Venting

[JoshuaMadoc]

Before i get accusations and i start reacting like a rabid toddler, I want to make a confession. If any of you here read a post that has an ounce of anger on the subject i'm going to rant about, please remind yourself of this post and don't forget it. I'm making this gamble in a bid to save everyone a lot of excess bickering.



I have a deep vitriolic hate for western superheroes and supervillains. I haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaate them. Hate hate hate hate hate hate hate them. The fact that they've "evolved" doesn't excuse my hate for them anymore.

Reason 1: They wear spandex, often brightly colored. Unless I want to be in hot pursuit with a bunch of idiot cops, i would rather modify everyday clothing and add one minute detail just to slightly stand out. Same thing with the non-spandex designs as well.

Reason 2: They use their powers very poorly. Maybe i've been missing on important moments of western comicry, but from what i've seen, all i ever see with supes is that no matter what abilities they're given, the writers feel the need to nerf them down to adhere to the standards of a fascist superpower dictating their every actions.

Example 1: Feral, Squirrel Girl, all the other animalistic supers. Sure, they have a tail, elvish ears, and a few subtle animalistic features, but not once have i seen an animalistic super with a decent balance between human and animal features. Even if they do, it's almost always exclusive to supervillains. f*** that noise.

Example 2: Most supers that fire a generic stream of whatever ability they've been given. This is even worse than example 1 in my opinion, because this is the most common thing for supers to use. So common, i didn't get to see 2-3 other types of skills they could so easily use judging by their appearance. It's like "hey, i can control liquids!! But i'm too lazy to control other people via the bloodstream so i'm gonna squirt high-pressure waterbeams of death!!". What the hell.

If i hear really really strong supers, I expect supers to be able to do actions that the guys in armor can do.

So far Storm is the only super who gets an exception.


Reason 3: The names. Alright, there's a few awesome names, but when i look at them, i feel like most of the names have just gone to waste. I do like Juggernaut and Apocalypse though.

Reason 4: The comics. No, i know, the comics themselves hold the status of iconism. But the lack of action, the intrusive and emotionless speech bubbles, and the occasional lack of control with detail drove me away from comics and made me stay permanently in manga. Yes, manga does have their own errors, but they give me less headaches. After all, i was born in southeast asia.


I could go on, but those 4 reasons are the biggest gripes that i can describe. Everything else is trivial.

PS: I also don't like James Bond, after i got to know Solid Snake more intimately. Gadgets, i like, but constantly whoring over the second Bond Girl in every movie is getting really stale. Plus Solid Snake knows CQC, and i've yet to see Bond not hit like a drunkard from an irish pub and learn some actual combative techniques, because last time i remembered, almost all mainstream armies around the world mandates a form of martial art.

[RedEye]

Keep in mind that James Bond is nearly eighty-five years old. He may be excused a bit of triteness due to his age.

The real villan in the James Bond stuff is a guy named Broccoli--yeah, like the vegetable. He produced all those "bosom-buster girls and sex maniac spy" movies that created the genre'.

The "real" James Bond wouldn't last a second doing all that jerk-motion.

[JoshuaMadoc]

I'm very well aware that Bond is that old. However, even though that i've said that his philandering ways is getting stale, i'm more irritated that Bond, as a spy for MI6, is portrayed in the movies showing little to no signs of any kind of result from his supposedly intense MI6 training, especially his dubious lack of martial arts skills. He didn't even use a set of simple leg-disabling kicks against the north korean antagonist in Die Another Day and instead opted for constant use of clumsy-looking haymakers.

[Xiroteus]

I have a deep vitriolic hate for western superheroes and supervillains. I haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaate them. Hate hate hate hate hate hate hate them. The fact that they've "evolved" doesn't excuse my hate for them anymore.

I read a few comics, yet, I was just thinking about a few issues in the superpowered universe were they exist.

One problem with superhero comics (I still read them) is villains that continue to kill innocent people, go to jail get out kill, go to jail, get out kill etc... appears that putting them in jail is not working and somehow getting rid of them is worse then allowing them to continue to harm innocent people, they will even write it where the hero will even try to stop someone else from trying to get rid of a character like the Joker, it is just ridiculous to me, you do not want super heroes going around killing, you think someone would do something about it. I could never write such stores as they do not make any sense.

Another issue is trying to have all the same world problems we have in this world in the Marvel and DC universe, which does not make any sense, they have thousands of people with powers and they are saying people in different counties would allow the same dictators to rule? They have technology that can heal almost any damage, yet cancer cannot be healed? No one has the power to heal others? There would be much larger gray area or people willing to do whatever is needed for their cause, many even being misguided with trying to do good the wrong way, they always seem to go to extremes.

They use their powers very poorly. Maybe i've been missing on important moments of western comicry, but from what i've seen, all i ever see with supes is that no matter what abilities they're given, the writers feel the need to nerf them down to adhere to the standards of a fascist superpower dictating their every actions.

I notice that as well.

Most supers that fire a generic stream of whatever ability they've been given. This is even worse than example 1 in my opinion, because this is the most common thing for supers to use. So common, i didn't get to see 2-3 other types of skills they could so easily use judging by their appearance. It's like "hey, i can control liquids!! But i'm too lazy to control other people via the bloodstream so i'm gonna squirt high-pressure waterbeams of death!!". What the hell.

No kidding, There was that episode of Avatar, I do wonder why they require a full moon to do bloodbending, why should it be any harder then anything else, there way of avoiding any one character having too much power, yet, if that it the way it is, they need a good reason why they cannot do it. I see poorly used powers quite often, being able to do something and not having them do it makes them look clueless.

I could go on, but those 4 reasons are the biggest gripes that i can describe. Everything else is trivial.

You do have a point(s).

I also don't like James Bond, after i got to know Solid Snake more intimately. Gadgets, i like, but constantly whoring over the second Bond Girl in every movie is getting really stale. Plus Solid Snake knows CQC, and i've yet to see Bond not hit like a drunkard from an irish pub and learn some actual combative techniques, because last time i remembered, almost all mainstream armies around the world mandates a form of martial art.

I like the newer James Bond Films (last twenty years or so.) I have wondered for years why Bond cannot fight better.

[outwarddoodles]

I'm not a manga addict (yet), for the most part I've only read a couple. Yet what made me shy away from Western Comics is their "Bad Guys." Mostly, the Baddies are bad, because they CAN, and nothing more than simply being evil.

Personally, that just never really got to me.

[JoshuaMadoc]

That's also one of the things that i really loathe about Supers. Even the superheroes tend to come off as one-dimensional even though they have character flaws to try to make them more three-dimensional.

On the other hand, japanese-manufactured antagonists from games, manga and anime may have a similar problem, but they at least had the decency to go into depth with their reasons of being evil, although most of the time, they have to resort to spilling the beans to the protagonist(s) for at least half an hour before the antagonists get killed because of their arrogance. Even stupid reasons like the classic "humans are nothing more than objects" sometimes get enough explanation to even the scale. In fact they suffice to the point that they're only "evil" on the surface.

[Figarou]

ok, its time for me to vent!
someone has used my nickname "Figarou" as a spam bot. I placed it in google and did a search for fun. I noticed it in forums I never heard of. It has to be a bot cause I noticed a russian and chinese forum in the search results. Why would someone call a spam bot "figarou?"

arrrrrgh! I hate the internet!

[Howlitzer]

*sigh*

yeah the internet is pretty much the biggest double-edged sword of all time.

[Shadow Wulf]

Yeah, Internet has its serious cons. It has its risks, when you make something original and expose it on the world wide web, it's practically for the taking.

[Silverclaw]

This thread is kindof pissing me off right now :
http://www.thepacksden.com/thepackboard ... fce47e4d8a
Edit: I'll just quote it to:

Figarou wrote:
ahhh......dark horror. I see.

I'm sorry, but there is no other kind of horror, Figarou. There is no "bright" horror, or "cheery" horror. Horror is, by definition, "dark". Saying, "Ahhh, dark horror," is a litle like saying, "Ahhh, funny comedy," or "Ahhh, sad tragedy." Perhaps you are thinking off the subgenre known as "paranormal romance", which uses some of the same elements as horror, but is not horror because it's ... well, basically romance.

Scott Gardener wrote:
We have covered quite a lot over the past three and a half years about what werewolves are, aren't, should be, and shouldn't be.

You may be a little late there, folks. Werewolf mythology has been around a long, long time -- loooong before Internet message boards, movies, massmarket novels, roleplaying games, or comic books. Werewolf mythology goes waaaay, waaaay back. Werewolves have *always* been savage, scary, bloodthirsty monsters. In 1941, Universal Pictures made a movie called THE WOLF MAN, which is now considered a classic. In it, an actor named Lon Chaney Jr. played Larry Talbot, a man who is turned into a werewolf after being bitten by one. As a man, Larry is a tragic, tormented character, and very sympathetic -- but when he becomes a werewolf under the full moon, he is a savage, scary, bloodthirsty monster with no sense of right or wrong, a beast that will not hesitate to kill even those whom Larry loves most. As a werewolf, he does not maintain his sensitivity or tragedy -- that all goes out the window and he becomes a ravenous, deadly beast. Much of the mythology in THE WOLF MAN was concocted out of whole cloth, but it was firmly based on much older mythology that goes back centuries. Werewolves -- or shapeshifters or lycanthropes or strigoi, they have many names that come from many different cultures -- have long been an icon of traditional horror film and literature. The idea of sensitive, sympathetic werewolves who are romantic and noble and who apparently grow fur, fangs, and snouts and then go around doing good deeds and conducting emotional relationships with people is very, very, very new and seems to have sprung up under the broad umbrella of "goth" culture. It has nothing to do with the traditional werewolf in the horror genre.

Obviously, I made a mistake in coming here. I'm a writer, it's what I do for a living, and when I have a new book about to be released, I do everything I can to draw attention to it so it will sell. I should've looked more closely at this board before posting here. I mistakenly thought it to be a gathering place for fans of werewolves and werewolf mythology, and the horror genre in general -- had I looked closer, I would've seen that its purpose is apparently to set rules and parameters for something that had its rules and parameters set long, long ago, to somehow create mythology that actually was created centuries ago, and to avoid things as unpleasant and unseemly as "horror". Horror on a werewolf message board? What was I thinking? I was under the mistaken impression that FREEBORN was a horror movie about werewolves. Apparently, it's something else -- a movie created specifically for a limited group that has its own particular, non-traditional ideas about lycanthropy that seem to have nothing to do with traditional mythology or the horror genre, a group that seems to turn its nose up at the stuffy old ideas about scary monsters, and that sneers at "horror". I suspect the movie will be limiting its viewership to that particular group as a result. The attitude here seems to be that the traditional werewolf found in the horror genre (a genre clearly disapproved of on this board), which has stood the test of time, is frowned upon and summarily dismissed, or at least it's something preferrably not discussed. I apologize. My mistake. If I offended anyone, I'm sorry. That was not my intention. I will limit my posts from now on to other boards frequented by horror fans who have what appears to be a misguided concept of the lycanthrope ... people who will no doubt be flocking to see the more traditional, crowd-pleasing upcoming remake of THE WOLF MAN rather than the far less traditional and apparently more sophisticated and recently-developed-by-online-committee FREEBORN.

Again, I apologize for my posts and will move along now. Thank you.

The author 'apologizing' and passively-aggressively telling us all to f*** off. I think his behavior is really immature. Just because we have different views of what a werewolf is. Everyone in that thread warmly welcomed him to The Pack. A few stated that horror/raping stories wasn't their cup of tea, but whatever. Unless people have been PMing him hate mail, I really don't see where his last response came from. He could of just quietly left, or say that he was looking for more of a horror fan-base and that is why he was leaving. Instead he acts like a douche bag, talking down to others. Can almost hear him sneering...
And I for one enjoy both our werewolves-are-not-all-evil types, and horror ones. Its reused and recycled storylines/plots/characters that I get sick of.
I can respect that others do not agree with our viewpoints, I just hate this holier-than-thou attitude with 'real werewolf fans'. Whatever.
He may or may not be a good writer, but unless he grows up, good riddance.

[Figarou]

he's not the 1st, Silverclaw. and i know he won't be the last.

[Silverclaw]

Yeah. We'll most likely get even more when Freeborn comes out.

The only other person who caused some trouble was that 'Cold Blooded' director guy. That I remember anyways.

If Freeborn is a big hit, I'll be laughing my a** off at these people

[Howlitzer]

This thread is kindof pissing me off right now :
http://www.thepacksden.com/thepackboard ... fce47e4d8a
Edit: I'll just quote it to:

Figarou wrote:
ahhh......dark horror. I see.

I'm sorry, but there is no other kind of horror, Figarou. There is no "bright" horror, or "cheery" horror. Horror is, by definition, "dark". Saying, "Ahhh, dark horror," is a litle like saying, "Ahhh, funny comedy," or "Ahhh, sad tragedy." Perhaps you are thinking off the subgenre known as "paranormal romance", which uses some of the same elements as horror, but is not horror because it's ... well, basically romance.

Scott Gardener wrote:
We have covered quite a lot over the past three and a half years about what werewolves are, aren't, should be, and shouldn't be.

You may be a little late there, folks. Werewolf mythology has been around a long, long time -- loooong before Internet message boards, movies, massmarket novels, roleplaying games, or comic books. Werewolf mythology goes waaaay, waaaay back. Werewolves have *always* been savage, scary, bloodthirsty monsters. In 1941, Universal Pictures made a movie called THE WOLF MAN, which is now considered a classic. In it, an actor named Lon Chaney Jr. played Larry Talbot, a man who is turned into a werewolf after being bitten by one. As a man, Larry is a tragic, tormented character, and very sympathetic -- but when he becomes a werewolf under the full moon, he is a savage, scary, bloodthirsty monster with no sense of right or wrong, a beast that will not hesitate to kill even those whom Larry loves most. As a werewolf, he does not maintain his sensitivity or tragedy -- that all goes out the window and he becomes a ravenous, deadly beast. Much of the mythology in THE WOLF MAN was concocted out of whole cloth, but it was firmly based on much older mythology that goes back centuries. Werewolves -- or shapeshifters or lycanthropes or strigoi, they have many names that come from many different cultures -- have long been an icon of traditional horror film and literature. The idea of sensitive, sympathetic werewolves who are romantic and noble and who apparently grow fur, fangs, and snouts and then go around doing good deeds and conducting emotional relationships with people is very, very, very new and seems to have sprung up under the broad umbrella of "goth" culture. It has nothing to do with the traditional werewolf in the horror genre.

Obviously, I made a mistake in coming here. I'm a writer, it's what I do for a living, and when I have a new book about to be released, I do everything I can to draw attention to it so it will sell. I should've looked more closely at this board before posting here. I mistakenly thought it to be a gathering place for fans of werewolves and werewolf mythology, and the horror genre in general -- had I looked closer, I would've seen that its purpose is apparently to set rules and parameters for something that had its rules and parameters set long, long ago, to somehow create mythology that actually was created centuries ago, and to avoid things as unpleasant and unseemly as "horror". Horror on a werewolf message board? What was I thinking? I was under the mistaken impression that FREEBORN was a horror movie about werewolves. Apparently, it's something else -- a movie created specifically for a limited group that has its own particular, non-traditional ideas about lycanthropy that seem to have nothing to do with traditional mythology or the horror genre, a group that seems to turn its nose up at the stuffy old ideas about scary monsters, and that sneers at "horror". I suspect the movie will be limiting its viewership to that particular group as a result. The attitude here seems to be that the traditional werewolf found in the horror genre (a genre clearly disapproved of on this board), which has stood the test of time, is frowned upon and summarily dismissed, or at least it's something preferrably not discussed. I apologize. My mistake. If I offended anyone, I'm sorry. That was not my intention. I will limit my posts from now on to other boards frequented by horror fans who have what appears to be a misguided concept of the lycanthrope ... people who will no doubt be flocking to see the more traditional, crowd-pleasing upcoming remake of THE WOLF MAN rather than the far less traditional and apparently more sophisticated and recently-developed-by-online-committee FREEBORN.

Again, I apologize for my posts and will move along now. Thank you.

The author 'apologizing' and passively-aggressively telling us all to f*** off. I think his behavior is really immature. Just because we have different views of what a werewolf is. Everyone in that thread warmly welcomed him to The Pack. A few stated that horror/raping stories wasn't their cup of tea, but whatever. Unless people have been PMing him hate mail, I really don't see where his last response came from. He could of just quietly left, or say that he was looking for more of a horror fan-base and that is why he was leaving. Instead he acts like a douche bag, talking down to others. Can almost hear him sneering...
And I for one enjoy both our werewolves-are-not-all-evil types, and horror ones. Its reused and recycled storylines/plots/characters that I get sick of.
I can respect that others do not agree with our viewpoints, I just hate this holier-than-thou attitude with 'real werewolf fans'. Whatever.
He may or may not be a good writer, but unless he grows up, good riddance.

If you don't mind me giving my two cents on this matter, tell me if this is kinda what you were thinking.

Eh...I haven't been here that long. But if anything, his handling of this is what makes me angry.

He does have a point though....the idea of Werewolves that are *not* out-of-control, bloodthirsty monsters IS a relatively NEW idea.

However that does NOT mean that exploring this alternative is a bad thing. From what I've seen at the forums here so far...it seems like one reason why the werewolf genre might not be doing so well is that the whole premise of the bloodthirsty, out-of-control werewolf has been done to death, no matter HOW OLD that take on the mythology is.

So, perhaps the only way to create something truly good and original out of this genre is to ignore those "standards" and reinvent it into something else. Heck, if you take away the out-of-control aspect of the werewolf, and leave everything else, then whatever actions that the werewolf commits are no longer beyond their control... suddenly it's not a "curse" that drags the person around, making them do horrible things against their will....but rather a tremendous responsibility.

THAT makes it more interesting... it leaves more possibilities open as to what could happen. And it lets you make a movie with a truly original plot.

If Scott there is going to be talking down at the very prospect of doing something new, as if saying "How dare we rewrite the standards of the werewolf genre!"....well, I would be pissed off if I were you. Sure, it's unconventional, BUT WHO SAID THAT SHOULD BE A BAD THING.

[JoshuaMadoc]

I think he's being a selfish duck.

Werewolves, out of control, zealously carnivorous, evil, techno-hating, and naked most of their lives. Where the f*** is the fun in that? This is supposed to be an open fashion and weaponry science show, not a neo-wiccan evangelical church for the superhero subculture.

[Xiroteus]

That was a rather passively-aggressively statement made by Ray, I always thought there is more then enough room for all types of Werewolves, good and bad.

[Gevaudan]

I agree with Howlitzer and Silverclaw. Ray's condescending attitude is totally unacceptable, not to mention just plain rude. He made sweeping generalizations of this forum by saying that we were all werewolf fans who wanted to eradicate the horror genre. That is not true at all. I occasionally like the good horror story as much as the next guy, but as Silverclaw said, it's overused plot-lines and the like that get on my nerves. He also jotted off a bunch of facts that almost everyone on here most likely already knows. He was a braggy, condescending, stereotyping idiot would should leave the forums of his own accord if he feels that he can find people who conform with his ideas of a "normal" werewolf story elsewhere.

That's why I like this forum: it offers new ideas and a diversity of opinions about those ideas. I guess if some people can't be tolerant about that, then they can go live in their conformist fantasy world elsewhere, while we have REAL FUN!

Some of the most creative people on earth thought outside the box.

[Berserker]

I love how he talked about werewolf mythology as if he was an authority on the subject. Seems he missed the substantial body of well-documented legend--yes, even stories hundreds of years old--in which werewolves or werewolf-like characters are not mindless monsters.

It doesn't matter though: werewolves can be wise, gentle, viscious, or murderous; they are what we want them to be, and I haven't seen anyone on this forum suggest otherwise.

I take partial blame for biting him on the ankle when he joined. I questioned his B-rack horror novel and it must have rubbed him the wrong way. Werewolves spread their kind by raping people? I like horror. I like it quite a bit, even the brainless stuff. But I don't think my comparison to grindhouse was off base. It definitely sounds like a throwback to -sploitation genres, and that's lame and trite to me.

I just hope he doesn't go around trashing us on other horror forums. That would be a major asshat move, considering it was he who got his panties in a wad to begin with.

[RedEye]

So, relax, everybody. Lulu.com will have Wulfen Blood out in about a month.
Silverclaw is doing the Covers.

It's something that got started here, and should sell well...not just here, but generally. I'm even getting nibbles from some serious hardback publishers now that I've decided to use Lulu. Life's like that...

If Mr. Gartner is doing that many books a year; there is a name for his sort of writing...Hack Writing; done for a price and a specific audience. There is no originality involved, just a plot that can be made to fit anything with the addition of the proper names and places. I wish him luck, because eventually he'll run out of venues to do his plot in and have to try and create instead of filling in the blanks. That takes time.

Oddly, some of the best writers got their start that way; in a now extinct type of publishing generically called "Pulp Fiction". Any venue, from Horror to romance to sci-fi/fantasy had its pulp writers, and it was there that they learned their art.
I'm talking about Asimov, Del Ray, A. Bertram Chandler, Norton, Heinline, and all the rest of the now "Classic" Sci-Fi/Fantasy crowd.
Maybe some day Mr. Gartner will be a part of that elevated group of people; but as for now; he's just a Hack.

[Lukas]

now that were done with that displeasing trash section, lets move on to vent about more worthwhile things, whatever they may be

[Figarou]

I just hope he doesn't go around trashing us on other horror forums. That would be a major asshat move, considering it was he who got his panties in a wad to begin with.

You know that 'Cold Blooded' director guy Silverclaw mentioned? He did just that.

[Lukas]

I just hope he doesn't go around trashing us on other horror forums. That would be a major asshat move, considering it was he who got his panties in a wad to begin with.

You know that 'Cold Blooded' director guy Silverclaw mentioned? He did just that.

why not post some links of that, it would make me laugh

[Figarou]

I just hope he doesn't go around trashing us on other horror forums. That would be a major asshat move, considering it was he who got his panties in a wad to begin with.

You know that 'Cold Blooded' director guy Silverclaw mentioned? He did just that.

why not post some links of that, it would make me laugh

I would if they didn't delete the thread.

[Lukas]

I just hope he doesn't go around trashing us on other horror forums. That would be a major asshat move, considering it was he who got his panties in a wad to begin with.

You know that 'Cold Blooded' director guy Silverclaw mentioned? He did just that.

why not post some links of that, it would make me laugh

I would if they didn't delete the thread.

o well, there is always this guy to provide me something to make me grin
(by the way i believe that director's username was sunny or sonny if i researched correctly)

[Figarou]

o well, there is always this guy to provide me something to make me grin
(by the way i believe that director's username was sunny or sonny if i researched correctly)

Ding ding ding!!! Give the man a prize!!!

[RedEye]

How about some Duckies? We seem to have plenty...