mattstev2000

April 24, 2012 5:07 am @comicBOOKchris The reason the 'he's a nobody' argument keeps coming up is because he's tried to make himself in a martyr with all this nonsense, as someone else said he clearly came out and proclaimed he was leaving on twitter because he was looking for admiration which as I've said previously is rather egotistical. He's got his principles, good for him, but don't come out and announce you're no longer working for DC because they're not ethical. Who's he to try and define whether DC are ethical or not?

April 23, 2012 12:56 pm Can't say I have too much sympathy with Roberson, in actual fact he strikes me as a bit egotistical to say the least. Will DC honestly notice that he's gone? Outside of iZombie which has just been cancelled, a mediocre run on Superman which did nothing to improve on JMS's misfire and an arc on Fairest what are they missing out on? As for getting sniffy over Before Watchmen because of the ethics involved, give me a break. Moore and Gibbons signed stupid contracts, DC are hardly going to shoot themselves in the foot commercially because two creators were too naive to realise the potential of the characters they were writing. Can you see any big cooperation forgoing profits because a employee made a mistake 20-30 years ago? I can't Personally I'm really looking forward to Before Watchmen because although the original is clearly very good it's not sacrosanct and the story itself reads rather dated now. DC are being respectful by only allowing the best creators to work on the characters and the characters clearly deserve more quality stories told about them.

April 12, 2012 4:50 am Seriously hope that this issue is better than the first - if not it's for the chop as far as I am concerned. That first issue was the most over-hyped comic issue I've seen in a long time for something that was average at best (outside of the art which was very good).

April 5, 2012 5:52 am Bit of a nonsensical list considering some of the obvious candidates that have missed out. Also, seems a rather arbitrary list of people who are responsible for the nominations - seems to lack a bit of credibility.

March 19, 2012 6:34 am I don't think they were part of the story, just needless gratuity in a couple of place that didn't really serve the story at all. At least Ellis has the good graces to not try to intellectualise his sonic bowel disruptor.

March 19, 2012 6:32 am Hmmm, kind of underwhelmed by this book. I liked the art and the narrative choice of using the child in the background but the actual story and characters all seemed a bit half assed, thrown together and lacking in maturity.

February 9, 2012 10:50 am I miss the Spidey / MJ marriage - the books now just seem lacking without it :( On the plus side, good to see McFarlane's Spider-Man again - whatever you think about the guy he did draw some exciting dynamic Spidey.

February 7, 2012 9:28 am Chuck Austen is apparently such a comic book pariah that he can't even make the pariah list.

February 7, 2012 6:55 am They do seem to be playing this one quite dark and gritty for some reason - not really the way to go with a Spidey film...

February 7, 2012 5:43 am Totally agree - CGI villains are an immediate check in the negative column in my book. The overblown CGI sandman and venom at the end of Spider-Man 3 was one of (many) problems with that movie.