flapjaxx

August 26, 2013 6:39 pm Unfortunately, I think it is. I really wish Marvel would keep artists on books longer. Even if they double-ship them, at least get a semi-regular artist to keep coming back to the book. Acuna's style has fit this series very, very well. Sorry to see him go.

August 26, 2013 6:37 pm Very excited to see what Aaron has planned now for this series going forward. Whatever happens next, the Gorr saga will be a tough act to follow...

August 26, 2013 5:18 pm Yeah, I was thinking Dr. Evil mixed with John Wayne Gacy without his clown makeup. I remember when that picture first surfaced in a lineup of the "Marvel Architects". Everyone thought it was super creepy then and I wonder if Bendis was intentionally trying to make a mugshot to remember.

August 20, 2013 9:58 pm Yup, I was really prepared to drop this when JH left art duties, because I thought it was becoming very overwritten anyway. But these last four issues have seen SUCH an improvement in the writing. It's all just more straightforward now. And McCarthy has leveled up as well. And as microwave said, I'm really really appreciative of how this title has not had to go through all of the constant Owls/Joker/Requiem/Zero/whatever stuff. Kate in her title works better separately like this, much like the case with Azzarello's Wonder Woman.

August 20, 2013 9:54 pm Thirded.

August 20, 2013 9:53 pm Yup, pretty much. The reaction I have to that cover is the same reaction a stereotypical soccer mom would have to seeing puppies. "Awww!" I luvs it.

August 20, 2013 9:47 pm That's one damn great cover.

August 19, 2013 4:14 pm (quote) Wow… so many people commenting here seem to have missed the point entirely… The question “is it still a thing?” doesn’t matter. The question should be “Why do you care?” (/quote) Then maybe Jimski shouldn't've titled the article "Is It Still a Thing?" I tell ya, sometimes these articles are so all-over-the-place that they just breed total dysfunction and bickering. I guess it gets website hits or whatever.

August 14, 2013 11:00 am 1) The title is cringe-worthy and insulting. I can't imagine ever being involved with something like this or writing anything "-gasm" on my resume. It reminds me of Jimski's article from last week. The oversexualization of geek culture is just disgusting. 2) It seems like the idea of the show runs against the grain of literally dozens of iFanboy articles. This sort of show further stigmatizes "geeks" in a weird way, BY promoting them in obnoxious and narcissistic ways. It's like the mantra is "Be PROUD to be a geek . . . and the only way you can do that is by being a self-promoting narcissist!" Yeah, that sounds healthy. 3) I remember an article in which Molly talked about having issues with her body when she was younger. Looking at her pictures, then and now, she obviously had no reason to feel that way. It's a sad thing and a real problem that many people go through, and we should all have a ton of sympathy for people who have to deal with those issues. It isn't fair and it should change. But here's the thing: It's media like "Fangasm" that causes this oversexualization and overconcern with everything. Look at the cast photo: Everyone is photoshopped and the ladies all have makeup expertly applied. The very medium and the studio transforms them and then insists that everyone view them as "everyday people". You're not longer an everyday person as soon as you get on camera. You're a celebrity of sorts, whether you like it or not. 4) People care way, way, way too much about media, particularly TV. It's just not good and makes everything weird and contentious.

August 14, 2013 10:50 am "Instead of the window breaking through the study there’s a futuristic sphere that projects holograms" Wow. Talk about how to overcomplicate things and tear the heart out of a story. I guess computers and holograms are just too cool not to use? Feels like an unnecessary elaboration that removes the simplicity and poetry of the origin. Glad I dropped this title.