!!
>-->
>-->We *shouldn't* have to!  Is it too much for a book to have both image
>-->*and* substance?  The moral: don't settle for less, and keep mailing
>-->those letters to the editor.
>
>Listen - if you like B&W soooooo much why don't you just settel for the  
>newspaper funnies - they also wouldn't be as demanding as far as the reading is  
>concerned.

Go screw yer mom, sphincter-boy!  You have the knack for totally
misconstruing a level-headed critique in your zealous defense of a
simple comic.  Did I *say* B&W was better?  NO, you simp!  *I* only
said that B&W is *not* worse than color.  But apparently you assume
otherwise?  Fool...

Query: does manga suck in your book?

>-->
>-->>No wonder it didn't do anything for you.
>-->>Go look at some Monet and leave comics alone!
>-->
>-->The idea of comics is that it's both art *and* story-telling.  If one
>-->side is weak, it tends to bring down the other.  As art only, CF #1
>-->really couldn't stand on its own.  As a story it is still incredibly
>-->flat.  Put 'em together and it's still only typical.
>
>It's not HEMMINGWAY - but is it supposed to be?  Typical?  Unlike Clinton, I  
>bet you DID inhale!

Well, while I might actually enjoy the perfume of cannabis, you seem
to prefer the odor you receive by living with your head up your ass.

It's not Hemmingway...certainly by no means!  Since we *obviously*
don't have any bloody *characterization* in this book, how could it be
mentioned in the same *sentence* as Hemmingway?  At this point all we
have are flat players which are simply portrayed as the sum of their
powers.  That sucks.

>-->>: However, I do encourage people to take a look
>-->>
>-->>Why!?!?! you hated it!
>-->
>-->Because no matter what I think about it in summary, it still may have
>-->potential.  I by no means tell people *not* to get a book, ever!
>-->
>
>Not many will listen to you after this little interlude...

Ahhh, ye of little brain, you object to my criticizing a comic book,
but then admitting it may have potential?  Quit thinking in absolutes,
fanboy: comic reviews have more sides than a coin, more facets than a
diamond, more aspects than you have brain cells...

>-->Just because I find faults in a book doesn't mean it's *all* bad.  We
>-->gotta learn to stop thinking in absolutes.  The only point *I* was
>-->making was that this, by no means, is the best comic in print today,
>-->as you seem to believe.  I think this assesment is quite unrealistic.
>-->
>
>What planet are you from?  And what do you *read* there?

*I* read whatever I can get my hands on.  This means that I read color
comics, black and white comics, newspapers, magazines, novels, etc.  I
read for enjoyment and enlightenment.  You seem to read for the pretty
pictures.

Quite simply, if you contest that Cyber Force #1 *is*, in fact, the
best comic in the world today, I will laugh in your face.  A comic
with good art does *not* rank over a comic with good art *and* good
story.  Thousands of other RACM readers will agree with me on this
point.  In fact, I will even argue that a book with great writing and
shitty art beats a book with great art and shitty writing.  But that's
more appropriate for discussion in another forum...

>-->>Petty vindictive comments like this tend to shoot down any arguements
>-->>you made previously!
>-->
>-->Or rather, perhaps your sense of importance of your title lends doubt
>-->to your judgement in other realms.  You may be Adamant Authority on
>-->Everything in your own little world, but here you're just this guy,
>-->you know?
>-->
>
>Look who's talking.  I wouldn't want to visit the little world you're from.
>Planet of the [inbred] Apes, perhaps?

Ahhh, the barbed tongue! That savage wit!  You certainly *are* a self
proclaimed mind of our times, aren't you?  Perhaps if you cited some
*examples* or submitted some *arguments* or *anything* most sentient
newsreaders can, then I'd give you an honest listen.

Instead, however, you subsist on striking down my points with but only
an insult apiece.  Why is that?  I must theorize that it's because you
are not mature, intelligent, or level-headed enough to relate your
thoughts and emotions in terms of words and phrases.  I know it's
tricky, but if you take the time to post with a bit of thought then
you can get your point across.

All you had to do was cite a single instance of ingenuity in the comic
and I would've been happy.  However, your only semi-concrete argument
was "PURTY COLERING", which *I* never contested in the first place,
you git!  Besides, we all know how birds and small children are
attracted to bright colors and shiny objects: is this the level of
intellect i'm dealing with?  'Pack it with a hologram and they will
come...'

I can't believe it: you struck out big time!  It would've been even as
simple as saying, "geee, I kinda dug the splash-page of Ripclaw."  If
you did so, of course, I would've been prompted to ascertain what
exactly drew your eye to that particular drawing.  But then you'd have
to support it with *words*, which are OH-so difficult to arrange into
those *long* sentences, eh?  Poor baby...

The distillate of my critique remains as "why can't we have comics
with good art *and* writing?" and "Cyber Force #1 is by no means
'leaps and bounds' above the rest."  Your "purty colering" fixation,
however, leads me to believe that you place absolutely no emphasis
on the writing side of comics.

Get with the program: you're only enjoying half the point of comics.

						Sincerely,
						- Mark

>-->Mark "Klone Crimson" Friedman is friedman@cis.ohio-state.edu
>        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>     PUH-LEEZ!

Oh, this from a guy using the name 'Zeus'?  I simply adopted a name
bestowed upon me by a friend, relating certain similarities in my
musical composition style to a certain band.  You, on the other hand,
take the name of a *god*?  What does that say about you?

Whilst I portray myself as the artist, you certainly do your best to
come across as a hate-filled megalomanic.  Congratulations.

-- 
Mark "Klone Crimson" Friedman is friedman@cis.ohio-state.edu .................
"There is nothing former   "Beat poets,    "If you put a hungry ferret in your
 about King Crimson."       not children."  trousers, he'll run around..."
 - Robert Fripp, 5/11/90    - anonymous     - Nigel Tufnel (Spinal Tap)