INCREDIBLE HULK #77 ADVANCE REVIEW

[Andrea Speed]

Reviewer: Andrea Speed andy@comixtreme.com
Quick Rating: A tad baffling (probably not to fans, though)
Title: Tempus Fugit, Part 1

The Hulk ends up on Monster Island.

<a href="http://www.comixtreme.com/gallery/data/media/39/hulk77.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.comixtreme.com/gallery/data/thumbnails/39/hulk77.jpg" align="left" border="0"> </a>Writer: Peter David
Pencils: Lee Weeks
Inks: Tom Palmer
Colors: Studio F
Letters: Virtual Calligraphy's Randy Gentile
Editor: Tom Brevoort
Cover Art: Lee Weeks
Publisher: Marvel



Review: You know, maybe I missed a subtext.

I never read David's Hulk run - I'm sorry, the Hulk as a character just never appealed to me. But I did like the X-Files-ish Bruce Jones run (although it fell to pieces at the end, which was a shame), so I thought I was pretty much prepared for more Hulk and apparently I'm not.

Not a whole lot happens here that I could make sense of. It's not incoherent, in fact it's pretty straightforward, but I was still left going huh?-� although that could just be a failing on my part. Hulk is in the ocean tearing up sharks, Hulk is reminiscing, and then Hulk ends up on shore, and turns into Bruce. They seem to be bickering with each other a bit during this time, and then a Monster Island denizen appears, as do some others, and there's a twist at the end, suggesting the time travel the arc title seems to tease. (Or time something; somebody's been futzing with time, or everything isn't as it seems.) Maybe it is because I am not a Hulk fan, this all means bupkis to me, and seemed disappointing. I didn't think I was expecting anything, yet I felt like I missed something. Maybe if you're a Hulk fan, you've been around through David's run, this will mean a lot more to you, and you will catch what I missed.

I love Weeks. He is a tremendous artist and his hulk looks indeed very hulking, and the underwater scenes are great. The art is very good, I have no problems with it at all, and the flashback scenes are handled deftly. Studio F keeps the colors muted, and they are pretty good as well.

The Hulk does smash some things (mainly fishy things, but it still counts), and I think genuine Hulk fans will be pleased, and should raise my rating accordingly. But I feel like I've come in on act two, and completely missed act one.




Rating:http://www.comixtreme.com/reviews/full.jpghttp://www.comixtreme.com/reviews/full.jpghttp://www.comixtreme.com/reviews/full.jpghttp://www.comixtreme.com/reviews/none.jpghttp://www.comixtreme.com/reviews/none.jpg





Buy The Hulk online now from X-World and Save! (http://x-worldcomics.com/yourvirtualstore/shopdisplayproducts.asp?id=69&cat=INCREDIBLE+HULK)

[Ammar Al Subahi]

At last.....PD's back....feeling....exstacy....rush all over me...

[Mark Blicharz]

I've been reading the Hulk for years, I didn't get what the hell was going on either.

[PinchyWearO]

I liked Jones' take...but I'm so looking forward to David's return...

[Ryan Broussard]

i am lil' worried here

[Andrea Speed]

I've been reading the Hulk for years, I didn't get what the hell was going on either.

*phew* So it wasn't just me? I thought the problem was mine, and I was missing something some *real* Hulk fan would know.

[batmanego]

Well, I never felt a lot of interest in David´s concept of The Hulk... The idea of a smart Hulk always felt to me as appealing as a grim and gritty Spider-Man or a sweet cuddly Batman... That´s just not the character, no matter how well he writes it.

[chrismozer]

this issue almost sounds like the Hulk is gonna guest star on ABC's show "LOST"

[Andrea Speed]

...

Actually, that might be interesting ...:LOL:

[SonOfSatan]

Originally posted by batmanego
Well, I never felt a lot of interest in David´s concept of The Hulk... The idea of a smart Hulk always felt to me as appealing as a grim and gritty Spider-Man or a sweet cuddly Batman... That´s just not the character, no matter how well he writes it.

That's actually quite funny, considering the original conception of the character and his evolution through the first few years. Remember--the "savage" Hulk personality most often associated with the character didn't appear until 3-4 years into his history, and even then, it wasn't a mainstay for a few more years after that. So, to me, PAD's version of the character is a lot truer to the core concept than virtually anyone's, including the abysmal in-name-only Hulk of Bruce Jones' plodding, plot-device prone, television show rip-off version of the last few years. At the very least, PAD's is a Hulk perfectly capable of carrying the full narrative weight on his shoulders, something Jones' Hulk--well, wasn't.

Of course, I could acknowledge that PAD's version may be similar in some ways--then again, PAD himself has acknowledged that version is in some ways similar in turn to his conception of the character right before he was unceremoniously taken off the book in the '90s.

(All of which isn't to say PAD is my favorite Hulk writer--he isn't; Bill Mantlo nudges him out, with Roger Stern pretty close behind.)

~G., back with a vengeance

[Mark Blicharz]

There's nothing wrong with any version of the Hulk as long as it's written well. Jones' Hulk was written well, though I can understand your points.

[batmanego]

Originally posted by SonOfSatan
That's actually quite funny, considering the original conception of the character and his evolution through the first few years. Remember--the "savage" Hulk personality most often associated with the character didn't appear until 3-4 years into his history, and even then, it wasn't a mainstay for a few more years after that. So, to me, PAD's version of the character is a lot truer to the core concept than virtually anyone's, including the abysmal in-name-only Hulk of Bruce Jones' plodding, plot-device prone, television show rip-off version of the last few years. At the very least, PAD's is a Hulk perfectly capable of carrying the full narrative weight on his shoulders, something Jones' Hulk--well, wasn't.

Of course, I could acknowledge that PAD's version may be similar in some ways--then again, PAD himself has acknowledged that version is in some ways similar in turn to his conception of the character right before he was unceremoniously taken off the book in the '90s.

(All of which isn't to say PAD is my favorite Hulk writer--he isn't; Bill Mantlo nudges him out, with Roger Stern pretty close behind.)

~G., back with a vengeance

Fine, call me a Savage Hulk fan, then. I still don´t care for his version.

[SonOfSatan]

From The Incredible Hulk Message Board (http://www.comicboards.com/hulk/view.php?rpl=050104160532) :


Originally posted by Peter David

> Andrea's Review: You know, maybe I missed a subtext.

> I never read David’s Hulk run - I’m sorry, the Hulk as a character just never appealed to me. But I did like the X-Files-ish Bruce Jones run (although it fell to pieces at the end, which was a shame), so I thought I was pretty much prepared for more Hulk … and apparently I’m not.

> Not a whole lot happens here that I could make sense of. It’s not incoherent, in fact it’s pretty straightforward, but I was still left going “Huh?” although that could just be a failing on my part.


Because of course, the hallmark of Bruce Jones's run on the book was putting all his cards on the table up front and having everything be crystal clear.

Actually, you could argue that Andrea Speed is now encountering the same sort of disorientation that long-time Hulk fans had in reading the Jones run and wondering why Bruce was having random trysts with women or why the Absorbing Man was nothing like he'd ever been before.

Me, I'm endeavoring to please long-time readers while at the same time keeping it simple for new readers. But if she couldn't "make sense" of a story as "straightforward" as this one is, then the fan need for spoonfeeding is reaching new heights.

PAD

[Andrea Speed]

Wow - now PAD attacks me, and I'm a fan of his!

Spoonfeeding? Come on, PAD - this story doesn't make sense!I'm not asking for everything on the table - I'm asking for general coherence. Or were you spoonfeeding us all in Captain Marvel - which I never had any trouble getting - or even in Madrox? So, you spoonfeed us stupid readers there, but refrain in The Hulk?

I won't say that's arrogant, but it sounds like it.

[Mark Blicharz]

I've been reading the Hulk for years, pretty much every issue since his conception and I didn't get what was going on. That post from PAD was extremely obnoxious.

[Andrea Speed]

It's rather curious. I didn't even say it was awful - I gave it a three out of five - I just said it didn't make sense. And it's fine to write a story that makes no sense, as long as you make up a set up intriguing enough to make readers pick up the next issue in hopes of understanding it. Another example of this is JLA:Classified (which some people, as you know, openly loathed.) I just didn't feel this was intriguing enough to want to pick up the next issue.

It does make me wonder if I was spoonfed Captain Marvel ....

[CylverSaber]

Originally posted by Andrea Speed
Wow - now PAD attacks me, and I'm a fan of his!

Spoonfeeding? Come on, PAD - this story doesn't make sense!I'm not asking for everything on the table - I'm asking for general coherence. Or were you spoonfeeding us all in Captain Marvel - which I never had any trouble getting - or even in Madrox? So, you spoonfeed us stupid readers there, but refrain in The Hulk?

I won't say that's arrogant, but it sounds like it.

I think the problem with your review is that you say it doesn't make sense, but you don't actually point out anything that doesn't make sense-- you just point out things that we don't have all the answers to yet. And I think that's what's frustrating for PAD-- that your review basically demands he give all the answers up front, and doesn't allow for any kind of mystery.

Unfortunately, that's all too common today. How many people always want spoilers to comics even before they come out, or flip through their novels to read the surprise revelations at the end. Even I'm guilty of it at times. We're conditioned to demand everything be laid out for us now, now, now. It's a fast-food, soundbite culture.

[Mark Blicharz]

She can't give what doesn't make sense without spoilers. The book simply didn't make sense. I know the Hulk, inside and out, and I didn't get what he was trying to get across.

[Andrea Speed]

Yep, I can't spoil - it's verboten.

As I said up there - go read - is that an issue can be completely baffling, as long as it's (here, i'll italicize it) intriguing enough to make you want to buy the next issue. This doesn't pass that test, in my opinion.

It feels like PAD assumes you know all about these characters and care about them so much you can't wait to see what happens. But, as Goku said, he's a long time Hulk reader, and he didn't get it either.

So, Goku, let me ask you a question, as a long time Hulk reader: are you on pins and needles, unable to wait for what may come next?

[CylverSaber]

Originally posted by Andrea Speed
Yep, I can't spoil - it's verboten.

As I said up there - go read - is that an issue can be completely baffling, as long as it's (here, i'll italicize it) intriguing enough to make you want to buy the next issue. This doesn't pass that test, in my opinion.

It feels like PAD assumes you know all about these characters and care about them so much you can't wait to see what happens. But, as Goku said, he's a long time Hulk reader, and he didn't get it either.

So, Goku, let me ask you a question, as a long time Hulk reader: are you on pins and needles, unable to wait for what may come next?

Why are you asking Goku when he already stated his dislike for it? Sort of a staged question isn't it?

I'm a longtime Hulk reader too, I just read it, and I think it's great. I can't for the life of me figure out what you found so confusing.

[Blake Petit]

You know, this is the second time in the last few months that PAD has lashed out at one of our reviewers for giving a negative review to one of his books, and both times he had the same complaint -- that they wanted to be "spoonfed." And NEITHER time did I get that impression reading the reviews at all. I'm seriously reconsidering buying any comics with his name on them in the future -- the guy is a talented writer and I've been a fan of his for years, but if he's going to keep pulling out the same attacks on people who just honestly didn't care for one of his books (particularly two people who have been vocal proponents of his in the past), I don't see why I should support him.

[Lord_Magneto]

where did he lash out? i haven't seen him around here at all.

[Blake Petit]

I didn't say he did it here -- that lash at Andrea on the first page of this thread was done at another site. He did jump on Craig here for his Fallen Angel column, and he also took that fight to Newsarama.

[CylverSaber]

Originally posted by Blake Petit
I didn't say he did it here -- that lash at Andrea on the first page of this thread was done at another site. He did jump on Craig here for his Fallen Angel column, and he also took that fight to Newsarama.

I think until someone's had their work published in a major venue (I mean actually published, not posted on the Internet), they can't really judge how it feels to be criticized in that manner (or by that many people), nor say how they would react.

[Blake Petit]

Oh, please.

I'm sure it does sting to get a negative review. I have no doubt about that. But that doesn't mean that the way to respond is to attack the reviewer and call him or her stupid.

[CylverSaber]

Originally posted by Blake Petit
Oh, please.

I'm sure it does sting to get a negative review. I have no doubt about that. But that doesn't mean that the way to respond is to attack the reviewer and call him or her stupid.

Where did he call Andrea stupid?

[Lord_Magneto]

huh, thats not very professional of him.. even though i dig his Madrox, i hope Andrea hit him back just like he deserves.

[Blake Petit]

Originally posted by CylverSaber
Where did he call Andrea stupid?

He implied it with that "spoonfed" remark, and you know he did. Same as he did to Craig. Same as he does, I've noticed, with most reviewers who criticize his work.

LM -- Andrea doesn't need to "hit back." I've got total faith in her ability to be professional about this.

[Lord_Magneto]

i actually do think Andrea (or anyone, for that matter) need to comment David on his behavior.

[CylverSaber]

Originally posted by Blake Petit
He implied it with that "spoonfed" remark, and you know he did.

I think that's a comment on her patience for the unfolding story and her willingness to put some thought into the reading experience.

[Blake Petit]

So you're saying it means she's not willing to put thought into reading the comic? This is somehow better than just saying she's stupid?

[CylverSaber]

Originally posted by Blake Petit
So you're saying it means she's not willing to put thought into reading the comic? This is somehow better than just saying she's stupid?

Of course it is. If you're stupid, there's nothing you can do about it. If you just didn't do something, you can always go back and do it.

[Blake Petit]

But she did do it, that's what you and PAD don't seem willing to accept. The way he comes across, it seems like if someone didn't like a comic, he can't fathom that they actually read it critically and came to that conclusion, obviously they missed the point. That's no better than just calling the reviewer an idiot, no matter how you try to dress it up.

[CylverSaber]

Originally posted by Blake Petit
But she did do it, that's what you and PAD don't seem willing to accept. The way he comes across, it seems like if someone didn't like a comic, he can't fathom that they actually read it critically and came to that conclusion, obviously they missed the point. That's no better than just calling the reviewer an idiot, no matter how you try to dress it up.

PAD points out on that same thread that Fourth Rail regularly trashed CM, but that he never took issue with it because he felt the reviews were well-thought out, even if he didn't agree with them. Like I said earlier, I think his issue with Andrea's review is that it dismisses the book as not making sense, but never really explains how or why. I understand that Andrea doesn't want to give away spoilers, but I still think she could have gone into a little more detail about how and why she found it confusing without giving away plot points. A good review manages to perform that high-wire act. But that's just my opinion, your mileage may vary.

[Ammar Al Subahi]

Or someone should notify PAD that this was an advance review and that Andrea isn't allowed to post spoilers thus she can't really describe what's confusing

[Pascal]

Originally posted by Blake Petit
Oh, please.

I'm sure it does sting to get a negative review. I have no doubt about that. But that doesn't mean that the way to respond is to attack the reviewer and call him or her stupid.

You know I've been there. Do you really saw his posts as attacks?

[Michael Hetman]

So, how didn't it make sense?

Was it like: "so, my mom was cutting carrots in the kitchen, then birds popped out of my dad's radiator."?

"So, I was staring at this 2d-3d puzzle for hours, and I just couldn't unfocus my eyes so that I could see the tyrannosaurus rex munching on the juicy brontosaurus." ?

"$(*&! I hate quantum mechanics!" ?

"Can't find a single spot that I can stand on in my room."?

[Andrea Speed]

Do I have PAD's permission to blow the entire plot of the issue - in advance - on the web? Then I can talk about it in depth in my review. Otherwise, no, I can't - I have to be very careful what I say because some writers actually object to having entire stories blown before they're actually out on the stands. Silly buggers.

"Spoonfed" is a compliment? Well, really? How do you like your comics spoonfed to you, CylverSaber? Tablespoon or teaspoon? Spoonfed like Captain Marvel, Madrox, Fallen Angel, or Hulk?

The story is shapeless. He has done much, much better. He thinks it's the greatest thing he's ever written? Fine.

But ask PAD if he's going to put out a chart telling us which comics of his spoonfeed the stupid readers, and which ines in which he doesn't bother. Because I'd like to mark my CM's accordingly. Maybe I'll get little spoon stickers, mark the ones where he spoonfed us readers; it'll make it much easier on our tiny little minds. :D

[CylverSaber]

Originally posted by Andrea Speed
Do I have PAD's permission to blow the entire plot of the issue - in advance - on the web? Then I can talk about it in depth in my review. Otherwise, no, I can't - I have to be very careful what I say because some writers actually object to having entire stories blown before they're actually out on the stands. Silly buggers.

"Spoonfed" is a compliment? Well, really? How do you like your comics spoonfed to you, CylverSaber? Tablespoon or teaspoon? Spoonfed like Captain Marvel, Madrox, Fallen Angel, or Hulk?

The story is shapeless. He has done much, much better. He thinks it's the greatest thing he's ever written? Fine.

But ask PAD if he's going to put out a chart telling us which comics of his spoonfeed the stupid readers, and which ines in which he doesn't bother. Because I'd like to mark my CM's accordingly. Maybe I'll get little spoon stickers, mark the ones where he spoonfed us readers; it'll make it much easier on our tiny little minds. :D

I didn't say it was a compliment. It's clearly a criticism. But there's a big difference between a criticism and an attack. And frankly, if you're going to dish out criticism about someone else's work, you ought to be able to take it about your own.

Let me suggest a way you could have explained your confusion without giving away plot points. Suppose there's a comic in which Spider-Man is about to be attacked by a dangerous supervillain, but for some reason his spider-sense doesn't go off, and that confuses me. I don't want to give away those plot points, so in my review I say "There's a scene on page 3 where Spidey's powers don't seem to work quite the way they're supposed to". That's addressing a specific point of confusion, without actually giving away what happens in the story. And consequently, people (including the writer) will be able to see what you had a problem with, and address the issue.

As for the story being shapeless, I don't agree. The gist of the story is the conflict between the Hulk and Banner, and how that reflects Banner's issues about his own sense of self-worth. This was illustrated in the classroom scene. And then at the end, we have a nice surprise that sets up a very intriguing mystery.

[Blake Petit]

Ah yes, that'll make for a review people want to read. "On Page 4, the Hulk says something that doesn't make sense. On page 11, Betty's hair is colored red instead of brown. Oh, and wait until you see what happens on page 22..."

[Andrea Speed]

Yeah, people love reviews like that.

And, let's see: if he attacks me, it's just criticism. If I criticize his work - and just this one issue (I'm a fan) - I'm attacking him? Explain the logic.

[CylverSaber]

I think you guys are having trouble keeping things straight. You keep making up things I didn't say. I never said you "attacked" him. You and Blake said that's what PAD did to you.

And yeah Blake, a good review does refer to specific things within the work. Roger Ebert manages it regularly when he doesn't want to spoil something. He'll say "There's a scene about a third of the way into the movie where..."

Really, with how defensive you guys are getting, it's astonishing that you objected to PAD's doing so.

[Blake Petit]

Nobody said that YOU said that he attacked her.

WE said he attacked her.

[CylverSaber]

Originally posted by Andrea Speed
Yeah, people love reviews like that.

And, let's see: if he attacks me, it's just criticism. If I criticize his work - and just this one issue (I'm a fan) - I'm attacking him? Explain the logic.

[Blake Petit]

Your point? She just said he attacked her. She's not putting words in your mouth, she's disputing your selective terminology.

[CylverSaber]

Originally posted by Blake Petit
Your point? She just said he attacked her. She's not putting words in your mouth, she's disputing your selective terminology.

Do you not see where she says that I'm alleging that SHE is attacking him? Here it is again:

"If I criticize his work - and just this one issue (I'm a fan) - I'm attacking him?"

[Ronée]

WOW! This review is a great read from start ot finish!

What I personally find a bit.. well..strange.. is the fact that PAD talks directly ABOUT Andrea's review other places but not here. I mean, i feel he has every right to say what he thinks, I just believe it would be more commendable if he did it HERE to her.

Look, reviews are each reviewers opinion... I don't think like everyone else here, and niether does anyone else. She IS a fan of PAD and just expressed confusion concerning THIS issue.

Being criticized sux.. but it is the price you pay for the fame. I also think a common excuse for why someone does not like your work is to blame a lack of intelligence on the critic.

[Andrea Speed]

Cyber Saber, it's clear you're a PAD fan, no matter what. that's fine; loyalty is appreciated by many. But how is "spoonfed" a criticism? A criticism is something that could be built upon or improved: confusing, for example, unclear, shapeless. Spoonfed? How do you build on that? I am disputing your selective terminology. Spoonfed is an insult, not a criticism, unless you can explain how it can be built upon.

I also think a common excuse for why someone does not like your work is to blame a lack of intelligence on the critic.

Or do what another writer did, and call all criticizers "fanboys".

[Ammar Al Subahi]

God bless comic fanboys! :LOL:

[Lord_Magneto]

hmm, i wonder. when you gave a good review issue after issue of Captain Marvel, and when you tried to convince everyone and their mother to buy it, did David also said something about your reviews? did he have any problems with them then?

[Ronée]

Now why would he? I am sure she was a genius to him then. lol.

It's called a review, if you can't take the criticism, you are REALLY in the wrong business.

[Dhampir24]

This issue was indeed confusing as Andy said. However, I will pick up following issues to see how the story unfolds; as I have faith in PAD(the harshness of his response to your post was unwarrented, nonetheless)

[Lord_Magneto]

can someone link me to where that happened?

[Blake Petit]

Originally posted by CylverSaber
Do you not see where she says that I'm alleging that SHE is attacking him? Here it is again:

"If I criticize his work - and just this one issue (I'm a fan) - I'm attacking him?"

Ah, I'll apologize for that one, I misread you. I thought you were saying that we said you said she attacked him. (Boy, that was garbled.)

Point is, though, I don't think any of us would have a reaction along these lines, but it's something we've had to deal with time and again with PAD whenever someone says anything remotely negative about something he wrote. I've been a fan of his for a long time -- his first run on Hulk, his work on Supergirl and Young Justice -- I liked all of them. The current Madrox series is great. But I don't take to having my intelligence, or my integrity as a reviewer, called into question just because I've found one thing of his I don't care for.

[Ronée]

Well it is like I said before to you in private Blake... just because a man is a good writer that does not always make him a nice PERSON.

And LM... look at the first page of this thread...where it is quoted there is also a link.

[Mark Blicharz]

Would have responded earlier, but I had a funeral for a friend of mine from high school to attend to.

Andy, I'm not looking forward to the next issue, this one was boring and confusing. I've read the issue again and I still don't know what PAD is trying to get across. I'm a fan of his writing, but this issue just had me sit there and go "Huh? What the hell is he talking about?"

[SonOfSatan]

Okay, okay, I thought it was amusing to see PAD's thoughts on the review and the commentary therefrom...but please, can we start discussing the actual issue in question rather than keep criticizing PAD for those comments?

~G., who won't get the book until tomorrow at the very least, but who's heard very good things

[Ronée]

uh-oh Goku... be careful. Your intelligence may be in question now.

[SonOfSatan]

Originally posted by SSJGOKU555
Would have responded earlier, but I had a funeral for a friend of mine from high school to attend to.

Andy, I'm not looking forward to the next issue, this one was boring and confusing. I've read the issue again and I still don't know what PAD is trying to get across. I'm a fan of his writing, but this issue just had me sit there and go "Huh? What the hell is he talking about?"


Thaaaaaaaaaaank you for at least replying toward the issue in question instead of continuing the infighting.

That said, now I trust you know how I've felt the past few years, when Bruce Jones went on and on with senseless, hollow tales that stripped away everything vital and interesting about every character in the book and turned them into boring one-dimensional cliches, with confusing plotline after confusing plotline. ;)

Just so we're settled...

And I still like that very moody piece on the first 5+ pages. And from what I've seen, the flashbacks to Bruce's childhood years look VERY intriguing. At least the Hulk's actually appearing in his own series, for once.

~G.

[Mark Blicharz]

I did enjoy the flashbacks, but I did enjoy Jones' run. It was a different take on the character which I felt intrigued by, this just felt eh.

[CylverSaber]

Originally posted by Andrea Speed
Cyber Saber, it's clear you're a PAD fan, no matter what.

Nope, not no matter what. I felt Fallen Angel got off to a slow start, for example. I felt the last few years of his Hulk run were not as strong as they could have been. I did not like his Dreamwave TMNT book at all. And if PAD starts writing like Chuck Austen, no amount of fond memories of his work will keep me following it.

But how is "spoonfed" a criticism? A criticism is something that could be built upon or improved: confusing, for example, unclear, shapeless. Spoonfed? How do you build on that?

Spoonfed was one word in the criticism; the criticism was "...if she couldn't "make sense" of a story as "straightforward" as this one is, then the fan need for spoonfeeding is reaching new heights." Here he points out that you call the story straightforward, yet say you can't make sense of it; his criticism is saying that you really aren't trying. Spoonfeeding requires no effort; you just open your mouth and in comes the choo-choo. What PAD is urging you to improve (and you say "a criticism is something that could be built upon or improved") is the effort and thought you put into the reading; he wants you to pick up your fork and knife, and dig in. He's saying that's what this issue required, and he's saying he doesn't think that's something that should be changed. Frankly, I agree; not every comic should be surface, there should be some you have to think about it to really appreciate.

Originally posted by Blake Petit
Ah, I'll apologize for that one, I misread you. I thought you were saying that we said you said she attacked him. (Boy, that was garbled.)

You didn't say that, but Andrea did.

Originally posted by Ronee Garcia
Well it is like I said before to you in private Blake... just because a man is a good writer that does not always make him a nice PERSON.

Unlike most of the people on this thread, I've met PAD in person, and I can testify that he is in fact a VERY nice person. I think we can see, just from the reactions of people in this thread to my comments, how hard it is to take criticism of your work without retorting. So I think the best answer is, if you're going to be a critic, be prepared to have your criticism criticized.

Lastly, I see a number of people in this thread echoing Andrea's comments, saying they couldn't understand this issue. This is the only place I've seen that criticism levelled (the "decompressed" criticism I've seen many more places), so I will make an offer. Anyone who doesn't understand something about this issue can private message me on this board, and I will not only explain it, but I will also explain how that could have been gotten from reading the issue, without an excessive amount of thought. I'd say ask publically, but there's the spoilers rule as Andrea pointed out. Or maybe there are tags you can use to post spoilers on this board, I don't know. Any takers? 'Cause I'm really curious as to what baffled so many people here.

[Andrea Speed]

So I think the best answer is, if you're going to be a critic, be prepared to have your criticism criticized.

So why can't PAD take it?

I've actually had nice, adult discussions with writers whose work I wasn't very fond of. They didn't just lash out with "fanboy" or "spoonfed" - they wanted to actually have a discusion.


PAD has never said a damn word to me. Even when I was leading the campaign to save Captain Marvel (which I now assume he spoonfed us, since I "got it"), or when I gave him a good review for the last issue of Madrox. So excuse me while I ignore any criticisms he has to say (himself or through his lackeys) until he grows up and talks to me, instead of slagging me off on other message boards or relying on his fan base to argue for him.

He's an adult. I know he can type.

[Templares]

Damn this was a good read . . . . hopefully next time PAD and other writers would use PMs or email to speak their mind about the reviews of their works.

I think this qualifies for an article in the Cx Columns :D :D :D .

[Mark Blicharz]

CS, yes books you have to think about are good, but when you think about them and they still make you say "Huh?" it's not good. It had some good points to it, but for the most part didn't make much sense.

[Bad_Monkey]

Originally posted by CylverSaber
Spoonfed was one word in the criticism; the criticism was "...if she couldn't "make sense" of a story as "straightforward" as this one is, then the fan need for spoonfeeding is reaching new heights." Here he points out that you call the story straightforward, yet say you can't make sense of it; his criticism is saying that you really aren't trying. Spoonfeeding requires no effort; you just open your mouth and in comes the choo-choo. What PAD is urging you to improve (and you say "a criticism is something that could be built upon or improved") is the effort and thought you put into the reading; he wants you to pick up your fork and knife, and dig in. He's saying that's what this issue required, and he's saying he doesn't think that's something that should be changed. Frankly, I agree; not every comic should be surface, there should be some you have to think about it to really appreciate.

That's not what the quoted line says. It might be what you as a reader infer out of that line, but that's not what it says. The quoted line, in it's own right, says that if this story is as straightforward as the critic claims then she's stupid and/or lazy for not getting it. This quote supposes that being straightforward and making sense are the same thing.... they aren't.


Unlike most of the people on this thread, I've met PAD in person, and I can testify that he is in fact a VERY nice person. I think we can see, just from the reactions of people in this thread to my comments, how hard it is to take criticism of your work without retorting. So I think the best answer is, if you're going to be a critic, be prepared to have your criticism criticized.

Just for the record, I, too, have met PAD in person at Dragoncon in Hotlanta last year. He generally is a nice person. However, the history of this board shows that he has a nasty habit of lashing out at critics.

And just for the record, I have no problem with PAD (or anyone else, for that matter) taking issue with the review. He is just as entitled to their opinions as we are. It's when he starts insulting the reviewer that I have a problem.

I mean, for a guy who constantly has his books cancelled out from under him due to low sales, you think he'd know better than to insult the fans he does have.

[CylverSaber]

My offer still stands for anyone to PM me with what they didn't understand about the issue.

[WhereIsTony]

Originally posted by SSJGOKU555
CS, yes books you have to think about are good, but when you think about them and they still make you say "Huh?" it's not good. It had some good points to it, but for the most part didn't make much sense.


See I like ahuh isssue havent read this one yet though....

[Mark Blicharz]

Not "huh" in the good way. "Huh" in the "This doesn't make sense" way. I like stories where I have to try to figure out what's going on, not when I have to sit there and figure out what the author is trying to say.

[Andrea Speed]

Yeah, bad huh. It's hard to make a feast on a banquet of crumbs, to wax poetic. (Choo-choo on that for a while.:LOL: And, in case anyone's wondering, no, I haven't heard from PAD yet. I doubt I will, which is sad.)

[COUSIN O]

Wow, i personally am surprised that PAD would even look at the message boards, let alone make comments on a SPECIFIC review.
In additon to the fact that i would start second guessing myself as a writer if i took every review to heart, it just seems very unbecoming to me, and beneath a person of PAD's caliber to make comments like that about Andrea's review, and then to criticize Jones' run like that.

Even if PAD can run circles around Jones in the writing department, wouldn't it be better to take the high road, and be gracious and say little to nothing about Jones' run? I can understand a gentle criticism like, "i had some problems with the continuity on Jones' stories" but isn't PAD'S sarcasm somewhat unbecoming? Perhaps the two have some personal issues that i am unaware of, but barring that, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth, especially when you consider that PAD is at the helm NOW, and writing the stories. What does he have to gain from taking a potshot at Jones now?

I can understand creative frustration as well... the feeling that people aren't "getting" your work. I believe a more noble course of action would be to vent one's concerns in a more appropriate forum, and with greater diplomacy. Obviously, PAD can do whatever he sees fit (this goes without saying) but wouldn't it reflect better on him if he addressed his concerns differently?


I'm not going to put words in his mouth, but if you want an example of what i mean, he could easily post some general comments on his website, something along the lines of:
"Sometimes people feel like the HULK is confusing or incoherent, and that bothers me because i feel i'm weaving together the elements of a good story... i don't want to show all my cards immediately. Sadly, that doesn't always seem to work well with today's audience, but i'm confident they'll come around".
See how easy that was? He could easily express his views without singling out andrea or looking like he he's overly angy at the fans.

As far as the first issue of PAD's 5 part story arc, it worked fine for me. Some of the flashback scenes were very nicely done... and i enjoyed the fight scenes as well. I'm not exactly sure what was confusing about this story, but maybe I just glossed over whatever was not clear to other people on this board. I think you really have to consider that this is the FIRST story in a 5 part arc and you can't expect PAD to come blasting out of the gate with the HULK story to end all HULK stories right away. He's got to lay some groundwork first!!!! That said, I think he did a nice job of including classic "hulk" moments while setting the stage for a new Hulk tale.

[CylverSaber]

Originally posted by Andrea Speed
Yeah, bad huh. It's hard to make a feast on a banquet of crumbs, to wax poetic. (Choo-choo on that for a while.:LOL: And, in case anyone's wondering, no, I haven't heard from PAD yet. I doubt I will, which is sad.)

Well, that makes two of us,'cause I haven't heard from anyone who didn't understand something in the issue. :)

For the record, PAD didn't read the comments here, nor did the person who posted them leave a link. Now, at least I invited you to tell me what was so hard to understand about the issue (which you have interestingly not done), but you haven't invited PAD to discuss this with you, which leads me to wonder if this isn't all just posturing.

[Blake Petit]

Really, Cylver, what part of "she's not allowed to post spoilers" don't you understand?

And if you're having trouble finding people who didn't understand the issue, try reading this thread. They've already made themselves heard.

[CylverSaber]

Originally posted by Blake Petit
Really, Cylver, what part of "she's not allowed to post spoilers" don't you understand?

What part of "PM me" don't you understand?

That's like the second time you've gotten snarky based on your misreading my posts. Sheesh.

[Ronée]

Ok this is just getting silly.. how about we all agree to disagree?

I know one thing, this issue will sell out based on this review lol. Now I have to see it. And I don't read the hulk!

[Lord_Magneto]

Originally posted by CylverSaber
What part of "PM me" don't you understand?

That's like the second time you've gotten snarky based on your misreading my posts. Sheesh. i don' t think the fact that people didn't bother to pm reflects anything about how many were confused by it.


everyone that hates chuck austen please pm me.. see my point?

[SonOfSatan]

After reading the book, I can safely say I have no complaints or immediate concerns. This book worked the gray cells, which is what I expect from PAD. And the insight into both Banner and the Hulk as characters and a dichotomy of each other, something sorely lacking from the past few years' worth of stories under Bruce Jones, was engaging...I particularly enjoyed the metamorphosis and the inner monologue that went with it--very nearly perfect. And that ending...! I'm looking forward to the next issue.

Have to say I'm with PAD on this one. The Hulk's actually acting like himself and is getting more than adequate screen time for further development and actual involvement in the narrative. To me, Bruce Jones' stories were...nightmarish, in all the bad ways, with narratives that were often labyrinthine to the point of being almost totally incomprehensible. While I'm still a fan of the days of "Hulk smash," "Tempest Fugit" and its Hulk(s?) is still an enriching read and easily one of the best Hulk stories in the last five years.

And hey, that's a nifty new power the Hulk's discovered this month, innit?:cool:

~G.

[Ammar Al Subahi]

This WAS VERY confusing , but I think I know what PAD has done to Bruce/Hulk. Or I atleast have my suspiscions

[DB7]

To be honest I don't see what is so hard to understand about this issue.

Its a standard Hulk tramps through location, has flashbacks and beats something up issue with a surprise twist ending.

Too be honest the only thing I found confusing is why Peter David would put out such a bog standard issue out for the first of his new run.

[Ammar Al Subahi]

the confusing thing was Hulk in the flashback pages, because I haven't seen The Hulk talking to Banner before the g-bomb , and last page. But that can be explained by what...like a mental manefestation? ghost? clone? robot? whatever,

It's the flashback thingy that confuses me, because I don't think anything like that has happened/mentioned in a Hulk book before.

[Mark Blicharz]

Tie into the movie I think.

[Ryan Broussard]

i have waited till i read this issue till i commented on anything said in this discussion

after reading it there is really only one thing to say

"I dont understand"

[CylverSaber]

Originally posted by Carnage
the confusing thing was Hulk in the flashback pages, because I haven't seen The Hulk talking to Banner before the g-bomb , and last page. But that can be explained by what...like a mental manefestation? ghost? clone? robot? whatever,

Ah, someone actually willing to explain what confused them! Good man! :D

The explanation is...

The Hulk has been with Banner ever since he saw his mother being abused by his father. It built up rage within him. The gamma bomb just let it loose. But even if you didn't know that, you could tell it was just a mental manifestation by the fact that his classmates and teacher aren't reacting to a giant green monster sitting in their classroom. As for the last page... that's the big mystery of the story! Gotta save something for the next issue, right?

Not too complicated, I think.

And now that everyone knows how to use the spoilers tags, the "I didn't understand it, but I can't post spoilers" rationale doesn't work anymore...

[CylverSaber]

Originally posted by SSJGOKU555
Tie into the movie I think.

Goku, you're such a longtime Hulk fan, you didn't even know it's been shown many times that Bruce had the Hulk inside him from a young age, first in Bill Mantlo's run, again in PAD's run, and again in Paul Jenkins run?

[Andrea Speed]

No offense, but duh - no kidding the Hulk in the flashback wasn't really there. But how does that make it on the intellectual level of, say, Rex Mundi?

(No, don't answer; consider it a rhetorical question. I want an explanation from PAD himself. This isn't high school - he can talk to me, rather than through others.)

[Ronée]

Andy.... have I told you lately how proud I am to be your co queen? It is things like that, lol

[CylverSaber]

Originally posted by Andrea Speed
No offense, but duh - no kidding the Hulk in the flashback wasn't really there. But how does that make it on the intellectual level of, say, Rex Mundi?

(No, don't answer; consider it a rhetorical question. I want an explanation from PAD himself. This isn't high school - he can talk to me, rather than through others.)

Have you even let him know you're interested in discussing it?

(and I have no idea what the Rex Mundi reference is supposed to mean)

[DB7]

Ah I see but I don't think it was actually meant to be the Hulk in the flashbacks. Bruce has always had his mental problems and likely even in school had an angry little voice talking in his head. Now after years of being the Hulk, when Bruce looks back at those times, he probably sees that voice as the Hulk because Hulk has now become the little voice in the back of his head.

Looking back on Bruce's history, that is how I took those flashback pages but I suppose I can see how if you weren't familiar with the history of Bruce Banner and the Hulk, why people would find it confusing.

[Mark Blicharz]

I forgot about that part. I am a long time fan of the Hulk, but I'm a longtime fan of a lot of books, not exactly the easiest to keep track of every bit of history of every character I read.

[Downfall]

Wow. PAD blasting Andy just because she didn't understand what's going on. That's, yeah, slightly childish...

*And to think, I was mad when he didn't answer my school-girlish Captain Marvel fan letter...*

But seriously... I think one thing that's confusing a lot of people is the inclusion of the Hulk in flashback sequences... but remember, the Hulk is just an aspect of Banner's multiple personality disorder.
Even before the gamma bomb gave the Hulk strength, he was always there.

Now, what confused me, I don't know why the Hulk was making a big deal ab/t breathing underwater, he's been doing that for years.

[CylverSaber]

Originally posted by downfall
Now, what confused me, I don't know why the Hulk was making a big deal ab/t breathing underwater, he's been doing that for years.

Actually he hadn't been breathing underwater before, he's had to hold his breath. So now he doesn't have to anymore. Additionally, the point of that scene was to illustrate the mental, not just physical, transformation back to Banner... notice that as he transforms back to Banner, his jargon gets more scientific and technical as he tries to make sense of what happened to him... and then at the end, the Hulk emerges just enough to tell Banner to "shut up", before Banner falls into unconsciousness.

[Ryan Broussard]

i am giving david a chance with his first arc, if i dont get it or am confused, i am off this book

[SonOfSatan]

Originally posted by Ryan Broussard
i am giving david a chance with his first arc, if i dont get it or am confused, i am off this book

Buh-bye!;-)

But seriously, folks: I'm still stunned. Bruce Jones' run had no deeper subtext, and a very, very murky, labyrinthine plot that put anything in "X-Files" to shame in its incomprehensiveness. Suddenly, take away all the conspiracy stuff, and put in a writer who knows how to use subtext and not belittle the characters (especially not the big one who's supposed to be the star of the book), and you make it comprehensible, to Jones' fans it suddenly isn't.

The cliffhanger? It's supposed to be a mystery. You're supposed to be surprised and confused. It's a narrative "hook."

Banner and Hulk talking to each other? It's happened on the mental plane many, many times over the years. People diagnosed with Dissociative Identity Disorder (DID) such as Banner not only transit between personalities, but also may suffer from audio-visual hallucinations (these in #77 just happen to take the shape of one of his alternate personalities). Heck, the implication goes that the other personality's voice in his head made him unable to concentrate as much as he should have, and hence held him back in school despite his immense intellect.

Yeah, the G-bomb released the Hulk. But he's (they've?) existed ever since Brian Banner abused his wife and son. And the Hulk's not an unthinking brute, nor is he just Bruce Banner in another skein.

In Jones' run, I guess it was easier to understand just because there was this green, raging thing without a vocabulary, and then there was the pink guy who could talk. Simple, high-concept, blah. The Hulk's more than that, and Peter David knows it. He doesn't insult the audience's intelligence by making it just about this green thing sans vocabulary and pink talking guy. And in "Tempest Fugit," he doesn't try arbitrarily merging the personalities into one superheroic character to further simplify (that, to me, was confusing more than almost anything). Here, Banner's Banner, and the Hulk is the Hulk, thank God.

~G.

[Ryan Broussard]

Originally posted by SonOfSatan


In Jones' run, I guess it was easier to understand just because there was this green, raging thing without a vocabulary, and then there was the pink guy who could talk. Simple, high-concept, blah. The Hulk's more than that, and Peter David knows it. He doesn't insult the audience's intelligence by making it just about this green thing sans vocabulary and pink talking guy. And in "Tempest Fugit," he doesn't try arbitrarily merging the personalities into one superheroic character to further simplify (that, to me, was confusing more than almost anything). Here, Banner's Banner, and the Hulk is the Hulk, thank God.

~G.

hmmm you obviously didnt read jones' run. Hulk wasnt a rampaging beast in that. In fact he was quite smart towards the end. He could talk and think as the hulk.

[Michael Hetman]

hmmm you obviously didnt read jones' run. Hulk wasnt a rampaging beast in that. In fact he was quite smart towards the end. He could talk and think as the hulk.

No, I believe that the Hulk in Jones' run was intelligent because Banner was in control. The Hulk alter ego only surfaced when it was cool to show the Hulk in a total rage .

[Ammar Al Subahi]

Originally posted by Ryan Broussard
hmmm you obviously didnt read jones' run. Hulk wasnt a rampaging beast in that. In fact he was quite smart towards the end. He could talk and think as the hulk.

He meant that the Hulk didn't appear in his run, only Banner in the Hulk's body

[SonOfSatan]

Originally posted by Phred
No, I believe that the Hulk in Jones' run was intelligent because Banner was in control. The Hulk alter ego only surfaced when it was cool to show the Hulk in a total rage .

We have a winner!

Q: How could you tell that what Jones intended as the "real" Hulk was in control?

A: He didn't talk--he just smashed and roared and sniffed boobs on occasion.:o

~G.

[Ryan Broussard]

this isnt fully true, especially if you look at the hulk/thing hard knocks that jones just finished

[SonOfSatan]

Originally posted by Ryan Broussard
this isnt fully true, especially if you look at the hulk/thing hard knocks that jones just finished

1.) "Hard Knocks" wasn't part of Jones' regular run, but a separate limited series. And as you well know, interpretations in regular books haven't exactly been consistent with those in limited series or anywhere outside whichever character's main book. They're getting there, but aren't there yet.

2.) If that's the only evidence you have...no offense, but that's a weak argument. The larger part of Jones' stories don't back your ideas--or "Hard Knocks"--up.

Heck, Bruce Jones couldn't even decide to portray the '60s-era Hulk of FF #12 with any degree of consistency. One issue he was talking like he should, the next he was "Hulk smash" this and that, and the next, back to the previous characterization. And don't get me started on Psychotic Break Ben Grimm (TM--look for the action figure soon)!

It's just like the whole of Jones' run--absolutely, positively no consistency. Well, unless you count inconsistency as being consistent.:D

~G.

[SonOfSatan]

Oh, and now hear this: according to a Fanboy Radio interview, Peter David is now the regular Hulk writer throughout 2005 and possibly beyond.

http://www.comicmonsters.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=575

~G.

[DB7]

I enjoyed Bruce Jones' run on the title. It was a highly interesting conspiracy story, with a lot of twists and turns that kept you thinking(even with the dross that was the Absorbing Man story but at least Captain Marvel retconned that out).

The problem I had with his run was that in a book called the Incredible Hulk, there wasn't a lot of the Hulk in it. A minor complaint in the scheme of things I suppose but an important one to me.

[COUSIN O]

I thnk there are some people on this board who don't realize how truly unpleasant they sound... probably no more than PAD does.

Anyway, I've been reading the Hulk on and off since I was 5, (1973) and my favorite writer was Paul Jenkins.

[SonOfSatan]

Originally posted by DB7
I enjoyed Bruce Jones' run on the title. It was a highly interesting conspiracy story, with a lot of twists and turns that kept you thinking(even with the dross that was the Absorbing Man story but at least Captain Marvel retconned that out).

Eh...to each his own. And the Absorbing Man story was included specifically because there was an Absorbing Man-like character in the movie...but that doesn't make the story any less ill-conceived by Jones himself. On the plus side, Leandro Fernandez did one kick-butt Hulk. :D

The problem I had with his run was that in a book called the Incredible Hulk, there wasn't a lot of the Hulk in it. A minor complaint in the scheme of things I suppose but an important one to me.

Nope, actually a major complaint, because yeah, the book's title, as you pointed out, is HULK. Those fans who really, truly enjoyed the run generally will say that Banner was more fleshed-out as a character during this run. Fans who've stuck with the book all along realize the Hulk and Banner are one and the same, inextricable, and that they've both been characterized pretty well over the years. That said, to me it never made sense to sacrifice Hulk's screen time to "better characterize Banner." You don't have to cut back on Hulk to emphasize Banner. Heck, look at this month's story to compare.

Jones really just didn't show us anything new that we hadn't seen in the 40 years the Hulk had existed, real-time. We've knowd what the green guy could do--his strengths, weaknesses, and so on. Having the Hulk show up less in the book, as far as storytelling devices go, was comparable to an old analogy I made, about a husband suddenly deciding he's only going to have sex with his wife about once every 3 weeks or so to add some kind of spice to the relationship--if he doesn't add any new moves, she just has to wait longer for the same old, tired screw.

Now, Hulk #77? New, different, interesting, without betraying the original formula. It's like returning to Classic Coke after only having New Coke around the last few years (well, since Paul Jenkins left, at least).

Bill Mantlo's my Hulk scribe of choice. Yeah, even though he plagiarized from Barry Windsor-Smith. Hey, at least he borrowed from the best...

~G.

[Blade X]

Originally posted by Andrea Speed
So why can't PAD take it?

I've actually had nice, adult discussions with writers whose work I wasn't very fond of. They didn't just lash out with "fanboy" or "spoonfed" - they wanted to actually have a discusion.


PAD has never said a damn word to me. Even when I was leading the campaign to save Captain Marvel (which I now assume he spoonfed us, since I "got it"), or when I gave him a good review for the last issue of Madrox. So excuse me while I ignore any criticisms he has to say (himself or through his lackeys) until he grows up and talks to me, instead of slagging me off on other message boards or relying on his fan base to argue for him.

He's an adult. I know he can type.

Well said Andrea, I agree with everything you said. As long as I have been lurking, and later, posting on these boards, you have been a staunch fan and suporter of PAD's Captain Marvel series. And yet, the only time he deems it necesary to respond to one of your reviews of his work, is to critasize you for giving him a slightly negative review. That all being said, I think PAD's respons to your review had more to do with his angrer towards a number of todays comic fans and critics, who always seem to critasize any older and/or less popular writers for not making their stories accessable and/or easy to understand for new readers. Yet, at the same time, those same fans see fit to critasize those very same writers for being "too wordy" when they use caption boxes and/or word/thought baloons to explain what is happening. This becomes a major concern for older rliable and proven comic book writers, especially when they are constantly being denied or loosing major writing assignments by the major companies in favor of the latest "hot" or Hollywood writer. Their are many qualified comic book writers out there who can't land a job at the major companies, much less a plum high profie writing assignment. I beleave (and I may be wrong) that PAD has a fear that he might end up being denied work in an industry that he loves due to negative coments by new (and sometimes old) readers, who post on internet measage boards.

OMT, I read Hulk #77 and I LOVED IT. Of course, I was a fan of PAD's first Hulk run and I had no problem understanding what was going on.

[COUSIN O]

i don't think because it's called "hulk" that the hulk needs to be on every other page of the book. and i don't think the book even has to mainly be about his exploits exclusively, just about him and how his existence shapes and molds characters around him.


regardless of any other problems i had with jones' writing (i had many problems with it)
holding back the hulk's appearances was a dramatic device.
one that i happened to like.


or maybe jaws would have been a better movie if the shark was in every scene? i'm NOT saying the hulk is a dumb brute like the shark in jaws (who was also named bruce!) , what i'm saying is that having the name in the title does NOT mean that the film and/or comic book has to have that character in it more than, or even as much as, other characters in the book.

yes, the hulk is very complex as a character, but having the name in the title does not automatically mean the book has to spend the most time developing that character.

[COUSIN O]

To follow up, i'm sure someone will jump in here and say that was the problem, that jones treated the hulk like a mindless machine, (or whatever he needed for that issue) but that was not my point. i'm not addressing whether i agree with that or not.

all i'm saying is that traditonally, having the name in the title, while not having that character appear much, does not preclude creating an effective work of art.

[Blake Petit]

Exactly, Cousin O. Have you ever read "Julius Caeser?" The title character is almost a bit player. It doesn't STAR him, but it's ABOUT him. Admittedly, I haven't read Jones' Hulk run, but I'd wager he was going for the same idea.

[Mark Blicharz]

Yep, it's close to that. Bruce was the major character with the Hulk surfacing occassionally.

[Michael Hetman]

How in hell did we get to the point where we compare Shakespeare writing conventions to the Hulk writing conventions which is best summarized by the George Foreman skit on SNL.

"uhh, no more things for Hulk to smash! Hulk clean!"

Sorry to be a jerk but I think it more likely that he was more influenced by X-Files and the Hulk t.v. show than he was by Shakespeare. I wouldn't think any more or less of him whatever his influences were.

I'll say that the Jones run was entertaining. It was hip and cool. And I really liked seeing an x-files-ish take on the Hulk. That being said, I also liked the multiple personality take for the Hulk. Bruce Jones chose to ignore this against the continuity so you can say that I had a moment of disorientation when I started reading the Bruce Jones issues.

I admit that I found the PAD comment obnoxious. On the other hand I'm not going to boycott his books just because of it. He isn't my friend and I couldn't give a fig whether he was the nicest guy on the planet. If his writing sucked or was trite or redundant I wouldn't buy it.

[Blake Petit]

First of all, why couldn't a comic book be compared to Shakespeare?

Second, I wasn't saying Jones' run was on Shakespeare's level, far from it. I was using perhaps the best-known example of a story wherein the title character plays a small part to illustrate a point.

[Blade X]

Originally posted by Blake Petit
Exactly, Cousin O. Have you ever read "Julius Caeser?" The title character is almost a bit player. It doesn't STAR him, but it's ABOUT him. Admittedly, I haven't read Jones' Hulk run, but I'd wager he was going for the same idea.

I think a better (and comic book related) example is Steve Gerbe's Man-Thing series and Marv Wolfman's Tomb of Dracula series.

That being said, while that particular method of storytelling may work for those two series, it does not really work (as a running and/or continuous theme) on a comic like the Hulk. Despite what some comic fans may say or beleave, the Hulk comic is a superhero comic and is expected to have lots of bone crushing "Hulk smash" action.

[SonOfSatan]

Originally posted by Blake Petit
Exactly, Cousin O. Have you ever read "Julius Caeser?" The title character is almost a bit player. It doesn't STAR him, but it's ABOUT him. Admittedly, I haven't read Jones' Hulk run, but I'd wager he was going for the same idea.

...and failed abysmally.

~G.

[Mark Blicharz]

In your opinion, in my opinion, Jones pulled it off.

[SonOfSatan]

Originally posted by Blade X
I think a better (and comic book related) example is Steve Gerbe's Man-Thing series and Marv Wolfman's Tomb of Dracula series.

That being said, while that particular method of storytelling may work for those two series, it does not really work (as a running and/or continuous theme) on a comic like the Hulk. Despite what some comic fans may say or beleave, the Hulk comic is a superhero comic and is expected to have lots of bone crushing "Hulk smash" action.

Not only that, but as I suggested before, Jones didn't add anything new to the mythos. (But okay, he might have subtracted something--the hair. Ba-DUM-bum.) If something, ANYTHING new and original had been done with the Hulk, I could have excused his absence on-panel. But with no new tricks, there was no suspense, and therefore the execution fell flat. Why reduce the time the lead character's in his own book if he's not doing anything new or distinctly different from before? Survey says? "Because it's kewl."

The key to making the Hulk successful IMO is the psychological interplay between Banner and Hulk, played out on both the battleground of the mind and the physical plane. (Doesn't Hulk traveling to far-away locations and leaving Banner to fend for himself in those environments just scream "Nyah, nyah"?) Exclude this approach in favor of the "Hulk-as-force-of-nature" model, and it stinks on ice. Reduce the Hulk to a plot device, and it doesn't work. Have Banner control the Hulk without apparent consequence beyond spooky, idle threats (Jones' trademark), and it doesn't work. Having the Hulk play no part whatsoever in the conclusion of several of his own stories--

Eh, you know the tune.

~G.

[COUSIN O]

The survey also says... a patronizing tone toward anyone who happened to like jones' run is decidely UN-KEWL....

[WhereIsTony]

Finaly read this one.

I liked it. Certainly better than Jone's Interpreation, which i did not like.

Did not hate it. Just think trhey should have given him a new character that was not the hulk and diud not have continuity.

Always felt he had a story prewritten and just adapted it as little as possible to fit with the hulk.

I was not confused at all til the last page but I am sure that is intentional

[Michael Hetman]

I was not confused at all til the last page but I am sure that is intentional

What? Leave on a cliffhanger. yup, name of the game. :D

Otherwise, yeah, I guess you can compare it to Shakespeare, greek tragecomedy, whatever. I just meant that the argument was whether the actual Hulk had been in the series during Bruce Jones' run or whether it was Banner who was in charge throughout the series. Although, if you look at PAD's run, you can also argue whether that was Banner/green hulk/gray hulk amalgation in charge or whether it was Banner on anti-depressants who was in charge of the Hulk(though I think it got retconned so that the main Hulk in PAD's run was just another personality that was made up to give Banner stability).

[Dino Pollard]

That's actually quite funny, considering the original conception of the character and his evolution through the first few years. Remember--the "savage" Hulk personality most often associated with the character didn't appear until 3-4 years into his history, and even then, it wasn't a mainstay for a few more years after that.

Hulk may not have been the savage Hulk at first, but he certainly wasn't intelligent. When Stan Lee first created Hulk, it was a modern-day Jekyll & Hyde or a modern-day Frankenstein. So I fail to see how getting rid of that aspect of the character and turning him into a brilliant, wise-cracking superhero who can smash things is closer to the original concept.

But then again, maybe I just want to be spoonfed.

I think until someone's had their work published in a major venue (I mean actually published, not posted on the Internet), they can't really judge how it feels to be criticized in that manner (or by that many people), nor say how they would react.

If anything, being a published, professional writer should give you tougher skin when someone gives you a negative review and you should act... oh, I don't know... professional about it.

[Pascal]

Originally posted by Dino Pollard


Hulk may not have been the savage Hulk at first, but he certainly wasn't intelligent. When Stan Lee first created Hulk, it was a modern-day Jekyll & Hyde or a modern-day Frankenstein. So I fail to see how getting rid of that aspect of the character and turning him into a brilliant, wise-cracking superhero who can smash things is closer to the original concept.

But then again, maybe I just want to be spoonfed.


But why keep everything the same way as in the 60's. I wouldn't read comics if I'd dislike status quo changes.

[Ammar Al Subahi]

Originally posted by Dino Pollard


Hulk may not have been the savage Hulk at first, but he certainly wasn't intelligent. When Stan Lee first created Hulk, it was a modern-day Jekyll & Hyde or a modern-day Frankenstein. So I fail to see how getting rid of that aspect of the character and turning him into a brilliant, wise-cracking superhero who can smash things is closer to the original concept.

But then again, maybe I just want to be spoonfed.



If anything, being a published, professional writer should give you tougher skin when someone gives you a negative review and you should act... oh, I don't know... professional about it.


That's....basicly what Austen did in Action Comics....he used the original characterisation of Superman...the jokester

[Ammar Al Subahi]

And actually...the first Hulk ever was fairly intelligent...he wasn't mindless, it was the Gravage Hulk

[Mark Blicharz]

Nah, the original Superman wasn't stupid.

[Blake Petit]

Or arrogant.

[SonOfSatan]

Originally posted by Carnage
And actually...the first Hulk ever was fairly intelligent...he wasn't mindless, it was the Gravage Hulk

Yup. I think our pal Dino was referencing the "Merged" incarnation of the Hulk that Peter David used during the middle part of his run. He totally confused my point because that Hulk is not the one being currently seen in #77. The Hulk I was noting was the one from the original six issues plus all of his guest appearances from that era and some of the TALES TO ASTONISH stories pre-"Hulk smash." In recent interviews, PAD has outright stated he doesn't plan to use the "Merged" Hulk as main protagonist during his new run. That incarnation has run its course (...and subsequently been run into the ground by Paul Jenkins with its development into the "Professor"). The intelligent speak from Hulk immediately pre-transformation in #77? Nothing but PAD's own spin on that whole "bleeding of the minds" Bruce Jones was so keen on. Just like having Banner speak like the Hulk once the change was complete.

PAD's Hulk hasn't been about what Dino spoke of in some time. Particularly, the last two years (#443-467) portrayed him closest to the original six...well, the last five of those six: green skin, but with the craftiness and arrogance carrying over from the grey version of #1.

As for why any writer would return to this particular take on the character, I'd suggest it's the best way the writer knows to present and exemplify the themes inherent in the character to their fullest extent. Heck, I'm a fan of the savage Hulk, when written well (and he's rarely been since 1982). But I guess since I got to know the "original" Hulk incarnation(s) from very early on, maybe I have a greater acceptance of the version PAD's using currently.

Some random comments:

WhereisTony: Yup, about the same as I feel. The Hulk and his cast felt shoehorned into that entire narrative.

COUSIN O: It seems you were taking my comments to Blade X personally. If you don't like me, ignore me. I'm not attacking you, never have been; I'm making my general opinions known. Save your snarky 'tude.

At least Shapespeare's Caesar could speak for himself, however small his part in the narrative. IMO, that didn't seem to happen with Hulk during Bruce Jones' main tenure. He was just a mute behemoth save when Banner controlled him. ("Hard Knocks," I don't know what to make of, frankly.)

~G.

[COUSIN O]

SOS, I merely wanted to comment that your tone in many of your posts is patronizing, something which i am sure many people here will assent to, whether you see it or not. the only reason i used your own words ("kewl") was to quickly indicate one of many examples which come off as patronizing. though it is not stated explicitly in the post, (it seems to be more directed at jones than the readers) the attitude that anyone who likes jones' work is foolish, or worse, vapid, comes through loud and clear.

[SonOfSatan]

Originally posted by COUSIN O
SOS, I merely wanted to comment that your tone in many of your posts is patronizing, something which i am sure many people here will assent to, whether you see it or not. the only reason i used your own words ("kewl") was to quickly indicate one of many examples which come off as patronizing. though it is not stated explicitly in the post, (it seems to be more directed at jones than the readers) the attitude that anyone who likes jones' work is foolish, or worse, vapid, comes through loud and clear.

Cousin O, it's not a sin to dislike a writer's work, certainly not a bad thing to voice the reasons for that dislike (not a lot of 'net users in my experience go further than 'it sucks' or the equivalent thereof, which doesn't do much to encourage discussion), nor to use negative terminology to bring that opinion across. I'm not calling anyone an idiot for liking Jones or not liking Peter David. (Hey, more often than not, I've disliked the latter's work, in fact. You'd LOVE to see my thoughts on PAD from just a few years ago. Upon a recent reread, however, I've found a lot of things I didn't catch the first time, which makes me at least re-evaluate some of my opinions.)

Yeah, I guess I'm attacking Bruce Jones a bit, but very much for his story choices and not for who he is. (FWIW, I really, really liked his I...VAMPIRE stories.) My point behind the "kewl" comment was that, IMO, there didn't seem to be much thought behind the decision to hide the Hulk, since everything else was pretty much the same. Guess if I'd written it that way, it wouldn't have been taken quite so harshly.

Food for thought: it's been heavily suggested that the reason at least one of the artists on HULK left the book during Bruce Jones' tenure was that they wanted to draw the Hulk more than zero to two pages a month.

More than anything, I'm dumbstruck by the sharp contrast between how Bruce Jones and Peter David approach the same basic status quo of the character. (Peter's take is, by his own admission, lifted from the status quo Jones established, as it was supposed to be a separate miniseries running concurrently with Jones' main series.) I'm patently curious to see how the Hulk's development will advance since currently, Peter, as regular scripter, is no longer bound to the Jones status quo. I also wonder what impact Mark Paniccia as editor will have on the book post-#82. And I hope Lee Weeks stays on the book for as long as possible.

(Hmm...I wonder how Sal Buscema's inks would look over Lee's pencils? Tom Palmer, while good, is a bit of a heavy inker.)

~Gary

[Dino Pollard]

That's....basicly what Austen did in Action Comics....he used the original characterisation of Superman...the jokester

No, that's only what he said he did. As Blake will tell you, the original incarnation of Superman was nowhere near as arrogant as Austen's version. Austen was just using that as a scapegoat for his bad writing.

Yup. I think our pal Dino was referencing the "Merged" incarnation of the Hulk that Peter David used during the middle part of his run. He totally confused my point because that Hulk is not the one being currently seen in #77.

I wouldn't be referring to the Hulk in issue #77, because it's hard to refer to something when you haven't read it. I was referring to the inference that someone made as to Peter David's Hulk being more true to the original concept of the character, when the Hulk who seems to be most-often associated with PAD is the merged one, at least in my mind.

[SonOfSatan]

Originally posted by Dino Pollard
I wouldn't be referring to the Hulk in issue #77, because it's hard to refer to something when you haven't read it. I was referring to the inference that someone made as to Peter David's Hulk being more true to the original concept of the character, when the Hulk who seems to be most-often associated with PAD is the merged one, at least in my mind.

Ah, mea culpa. At no time during your post did I get the feeling you hadn't read the new issue. I too didn't really care for the "merged" version but now can appreciate it for what it was--an internalization of the conflicts which had, to that point, been largely externalized. Peter David did a BID article about it that's worth reading. But yeah, that Hulk pretty much dissociated after "Onslaught" and what was left over from that point forward more closely resembled the "original" Hulk...which is pretty much the same version of the character that's now being used in #77. It's a nice, refreshing throwback I enjoy in spite of PAD also being the "merged Hulk guy."

Anyway, I do encourage you to give #77 a look, Dino, and let everyone here know your thoughts. :)

Best,

~G.

[Dino Pollard]

I very well might give it a shot once the trade is released.

[Peter David]

Originally posted by Andrea Speed
So why can't PAD take it?

I've actually had nice, adult discussions with writers whose work I wasn't very fond of. They didn't just lash out with "fanboy" or "spoonfed" - they wanted to actually have a discusion.


PAD has never said a damn word to me. Even when I was leading the campaign to save Captain Marvel (which I now assume he spoonfed us, since I "got it"), or when I gave him a good review for the last issue of Madrox. So excuse me while I ignore any criticisms he has to say (himself or through his lackeys) until he grows up and talks to me, instead of slagging me off on other message boards or relying on his fan base to argue for him.

He's an adult. I know he can type.

Why can't I take it?

Why can't you?

For centuries now, critics in literary circles have had writers of the criticized work fire right back, giving as good as they get, in far more vicious and venal style than anything I've ever said. If you don't believe me, I suggest you pick up a book called "Fighting Words" which consists of nothing but critics and writers hammering at each other. It'll open your eyes for the level of the bar of expected "professional behavior."

But on the internet, ooohhh, no no...that's not fair. That's not right. Fans set themselves up to be reviewers, post their reviews, and if a pro should say, "Wait a minute," then the pro is accused of being unprofessional, thin-skinned, etc. The unfairness of that attitude, the irony of those who are the most unable to withstand criticism claiming that the problem lays with those who are initially criticized, seems to be elusive to many. Sometimes I even ape the style of the critic in responding and oh, the howling that cascades of how awful and nasty I am from those oblivious to the fact that they're simply looking at mirrors of themselves.

Fan reviewers should adjust themselves to the notion that they don't get to have it both ways. In grand literary tradition, set yourself up to be a pundit or arbiter of quality, and be aware that your words can and should be as fair game as those of the person you're writing about. Fair is fair.

Andrea, I hope this will not crush your ego, but I never heard of you before this review (or even peruse this website much). Sorry. Never did. If you fought the good fight to try and salvage "Captain Marvel," I appreciate the endeavors, but your name didn't really come to my attention, and if you e-mailed me or something, it didn't sink in. Considering the vast number of fans who inhabit the internet and are still saying "Fallen Angel? What's that?" I think you have to acknowledge the signal-to-noise ratio makes it difficult for new names to take root.

You might also want to ignore the notion that I can't take criticism. If I couldn't take criticism, I'd have bolted from this line of work years ago. To me, the ultimate moment was when a fan posted a scathing review of a Trek novel of mine. I read it, kind of shrugged, thought "Oh well, can't win 'em all" and went on to the next thing. A week later, he started a new thread entitled "Peter David Doesn't Get a Damn About the Fans." The reason? Because I had NOT posted a rebuttal to his review. You want to enter the world of damned if you do, damned if you don't? Become a writer and interact with fans. You can' t win for losing.

I took issue with your review because it made no sense to me. If you'd said, "The book read way too fast," I can respect that. I wrote it the way I did for a reason, and if you think there should have been more word balloons and such, I disagree, but I know where you're coming from. If you'd said, "Well, it's mostly the Hulk fighting with giant monsters, and I have no interest in that," okay, well, boy is this the wrong story arc for you, sorry, hope to see you with issue #82 which is a haunting romance tale. But you claimed it was confusing, and I was frankly flabbergasted, especially since you then proceeded to correctly cite everything that happened in the issue. I mean, I feel burned enough with readers claiming that everything from "Captain Marvel" to "Supergirl" to "Fallen Angel" is "inaccessible" or "confusing." So I write something as stripped down, bare essentials as "Hulk #77" and people are STILL saying they're confused? That's the point where I'm going, "Oh my God, what's it gonna take? Do I have to enclose a CD-Rom with me reading each page aloud and offering commentary? Do I have to open up a help line? What the hell?"

It can't be that you didn't get the events. It had to be that you didn't understand WHY it was happening, or the point of it all, which is fine, because I didn't tell you why yet. So what it comes down to is that fans seem to believe there's something wrong with the story because they don't know why the events are transpiring, whereas I think there's something wrong with the fans because they're incapable of understanding that the "why" is the whole point of the storyline. Not to go Darth Vader on you, but I find your lack of faith disturbing, especially since fans were willing to extend Bruce Jones *years* worth of rope while freaking out because I'm not showing all the cards in my hand in the first issue.

So that's why I said what I did, and that's why I didn't acknowledge your support for "Captain Marvel," and that's why in my frustration I talked about having to spoonfeed the fans. And I'm sorry if you took offense because I suppose I could have phrased it more delicately. But, like Monsters Inc., I scare because I care, and besides, you set yourself up as a reviewer, so Sorry Fred, you knew the job was dangerous when you took it.

PAD

[Peter David]

Originally posted by Andrea Speed
No offense, but duh - no kidding the Hulk in the flashback wasn't really there. But how does that make it on the intellectual level of, say, Rex Mundi?

(No, don't answer; consider it a rhetorical question. I want an explanation from PAD himself. This isn't high school - he can talk to me, rather than through others.)

Y'know what?

Just for you...I'm going to reproduce, right here, right now, a couple of script pages from next issue. Marvel might not be thrilled with me for doing it, but what the hell. Not because I'm trying to compete with "the intellectual level of Rex Mundi," whatever that level may be, but because I want you guys to wrap yourselves around the notion that I'm introducing concepts AND THEN EXPLAINING THEM.

Is it a new and different approach insofar as the Hulk/Banner relationship goes? Yeah. But if I didn't do new and different, you guys would accuse me of just recycling. So I want to explore some of the psychological edge that I'm known for, while doing it in a different manner, and this is how I went about it.

The scene is in flashback with Bruce's guardian, Susan Banner (his aunt) in the principal's office, and the principal has just asked her "Who is Hulk?" (The numbers after the character names is to aid in balloon placement.)

PANEL A: The same as the image in Panel E, with Susan looking stunned.

SUSAN 1: What?

PANEL B: Same angle on the Principal as on page 11, Panel E.

GUINESS 2: Who? Is? “Hulk?”

PANEL C: She looks at him suspiciously.

SUSAN 3: He’s…it’s nothing.

OFF PANEL 4: Miss Banner…

SUSAN 5: He was Bruce’s imaginary friend.

PANEL D: The Principal is looking at her skeptically.

GUINESS 6: Imaginary friend?

SUSAN 7: I’m sure you know about Brian, my brother. Bruce’s dad. He’s been institutionalized since…the death of Bruce’s mom ten years ago. This “Hulk” was sort of Bruce’s substitute father figure.

SUSAN 8: I mean…the doctors said it was nothing. A coping mechanism to help Bruce through the loss.

PANEL E: The Principal leans forward, elbows on the desk.

GUINESS 9: According to some students, Bruce still talks to this “Hulk.” Mutters to him when he thinks no one’s listening.

GUINESS 10: Ten years is a long time for an imaginary coping mechanism.



PAGE 16

PANEL A: Susan waves dismissively.

SUSAN 1: Oh, Bruce is having the kids off, that’s all.

SUSAN 2: He makes them think he’s strange so they won’t pick on him.


Does that interest you? If not, okay, then don't buy the issue. If, on the other hand, you want to see where I'm going with it, then come on back, and be aware that I really AM going somewhere with it.

PAD

[Cardiac]

It's always nice to see a creator posting on here, particularly one so renowned for being a loose cannon (at least as far as loose cannons go at Marvel. I recently read about your long-forgotten plans to kill off JJJ and let the Kingpin take over the Daily Bugle, Peter. That's a 'what if?' story I'd gladly buy.

[Ronée]

Welp, i gotta give the man credit. he did come here and address everything, he made great points about the fact that really we are just one site of hundreds of thousands. and that reviewers need to be able to have thier own words questioned. I have an all new respect for Peter David now.

[Peter David]

Originally posted by Cardiac
It's always nice to see a creator posting on here, particularly one so renowned for being a loose cannon (at least as far as loose cannons go at Marvel. I recently read about your long-forgotten plans to kill off JJJ and let the Kingpin take over the Daily Bugle, Peter. That's a 'what if?' story I'd gladly buy.

Well, before THAT rumor gets out of control, let me clarify that that came out of a discussion I was having with Tom DeFalco while in Jim Owsley's office, and it wasn't serious. Tom--who, by the way, is a good friend and I adore the guy--was illustrating the importance of not writing stories that make it impossible for subsequent writers to continue the series in the same spirit. And he said, "I could write this fantastic story in which we kill off JJJ, and have this heartbreaking death scene with him and Peter in which they finally come to terms, and then JJJ is dead. But what do you do then?"

And I instantly said, "Well, I'd have the Kingpin buy the Daily Bugle." And I started rattling off this whole storyline with growing excitement. Poor Tom's standing there going, "No, no, Peter, you're missing the point" and I'm jumping up and down and saying, "Owz! Owz! This could be great! Let's do it! Let's kill off JJJ!" But I was never really serious and it didn't go beyond that.

The karmic revenge came some years later when I was at an X-writers' retreat (doing X-Factor at the time) and we were discussing Magneto's imminent return and him facing off against Wolverine. And I said, "Y'know, I don't know why Magneto even bothers with Wolverine. Why doesn't he just rip out Wolverine's metal skeleton and be done with him." And Bob Harras and the guys all looked at each other and said, "What a GREAT IDEA!" And I immediately said, "No, guys, no, I was kidding, it's a terrible idea. Wolverine can't survive that." And they're going, "No, it could work, 'cause he's got a healing factor." And I'm screaming, "Healing factor?!? He'd HAVE NO BONES! He'd be a healed puddle of flesh!!! Are you all INSANE?!?"

And they went and did it. My major contribution to X-mythos, and it stemmed from one dumb remark that I tried to recant and couldn't.

PAD

[Terry Verticchio]

I've decided to jump feet first into this mess, all without looking where I was going.

Anyway...

I read Peter David's most recent letter and I must say I stoped when he wrote 'Andrea, I hope this will not crush your ego'

Oookaayy. I've been coming to this board for nearly a year now and I have never felt that any reviewer here had an 'ego'. Andrea Speed has always been objective, concise and very professional. For her review of the Hulk she made it plain from the beginning that she wasn't a fan of the character and mentioned several times that while she understood what has happening she didn't quite get the point of all the drama. At least this is how I understood her review.

I've been there plenty of times. The plot is easy to understand but you don't quite get the motivation.

Peter David is making a mountain out of a mole hill. His ego was bruised not by a bad review but by an indifferent one.

As far as I'm concerned, Andrea, you have nothing to worry about. The review you posted was fine and no doubt bang on, as usual.

Cheers to you, Andy.

[Cardiac]

Ah sorry. I read the anecdote in Writers on Comics Scriptwriting while I was coming down at a house party early New Years Day so it didn't all sink in.

I was a very big Young Justice fan in my time, so I'd like to take this oppurtunity to thank you for that. It was my favourite comic throughout my mid-teens, so cheers. Fanboy moment, I apologise.:)

[Peter David]

Originally posted by estee
I've decided to jump feet first into this mess, all without looking where I was going.

Anyway...

I read Peter David's most recent letter and I must say I stoped when he wrote 'Andrea, I hope this will not crush your ego'

Oookaayy. I've been coming to this board for nearly a year now and I have never felt that any reviewer here had an 'ego'.

Well, then in my opinion, you're kidding yourself, and any reviewer who concurs with you is kidding themselves.

Years ago, I tried to tell Harlan Ellison that I didn't have an ego, and he cut me off at the knees by telling me the following, and I think he was right: Anyone who writes has an ego. A huge ego. A monumental ego. Because what you're essentially doing is saying, "Look at me. I have something to say that is so important, so interesting, so worth reading, that it should be disseminated to as many people as humanly possible with my name attached so they'll know who said it."

PAD

[Cardiac]

Originally posted by estee
Oookaayy. I've been coming to this board for nearly a year now and I have never felt that any reviewer here had an 'ego'.

Everyone has an ego and Peter was probably not being detrimental. It's part of a three part psychological structure consisting of Id, ego and superego. Ironically enough I learned that from a Young Justice comic...:o

[Terry Verticchio]

Originally posted by Cardiac
Everyone has an ego and Peter was probably not being detrimental. It's part of a three part psychological structure consisting of Id, ego and superego. Ironically enough I learned that from a Young Justice comic...:o

Sure, Cardiac, I understand. But I couldn't help but see it as being a insult.

[Andrea Speed]

Well, it's nice to know I'm absolutely nothing. :LOL:

Wow - you never heard of my campaign to save Captain Marvel at all? Not once? Letter writing, internet, big article, nothing? Never saw my Captain Marvel reviews, Madrox, nothing? How on earth did you find this one then?

I do have an ego, just like everyone else, but I try an set it aside as much as possible for the job. A review is an opinion, nothing more - is my opinion better or more valid than the hundreds of other people on the web? No - I'm just saying what i think of comics. People are free to agree or disagree - but hey, at least they're talking.

[Craig Reade]

Heh - calling the reviewer a simpleton (in so many words) is not the same as saying "wait a minute."

To be blunt, when someone disagrees with you, you call them an idiot. Their opinion is NOT VALID. For example -

Originally posted by Peter David
Well, then in my opinion, you're kidding yourself, and any reviewer who concurs with you is kidding themselves.

When someone disagrees with what Andrea has to say, she takes it in stride. She discusses it. Her response is not "You clearly don't understand what I was saying," or "You obviously aren't smart enough to see the book for what it is."

I have an ego - she has an ego - we ALL do. This much is true. There is nothing wrong with that. But when your ego becomes so inflated that you seem to honestly believe that anyone who disagrees with you is an idiot - well, then, that is too much. Nobody here is attacking you for taking pride in your work. No one is attacking you for simply responding to a review. You are being attacked because of the way you respond to these bad reviews. And I think it is important you realize that.

You don't respond to bad reviews, you attack reviewers who give you those bad reviews. Not by discussing the facts they bring up, but by insulting their intelligence. Do you honestly think anyone would care about any of this if you didn't imply that Andrea was somehow less than intelligent because she didn't RAVE about one of your books?

I have asked you this before - but please - give us all an example of a bad review that you responded to without badmouthing the reviewer. You can't, because it has never happened.

Say you disagree with a bad review! Discuss why! That is all fantastic! Fans will love that! But you don't DO that! You start with the assumption that the bad review was written by an idiot, and move on from there. Look at your responses! Andrea needs to be "spoonfed." Andrea is not "important" enough for you to notice. Estee is "kidding himself." I am neither intelligent enough to grasp Fallen Angel, nor impartial enough to give it a fair shake.

Please, Mr. David- get over yourself.

[WhereIsTony]

Not to switch yhe subject back to the issue instead of the review or the review of the review.

But I loved the artwork, I am not usaly a big "art" guy but there was just something about the hulks facial expressions i loved.

I liked the story, I admit i prefer a lot of ext (again not a big "art" guy) but the way i judge it is this.

I read it was suprised at the end and am eagerly waitng for the next issue.

[Dino Pollard]

Originally posted by Peter David
The karmic revenge came some years later when I was at an X-writers' retreat (doing X-Factor at the time) and we were discussing Magneto's imminent return and him facing off against Wolverine. And I said, "Y'know, I don't know why Magneto even bothers with Wolverine. Why doesn't he just rip out Wolverine's metal skeleton and be done with him." And Bob Harras and the guys all looked at each other and said, "What a GREAT IDEA!" And I immediately said, "No, guys, no, I was kidding, it's a terrible idea. Wolverine can't survive that." And they're going, "No, it could work, 'cause he's got a healing factor." And I'm screaming, "Healing factor?!? He'd HAVE NO BONES! He'd be a healed puddle of flesh!!! Are you all INSANE?!?"

And they went and did it. My major contribution to X-mythos, and it stemmed from one dumb remark that I tried to recant and couldn't.

I remember a few years ago a friend of mine told me that story and I couldn't stop laughing.

[Ammar Al Subahi]

hmmm...my spidersense is tingeling, flamewar will come!

Anyway always cool to talk with creators though, but I have some questions and opinions for you Peter.

This will sound really stupid but...are you sure about what you are doing? Will this somehow be relevant to your new run on the Hulk or is it just some plot device in this arc? Because part one of the cool things about the early Hulk/Banner relationship is that Bruce didn't know (atleast from what I remember, I could be wrong) what the Hulk was.

showing that after his mother's death Banner became a bomb ready to explode anytime sounds pretty good though, although I would write that Banner wouldn't know that this was the Hulk he was talking to, maybe even make it the Devil Hulk from Jenkins' run trying manipulate Banner.

And what marvel heroes/villains can we expect to appear in your new run?

[Mark Blicharz]

I'm a fan of your writing, PAD, but from the comments you've made of reviews that were indifferent or didn't like your writing on certain issues, you come off extremely egotistical. Andrea stated in the beginning of her review that she hasn't been a fan of the Hulk, right there that should tell you that she's not familiar with his history. I am familiar and it still confused me. It intrigued me to get the next issue as I do want to see where you're going with this, but come down off your high horse.

[CylverSaber]

Originally posted by Andrea Speed
Well, it's nice to know I'm absolutely nothing. :LOL:

Wow - you never heard of my campaign to save Captain Marvel at all? Not once? Letter writing, internet, big article, nothing? Never saw my Captain Marvel reviews, Madrox, nothing? How on earth did you find this one then?

Well, you kept saying you wanted him to come here and speak to you personally, so I helped you out. No thanks necessary. :)

[darkerion]

Let's please keep the dialogue civil here. No flamewar, no insults. Talk about the story or the review..BUT DO NOT ATTACK EACH OTHER. That will not be tolerated from either staff or creators or visitors.
This is the only warning that will be posted, so please everyone....be nice!

[Jason Kanno]

there goes my illusion of creators and fans getting along......

[Terry Verticchio]

Well, then, dude, you must've never read a review of one of Chuck Austen's books. Yikes. A tsunami-load of water couldn't put out those flaming posts. :(

This particular little cookout just baffled me, really. I still don't understand the point of any of it.

[Jason Kanno]

Chuck Austen? The guy who's been writing X-Men lately? huh. just thought he was an average X-Men writer like Scott Lobdell or someone like that.

[Dino Pollard]

Originally posted by WMdude46
Chuck Austen? The guy who's been writing X-Men lately? huh. just thought he was an average X-Men writer like Scott Lobdell or someone like that.

Scott Lobdell is like Alan Moore compared to Austen.

[T.C. Johnson]

I think PAD could have phrased things better, but I don't think he was trying to be insultuing.

And he did give us an exclusive here....Thank you!!!

[Terry Verticchio]

Sorry, bro, but PAD done dissed my sistah Andy S. and ain't no body does that kinda thing to my peeps. Word.

...okay that was some lame ofay trying to be street, but hey it was fun. Remember, above all comics and the net are meant to be fun.

Don't be hatin'....peace out.

[Jason Kanno]

What's an ofay?

[Terry Verticchio]

Its 'foe' in pig-latin.

oe-f-ay.

It was a derogatory term applied to white people and was popular from the thirties to about the late sixties. But its not used much anymore.