nenena: (Devi - Flaming Tara)
Mike Landis (writer of Chronicle) films his celebrity friends re-enacting the death and return of Superman:

Starring Elden Henson, Elijah Wood, Mandy Moore, and Morgan Krantz with cameos by Simon Pegg, Ron Howard, Elmo, and about a dozen other famous people whose names escape me but I know I've seen them before.
nenena: (W.I.T.C.H. - Irma rocks)
Every now and then Marvel actually manages to use their marketing to successfully hoodwink even their most cynical comic-reading audience. Which is exactly what happened with the lead-up to Schism and I kind of love Marvel for it.

And now for some linkspam: DC's New 52 covers as re-imagined by independent cartoonists. Hat-tip to the always fabulous Project Rooftop blog for the link.
nenena: (Default)
Yes, yes, I know. The panel description is shockingly bass-ackwards and sexist. So is the grouping of the women. Louise Simonson, Amanda Conner, and Colleen Doran are seasoned veterans who worked damn hard to get where they are; Jenna Jameson, on the other hand, has fun ideas for comics, but she:
A) is a n00b,
B) doesn't handle the writing or art herself, and
C) to be honest, the fourth panel slot should probably have gone to someone else who has had to work harder, faster, better, and longer in order to be successful in the comics business.

Does Jenna Jameson have interesting things to say about science fiction, horror tropes, and the art of making comics? She does. Yes, she really does. You can read the things that she has to say in her editorials in Shadow Hunter. She's a smart and fun person. That still doesn't mean that she has anything else in common with the other three women on that panel. Let's be honest here: Jameson got an opportunity to make a comic because of her celebrity status. So far, it's a good comic. But that panel slot probably should have gone to a hard-working and under-appreciated female industry veteran. That's kind of the point of the panel, isn't it?

Panel seats are rewards. They're recognition for people that have been making long-time contributions to a field, in this case comics. Louise Simonson, Colleen Doran, and Amanda Conner have been contributing to the industry for decades. Jenna Jameson? It's not that she doesn't have anything to contribute, because she does. But there are others who have been working longer who have contributed more. And Jameson doesn't even write or draw her own comic book. That's the most damning strike against her in this situation. I'd be a lot more willing to defend her seat on that panel if she actually rolled up her sleeves and did the hard work of making a comic, either writing the script or drawing the artwork or doing the lettering or something. As it stands now, she's more of a creative director than anything else. She comes up with the ideas; other people bring them to life. That's great, but it also means that she only gets to do the fun part. The panel seat should have gone to someone who can do the hard work, too.

Having said that, however, I'm still disappointed at the misogynistic poo that's already being flung at Jameson, in the comments at two certain blog posts.

FFS, people. Don't make me bust out the Wall of Shame again.

As usual, Rachel hits the nail on the head, and I tried to be a little more coherent in the comments there, but I'm still just reeling from all the general stupidity and wrongness surrounding this. And I mean general stupidity and wrongness coming from all sides, including those who are using this as an opportunity to crack cheap sexist jokes at Jameson's expense.

Also, "outrageous and provocative"? Are you effing kidding me?!

Power Pack. New Mutants. Birds of Prey. X-Factor. Superman. Heck, even Shadow Hunter. What exactly is outrageous or provocative about ANY of these titles? Why does a comic have to be "outrageous and provocative" in order to to be considered good? Why are "outrageous and provocative" the ONLY adjectives chosen to describe these women's works and presumably to excite potential panel-goers? Why?!

(And yeah, I know what you're thinking, and no, I still say that Shadow Hunter is not particularly outrageous or provocative. Look, I like the series, but come on, there's nothing new about a scantily-clad woman slaying demons and spraying lots of blood and gore anywhere. Obviously Jameson's name associated with the title is outrageous and provocative, but I'd say that's more a result of the fact that a lot of comics readers - and a lot of the the general public - are mouth-breathing idiots who can't wrap their tiny trogolodyte brains around the concept of a pornographer actually having thoughts and talents, rather than a characteristic of the comic itself.)

I think it's a sad, sad reflection on the mainstream comic industry if things like good writing, nice artwork, and strong women characters can be described as "outrageous" and "provocative."

EDIT: Oh good God. Is it Comics Book Fans Flash Their Assholes Week, or what? There's so much stupid in the comments here that I don't even know where to start.

EDIT TWO: What actually happened at the panel.
nenena: (Default)
The most awesome things that I have read all month:

Batman as written by Chuck Palahniuk

Spiderman as written by Woody Allen

Dr. Strange as written by Hunter S. Thompson

Punisher as written by Lemony Snicket

Superman as written by Friedrich Nietzsche

The Swamp Thing as written by H.P. Lovecraft

X-Men as written by David Cronenberg

Aquaman written So That He Does Not Suck

And as if all of the above weren't enough...

The challenge for the rest of you!

And there are even more entries being listed on the sidebar of Lurking Rhythmically as I type. I can't keep up with them all. They are awesome!

I think that my Palahniuk-fu is weakening. I could pinpoint the book or story that almost every single line from the Batman entry came from, but there were three lines that were stumpers for me.