#Comicsgate - The Culture Wars Hit The Funny Books!

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
The Incredible Gassy said:
Does Richard actually like the Crow remake? That fucking thing spits in the face of the original movie and the comic.
Click to expand...
If its a shit, current year remake/retelling/reboot that majority of the world disliked then yes.

Yes he did like it. And he gets genuinely mad if YOU don't. So you better change your attitude now, you clown
 
Strix454 said:
Jinxworld was an internet forum associated with Brian Michael Bendis that EVS used to post to. But this goes back 15-20 years maybe. There is a few different possibilites for whats being referred to.

EVS got into into a fight maybe around maybe 20 years ago with other pros about the anti-Communist US Senator Joe McCarthy. EVS was pro Joe McCarthy.

There was a bunch of controversy years ago over certain art of EVS's for Green Lantern that was considered "fascist"

EVS would occasionally get into arguments on Jinxworld with other people.

EVS had some business problems with art commissions at some point. But I don't remember if that was on Jinxworld.

Unless people give context, most of this Jinxworld stuff is so old that its going to be difficult to find much of it exactly what it is.
Click to expand...
1772614733830.pngEvan was a fucking shit bag two decades ago btw
Not sure if this is the same forum but the whole thread has been dropped as screenshots.
1772615339008.png
 
Mr Processor said:
I found the clip: https://kiwifarms.st/threads/comicsgate.38138/post-19224658
Click to expand...

Its an interesting clip. Richard tries really hard to prove that drinker didn't see the movie. But what mostly come across is that Richard's problem was the drinker didn't love the movie the way Richard obviously did.

The co-ed "rehab center" in the film that looks like a county jail. Its involuntary commitment with backdrops that look like a jail and everyone acts like they are in jail. But Richard says drinker questioning the plausibility of that co-ed facility means he obviously never saw the movie because the movie says its a rehab facility. This is actually the pattern of most of richard's criticism of the review. "You can't question that plot-point because its what the movie said", Richard may also have more experience in involuntary drug treatment facilities that look like jails than many other people do.

He loves the girlfriend character in the movie who is presented as a drug-addicted prostitute and insists the drinker should properly call her a "musician" because demons made her a bad person and made her do everything else. I imagine that somewhat perhaps reflects Richard's real life relationships. He also makes a big deal out of trying to draw a distinction that she can't be called a prostitute because she is just in a "sugar daddy" relationship and that calling a woman with a "sugar daddy" a prostitute means he didn't see the film.

He also doesn't like the main character being called a pussy by drinker. Because the film says he is a hero and if you don't say what film says, you didn't see the film. Richard also does a whole sympathy bit where the guy is just an ordinary guy with a few drug and mental health issues. Again maybe Richard seeing himself in the character. He also invents a backstory for the character (the guy who becomes the crow) where Richard imagines that he murdered one or more parents before ending up in co-ed involuntary rehab jail which is just rehab. Its been a while, but I don't believe the parent murdering is in the film.

Generally the drinker's review did hit all the main problems with the film. That it takes way too long getting to the crow. That all the long establishment and romance with the girl is not necessary & inferior to her just as revenge motif in the original film. That the casting non-actress singer "FKA Twigs" in the role of the girl was itself a real disaster. And that the main character (the crow) is generally shown as a weak guy into constant self-pity.
 
Richard is fucking retarded. What made Eric and Shelly's deaths so tragic and gut-wreching is that they were normal people. Normal people that died horrific and painful deaths for no reason other than the satisfaction of their tormentors. That is why Eric becomes a crow, that wasn't supposed to happen. Making Eric and his girlfriend junky retards takes away from that.
 
Mr Processor said:
There's an irony that Richard literally did cuck porn.
Click to expand...
Richard did not do cuck porn. He was an extra body in the background at a porn shoot. The woman he was with rubbed a finger against the woman being railed, then licked her finger (what she picked up while doing so is up for debate, and since nobody had ejaculated yet, saying she licked jizz is therefore inaccurate), with Richard kissing her afterwards.

You clowns that make more out of the incident than it was hurt your integrity by calling this cuck porn. For the bunch of Autists that we are, there are too many that are dishonest about the event. The milk from this lolcow-incident is of poor quality, and lying about it doesn't make it better.
 
Dong-Liquor said:
Richard did not do cuck porn. He was an extra body in the background at a porn shoot. The woman he was with rubbed a finger against the woman being railed, then licked her finger (what she picked up while doing so is up for debate, and since nobody had ejaculated yet, saying she licked jizz is therefore inaccurate), with Richard kissing her afterwards.

You clowns that make more out of the incident than it was hurt your integrity by calling this cuck porn. For the bunch of Autists that we are, there are too many that are dishonest about the event. The milk from this lolcow-incident is of poor quality, and lying about it doesn't make it better.
Click to expand...
Massive fucking cope.
 
Strix454 said:
Generally the drinker's review did hit all the main problems with the film. That it takes way too long getting to the crow. That all the long establishment and romance with the girl is not necessary & inferior to her just as revenge motif in the original film. That the casting non-actress singer "FKA Twigs" in the role of the girl was itself a real disaster. And that the main character (the crow) is generally shown as a weak guy into constant self-pity.
Click to expand...
I think Zack is also trying to mimic Drinker's detractors' attacks. At least from what I have seen a lot of his detractors usually accuse him of being media illiterate, which Zack does or not seeing the movie. It's also worth noting that Zack also gets angry if Drinker liked a movie he likes, again like Drinker's detractors. For example, Drinker liked Furiousa and attacked Drinker over it. He seem to get angrier when it was pointed out that Drinker liked the movie. Another detractor of Drinker's attacked him over liking Sinners(I guess because it hurts the racist narrative,)

Yeah, Zack has shit taste in film, but I think some of this is just performative with a huge mix of Social chameleonism. He's just really shit at it and too boring for whatever new crowd he's trying too attract.

Dong-Liquor said:
Richard did not do cuck porn. He was an extra body in the background at a porn shoot. The woman he was with rubbed a finger against the woman being railed, then licked her finger (what she picked up while doing so is up for debate, and since nobody had ejaculated yet, saying she licked jizz is therefore inaccurate), with Richard kissing her afterwards.

You clowns that make more out of the incident than it was hurt your integrity by calling this cuck porn. For the bunch of Autists that we are, there are too many that are dishonest about the event. The milk from this lolcow-incident is of poor quality, and lying about it doesn't make it better.
Click to expand...
"Oh no, you are not making an adequate differentiation in the porn type."

Nigga..shut up.
 
As much as I don't want to continue arguing this point... he did not "do" porn. He stood in the background. If you had a screenshot of the scene where he had sexual contact with the whore, you could say he "did" porn. Call it cope, or call it itellectual integrity, I don't see the need to perpetuate a myth, which seems to be an ideal followed in other threads.
 
Dong-Liquor said:
As much as I don't want to continue arguing this point... he did not "do" porn. He stood in the background. If you had a screenshot of the scene where he had sexual contact with the whore, you could say he "did" porn. Call it cope, or call it itellectual integrity, I don't see the need to perpetuate a myth, which seems to be an ideal followed in other threads.
Click to expand...
It's not an argument, it's semantics. You're saying he wasn't in a porno because he wasn't the guy having sex. What do you call a guy that stands there and watches as another man has sex?
 
Wenger said:
It's not an argument, it's semantics. You're saying he wasn't in a porno because he wasn't the guy having sex. What do you call a guy that stands there and watches as another man has sex?
Click to expand...
An observer, a watcher, a guy standing in the back. In all of the times I've argued this, I've never said it wasn't an embarrassment for him (though I did say that he shouldn't be embarrassed about it because he probably had the best sex of his life that night because his companion was so into that event). He was "in a porno" as much as "I went to Princeton in 2014" because I attended an event there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom