[tile_mcgillus]

I hated Michael Bay's Transformers!

[Obiwanjacoby]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DESTRO

To be honest and blunt, The Movie will take the best of G.I. Joe from both the TV series and Comics and make it work on Film. So it really does not matter what was better because its all going to be changed.

I can agree with that, and I can get behind that.

All I'm saying is don't flush the elements of Joe that did work--just because it was the toon or just because it was the comic. It's more complex an issue than just comic vs. toon. I obviously prefer the comic over the toon, but good gawd there's a ton of great stuff from Sunbow there that you can cannibalize to make the movie that much better. Flint for example.

To sum up: Don't throw the "babies" out with the bathwater. ;)

-PJ

[Compulsive Collector]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gunslingercbr

fine, you want to criticize me and talk about poorly formed opinion, than I say you have absolutely no sense of what makes good dialogue, so your own poorly formed opinion isn't worth wiping my tush with. see how easy and unconstructive saying people's opinions are poorly formed is.

I make my living as a writer and editor. Based on what I see in this quote, I'm not surprised you have no appreciation for good writing when you see it. I could have all kinds of opinions on international football (soccer), but they wouldn't have much value, as I possess little knowledge on the subject.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gunslingercbr

why don't you define the factors of how to form a brilliant opinion, since you seem to be such an expert on it

Well, I know a thing or two about the written word, and some opinions are worth more than others. In this case, I'm going to go with mine.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gunslingercbr

you need to back off your tone.

Oh, do I? You're hilarious. I'll take my chances.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gunslingercbr

and you want to also claim Hama did something no one had ever done before, than I dare you to actually define what was so unique that he did.

Dare me? That's not very challenging. He created a story based on a toy line and ran with it for 155 issues. No one has ever duplicated that, not without backstory and history for the characters, and he created all of it. Hell, plenty of titles with years of story and character development fail well before they ever see 155 issues. The cartoons of which you were so fond were mindless drivel, dumbed down interpretations of the stories Hama was delivering month after month, intended for an easily entertained audience. I spent a lot of my childhood curious as to exactly who would actually enjoy them.

I guess now I know.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gunslingercbr

getting more writing gigs in no way makes him brilliant. Uwe Bol has made several movies, but just because people keep hiring him doesn't mean his films are quality. get it.

Larry Hama is also an accomplished editor, and he's done a considerable amount of commercial work you wouldn't know to associate with him. Empty criticism and silly analogies add no strength to what you've been saying.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gunslingercbr

and I don't care what other comic writers think. I think his dialogue stinks -- as does most comic dialogue. I'm not a comic guy because IMO comic's have cheap exposition and poor dialogue.

Right, says the guy who looks to the G.I. Joe "movie" as example of quality dialogue.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gunslingercbr

it is a completely different medium than film, and requires different skills -- skills that Ham a does not posses. so he has no business anywhere near a Joe movie.

Well, if you'd bothered to read what I've posted on this very forum, you'd have noticed that I've already said Hama is not a screenwriter, and that he shouldn't be writing a screenplay. Or maybe there's an echo in here...

Quote:

Originally Posted by gunslingercbr

and the cartoon aired well into 1994, regardless of how many new episodes were made

Repeats in syndication are hardly a sign of success. :rolleyes:

Quote:

Originally Posted by gunslingercbr

if you want to mention things, make sure your positions are factual.

What I said was factual. The "movie" never saw its intended theatrical release, just as I stated in my post.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gunslingercbr

god, I hate specious arguments.

But not nearly to the extent that I hate feined erudition.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gunslingercbr

by your logic, you probably think curry cures Alzheimers because India has the lowest reported number of Alzheimer cases in the world. of course, you haveto ignore the fcat that the life expectancy in India is only 64 years, and Alzheimers doesn't occur until after 65. you see, there ar eplenty of other factors that go into results.

Well, while Alzheimer's disease is far more common in those over the age of 65, the idea that it "doesn't occur until after 65" is inherently false. Not only are you incorrect, but this is totally irrelevant to any discussion on this site. You are making no effort to focus. In fact, you're babbling.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gunslingercbr

even so, the length of how long the cartoon ran in no way means the comic was brilliant.

No one said it did. The comic stands on its own, with or without the existence of the cartoon.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gunslingercbr

the comic could have been (and was very likely) succesful because it complimented a very succesful toyline.

The comic attracted an adult audience in addition to the young readers who played with toys.

Quote:

but tell me, if the comic was so succesful on its own merits, why didn't it last beyond the end of the toyline? it didn't

It actually lasted well beyond the toy line's height of popularity, so you're really not bringing anything to the table here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gunslingercbr

of course, that would require you to actually dig deep into numerous factors andnot just make surface arguments.

Surface arguments? You mean like, "all comics are soap operas with bad dialogue"? Please.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gunslingercbr

I prefer the cartoon.

And some people prefer boy bands to Rachmaninoff.

'Nuff said.

[BEACHHEAD]

I don't know what's the matter with the American lead Global G.I. Joe Idea.
It's the situation we have right now. Free World against Terrorist scum and works well in countries like Afghanistan.
So every country which stands up and sends out soldiers to fight against the enemies of democracy deserves at least a small place in the team of G.I. Joe.

In the movie they should recruit the Joes from the best of the best of each countries Special Forces.

My first encounter with G.I. Joe / Action Force was on our family vacation to Italy in 1987 where i bought my first Joe, Beachhead.
I didn't got in touch with any kind of military stuff before, but at this moment it was clear that I want to join the military after im old enough.

So I joined the German Bundeswehr for some time, 15 years later, not in the Beachhead branch but in the Law&Order Crew (I still hope that Uwe Boll makes it on the terrorist list so that we can rid of him^^).

So what's up with all the Kids worldwide who wants to join the military (and there will be many) after they saw the movie? Especially if it's an American's only Special Force. Fill out millions of green cards?

[gunslingercbr]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Compulsive Collector

I make my living as a writer and editor. Based on what I see in this quote, I'm not surprised you have no appreciation for good writing when you see it. I could have all kinds of opinions on international football (soccer), but they wouldn't have much value, as I possess little knowledge on the subject.

Well, I know a thing or two about the written word, and some opinions are worth more than others. In this case, I'm going to go with mine.

yes, it is clear you believe you're an expert in this matter, but your ignorance to my background and the conclusion you jump to about it because of your own ignorance of the matter only exemplifies how poor your argument continues to be.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Compulsive Collector

Dare me? That's not very challenging. He created a story based on a toy line and ran with it for 155 issues. No one has ever duplicated that, not without backstory and history for the characters, and he created all of it. Hell, plenty of titles with years of story and character development fail well before they ever see 155 issues. The cartoons of which you were so fond were mindless drivel, dumbed down interpretations of the stories Hama was delivering month after month, intended for an easily entertained audience. I spent a lot of my childhood curious as to exactly who would actually enjoy them.

many comics have lasted well beyond 155 issues, so that accomplishment isn't that big of a deal. again, you want to put the applaud solely on Hama for that but you have to ignore many other factors that led to that success as well, which you have shown a rather sad consistency to do. the only valid point is that it was a long running comic based on a toy -- yes, that was unique, but it doesn't, in and of itself, point to Hama's ability -- it could very well have something to do with the toy's popularity as well. and many writers simply move on to other projects after working on a project for so long, so his length of time on G.I. Joe could still point to other underlying factors. oh, I forgot, you want to ignore all the factors that don't fit into your own argument.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Compulsive Collector

Larry Hama is also an accomplished editor, and he's done a considerable amount of commercial work you wouldn't know to associate with him. Empty criticism and silly analogies add no strength to what you've been saying.

I have said several times that it's not that I don't believe Hama is talented, just that his work on G.I. Joe doesn't exhibit the brilliance you want to say it does. again, you have to ignore that to continue to make your flawed arguments.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Compulsive Collector

Right, says the guy who looks to the G.I. Joe "movie" as example of quality dialogue.

it's called context. the argument is between what had the better dialogue, the cartoon or the comic. believing the cartoon had better doesn't mean I think it is the greatest dialogue in the world. of course I could give examples of films that had better dialogue than the comic to make my argument, but that wouldn't be a sound argument would it? I retract that question, you clearly don't know how to make a sound argument. never edited any logic text I assume, eh Mr. Editor?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Compulsive Collector

Repeats in syndication are hardly a sign of success. :rolleyes:

now you are going to have to explain why not, because syndication is generally only used for successful shows.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Compulsive Collector

What I said was factual. The "movie" never saw its intended theatrical release, just as I stated in my post.

sure, factual, but again you have to ignore numerous other factual factors that led to it to make your poor argument. that's okay, it is clearly your trademark.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Compulsive Collector

Well, while Alzheimer's disease is far more common in those over the age of 65, the idea that it "doesn't occur until after 65" is inherently false. Not only are you incorrect, but this is totally irrelevant to any discussion on this site. You are making no effort to focus. In fact, you're babbling.

early Alzheimers is extremely rare, so using it to make a point is irrelevant. and the point of the analogy is still sound, that it exemplifies how you only look at the simple, surface factors of an argument and ignore the many of underlying factors that could directly influence the outcome. even in this post you clearly do so.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Compulsive Collector

It actually lasted well beyond the toy line's height of popularity, so you're really not bringing anything to the table here.

now, we want to qualify it as the height of the toys popularity. both the toys and the comic ended in 1994, please explain how that is "well beyond." what a coincidence. please explain, if the comic was so much more popular beyond the height of the toys popularity, why didn't it last any longer than the toy, because it is awfully convenient that, if its popularity was independent of the toys, that they ended at the same time. unless the comic sold as many issues per month at the end of its run as it did at the height of the toys popularity, it is clear that the comics popularity was tied directly to the toys. but if the comic sold more during the height of the toys popularity, but less at its end, than it is clear the success of it was directly correlated to the popularity of the toys as well. of course, that is far deeper a scenario than you seem to want to take it. and if the comic continued to be successful, I am sure Marvel would have continued publishing it despite the toy being canceled.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Compulsive Collector

Surface arguments? You mean like, "all comics are soap operas with bad dialogue"? Please.

that's not a surface argument. that is a generalization. huge difference.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Compulsive Collector

And some people prefer boy bands to Rachmaninoff.

and some people think you can actually make an argument of quality comparing the two just because they are both music. again, depending on extremes only exemplifies a poor argument.

[Paul]

Man am I glad I stayed out of this thread.

[Derek2783]

Jimminy Christmas, what the heck is going on in here?

I'm not as eloquint as our two orators here, but screw it, the comic rocked and the cartoon sucked.

On the other hand, I'll be darned if I didn't love both the same!

[Obiwanjacoby]

C'mon Gun, I think you up and leaped off the wagon at. . .

Quote:

Originally Posted by gunslingercbr

many comics have lasted well beyond 155 issues

Only one writer wrote almost the entire comics run dude. That's one single fact you can't deny.

Conversely, the Sunbow series had loads of writer(s), all of varying quality/popularity. It's down to hard numbers now. You got your foot on the gas at this point and you're just grinding metal, ease off there Ripley.

When the movie attempts to both refresh and restore the Joes to a cinematic version, a very small percentage of each individual toon writer's contribution might have a chance of making it to the silver screen.

But Larry's work will receive the lion's share of credit. It's more easily accessable, and it's in storyboard format.

Futhermore, they won't have to skip past/groan through "Bazooka saw a Sea Serpent" in order to get to the better Sunbow elements, some of which are mere snippet-moments within one half-hour show. Who's got the time to flip through all of that?

- A two-story orphanage w/Sailor flashbacks won't make it into the movie, which means another "no" to the clever dialogue attached to it.

- A helicopter made of solid gold won't make it into the movie, which means another "no" to the clever dialogue attached to it.

- Break-dancing Snake-Eyes, and dancing wolf won't make it into the movie, which means another "no" to the clever dialogue attached to it.

- Fatal Fluffies and the clever dialogue attached to that! Gah, losing my mind! I don't need to go any further!

BTW, do super corny jokes count as clever dialogue? Because I guaran-damn-tee at no time in the movie will you hear, "Argh! Now I know how (insert well-known food) feels."

But regardless of all of the above ^^^ here, we simply had you at fudgies. :cool:

And scene-for-scene; Joe-for-Joe, the comic elements will far outweigh what each fly-by-night indie writer threw into the fusillade of random craziness that was the toon.

-PJ

[Compulsive Collector]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gunslingercbr

yes, it is clear you believe you're an expert in this matter, but your ignorance to my background and the conclusion you jump to about it because of your own ignorance of the matter only exemplifies how poor your argument continues to be.

Your "background"? Adorable. The content of your posts - hell, even this attempt at a sentence - tells me all I need to know, and further discourse isn't worth the time or effort. Maybe someone else will be willing to take your comments seriously, but I just can't do it.

[Snowjob00]

Im positive Flint and Duke will both be in the movie. I hope they dont F#ck up the dialogue too bad. That can destroy anything regardless of effects and actors.