Quote from: GingerGal on April 22, 2016, 02:38:44 PM

Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on April 22, 2016, 01:27:33 PM

Quote from: GingerGal on April 22, 2016, 12:17:31 PM
From the pictures of her in the article she doesn't seemed too upset about failing at life. As a matter of fact she looks pretty happy at her current life.

I don't even think professional psychologists and psychiatrists could definitely rule out clinical depression based on a few photographs where the person appears happy. I think that's what they mean when you hear the expression "appearances can be deceiving". They would probably pay more attention to what the person had to say about herself and how she answered a series of questions. Since most people don't have paparazzi following them around, it would be pretty easy to avoid having your picture taken when you were feeling down and depressed. Easier still to avoid putting the odd picture taken of you when you weren't feeling good about yourself on the internet. You just never know, some people can be really good at faking it and keeping up appearances even while they're struggling with themselves on the inside. Hopefully you'll never know about that.

She could be pulling the wool over everyone eyes but she could also be actually be happy. We don't know. I am just going by what I got to see at quick glance and that was smiling photos. I'm not a Psychologist and will never have the opportunity to ask her questions either, but I also think a person can also hide emotions very well by avoiding answers and giving other false answers. Just saying.

True enough. I guess she might be, or should we pay more attention to the fact that she titled her blog "I fail at life"? She could have titled her page almost anything, but for some reason she chose that. It might just be her idea of humor, but I sort of wonder why she would choose to present herself in a self-depreciating manner to people from the get-go. I hope she's as happy as she appears in photos, but I guess we'll never know, like you say.

Quote from: GingerGal on April 21, 2016, 03:20:37 PM
I have Red Hair and I am a Gal. Simple enuff.

South Africa's Typical Teenage Girl, eh?

Quote from: spazaru on April 14, 2016, 05:02:00 PM
If the fans supported them so well for so many years, why would a reboot be necessary?  They didn't cancel the old series because they were selling too well.  I prefer the classic style as well, by far.  But I'm not going to pretend it was selling a ton for Archie because it wasn't.

All comic fans are comic book readers, but not all comic book readers are fans. When the majority of floppy comic sales shifted from general retail outlets to comic book shops, the fans began to dominate readership of comics in the floppy format. That format of comics just isn't available in enough places other than comic shops. While Marvel and DC Comics can still do a reasonable amount of business by relying on their hardcore fans, Archie Comics cannot. There aren't enough hardcore fans of Archie to really depend on to publish a comic book. The backbone of Archie Comics' readership has always been composed of younger and casual readers, and only the digest format is reaching those readers. Right now with the reboot floppies, Archie Comics is trying to create a fanbase of comic shop customers who have never really existed before. There are certain Pavlovian-response sales techniques that are proven to work with this audience in the short term (the prime and most important one is to win the confidence of the retailers in ordering the first issues of new titles), but creating an audience where none exists is a tough trick to pull off, because if the sales don't follow on subsequent issues, retailers aren't going to continue to speculate. It's a tough market with too many publishers and too many titles.

I think sometimes they throw those kind of teasers out at the end of a story to see whether it generates any letters from the readers. Sales of the current storyline and letter responses would then dictate whether a followup would be considered.

Quote from: GingerGal on April 27, 2016, 04:52:30 PM
Perfect way to greet each other when your constantly fighting with each other. 

Dan Parent handles the Veronica-Jughead feud better than anybody. With him it's entirely verbal, but there are some great zingers he manages to work in there on both sides. Besides that, he gets to show how well each of them understand the other's psychology, with information implied or withheld leading to the predicted effect on either side. Jughead really got the better of Veronica by preventing anyone from cluing her in about Kevin being gay.

Quote from: 60sBettyandReggie on April 28, 2016, 08:31:15 PM

Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on April 28, 2016, 04:11:57 PM

Quote from: 60sBettyandReggie on April 28, 2016, 01:08:33 PM
Didn't Veronica calm down once Dan Parent took over? Or did it happen before. By the way, I prefer the old Veronica.

When BETTY AND ME started, that was the beginning of sweet and nice Betty, and the beginning of the end of feisty, wily schemer Betty. Similarly, when Veronica got her own comic, they had to tone down some of her more outrageous aspects to make her more likable and sympathetic. Same thing happened to Cheryl Blossom when she got her own comic. I guess the takeaway here is if you like this or that character, then just pray that they don't get their own comic book.

So Betty changed in the late 60s? Many stories from Betty and Me still had a "crazy" Betty, but I guess those stories were from the first issues. Okay and then Veronica got nicer in the 80s, when, like I said, Dan Parent took over.

It was a slightly slower evolution for Betty, but you begin to see it more easily by tracking the change in "Betty's Diary" stories. The early ones (pre- and early BETTY AND ME) are short gag strips, outrageous exaggerations of small incidents that occur, magnified through the fish-eye lens of Betty's mind to imbue the slightest event as fraught with implications of Archie's burning desire for her. Frankly, they make Betty look like some kind of nutcase who lives in a world of fantasy. Some of them even seem a little cruel, like the other kids are laughing at Betty's naivete behind her back. But gradually, the later Betty's Diary stories become more grounded in realism and portray her more sympathetically, and concentrate on showing her sweet side. At a certain point in the 1970s, Al Hartley took over as the primary Betty's Diary writer, and the change is complete. Kathleen Webb solidified that in longer stories later, and in the actual BETTY'S DIARY spinoff comic book. The changes in the regular Betty stories paralleled that evolution, and perhaps even ran ahead of it in some ways, but essentially, by the late 60s that wily schemer Betty has pretty well disappeared.

Quote from: invisifan on April 28, 2016, 04:36:16 PM

Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on April 28, 2016, 06:25:10 AM
Okay, I admit that I'm just counting the Superteen stories printed in B&V and B&Me where she's the star of the story, so I'm not counting any appearances outside of those titles with The United Three, like in LIFE WITH ARCHIE #50. I'm missing that story, as well as "To the Rescue" from B&Me #5.

Yes, you mentioned them — they aren't there because (as mentioned on the old board) I hate Little Archie and they are separate enough I can ignore them — still, I've added a couple of notes to Re: SuperTeens just for archival accuracy ...

I think you're confusing this post I made with another in the other thread about lists, but I get what you're saying. I'm not a fan of Little Archie either, but those particular stories are so anomalous (Bolling didn't want to include Little Pureheart, but was forced to by the editor) that for those three stories I can make a small exception. Not that there's any way you can square Little Captain Pureheart with the "The PH Factor", but the Archie superhero stories are just inconsistent in and of themselves anyway, with both Pureheart and Superteen having more than one origin (dream or real?)... but maybe Little Captain Pureheart's powers extend to memory wipes as well (even including wiping his own memory), or maybe they're just a dream of Little Archie's, the way some of his more fantastical exploits turn out to be (or it's that dimensional-hopping thing with Little Ambrose going on). At any rate, the fantastical nature of the Pureheart stories gives them more in common with the Little Archie stories in general than is usually the case for standard Archie stories.

    How DOES he do it? Pure EVIL, brother... pure evil.

(Comic book tip: If you want to be a superhero, don't wear a green and purple costume. Those are the colors of PURE EVIL!)

I mean, let's face it, if you read the RIVERDALE premise on some internet message board, you'd just go "Wow, this guy's got some pretty twisted fan-fantasies".

Quote from: Original Sin on April 28, 2016, 04:04:53 PM

Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on April 28, 2016, 04:00:17 PM

Quote from: Original Sin on April 28, 2016, 02:54:51 PM

Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on April 28, 2016, 02:49:13 PM

Quote from: Original Sin on April 28, 2016, 02:39:24 PM
I appreciate all that, and loved the 50s-60s love triangle stories. But that stuff has not been funny for a long time.

I don't think Betty needs to be perfect. Back in the day, she was not this multi-talented, super-virtuous, loved-by-everybody sweet little girl. Back then she was awesome.
I am not saying I want her to become full-on crazy again, because crazy Betty was entertaining but not exactly relatable. Which is why I believe they tried to make her into a girl-next-door, and ended up creating this perfect being. That's not very relatable either.

Veronica and Betty's rivalry does not have to end. They don't just fight over Archie. They have fought each other for other boys, popularity, modelling gigs, and so many other things. Way I see it, Betty and Veronica are two women fighting for the alpha female position of their little tribe. Archie does not have to be the main reason for everything. In fact, I don't even want Betty to lose ALL interest in Archie. She can still try to steal Archie once in a while to beat her rival Veronica. Or Archie maybe one of the guys in her life.

I want Betty to become her own person, an entertaining and relatable character, whose existence does not revolve around getting Archie's approval.

Hey, you don't have to sell ME on the idea. I'm totally down with it. It pretty much gives Archie nothing left to do, but I'm okay with that. I'd be fine with the company changing its name to B&V Comics. Jughead could continue on virtually unaffected by the whole change in status quo (and maybe that's the only function left for Archie, to become Jughead's clumsy and trouble-prone sidekick and sounding board).

Oh, I know. But since you said you don't understand the ship I thought I would familiarize you with the concept. More importantly, I like to talk about it. 

Well, it wouldn't bother me if what you described actually happened, but that's not the same as saying I think there's any actual chance of it happening, either. I think any of those scenarios are pretty much going to stay confined to fanfics. Maybe if we all live long enough, the characters will all be in public domain and anyone can do anything they want with them.

Dude, there's precious little chance of the things any of us want happening. They don't care about the fans' opinions. Hence the TV show.

What do you mean? Roberto Aguirre-Sacasa got to write the fanfic HE wanted to, for real! He just had to get a job as a big-time TV writer first. Too bad some Betty/Reggie fan didn't beat him out of the gig first, huh?

Quote from: 60sBettyandReggie on April 28, 2016, 01:08:33 PM
Didn't Veronica calm down once Dan Parent took over? Or did it happen before. By the way, I prefer the old Veronica.

When BETTY AND ME started, that was the beginning of sweet and nice Betty, and the beginning of the end of feisty, wily schemer Betty. Similarly, when Veronica got her own comic, they had to tone down some of her more outrageous aspects to make her more likable and sympathetic. Same thing happened to Cheryl Blossom when she got her own comic. I guess the takeaway here is if you like this or that character, then just pray that they don't get their own comic book.

Quote from: Original Sin on April 28, 2016, 02:54:51 PM

Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on April 28, 2016, 02:49:13 PM

Quote from: Original Sin on April 28, 2016, 02:39:24 PM
I appreciate all that, and loved the 50s-60s love triangle stories. But that stuff has not been funny for a long time.

I don't think Betty needs to be perfect. Back in the day, she was not this multi-talented, super-virtuous, loved-by-everybody sweet little girl. Back then she was awesome.
I am not saying I want her to become full-on crazy again, because crazy Betty was entertaining but not exactly relatable. Which is why I believe they tried to make her into a girl-next-door, and ended up creating this perfect being. That's not very relatable either.

Veronica and Betty's rivalry does not have to end. They don't just fight over Archie. They have fought each other for other boys, popularity, modelling gigs, and so many other things. Way I see it, Betty and Veronica are two women fighting for the alpha female position of their little tribe. Archie does not have to be the main reason for everything. In fact, I don't even want Betty to lose ALL interest in Archie. She can still try to steal Archie once in a while to beat her rival Veronica. Or Archie maybe one of the guys in her life.

I want Betty to become her own person, an entertaining and relatable character, whose existence does not revolve around getting Archie's approval.

Hey, you don't have to sell ME on the idea. I'm totally down with it. It pretty much gives Archie nothing left to do, but I'm okay with that. I'd be fine with the company changing its name to B&V Comics. Jughead could continue on virtually unaffected by the whole change in status quo (and maybe that's the only function left for Archie, to become Jughead's clumsy and trouble-prone sidekick and sounding board).

Oh, I know. But since you said you don't understand the ship I thought I would familiarize you with the concept. More importantly, I like to talk about it. 

Well, it wouldn't bother me if what you described actually happened, but that's not the same as saying I think there's any actual chance of it happening, either. I think any of those scenarios are pretty much going to stay confined to fanfics. Maybe if we all live long enough, the characters will all be in public domain and anyone can do anything they want with them.

Quote from: irishmoxie on April 28, 2016, 11:39:52 AM
I'm curious to what other comics you consider to be similar to the new Riverdale. I might be interested in reading them.

I've read a lot of comics, and find very little of uniqueness in the two New Riverdale books. The style of art and writing/storytelling in basically the same as in most mainstream comics, but that shouldn't be all that surprising because that's why they hired those people to write and draw them. It basically looks like those pages of a superhero comic on which no superheroes appear, and it's just people walking around, talking and doing other ordinary boring-type stuff. Other mainstream comics have other elements that make them unique that I like, but those are conceptual usually, or sometimes more character-driven, but for the most part they are illustrated adventure stories, not characters that were originally designed as funny cartoons. With Archie Comics, there's just nothing about the characters themselves and their relationships that I find that intrinsically compelling apart from the style and tone, and the way it's executed. It's just like there are a dozen different styles of Batman comic books, but I don't like them all, only certain ones, according to the style and execution of it.


I like classic Archie because it's unique and not like comics produced by any other company (although other companies DID produce this type of comics in the past, and I like those too... Millie the Model, Chili, Patsy and Hedy, Date With Debbi, Leave It To Binky, Swing With Scooter, Tippy Teen, Go-Go and Animal, and others -- plus a few new ones like Die Kitty Die and Super Suckers). I like the cartooniness, the lightheartedness, the cuteness and sweetness of them. They are "comical comics". They are candy for the eyes and for the mind in the same way bubblegum rock is candy for the ears. All that is completely gone from the New Riverdale books. I'd rather read an old issue of one of those other comics I mentioned, or an old issue of some Archie comic.

Quote from: Original Sin on April 28, 2016, 02:39:24 PM
I appreciate all that, and loved the 50s-60s love triangle stories. But that stuff has not been funny for a long time.

I don't think Betty needs to be perfect. Back in the day, she was not this multi-talented, super-virtuous, loved-by-everybody sweet little girl. Back then she was awesome.
I am not saying I want her to become full-on crazy again, because crazy Betty was entertaining but not exactly relatable. Which is why I believe they tried to make her into a girl-next-door, and ended up creating this perfect being. That's not very relatable either.

Veronica and Betty's rivalry does not have to end. They don't just fight over Archie. They have fought each other for other boys, popularity, modelling gigs, and so many other things. Way I see it, Betty and Veronica are two women fighting for the alpha female position of their little tribe. Archie does not have to be the main reason for everything. In fact, I don't even want Betty to lose ALL interest in Archie. She can still try to steal Archie once in a while to beat her rival Veronica. Or Archie maybe one of the guys in her life.

I want Betty to become her own person, an entertaining and relatable character, whose existence does not revolve around getting Archie's approval.

Hey, you don't have to sell ME on the idea. I'm totally down with it. It pretty much gives Archie nothing left to do, but I'm okay with that. I'd be fine with the company changing its name to B&V Comics. Jughead could continue on virtually unaffected by the whole change in status quo (and maybe that's the only function left for Archie, to become Jughead's clumsy and trouble-prone sidekick and sounding board).

Quote from: Original Sin on April 28, 2016, 01:48:59 PM

Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on April 28, 2016, 01:44:39 PM

Quote from: Original Sin on April 28, 2016, 01:34:14 PM

Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on April 28, 2016, 01:13:22 PM

Quote from: Original Sin on April 28, 2016, 11:28:44 AM
Pairing someone like Betty with someone like Adam maybe nice in real life, but it's not very entertaining in a comic book setting.

And that's why she'll forever be obsessed with a guy like Archie, who isn't worth her time in real life. My point here is that Betty doesn't need anyone to "bring out her best in her". She already IS the best. She can cook, she can sew, she can fix a car. She can race cars. She can ski, surf, play baseball or basketball as well or better than any teenager. She's an A student. She can write. She reads a lot and is smart and well informed. She good at gardening, crafts, or just about any activity she tries her hand at or sets her mind to. She's pretty, in great shape, and looks good in anything she wears. She's got more talent in her little finger than Veronica has in her whole body. She's funny and fun to be with, and cares about animals and people, and about the things in life that really matter, not just the superficial stuff. Veronica has looks and money, and that's all she really needs. She's not dumb, but it wouldn't really matter if she was. She's got all she needs to get by in life. Betty wasn't born with money, but she's a real do-it-yourselfer who can make the best of any situation. She can do just about anything - except win the love of an idiot who's too dumb to appreciate her. All Betty really needs to do is realize there there are some things in life that aren't worth doing, like chasing Archie. She's just got to stop wasting her time with jerks who don't appreciate how exceptional she really is, and start dating guys who treat her how she deserves to be treated. But I guess that wouldn't be entertaining, so she dates Archie instead.

Imbibing Betty with every virtue and talent under the sun is not a good thing. She would be much more interesting if she was not so perfect.

An entertaining comic character does not necessarily have to be crazy about Archie.

And being crazy about Archie is exactly what makes her not perfect. That's the very imperfection about her that makes her fans crazy, because she'd have to be crazy to put up with him.

Yes, I agree, that's what made her entertaining back in the day, and was fodder for so many great stories. However, the love triangle has already given us everything it could have. Every possible idea that can come from it has been hashed, rehashed, reused, recycled. It ceased to be funny a long time ago.

Archie is Betty's kryptonite. Without it, she, like Superman, would be perfect. However, you don't see Superman go looking for kryptonite to weaken him. If he did, you'd have to think that there was something seriously wrong with Superman.


But here's the thing you have to realize. The entire 75-year history of Archie Comics hinges on this one, impossible, monstrously irrational premise. Without Betty's obsession for Archie, she's perfect, finds a great guy who appreciates her, lives happily (and boringly, to the readers) ever after. Veronica, without Betty to compete with over Archie, loses all interest in him. What is there about Archie to possibly interest Veronica? NOTHING. She's not interested in him, she's interested in beating Betty, because Betty's the best, and obviously the only worthy challenger to Veronica. So without that triangle, no Archie Comics.