Hey guys i am back now i know that erasing my old account in this forum is unforgivable but at least i started new with a same old username but with a new password so anyway back to my current topic.
As you know the good news is that CW greenlights riverdale which is great :) but there is something that bothers me ???
Seeing that riverdale will just a drama series with dark elements it made me wonder, Shouldn't CW and archie comics at least make a archie riverdale series as a "teen sitcom" or maybe a tween sitcom that should be aired on nickelodeon or disney channel instead.
I mean sure we want drama but make the archie live action series as a comedy series, Why? because the main source material of archie comics (minus the spinoffs,the adventure,the horror and action version) are always comedy which was the reason why it was successful back in the day.
I mean why would archie comics and CW make a drama version of archie riverdale series without laughs i mean sure the company gains success thanks to its drama spinoff the married life and the horror title afterlife with archie but to have a series with dark elements and have the characters find out dark secrets in this town and not be faithful or loosely faithful to the source material that's unforgivable ,It needs to be a teen sitcom with a element that the source material needs "comedy" i mean yes we also need little of the drama elements including teenage issues for some special episodes if it is a "teen sitcom" .So what i am saying is that the live action archie series should be comedy not some dark teen drama series.
and if this show gets mixed reviews and will never be renewed for a future season then archie comics and CW should regret that they should have made a teen sitcom instead or at least make it as a disney channel/disney XD/Nickelodeon sitcom.
Why ACP would make an Archie series without laughs is basically what's been bugging me since the reboot. Since a lot of people seem to be fine with it (indeed, better than fine - they seem to prefer it that way), I've stopped questioning it. I'll never understand it, but apparently that's what people want.
Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on May 15, 2016, 11:22:44 AM
Why ACP would make an Archie series without laughs is basically what's been bugging me since the reboot. Since a lot of people seem to be fine with it (indeed, better than fine - they seem to prefer it that way), I've stopped questioning it. I'll never understand it, but apparently that's what people want.
Yes because this archie reboot has the element of comedy in it with a bit of drama including jughead.So why can't they make a sitcom instead with a bit of drama.Heck why would poeple want a archie series without comedy.
Quote from: terrence12 on May 15, 2016, 11:33:11 AM
Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on May 15, 2016, 11:22:44 AM
Why ACP would make an Archie series without laughs is basically what's been bugging me since the reboot. Since a lot of people seem to be fine with it (indeed, better than fine - they seem to prefer it that way), I've stopped questioning it. I'll never understand it, but apparently that's what people want.
Yes because this archie reboot has the element of comedy in it with a bit of drama including jughead.So why can't they make a sitcom instead with a bit of drama.Heck why would poeple want a archie series without comedy.
The reboot is comedy? Guess I missed it, or maybe they just left it out of the first 2 issues. Those were the only ones I read. There's a little bit in Jughead, but 'way too little. Can't just be me, because when Jonathan was commenting on the Riverdale Podcast about what he felt was lacking in ARCHIE #8, he specifically mentioned the lack of comedy. I guess maybe all the comedy must have occurred (if you say so) between issues 3 and 7, but it seems like an odd way to run a comic book.
Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on May 15, 2016, 12:00:10 PM
Quote from: terrence12 on May 15, 2016, 11:33:11 AM
Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on May 15, 2016, 11:22:44 AM
Why ACP would make an Archie series without laughs is basically what's been bugging me since the reboot. Since a lot of people seem to be fine with it (indeed, better than fine - they seem to prefer it that way), I've stopped questioning it. I'll never understand it, but apparently that's what people want.
Yes because this archie reboot has the element of comedy in it with a bit of drama including jughead.So why can't they make a sitcom instead with a bit of drama.Heck why would poeple want a archie series without comedy.
The reboot is comedy? Guess I missed it, or maybe they just left it out of the first 2 issues. Those were the only ones I read. There's a little bit in Jughead, but 'way too little. Can't just be me, because when Jonathan was commenting on the Riverdale Podcast about what he felt was lacking in ARCHIE #8, he specifically mentioned the lack of comedy. I guess maybe all the comedy must have occurred (if you say so) between issues 3 and 7, but it seems like an odd way to run a comic book.
Comedy is in the eye of the beholder. I've found comedy sprinkled throughout all the issues. I pointed out to Jonathan a gag I thought he missed in the latest issue and he said he did miss it and that he was in a grumpy mood when he read it and that he would give it another try. Hopefully he'll let us know what he thinks after he does.
they greenlit this sludge?!... my god archie comics, warner brothers, the cw... what are you guys doing... I know I cant be the only one alienated by this...
Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on May 15, 2016, 12:00:10 PM
The reboot is comedy? Guess I missed it, or maybe they just left it out of the first 2 issues. Those were the only ones I read. There's a little bit in Jughead, but 'way too little. Can't just be me, because when Jonathan was commenting on the Riverdale Podcast about what he felt was lacking in ARCHIE #8, he specifically mentioned the lack of comedy. I guess maybe all the comedy must have occurred (if you say so) between issues 3 and 7, but it seems like an odd way to run a comic book.
Well yeah the archie reboot comic is comedy but has a tints of drama in it .
Quote from: spazaru on May 15, 2016, 12:22:16 PMComedy is in the eye of the beholder. I've found comedy sprinkled throughout all the issues. I pointed out to Jonathan a gag I thought he missed in the latest issue and he said he did miss it and that he was in a grumpy mood when he read it and that he would give it another try. Hopefully he'll let us know what he thinks after he does.
True.
Quote from: longtermarchie101 on May 15, 2016, 12:22:54 PMthey greenlit this sludge?!... my god archie comics, warner brothers, the cw... what are you guys doing... I know I cant be the only one alienated by this..
Yeah now you know how i feel.
Quote from: spazaru on May 15, 2016, 12:22:16 PM
Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on May 15, 2016, 12:00:10 PM
Quote from: terrence12 on May 15, 2016, 11:33:11 AM
Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on May 15, 2016, 11:22:44 AM
Why ACP would make an Archie series without laughs is basically what's been bugging me since the reboot. Since a lot of people seem to be fine with it (indeed, better than fine - they seem to prefer it that way), I've stopped questioning it. I'll never understand it, but apparently that's what people want.
Yes because this archie reboot has the element of comedy in it with a bit of drama including jughead.So why can't they make a sitcom instead with a bit of drama.Heck why would poeple want a archie series without comedy.
The reboot is comedy? Guess I missed it, or maybe they just left it out of the first 2 issues. Those were the only ones I read. There's a little bit in Jughead, but 'way too little. Can't just be me, because when Jonathan was commenting on the Riverdale Podcast about what he felt was lacking in ARCHIE #8, he specifically mentioned the lack of comedy. I guess maybe all the comedy must have occurred (if you say so) between issues 3 and 7, but it seems like an odd way to run a comic book.
Comedy is in the eye of the beholder. I've found comedy sprinkled throughout all the issues. I pointed out to Jonathan a gag I thought he missed in the latest issue and he said he did miss it and that he was in a grumpy mood when he read it and that he would give it another try. Hopefully he'll let us know what he thinks after he does.
Well, terrence surprised me. Nobody really seems to mention anything about the comedy in any of their posts, and invisifan seems to be praising it for the qualities most diametrically opposed to that... grounded, reality-based, continuity-driven etc., all the things you'd associate with drama. He wants to keep the fantasy out of it, because that would seem to spoil any grounded, realistic, dramatic suspension of disbelief for him (and yet, he reads superhero comics, and they have the fantasy element, generally without comedy). I guess outright slapstick comedy would spoil the grounded realism as well. People seem to be liking it specifically for the drama/continuity, unless I'm completely misreading people's comments. I don't mind seeing a little bit of that thrown in here and there just for the sake of contrast and to break things up a little, but it's not what I read Archie Comics for. It was okay just for LIFE WITH ARCHIE, I guess, because the whole point of that was everything about it was different from the 'standard' Archie comic as possible. (Just like AFTERLIFE, the whole point is to contrast against the usual.)To be honest, I think LWA could have dialed back the angsty-ness a couple notches and thrown in a comedy bit or two now and then, just to remind people it actually
was an Archie Comic. But then again, it wasn't a mainstream Archie comic book, or pretending to be one.
Quote from: terrence12 on May 15, 2016, 12:32:40 PM
Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on May 15, 2016, 12:00:10 PM
The reboot is comedy? Guess I missed it, or maybe they just left it out of the first 2 issues. Those were the only ones I read. There's a little bit in Jughead, but 'way too little. Can't just be me, because when Jonathan was commenting on the Riverdale Podcast about what he felt was lacking in ARCHIE #8, he specifically mentioned the lack of comedy. I guess maybe all the comedy must have occurred (if you say so) between issues 3 and 7, but it seems like an odd way to run a comic book.
Well yeah the archie reboot comic is comedy but has a tints of drama in it .
Seriously, terrence, you are the first person I've read to even mention the humor, never mind to characterize it as a comedy overall. I certainly didn't find that to be the case with the first two issues.
Sitcoms on TV are on a decline — the ones that make it aren't as mundane as Archie seems after 75 years ... and as for more general "teen" shows, "Glee" and "High School Musical" showed they can work, but also sucked the air out of the room as far as competition — they also showed it's far to easy to overdo it, or do it wrong, so no one wants to try.
@DCR — I'm saying it needs a consistent feel — throwing in actual magic stuff ruins the feel they are trying for, comedy wouldn't do that — there's already some in there, and it could be cranked up quite a bit and be enjoyable ... but it should be grounded in reality since that's the tone they've set; if you want a magic/fantasy/superhero series, start a new comic in another Archiverse like they have for ChAoS & AWA
Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on May 15, 2016, 12:49:27 PM
Quote from: terrence12 on May 15, 2016, 12:32:40 PM
Well yeah the archie reboot comic is comedy but has a tints of drama in it .
Seriously, terrence, you are the first person I've read to even mention the humor, never mind to characterize it as a comedy overall. I certainly didn't find that to be the case with the first two issues.
It's a sort of teen romcom ... in the modern rather than classic Archie sense ...
Quote from: invisifan on May 15, 2016, 01:02:42 PM
Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on May 15, 2016, 12:49:27 PM
Quote from: terrence12 on May 15, 2016, 12:32:40 PM
Well yeah the archie reboot comic is comedy but has a tints of drama in it .
Seriously, terrence, you are the first person I've read to even mention the humor, never mind to characterize it as a comedy overall. I certainly didn't find that to be the case with the first two issues.
It's a sort of teen romcom ... in the modern rather than classic Archie sense ...
It's kind of giving me a My So Called Life vibe, if you've ever seen that show.
Quote from: spazaru on May 15, 2016, 01:29:18 PM
It's kind of giving me a My So Called Life vibe, if you've ever seen that show.
I don't watch a lot of TV — and particularly avoid sitcoms ... though the name rings a bell ...
I have My So Called Life on DVD, That was a great show. It was sad it only lasted 1 season.
The new Riverdale comic/Archie reboot reads like a YA novel with all the "teen" slang and angst. There are moments of comedy in there but it's mostly in the art, not the dialogue i.e. Archie setting ice cream on fire, Archie being flattened by a bulldozer.
The Riverdale TV show feels a lot like The OC (with the new Betty being Marissa) and a little of Dawson's Creek (with the whole dating your teacher thing).
Quote from: invisifan on May 15, 2016, 01:00:51 PM
Sitcoms on TV are on a decline — the ones that make it aren't as mundane as Archie seems after 75 years ... and as for more general "teen" shows, "Glee" and "High School Musical" showed they can work, but also sucked the air out of the room as far as competition — they also showed it's far to easy to overdo it, or do it wrong, so no one wants to try.
@DCR — I'm saying it needs a consistent feel — throwing in actual magic stuff ruins the feel they are trying for, comedy wouldn't do that — there's already some in there, and it could be cranked up quite a bit and be enjoyable ... but it should be grounded in reality since that's the tone they've set; if you want a magic/fantasy/superhero series, start a new comic in another Archiverse like they have for ChAoS & AWA
I know Mark Waid had previous experience doing a few Archie stories way back when ("Moose!" and one or two others I've seen reprinted), but it's curious to me why ACP didn't just hire someone 'big name' that had a previous track record of putting a lot of humor/comedy into their scripts (at least, on some of their work... I've read a LOT of Waid's stuff, and never really picked up on much comedy in
any of the series I've read by him). I'm thinking of somebody like Dan Slott over at Marvel (and of course, they're not going to get
Dan Slott, but someone
like him, and there are more than a few people like that working in mainstream comics). So I have to believe that wasn't any sort of primary consideration on ACP's part.
Maybe if someone like Rex Lindsey was drawing Waid's scripts they'd at least come across as funnier.
I'm not too interested in a rom-com or whatever the current subgenre thing is now. I really only have the vaguest idea of what that really is. It's not a genre I've ever really followed.
"Sitcom" punctuated with a good dose of slapstick now and then is really what I want from an Archie comic. But that can be like in a TV series like
Community, Parks and Recreation, 30 Rock, something like that. That and cute girls, but not just "good girl art" of the Adam Hughes type. I mean sexy/cartoony/cute/innocent type girls, like... maybe something like the Bruce Timm/Darwyn Cooke style.
Quote from: irishmoxie on May 15, 2016, 04:32:57 PM
The new Riverdale comic/Archie reboot reads like a YA novel with all the "teen" slang and angst. There are moments of comedy in there but it's mostly in the art, not the dialogue i.e. Archie setting ice cream on fire, Archie being flattened by a bulldozer.
The Riverdale TV show feels a lot like The OC (with the new Betty being Marissa) and a little of Dawson's Creek (with the whole dating your teacher thing).
"Angst" = Get me outta here. That is so last century for comic books.
Exactly what I'm trying to escape FROM by coming to Archie Comics. If I wanted angst, there are a dozen different X-Men and Spider-Man comics to pick through.
Say whatever nice things you want to about Fiona Staples, but she's basically an illustrator, not a cartoonist. Invisifan talked about consistency, and those scenes just plain DO NOT work. They stand out like a sore thumb as not consistent with the tone of the rest of the story, and I just stare at them in disbelief that they're even
trying to pass that off as comedy. They are really picking the wrong artists if they're expecting to toss those things into a script on rare occasions and think it's going to work. I haven't really studied Veronica Fish's art beyond just some brief surface scans, but if anything I find it less attractive than Staples' work. She might even turn out to be a better cartoonist than Fiona, but I just don't like the overall look of it. Possibly Derek Charm can pull something like that off. I hope so. Fingers crossed.
His style is both attractive and cartoony enough.
Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on May 15, 2016, 05:34:51 PM
I know Mark Waid had previous experience doing a few Archie stories way back when ("Moose!" and one or two others I've seen reprinted), but it's curious to me why ACP didn't just hire someone 'big name' that had a previous track record of putting a lot of humor/comedy into their scripts (at least, on some of their work... I've read a LOT of Waid's stuff, and never really picked up on much comedy in any of the series I've read by him). I'm thinking of somebody like Dan Slott over at Marvel (and of course, they're not going to get Dan Slott, but someone like him, and there are more than a few people like that working in mainstream comics). So I have to believe that wasn't any sort of primary consideration on ACP's part. Maybe if someone like Rex Lindsey was drawing Waid's scripts they'd at least come across as funnier.
Waid was already doing the Fox for their Dark Circle line, so I guess it was an easy association — and as Dark Circle goes that's pretty light stuff ...
QuoteI'm not too interested in a rom-com or whatever the current subgenre thing is now. I really only have the vaguest idea of what that really is. It's not a genre I've ever really followed.
Romantic
comedy — more of a movie genre really, not one that's normally sustained over a long term ...
Quote"Sitcom" punctuated with a good dose of slapstick now and then is really what I want from an Archie comic. But that can be like in a TV series like Community, Parks and Recreation, 30 Rock, something like that. That and cute girls, but not just "good girl art" of the Adam Hughes type. I mean sexy/cartoony/cute/innocent type girls, like... maybe something like the Bruce Timm/Darwyn Cooke style.
Is the Darwyn Cooke reference coincidental? You know he died literally yesterday ...
Quote from: invisifan on May 15, 2016, 06:02:48 PM
Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on May 15, 2016, 05:34:51 PM
I know Mark Waid had previous experience doing a few Archie stories way back when ("Moose!" and one or two others I've seen reprinted), but it's curious to me why ACP didn't just hire someone 'big name' that had a previous track record of putting a lot of humor/comedy into their scripts (at least, on some of their work... I've read a LOT of Waid's stuff, and never really picked up on much comedy in any of the series I've read by him). I'm thinking of somebody like Dan Slott over at Marvel (and of course, they're not going to get Dan Slott, but someone like him, and there are more than a few people like that working in mainstream comics). So I have to believe that wasn't any sort of primary consideration on ACP's part. Maybe if someone like Rex Lindsey was drawing Waid's scripts they'd at least come across as funnier.
Waid was already doing the Fox for their Dark Circle line, so I guess it was an easy association — and as Dark Circle goes that's pretty light stuff ...
QuoteI'm not too interested in a rom-com or whatever the current subgenre thing is now. I really only have the vaguest idea of what that really is. It's not a genre I've ever really followed.
Romantic comedy — more of a movie genre really, not one that's normally sustained over a long term ...
Quote"Sitcom" punctuated with a good dose of slapstick now and then is really what I want from an Archie comic. But that can be like in a TV series like Community, Parks and Recreation, 30 Rock, something like that. That and cute girls, but not just "good girl art" of the Adam Hughes type. I mean sexy/cartoony/cute/innocent type girls, like... maybe something like the Bruce Timm/Darwyn Cooke style.
Is the Darwyn Cooke reference coincidental? You know he died literally yesterday ...
I had not heard. He will be sorely missed. The comics industry needed more talents of his caliber. I would consider him one of the most serious cartoonists of this generation.
And I'd forgotten about Waid doing THE FOX momentarily. Now that I think about it that was funnier than the Archie reboot, but Waid's role in that was somewhat different. The Fox is really Dean Haspiel's brainchild (although Waid was a sounding board that he bounced his ideas off). Waid would then come in after Haspiel "wrote" the visual story, and add his dialogue and captions. So Haspiel is Kirby here, and Waid is Lee... In other words, the genesis of each issue did not begin with Waid sending Haspiel a script to draw from. Haspiel's written some of his own stuff in the past, so he's (at least) co-writer on THE FOX, although not the dialoguer.
Adam Hughes draws good girls? Had me fooled.
Quote from: DeCarlo RulesWell, terrence surprised me. Nobody really seems to mention anything about the comedy in any of their posts, and invisifan seems to be praising it for the qualities most diametrically opposed to that... grounded, reality-based, continuity-driven etc., all the things you'd associate with drama. He wants to keep the fantasy out of it, because that would seem to spoil any grounded, realistic, dramatic suspension of disbelief for him (and yet, he reads superhero comics, and they have the fantasy element, generally without comedy). I guess outright slapstick comedy would spoil the grounded realism as well. People seem to be liking it specifically for the drama/continuity, unless I'm completely misreading people's comments. I don't mind seeing a little bit of that thrown in here and there just for the sake of contrast and to break things up a little, but it's not what I read Archie Comics for. It was okay just for LIFE WITH ARCHIE, I guess, because the whole point of that was everything about it was different from the 'standard' Archie comic as possible. (Just like AFTERLIFE, the whole point is to contrast against the usual.)To be honest, I think LWA could have dialed back the angsty-ness a couple notches and thrown in a comedy bit or two now and then, just to remind people it actually was an Archie Comic. But then again, it wasn't a mainstream Archie comic book, or pretending to be one.
Yes i know but i still think that the liveaction archie should be a sitcom or a tween sitcom and be faithful to the element of the source material comedy.and i agree about life with archie the married life spinoff but i think it should remain as a dramatic spinoff with some little laughs.
Quote from: invisifanSitcoms on TV are on a decline — the ones that make it aren't as mundane as Archie seems after 75 years ... and as for more general "teen" shows, "Glee" and "High School Musical" showed they can work, but also sucked the air out of the room as far as competition — they also showed it's far to easy to overdo it, or do it wrong, so no one wants to try.
Actually sitcoms are still working heck look at the big bang theory for example even tween sitcoms.
Quote from: invisifan@DCR — I'm saying it needs a consistent feel — throwing in actual magic stuff ruins the feel they are trying for, comedy wouldn't do that — there's already some in there, and it could be cranked up quite a bit and be enjoyable ... but it should be grounded in reality since that's the tone they've set; if you want a magic/fantasy/superhero series, start a new comic in another Archiverse like they have for ChAoS & AWA
That is true since archie after the forties begin to go surreal. with magic/fantasy and superhero stuff
Quote from: DeCarlo Rules lSitcoms on TV are on a decline — the ones that make it aren't as mundane as Archie seems after 75 years ... and as for more general "teen" shows, "Glee" and "High School Musical" showed they can work, but also sucked the air out of the room as far as competition — they also showed it's far to easy to overdo it, or do it wrong, so no one wants to try. @DCR — I'm saying it needs a consistent feel — throwing in actual magic stuff ruins the feel they are trying for, comedy wouldn't do that — there's already some in there, and it could be cranked up quite a bit and be enjoyable ... but it should be grounded in reality since that's the tone they've set; if you want a magic/fantasy/superhero series, start a new comic in another Archiverse like they have for ChAoS & AWA
Quote from: DeCarlo Rules lI know Mark Waid had previous experience doing a few Archie stories way back when ("Moose!" and one or two others I've seen reprinted), but it's curious to me why ACP didn't just hire someone 'big name' that had a previous track record of putting a lot of humor/comedy into their scripts (at least, on some of their work... I've read a LOT of Waid's stuff, and never really picked up on much comedy in any of the series I've read by him). I'm thinking of somebody like Dan Slott over at Marvel (and of course, they're not going to get Dan Slott, but someone like him, and there are more than a few people like that working in mainstream comics). So I have to believe that wasn't any sort of primary consideration on ACP's part. Maybe if someone like Rex Lindsey was drawing Waid's scripts they'd at least come across as funnier. I'm not too interested in a rom-com or whatever the current subgenre thing is now. I really only have the vaguest idea of what that really is. It's not a genre I've ever really followed."Sitcom" punctuated with a good dose of slapstick now and then is really what I want from an Archie comic. But that can be like in a TV series like Community, Parks and Recreation, 30 Rock, something like that. That and cute girls, but not just "good girl art" of the Adam Hughes type. I mean sexy/cartoony/cute/innocent type girls, like... maybe something like the Bruce Timm/Darwyn Cooke style.
As i said before sitcoms are running and are still good but in different formats sometimes without laugh tracks and sometimes set in a real environment in a different setting rather than the traditional sitcom formats when we were young. and yes i think that romance will be included since it always happened in every archie comic stories.
Quote from: irishmoxieThe new Riverdale comic/Archie reboot reads like a YA novel with all the "teen" slang and angst. There are moments of comedy in there but it's mostly in the art, not the dialogue i.e. Archie setting ice cream on fire, Archie being flattened by a bulldozer. The Riverdale TV show feels a lot like The OC (with the new Betty being Marissa) and a little of Dawson's Creek (with the whole dating your teacher thing).
Yeah i agree so i think the live action archie should be a comedy and be faithful to the comedic element of the source material with a little bit of drama like how scrubs did with special episodes about teenage problems or maybe at least be disney channel/nickelodeon tween sitcom.
Quote from: invisifanRomantic comedy — more of a movie genre really, not one that's normally sustained over a long term ...
Well i think that the romantic genre should be included since it's also the element of archie comics with the love triangle part even though it goes on repetitive all over the years and made it maximum with the 'harem' part
Quote from: invisifanIs the Darwyn Cooke reference coincidental? You know he died literally yesterday
Quote from: DeCarlo RulesI had not heard. He will be sorely missed. The comics industry needed more talents of his caliber. I would consider him one of the most serious cartoonists of this generation.And I'd forgotten about Waid doing THE FOX momentarily. Now that I think about it that was funnier than the Archie reboot, but Waid's role in that was somewhat different. The Fox is really Dean Haspiel's brainchild (although Waid was a sounding board that he bounced his ideas off). Waid would then come in after Haspiel "wrote" the visual story, and add his dialogue and captions. So Haspiel is Kirby here, and Waid is Lee... In other words, the genesis of each issue did not begin with Waid sending Haspiel a script to draw from. Haspiel's written some of his own stuff in the past, so he's (at least) co-writer on THE FOX, although not the dialoguer.
Yeah he will truly be missed :'( he maybe a great artist for dc comics known for his 50's style artwork but at least he did a variant cover for the fox comic
(https://www.archiefans.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.newsarama.com%2Fimages%2Fi%2F000%2F109%2F668%2Foriginal%2FFox-1-Darwyn-Cooke.jpg%3F1373922483&hash=fefece19727e2808c0eb903b9396998b2f509ea6)
Quote from: irishmoxie on May 15, 2016, 10:11:04 PM
Adam Hughes draws good girls? Had me fooled.
Everyone seems to initially misinterpret the expression "good girl art" when they encounter it, and sometimes that confusion persists for some time thereafter. It's an old comic book collector-originated term. What it is, is not "GOOD GIRL art", it's "good GIRL ART". Not artwork featuring girls who are good, but artwork which is good featuring girls. Whether the girls featured in the art are good or bad is immaterial, the only thing important is that the art is good and the subject of interest is the girls. Certain comic book artists like Adam Hughes develop a reputation as 'good girl artists' because while any artist may have a reputation as a good artist overall within the fandom of comic books, particular artists like Hughes are in demand specifically in large part for their facility in drawing girls in particular. They are the
good "girl artists".
Now that the ranks of comic book artists are beginning to swell with greater numbers of female comics artists, in decades to come there's bound to be further confusion of the term 'good girl art'. Take for example DC artist Amanda Connor. She's a good artist, and she's obviously a girl (well, a woman, but let's not split hairs, she's a female artist). She's also primarily known for her facility at drawing girls, and she draws them well. Amanda Connor is both a good "artist girl", and a good "girl artist".
The term "good girl art" got further confused in the 1990s, with the proliferation of what became known as the "bad girl" subgenre of comics, in which -- exactly the opposite of the term 'good girl art' -- it IS the girls who are being referred to as bad. But the art is often bad as well, so that really does compound the confusion. Amanda Connor is good artist, but she's also known for drawing the "bad girl" Harley Quinn -- and also the "good girl", Power Girl. So she's equally a good "bad girl" artist, and a good "good girl" artist. So much confusion.
Amanda's a pretty good cartoonist. I had mentioned to Dan Parent when I saw him at a convention last year that if ACP was seeking 'big name' contemporary comic book artists for its reboot, they should have attempted to draft Amanda Connor, and he replied "They tried."
From seeing the sneak peak of the trailer before it was taking down what really gets me down about this whole thing is when they are taking out the whole "innocence" of Riverdale. Archie comics and Riverdale is innocence and this show seems to be far from what the comics have established for so many decades.
Quote from: Mazz on May 21, 2016, 08:28:22 AM
From seeing the sneak peak of the trailer before it was taking down what really gets me down about this whole thing is when they are taking out the whole "innocence" of Riverdale. Archie comics and Riverdale is innocence and this show seems to be far from what the comics have established for so many decades.
I'm just going to chalk that up to your not having paid that close attention to the information trickling out about
Riverdale up to this point. It's a pretty short hop between travesty and tragedy for fans of classic Archie Comics. Why would ACP allow it? They've abandoned any hope of fidelity to the spirit of the original comics. At this point they're just hoping to get some notoriety for generating shock waves. It's the old concept of "no such thing as BAD publicity".
"Archie Comics? Do they still make those??"
It's a sign of the times :P
Everything everywhere (real world, TV, video games, comics, etc, etc) is gore, violence, sex, drugs, darker, grittier, no morals.
Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on May 21, 2016, 10:26:28 AM
Quote from: Mazz on May 21, 2016, 08:28:22 AM
From seeing the sneak peak of the trailer before it was taking down what really gets me down about this whole thing is when they are taking out the whole "innocence" of Riverdale. Archie comics and Riverdale is innocence and this show seems to be far from what the comics have established for so many decades.
I'm just going to chalk that up to your not having paid that close attention to the information trickling out about Riverdale up to this point. It's a pretty short hop between travesty and tragedy for fans of classic Archie Comics. Why would ACP allow it? They've abandoned any hope of fidelity to the spirit of the original comics. At this point they're just hoping to get some notoriety for generating shock waves. It's the old concept of "no such thing as BAD publicity".
"Archie Comics? Do they still make those??"
Oh No!!!! I have been paying attention to the craziness that has been going on the past few months with this show. This was just the last "laugh out loud" moment I got from the trailer.
Quote from: Mazz on May 21, 2016, 08:28:22 AM
From seeing the sneak peak of the trailer before it was taking down what really gets me down about this whole thing is when they are taking out the whole "innocence" of Riverdale. Archie comics and Riverdale is innocence and this show seems to be far from what the comics have established for so many decades.
Heck it was supposed to be the first archie live action series faithful to the source material not about deconstructing its reputation.
Quote from: DeCarlo RulesI'm just going to chalk that up to your not having paid that close attention to the information trickling out about Riverdale up to this point. It's a pretty short hop between travesty and tragedy for fans of classic Archie Comics. Why would ACP allow it? They've abandoned any hope of fidelity to the spirit of the original comics. At this point they're just hoping to get some notoriety for generating shock waves. It's the old concept of "no such thing as BAD publicity"."Archie Comics? Do they still make those??
Yeah i agree with you >:(
and you know what i watched the trailer from a site i wouldn't reveal to you though it's on ahem tumblr by the name
"betty-and-jughead" and named as
"ipikaboo-spoiler-from-cws-riverdale-trailer"
Anyway i watched the trailer and you know what i think i think that it's deserves to have mixed or negative reviews with low ratings like A&E damien and then it will someday be cancelled ,SO that archie comics will understand their mistakes and make a
real teen sitcom faithful to the source materials element comedy which will be in the tone of boy meets world or make it as a Disney or Nickelodeon tween sitcom.I mean tv tried to make a live action archie sitcom in the 50s (or was it early 60's) and in the 70s (variety hour pilot ) So why make it as a drama that it loosely based on a source material it's stupid!