Thursday, April 28, 2016 • Afternoon Edition • "We Wipe Last. Not Before."

The Outhouse - The Greatest Comic Book Forum

Comics news, comic book reviews, feature articles about comics, interviews with comic creators, plus the greatest comic book and pop culture discussion in the Outhouse forums!


Review Group Week 241 - NEMESIS #3

Hey you! Reader! Want to be a part of the GREATEST COMIC BOOK AND GEEK COMMUNITY on the web?! Well, they're not accepting new members, but we'll take anyone here, so why not sign up for a free acount? It's fast and it's easy, like your mom! Sign up today! Membership spots are limited!*

*Membership spots not really limited!

User avatar

Punchy

Staff Writer

Postby Punchy » Sat Sep 25, 2010 2:15 pm

Victorian Squid wrote:
I think his "made for movies" style is not the same as his older style, and is predicated on the fallacy that Mark Millar can think of more violent, bloody, sexually twisted themes than his readers. (Which we know from the 20somethings here isn't true.) As regards to the old stuff, it's a question I can't answer for sure without re-reading some of the books I liked, and they aren't on hand anymore except for The Ultimates. No question I liked his first two volumes.

It could be like Hickman, where I'm now asking myself what I liked to begin with when I re-read Red Mass for Mars (but still need to re-read The Nightly News and read Transhuman for the first time). :smt102


The 20somethings are a bunch of idiots though. And certainly the stuff in this issue was more sexually twisted than anything I could think of.
User avatar

GLX

Outhouse Editor

Postby GLX » Sat Sep 25, 2010 2:23 pm

Victorian Squid wrote:Special thanks to GLX for saving the money I might have spent on this in trade.

3



Did you Byrne-steal it?

skywatcher

Swedish Pinata of Death

Postby skywatcher » Sat Sep 25, 2010 2:25 pm

Punchy wrote: forced incest. Yes, I did say forced incest.

There wasn't any sexual union of the two siblings, so there wasn't any incest. Nemesis impregnated the victim by artificial insemination, not by forcing her to have sex with her brother. Sorry to be so pedantic. :P
User avatar

Tintin Quarantino

Rain Partier

Postby Tintin Quarantino » Sat Sep 25, 2010 2:28 pm

GLX wrote:

Did you Byrne-steal it?


User avatar

Punchy

Staff Writer

Postby Punchy » Sat Sep 25, 2010 2:29 pm

skywatcher wrote:There wasn't any sexual union of the two siblings, so there wasn't any incest. Nemesis impregnated the victim by artificial insemination, not by forcing her to have sex with her brother. Sorry to be so pedantic. :P


You can't help yourself.

skywatcher

Swedish Pinata of Death

Postby skywatcher » Sat Sep 25, 2010 2:30 pm

Punchy wrote:
You can't help yourself.

Actually, I very rarely correct your many inaccuracies! It was the fact that you repeated the misinformation in two adjacent sentences that spurred me on! :P
User avatar

Punchy

Staff Writer

Postby Punchy » Sat Sep 25, 2010 3:38 pm

skywatcher wrote:Actually, I very rarely correct your many inaccuracies! It was the fact that you repeated the misinformation in two adjacent sentences that spurred me on! :P


Inaccuracies? Or just a more concise turn of phrase?

skywatcher

Swedish Pinata of Death

Postby skywatcher » Sat Sep 25, 2010 3:45 pm

Punchy wrote:
Inaccuracies? Or just a more concise turn of phrase?

"Forced incest" is not a "turn of phrase" and it provides a totally inaccurate picture of what actually happens in the issue!
User avatar

Punchy

Staff Writer

Postby Punchy » Sat Sep 25, 2010 3:48 pm

skywatcher wrote:"Forced incest" is not a "turn of phrase" and it provides a totally inaccurate picture of what actually happens in the issue!


It's close enough to accurate, and was more concise than 'artificially inseminated the daughter with genetic material of her gay brother'.

I know you delight in being a pedant, but give it a rest for once, you've never been involved in the RG before, and your first contribution is to pick holes? These reviews aren't in the New York Review Of Books, they don't have to be 100% accurate and detailed.
User avatar

Tintin Quarantino

Rain Partier

Postby Tintin Quarantino » Sat Sep 25, 2010 4:09 pm

Punchy wrote: These reviews aren't in the New York Review Of Books, they don't have to be 100% accurate and detailed.


I send mine off to them every week anyway though. :-(
User avatar

Tintin Quarantino

Rain Partier

Postby Tintin Quarantino » Sat Sep 25, 2010 4:10 pm

skywatcher wrote:"Forced incest" is not a "turn of phrase" and it provides a totally inaccurate picture of what actually happens in the issue!


We don't know for sure the twist won't be that they did it and liked it.

/markmillar'd

skywatcher

Swedish Pinata of Death

Postby skywatcher » Sat Sep 25, 2010 4:46 pm

Punchy wrote:It's close enough to accurate,

Don't be so obtuse. It was a legitimate criticism. Only those who have read the actual comic would not be misled.
As for not having contributed here before, how is that at all relevant? I often read these reviews.
User avatar

Punchy

Staff Writer

Postby Punchy » Sat Sep 25, 2010 5:30 pm

Victorian Squid wrote:
I send mine off to them every week anyway though. :-(


They're so slow I'm sure they'll reprint my review of Daredevil #82 soon.
User avatar

Punchy

Staff Writer

Postby Punchy » Sat Sep 25, 2010 5:31 pm

skywatcher wrote: Don't be so obtuse. It was a legitimate criticism. Only those who have read the actual comic would not be misled.
As for not having contributed here before, how is that at all relevant? I often read these reviews.


It's relevant because it's not cool just swooping in out of the blue and putting my review down. If you'd ever written a review before, maybe I wouldn't mind, but all you seem to do is point out other people's mistakes.

skywatcher

Swedish Pinata of Death

Postby skywatcher » Sat Sep 25, 2010 5:39 pm

Punchy wrote:It's relevant because it's not cool just swooping in out of the blue and putting my review down.

Bollocks. You made a mistake, I called you on it and now you want to argue over it rather than just accept constructive criticism.
Anything posted in a public forum is a legitimate target for criticism. I don't have to be a reviewer myself in order to point out that you were wrong. Anyway, when did you suddenly become so sensitive? I know you're having a hard time getting your first job, but....

leave a comment with facebook


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: fieldy snuts, gavincantdraw, Ms Lola, Punchy and 114 guests