In the other pictures I've seen (from the trailer), the color is super, super red. I'm wondering if it suffered a bit with the bluer treatment they use in the overcast outdoor scenes.
Same here. I think my library didn't have the last one, because I don't remember how it ended at all. The imagery from the first two really did stick with me, though.
That last bit ("I'd actually respect Moore a lot more if he would just come out and say "it's my shit, and I hate when people mess with it, because I'm selfish". That's at least straightforward.") perfectly sums up how I've felt about Moore.
I enjoy his work, I believe that he deserves to be compensated for the work he's done, and respect how much he's contributed to the genre... and yet his argument so often boils down to "I just don't like it." I can't even fathom the phrase "adaptation is evil," as a true statement outside of his own internal opinion.
I wasn't aware that they were wholly out of print, which does make the objections make more sense. (I still take issue with the sensationalistic headline. Nobody is creeping into your house, burning the old book, and leaving you with the new one.)
On the one hand - I get how much people dug the original art work. On the other, if you were to follow that line with all illustrated works, you'd never have had Mervyn Peake's illustrations for Alice in Wonderland or any of the illustrators who followed Denslow for the Wizard of Oz.
I'm all for having the original available, but having a new artist tackle the work doesn't "destroy" the original in any way.
Yeah, pretty much. If I could effectively give the author the middle finger through the internet, I would.
They make wee steps at progress (Charming wakes up, the Huntsman dies, etc.), and then spend the next week stagnating (the good option) or backtracking. The whole flashback architecture feels like it is supposed to move the plot forward, but it just seems to serve as a reminder that we already know how those stories end up. Everybody gets cursed and has to live in Maine with a crazy woman and her kid who aren't helping fix anything.
I guess I'm in Priest's camp with the spectrum, but for one thing -- if it doesn't have steam-powered technology as a part of the world, it can't really be Steampunk. All of the other trappings - Victorian era, alternate history, class distinctions - are nice and evocative of a certain aesthetic, but I don't see them as a requirement any more than I think every fantasy novel has to have dwarves and hobbits, or science fiction works robots and spaceships. A lot of fantasy and science fiction works have those elements, but they aren't a hard and fast requirement for the genres. Narrowing Steampunk to any element other than the technology that gives it its name just seems silly to me.
There's also the idea that designers can skip the manufacturing phase to sell directly to the consumer -- if a lot of people have a device for printing physical objects, who is to say that the designs you print might not be sold to you? A killer designer lamp recipe might be something you do purchase for money. I'd be happy to buy a doll's design for a slightly lower cost than the physical object if I'm supplying the manufacturing equipment in my home.
I think there will always be a call for professional level design, even if the manufacturing shifts from a large scale operation to something more personal.
I'm assuming the that hair Rumpelstiltskin kept might play a part in the whole getting her memory back bit, or at the least, might be what saves her life.
I thought the cabin (with its 8 coat hooks on the door) was supposed to be for the Dwarves, now all broken apart since nobody gets to be with the people they care about.
I think you should amend it to "Jason Statham with his shirt off" to get a proper vote.
I left this show in a bit of a huff, and just really got caught up -- I'm fairly impressed (there's a low bar here) with the progress. Things have happened, and stuff actually changes. I'm hoping they're working up to bigger and better changes, but not holding my breath. At the very least, they've at least explained how Snow could be loitering around in the woods with the 8, er 7, Dwarves without being anxious to get out and find Charming, without it being too cheesy or awful.
Also, I really, really want to know what Rumpelstiltskin is going to do with that other hair.
WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAALT!
Short answer, no.
Slightly more elaborated, it isn't really even the same story. It shares the 'fairy tale characters in a modern world' element, but that's about it. Much the same as all murder mysteries involve a murder that needs to be solved (more or less). The show isn't great or terrible, just middling at the moment. I got tired of it, but they seem to be addressing some of the early faults in the back half of the season.
As far as I can tell, he got stuck with mediocre writing and a less than stellar Lois Lane. The majority of film-goers aren't comic book readers, and were probably hoping for something either just like X-men, or just like the old Christopher Reeves films, and 'Superman Returns' was neither. I thought he did a good job, but the film was lesser than the sum of its parts.
Really great article; watching the manga industry stagnate is really difficult, and this seems to be a pretty good rundown of the why, how, and where things might go in the future.
Weird quibble - I've always seen it written as "scanslation" not "scanlation." I mean, it is a portmanteau that's relatively new, it is just odd to see an article written with, for me, the alternate spelling.
LOTR didn't have any barely averted baby sacrifices. Both had parents reject and try to murder their children for not living up to ridiculous expectations. They both have some pretty dark moments, but Willow has more comedic ones to liven the overall tone.
You neglect the evil "sheer fun of it" angle. Sometimes evil just does stuff because they can.
From someone who really enjoys 4e (I might be the only unicorn out there who's liked all of the editions differently), I think a lot of hate comes from players and their natural difficulty knowing when to bend, or play outside of, the rules. Hell, that's one of the reasons why a) rules lawyers exist and b) why everyone who isn't one hates them.
The books provide a launching point, but people often get mired in them as the end-all-be-all of the game. The way the 4E core books are written means that unless you're a very creative thinker, you might not intuit how to use the game elements outside of the described combat situations. It doesn't mean it is impossible, it just makes it less likely that an individual group will be able to go in that direction.
Hearing from the people who designed the game talking about their own games, they are usually very much like the sort of games I'd love to play. Reading through the rule books, the sample adventures they give are usually very unlike the sort of game I'd want to play. (All slash, little skill.)
I also loved the white hat/black hat bit with Snow and Charming while they were hanging posters. It didn't seem quite as "Oh, look, a label," as the Red stuff, but it was nice. Neither one of them looked odd in their winter gear, but the lines were clearly drawn.
