The Quartering critisizes IDW Turtles

[Sophie Campbell]

Originally Posted by Damo

May 2017: Tom Waltz communicates with Sophie Campbell about coming up with a design for Jennika as a turtle. He indicates Jennika will have a yellow bandanna. Campbell is struck by the fact that she had done a fancomic with a turtle sister named Artemisia, with a yellow bandanna. Sophie suggests maybe lifting some stuff from that character. Waltz points out that Jennika was probably too fleshed out for incorporating things like personality (since her origin had just come out), and Campbell moves away from that suggestion, not incorporating anything from Artemisia except a bow and arrow.

Not quite! I've never drawn Jennika with the bow-and-arrow, that was Michael Dialynas's addition.

[Damo]

Originally Posted by Sophie Campbell

Not quite! I've never drawn Jennika with the bow-and-arrow, that was Michael Dialynas's addition.

Thank you for the correction! I had been incorrectly remembering you as the artist for all the design stuff in https://twitter.com/TomWaltz/status/1148400099522801664

Always interesting to get insight into a long character creation/design process.

[TommyT]

Originally Posted by Sophie Campbell

Not quite! I've never drawn Jennika with the bow-and-arrow, that was Michael Dialynas's addition.

To clear it up, are you considered to be a co-creator on Jennika?

[Damo]

Originally Posted by TommyT

To clear it up, are you considered to be a co-creator on Jennika?

Tom Waltz and Ken Garing created Jennika in issue 51. Sophie and Michael Dialynas were much later asked to come up concept art for a turtle form. Sophie seems to have contributed the use of claws and something of the "clothing". A turtle's signature weapon is pretty important, but Jennika was very much created by Waltz and Garing well before Sophie and Dialynas were asked for input.

[TommyT]

Originally Posted by Damo

Tom Waltz and Ken Garing created Jennika in issue 51. Sophie and Michael Dialynas were much later asked to come up concept art for a turtle form. Sophie seems to have contributed the use of claws and something of the "clothing". A turtle's signature weapon is pretty important, but Jennika was very much created by Waltz and Garing well before Sophie and Dialynas were asked for input.

Lol, are you Sophie? No offence, wanted to get it from the source, you know?

[Sophie Campbell]

Originally Posted by TommyT

To clear it up, are you considered to be a co-creator on Jennika?

Hmm, that's a complicated question. Like Damo said above Jennika showed up in #51 and wasn't mutated until over 40 issues later (not even including TMNT Universe issues, where her backstory was done by Brahm Revel), and I never worked on the character even once during that entire time. But I DID design her mutant turtle form which is obviously a huge, defining thing for the character, even though it came 3-4 years after her actual introduction.

So.. I don't know. I'd love to take some kind of co-creator credit but maybe that's just pride talking, haha. I'd say The most important people in her development over the years are Tom Waltz, Ken Garing, Brahm Revel, Michael Dialynas, and myself. Maybe co-developer is a better term than co-creator?

[pferreira]

Originally Posted by Kamekichi

The 1985 Comic's Interview with Pete and Kevin both have them acknowledge TMNT was a parody of how comic were at that time.

They go on to say how it's not a direct parody of any particular comics just the elements from Ronin, Cerebus, Daredevil with the humor that this serious story was being done with turtles.

So both neatoman and Wiki are in fact correct, it's just whether you view the parody as spoofing something specific or the industry as a whole?

Originally Posted by TommyT

He also eloquently write all the reasons he refused to use said idea, and his reasoning was sound.

What was his reasoning?

Originally Posted by TommyT

That was 2017/2018.

The industry is healthy again, with sales up for most high profile books.
I’ve supported the argument. IDW is losing millions quarter over quarter. You could try googling it for yourself, if you still feel you need further proof that a FEMALE 5th TURTLE isn’t a stunt.

I'm not a financial expert when it comes to the production of comics but does anybody know whether IDW doing variant covers is losing them money that could be saved? They do a lot of variant covers but I wonder if its needlessly wasting money. Anybody know?

Originally Posted by ChosenOne

They're called story beats, actually. Y'know, just like "climate change" is really called seasons by people old enough to not be surprised by them.

Does anybody know the longest a comic has gone on for with its continuity before being rebooted? Superman maybe?

[Peter Palmer]

Originally Posted by pferreira

Does anybody know the longest a comic has gone on for with its continuity before being rebooted? Superman maybe?

I'm by no means a Superman/DC expert, but the bare minimum that I understand is that DC continuity is all over the place with multiple reboots and crises shaking things up every few years/decades.

What I can tell you is that both Cerebus and Spawn had/have very long runs, each reaching 300+ issues in their respective main titles. Dave Sim and Todd McFarlane remained close to their respective projects to guide the narratives, so I'd say that continuity was maintained fairly faithfully.

[pferreira]

Originally Posted by Peter Palmer

I'm by no means a Superman/DC expert, but the bare minimum that I understand is that DC continuity is all over the place with multiple reboots and crises shaking things up every few years/decades.

What I can tell you is that both Cerebus and Spawn had/have very long runs, each reaching 300+ issues in their respective main titles. Dave Sim and Todd McFarlane remained close to their respective projects to guide the narratives, so I'd say that continuity was maintained fairly faithfully.

That's good to know about Spawn. I know Superman was rebooted in 1986 but not sure when the next reboot in continuity was and if there was a reboot before the 1986 Crisis events.

Going back to the topic I just want to add that while The Quartering comes across like a money making troll there is more of a point to what he does. He has stated many times as has other drama news sites like Geeks & Gamers that yeah they are in it for the money but also they're making a point to protest against scummy business practices and political agendas. They've also pointed out many times they wouldn't have to keep making repetitive videos on various topics if whoever they talk about behave more properly. I would say Jeremy has it correct about 85% of the time. This particular video he was however pretty wrong with his facts, which I pointed out at the time in the YT comments. You may not like the reasons Jeremy does what he does but he is correct to report on a lot of the stuff he reports on.