Thoughts on Pete's Status/Hiatus

[Leo656]

Didn't Stan Lee pretty much just lay out the broad strokes and have guys like Ditko actually write the stuff in detail? I swear that's how I've always heard it described in their situation. Particularly from people who love to point out that Lee's partners/underlings did all the real "work" while Stan got all the credit, money, and fame. By Stan's own admission he was never much of a writer. He just did the basic, "So here's what happens" kind of stuff, far as I remember.

[myconius]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

...compare a Grant Morrison script to like a Geoff Johns script...

hahaha! i like that analogy!
Grant Morrison to Geoff Johns is like a seven course meal to a bowl of Cap'n Crunch!!!

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by myconius

hahaha! i like that analogy!
Grant Morrison to Geoff Johns is like a seven course meal to a bowl of Cap'n Crunch!!!

I like you already. Grant Morrison is a writing god and Geoff Johns is a meek but empowered frat boy who kissed the right asses coming up.

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by Leo656

Didn't Stan Lee pretty much just lay out the broad strokes and have guys like Ditko actually write the stuff in detail?

That I don't know. Though I'd be fascinated to read whatever would constitute a Stan Lee script. I wouldn't be surprised, in any case. Stan Lee seems like he was more of an ideas guy... thankfully, great ideas.

[myconius]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

I like you already. Grant Morrison is a writing god and Geoff Johns is a meek but empowered frat boy who kissed the right asses coming up.

thank you sir!

i can't say enough good things about Grant's writing!
the re-read of any given story of his alone is mind bending!!!!

i've read through his entire run on Batman several times, and i'm STILL finding little hidden gems in there!!!

his complete Batman saga is one of my ALL time favorite pieces of comic writing!

now i will admit i do find some of Johns writing amusing, but like i said ..... Cap'n Crunch. it's just empty calories and it'll rot your teeth!

[Leo656]

As someone who likes them both, for different reasons, and most of the time but not ALL of the time... I'll just say this...

Someone who hasn't read a million comic books in their life can pick up and read a Geoff Johns comic book, understand it, and enjoy it. You can almost never, ever say that about a Morrison comic.

One can argue all day long about whether one is "Deep" or the other "Superficial", as far as their writing style, and so on... but at the end of the day, comics are still a commercial medium aimed at pleasing the reader, and you have to be heavily immersed in the material to properly appreciate anything Grant does.

I wouldn't say one approach is "better" than the other but I will say that right there is a huge point for Geoff over Grant.

Like it's so weird. I can't even talk to my friends about comics sometimes. They're like, "Is 'Final Crisis' any good?"
"Yeah, it's brilliant, I loved it."
"So I should read it?"
"Oh, God, no, not at all, you'd hate it. You'd never finish it."
"But I thought it was good?"
"It is. But you'd hate it."
"Why?"
"Who is Kamandi, who is Dan Turpin, what do these characters have to do with Darkseid and what is The Omega Sanction? And are you okay with the idea that there are inter-dimensional cosmic vampires that have been feeding on the Multiverse since before it existed?"
"...You're right, I hate it already."
"I know, and that sucks, because it's really an amazing book."

No foolin'.

[myconius]

Originally Posted by Leo656

As someone who likes them both, for different reasons, and most of the time but not ALL of the time... I'll just say this...

Someone who hasn't read a million comic books in their life can pick up and read a Geoff Johns comic book, understand it, and enjoy it. You can almost never, ever say that about a Morrison comic.

One can argue all day long about whether one is "Deep" or the other "Superficial", as far as their writing style, and so on... but at the end of the day, comics are still a commercial medium aimed at pleasing the reader, and you have to be heavily immersed in the material to properly appreciate anything Grant does.

I wouldn't say one approach is "better" than the other but I will say that right there is a huge point for Geoff over Grant.

Like it's so weird. I can't even talk to my friends about comics sometimes. They're like, "Is 'Final Crisis' any good?"
"Yeah, it's brilliant, I loved it."
"So I should read it?"
"Oh, God, no, not at all, you'd hate it. You'd never finish it."
"But I thought it was good?"
"It is. But you'd hate it."
"Why?"
"Who is Kamandi, who is Dan Turpin, what do these characters have to do with Darkseid and what is The Omega Sanction? And are you okay with the idea that there are inter-dimensional cosmic vampires that have been feeding on the Multiverse since before it existed?"
"...You're right, I hate it already."
"I know, and that sucks, because it's really an amazing book."

No foolin'.

hahaha! i like your analogy!
especially that bit about Final Crisis. so true!

but with Geoff Johns that's why i called his writing Cap'n Crunch.
yes, it's delicious ..... but there's no nutrition to it.

that's not to say i don't mind a simple story from time to time, but he had sure as hell have an awesome artist on the book or forget it!!!!

Grant on the other hand can have an artist that i'm not all too thrilled with ... but the book is usually STILL amazing!!!!

now when Grant has an awesome artist drawing for him like Frank Quitely ...

ever read We3 ???

HOLY AWEMAZEBALLZ!!!!!!!! @www@

[Powder]

Can we not turn this into a thread about other sh*t for once?

[myconius]

Originally Posted by Powder

Can we not turn this into a thread about other sh*t for once?

AHHHH .... touché

[Leo656]

Yeah, We3 is really good.

I'll never deny the criticisms of how Johns writes, but he pleases the reader. He's like Loeb, nobody will argue their writing is deep but they excel at making things accessible for anyone at all to read and exploring characterization, and those things are just as important to comic book writing as depth and complexity.

Geoff and Grant don't write the same way at all but they've both done terrific work in completely different ways and I'm okay with that. I also think neither one deserves to have a pedestal as high as they do but that's neither here nor there.

An anecdote to clarify my position: I'm a huge Guy Gardner/Kyle Rayner fan. When Green Lantern: Rebirth came out, I was against it and I had no idea who Johns was as I hadn't been reading or collecting heavily in some years. All I knew was, for like 20-something years, I'd either hated or been bored by Hal Jordan. I didn't want him back and I didn't care. I swore it would take a hell of an effort to get me to accept the new direction.

Stupid me ended up not only really liking the book but also finding a whole new appreciation for Hal, and the rest of the Corps as well. I went into the whole thing actively wanting to hate it and instead I got something I didn't even know I wanted. I don't change my mind easily, as anyone who knows me can attest, but I did and was happy to admit I was wrong. I still think it might be Geoff's best work.

There's been a lot of ups and downs since then. But I'll always give credit where it's due for Rebirth and while that doesn't excuse a lot of the more recent stuff, I can't in good form say I don't like his work. I think a lot of it is good but it's not complicated, and I'd argue you don't have to be complex to be good. He's good at Big, Iconic, Dramatic stuff and that's fine.

He treated Guy pretty well. I can't hate him.

Originally Posted by Powder

Can we not turn this into a thread about other sh*t for once?

I think the guessing game about Peter Laird's whereabouts has already been thoroughly exhausted, Scrooge.

[myconius]

Originally Posted by Leo656

Yeah, We3 is really good.

I'll never deny the criticisms of how Johns writes, but he pleases the reader. He's like Loeb, nobody will argue their writing is deep but they excel at making things accessible for anyone at all to read and exploring characterization, and those things are just as important to comic book writing as depth and complexity.

Geoff and Grant don't write the same way at all but they've both done terrific work in completely different ways and I'm okay with that. I also think neither one deserves to have a pedestal as high as they do but that's neither here nor there.

An anecdote to clarify my position: I'm a huge Guy Gardner/Kyle Rayner fan. When Green Lantern: Rebirth came out, I was against it and I had no idea who Johns was as I hadn't been reading or collecting heavily in some years. All I knew was, for like 20-something years, I'd either hated or been bored by Hal Jordan. I didn't want him back and I didn't care. I swore it would take a hell of an effort to get me to accept the new direction.

Stupid me ended up not only really liking the book but also finding a whole new appreciation for Hal, and the rest of the Corps as well. I went into the whole thing actively wanting to hate it and instead I got something I didn't even know I wanted. I don't change my mind easily, as anyone who knows me can attest, but I did and was happy to admit I was wrong. I still think it might be Geoff's best work.

There's been a lot of ups and downs since then. But I'll always give credit where it's due for Rebirth and while that doesn't excuse a lot of the more recent stuff, I can't in good form say I don't like his work. I think a lot of it is good but it's not complicated, and I'd argue you don't have to be complex to be good. He's good at Big, Iconic, Dramatic stuff and that's fine.

He treated Guy pretty well. I can't hate him.

that's one of the only reason's i appreciate Barry Allen and Hal Jordan is because of Geoff Johns. he pretty much picked them up, dusted them off, and served them up to us ALL brand spanking new!

but still, he made me enjoy them.

i personally prefer Loeb over Johns any day, but that's just me.
i think a lot of Johns writing is accessible, but following his recent Justice League book there's a lot to be desired.

some of my favorite Grant Morrison writing is when he ditches the overly complex storytelling and just lays it on the line.

We3 was such as story as that for me, but also some nice portions of his Batman run.

Originally Posted by Leo656

....about Peter Laird's whereabouts

Peter Laird is trapped in time with Barry Allen!!!

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by myconius

thank you sir!

i can't say enough good things about Grant's writing!
the re-read of any given story of his alone is mind bending!!!!

i've read through his entire run on Batman several times, and i'm STILL finding little hidden gems in there!!!

his complete Batman saga is one of my ALL time favorite pieces of comic writing!

Me too. I swore off Batman comics because it got too be too much around 2000 and but I still bought the issues that he wrote.

now i will admit i do find some of Johns writing amusing, but like i said ..... Cap'n Crunch. it's just empty calories and it'll rot your teeth!

Packed with nothing but 2 page double splashes, poor man's Whedon dialogue and cliffhanger after cliffhanger and numbing "events" that aren't.

[Leo656]

Knowing how tightly the Fist of DiDio has long been clenched around the DCU... I'm willing to bet a lot of those things aren't all Geoff's fault (especially the Event Fatigue). I agree, not everything he does is great, but sometimes, I get the feeling the end result is kind of a "Dandelion growing through a crack in the sidewalk" kind of thing. I mean he has a lot of cache but he still has to kind of go in the direction he's nudged.

[myconius]

yeah, they keep putting out events that lead to other meaningless uneventful events that lead to one after another after another ...

the trinity war -> forever evil -> futures end -> convergence -> the darkseid war

it gets tiresome.

[MikeandRaph87]

Originally Posted by myconius

yeah, they keep putting out events that lead to other meaningless uneventful events that lead to one after another after another ...

the trinity war -> forever evil -> futures end -> convergence -> the darkseid war

it gets tiresome.

If that makes your head spin try every Bat-event from Vengeance of Bane/KnightFall ( late 1992-1994) super long KnightFall trilogy all the way through the War Games sequel, War Crimes (early 2005) are interconnected.

Marvel is no better. The sad thing is, what sells best for comic companies especially the big two? Company wide events so they have been churn them out every year since 1984/1985 with Secret Wars and COIE. We the fans give the most money for such books so they keep doing it. We say we don't like it but this compulsion worse than the Riddler's need to tattle on himself in riddle form keeps these events going and the same goes for the character centric stuff like address in Batman above.

[myconius]

Originally Posted by MikeandRaph87

If that makes your head spin try every Bat-event from Vengeance of Bane/KnightFall ( late 1992-1994) super long KnightFall trilogy all the way through the War Games sequel, War Crimes (early 2005) are interconnected.

Marvel is no better. The sad thing is, what sells best for comic companies especially the big two? Company wide events so they have been churn them out every year since 1984/1985 with Secret Wars and COIE. We the fans give the most money for such books so they keep doing it. We say we don't like it but this compulsion worse than the Riddler's need to tattle on himself in riddle form keeps these events going and the same goes for the character centric stuff like address in Batman above.

even though i love the character Spider-Man
i gave up on Marvel a LONG time ago!!!

Nightfall/Knights Quest/Knight's End was dragged out and exhaustive!!!!
there were some great parts like Prodigal.

War Games/War Crimes were pretty lame.

the Bruce Wayne Murderer/Fugitive stuff was enjoyable.

i also liked No Man's Land. but after about two thirds in i was like END ALREADY!!!!

[Nortock Diab]

Originally Posted by Andrew NDB

Like I said, I don't think it'd end too happily. Mikey maybe in self-imposed exile somewhere in space or just drifting (and no, I don't think those eggs are his kids, and I think that revelation coupled with the bloodshed he's partaken in will drive him into such), Don finally moving to Japan to live in isolation there with his "Chet" computer AI as seen in Plastron Cafe. Leonardo moving to his treehouse. Raphael hitting the bayou. I want to say I think the Splinter in the Battle Nexus is either lying or not entirely what he appears (I think the fur Donatello clipped from Dead Splinter will be cross-analyzed against some older Splinter DNA and it will match, or something, cementing that Real Splinter actually did die)... and may have to be killed by one of the Turtles (the future glimpse now finally being wholly realized from TMNT Vol. 2, #1). That could also be what spurs the more permanent separation of the Turtles... that they have to kill Splinter (maybe one or more of them didn't believe Donatello or whoever ends up killing him, that they thought it was the real deal or was better than No Splinter At All, who knows). There's nothing in the future glimpses of the Turtles that suggests any kind of Splinter sticks around much more into the future than this. And another poster might be right about the Karai in their world might actually be the Battle Nexus Karai... but then that begs the question of where the real Karai is. Maybe this ties into the people vanishing... maybe switcheroos across the world are happening en masse and the Turtles have to stop it (maybe some villain in the Battle Nexus is up to no good, causing this). I want to think April gets her head right and comes back to Casey, but I think a more "not quite happy ending" would be her doing so, him fessing up to his probably having sex with Karai (or worse yet, Karai comes to them both proclaiming to be pregnant with his kid), and them kind of in a gray spot unsure of their future together. Shadow maybe taking some time with Leonardo in his tree house, setting up her ninja training?

I think something like this would be what Peter would arrive at, just based on his long term setups and the way he generally ends things. But I have no idea.

That's awesome. Way better in my opinion than Jim Lawson "Volume 4 ending" pin-up (no offense, the drawing is really good as always).
I believe I will print this done in case Volume 4 never gets properly finished...

[myconius]

i have a feeling it'd be left to speculation?

there's no telling what crazy twists and turns this volume would have taken?

as far as i'm concerned, so much of volume four just seems to spiral out of left field.

i personally think much of the series of wild events was due to focus being divided in way too many directions (and not being placed on the comic)

[Nortock Diab]

Originally Posted by myconius

as much as i hate to say it but i think this is as much of a conclusion to volume 4 as we are going to get-

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-OPI8ZL8XDL...s1600/32-7.jpg

if by some chance Peter Laird gives Jim Lawson the OK to actually finish the story then great.
but i'm not going to hold my breath over that.

(personally i think Casey is at the bottom of the hill there with April)

Do we know who asked this commission to Jim Lawson?

[Andrew NDB]

Peter posted his first blog in like a year the other day. Not on his TMNT blog, but the PAL Blog.

Just about time for another Q&A.