Happy Face 29 Posted February 24, 2007 Share Posted February 24, 2007 Just because they're not aimed at kids, doesn't mean they aren't aimed at nerds. I just think a guy posting on an internet message board going on about things being nerdy is hilarious. The moment you pressed 'add reply' the first time you were forever made a nerd. And it's something you have done over 4000 times. haha, nerd. I never said I wasn't tbf. I'm a total film geek and a football bore to boot. But I admit it. I don't claim I'm at a sophistated dinner party when I'm on a forum full of nerds. Comic book nerds are trying to repackage themselves as high brow literary specialists. When even the most adult oriented 'graphic novels' are still just tits and violence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted February 24, 2007 Share Posted February 24, 2007 Just because they're not aimed at kids, doesn't mean they aren't aimed at nerds. I just think a guy posting on an internet message board going on about things being nerdy is hilarious. The moment you pressed 'add reply' the first time you were forever made a nerd. And it's something you have done over 4000 times. haha, nerd. I never said I wasn't tbf. I'm a total film geek and a football bore to boot. But I admit it. I don't claim I'm at a sophistated dinner party when I'm on a forum full of nerds. Comic book nerds are trying to repackage themselves as high brow literary specialists. When even the most adult oriented 'graphic novels' are still just tits and violence. I'll vouch for HP on the first two sentences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj 17 Posted February 24, 2007 Author Share Posted February 24, 2007 Just because they're not aimed at kids, doesn't mean they aren't aimed at nerds. I just think a guy posting on an internet message board going on about things being nerdy is hilarious. The moment you pressed 'add reply' the first time you were forever made a nerd. And it's something you have done over 4000 times. haha, nerd. I never said I wasn't tbf. I'm a total film geek and a football bore to boot. But I admit it. I don't claim I'm at a sophistated dinner party when I'm on a forum full of nerds. Comic book nerds are trying to repackage themselves as high brow literary specialists. When even the most adult oriented 'graphic novels' are still just tits and violence. I'll vouch for HP on the first two sentences. Bet that makes him feel a lot better that the resident forum crackpot is vouching for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted February 24, 2007 Share Posted February 24, 2007 Comic book nerds are trying to repackage themselves as high brow literary specialists. When even the most adult oriented 'graphic novels' are still just tits and violence. Hehe I don’t think you can describe it as “high brow” although some of it may be…. but well you do quite eloquently show how most prejudice is based upon ignorance. There’s some great stuff in that area, 300 being a fairly decent example (although far from the best). Horses for courses though I guess, I know plenty of people that just don’t read books either. (Although the Sistine Chapel is clearly still just tits, dicks and a bit of paedophilia thrown in for good measure. ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted February 24, 2007 Share Posted February 24, 2007 Just because they're not aimed at kids, doesn't mean they aren't aimed at nerds. I just think a guy posting on an internet message board going on about things being nerdy is hilarious. The moment you pressed 'add reply' the first time you were forever made a nerd. And it's something you have done over 4000 times. haha, nerd. I never said I wasn't tbf. I'm a total film geek and a football bore to boot. But I admit it. I don't claim I'm at a sophistated dinner party when I'm on a forum full of nerds. Comic book nerds are trying to repackage themselves as high brow literary specialists. When even the most adult oriented 'graphic novels' are still just tits and violence. I'll vouch for HP on the first two sentences. Bet that makes him feel a lot better that the resident forum crackpot is vouching for him. It wasn't easy I had to beat off some stiff competition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 11121 Posted February 24, 2007 Share Posted February 24, 2007 Comic book nerds are trying to repackage themselves as high brow literary specialists. I don't think that's true, I think people who read graphic nobvels are trying to repackage themselves as "people who read graphic novels" rather than "Comic book nerds" When even the most adult oriented 'graphic novels' are still just tits and violence. Isn't that the same as hollywood films? also you mention that Graphic Novels are tits and violence, how much tits and violence do you remember in Roy of the Rovers, or Desperate Dan? if you can't see the difference between a graphic novel and a comic then it's a shame because there are plenty of Graphic Novels out there that you would really enjoy and it's clear that you would resist reading it purely becuase it's a "comic" in your eyes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj 17 Posted February 24, 2007 Author Share Posted February 24, 2007 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhi5x7V3WXE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted February 24, 2007 Share Posted February 24, 2007 Comic book nerds are trying to repackage themselves as high brow literary specialists. I don't think that's true, I think people who read graphic nobvels are trying to repackage themselves as "people who read graphic novels" rather than "Comic book nerds" When even the most adult oriented 'graphic novels' are still just tits and violence. Isn't that the same as hollywood films? A quick perusal of the Oscar nominations provides loads of grown up films without sex or violence being the main attraction. I think Ghost World is the only graphic novel turned film that can say the same. A History of Violence had a lot to say, but having not read the comic I'm not sure how much of that was there originally and how much Cronenberg brought to it. also you mention that Graphic Novels are tits and violence, how much tits and violence do you remember in Roy of the Rovers, or Desperate Dan? None, but that's just content. The one thing that makes it a graphic novel is the content. Just because there's more and it's adult, doesn't stop it being a comic. I'd have thought it's offensive to the classic comics of the past that have inspired these artists, that people see fit to dissassociate them so much from their roots. if you can't see the difference between a graphic novel and a comic then it's a shame because there are plenty of Graphic Novels out there that you would really enjoy and it's clear that you would resist reading it purely becuase it's a "comic" in your eyes. A documentary is still a film. A graphic novel is still a comic. I understand there are sub-genre's, but the soopafans throw a hissy fit when you call it a comic. That's all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 11121 Posted February 24, 2007 Share Posted February 24, 2007 I think the problem is when people lump Graphic Novels as the same as certain comics. I think to say that Superman shares anything with Sin City or 300 is ignorant. Especially when those comics are referred to as chilidish pulp, therefore Sin City and 300, when lumped into Comics, are referred to as chilidish pulp by association. is Winnie the Pooh a comic? it's an illustrated novel. You say that Graphic Novels are a sub-genre of Comics, I say it's the other way round, but comics are more famous. Graphic Novels CAN be trashy disposable kid stuff akin to The Hulk, but Comics cannot be Graphic Novels. I know this seems like I'm trying to grant a level of maturity to a medium roundly mocked and derided by distancing it from it's more famous brtother, but I genuinely think that Graphic Novels are not the same as comics, I can see a stark distinction between them, just as I can see a stark distinction between NYPD Blue and The Bill, they're both crime drama/soap opera type tv shows, but one can genuinely call itself a drama and the other should not. I know to someone who doesn't read them they can seem just like comics, but there is a difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted February 24, 2007 Share Posted February 24, 2007 I think the problem is when people lump Graphic Novels as the same as certain comics. I think to say that Superman shares anything with Sin City or 300 is ignorant. Especially when those comics are referred to as chilidish pulp, therefore Sin City and 300, when lumped into Comics, are referred to as chilidish pulp by association. is Winnie the Pooh a comic? it's an illustrated novel. You say that Graphic Novels are a sub-genre of Comics, I say it's the other way round, but comics are more famous. Graphic Novels CAN be trashy disposable kid stuff akin to The Hulk, but Comics cannot be Graphic Novels. I know this seems like I'm trying to grant a level of maturity to a medium roundly mocked and derided by distancing it from it's more famous brtother, but I genuinely think that Graphic Novels are not the same as comics, I can see a stark distinction between them, just as I can see a stark distinction between NYPD Blue and The Bill, they're both crime drama/soap opera type tv shows, but one can genuinely call itself a drama and the other should not. I know to someone who doesn't read them they can seem just like comics, but there is a difference. Isn't Winnie the Pooh written in prose? Like most kids books, illustarions are included because kids like pictures and it helps them imagine what's being described, you could still read it without the pictures. A comic tells a story in it's pictures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve 0 Posted February 24, 2007 Share Posted February 24, 2007 A comic tells a story in it's pictures. Yes, graphic novels and comic books do contain pictures as they are a visual medium. A movie is a visual medium also. So seeing as you are lumping both comics and graphic novels in together therefore movies and television go into that category too. You're the one telling us not to be so anal about genres and categories here. Why can movies, or books, be classifed as an artistic medium yet comic books and graphic novels are childish, throw away forms of entertainment? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radgina 1 Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 (edited) I was once loaned a graphic novel to "read"...cannot remember the title but it had a smiley face with blood on it on the front cover ???? quite enjoyed it really thinkit may have been The Watchmen or something ???? Edited February 25, 2007 by Radgina Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 11121 Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 (edited) I was once loaned a graphic novel to "read"...cannot remember the title but it had a smiley face with blood on it on the front cover ???? quite enjoyed it really thinkit may have been The Watchmen or something ???? why'd you put read in quotation marks? or... oh and while I'm here, does this sound like the typical "Tits and Violence" HF described? Berlin: City of Stones by Jason Lutes (Drawn & Quarterly; 2000)Part of an incredibly ambitious, years-in-the-making project, this is just the first volume of a series of novels that will all take place during the combustible Weimar era of the titular city. Drawn with clean lines and an attention to architectural detail that pays homage to such European comics as Hergé's "Tintin," City of Stones follows a young woman art student who starts an affair with a weary leftist journalist against a background of boiling politics and decadence. Filled with rich characters and period detail, even if the follow-up books never come, it will still be one of the premier works of historical fiction in the medium. Edited February 25, 2007 by The Fish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radgina 1 Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 (edited) I was once loaned a graphic novel to "read"...cannot remember the title but it had a smiley face with blood on it on the front cover ???? quite enjoyed it really thinkit may have been The Watchmen or something ???? why'd you put read in quotation marks? because obviously there were more pictures than wordplay in the "novel"........hence I looked at the pictures more than "reading" the novel yes and that was the very fella !!!! Edited February 25, 2007 by Radgina Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 11121 Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 (edited) I was once loaned a graphic novel to "read"...cannot remember the title but it had a smiley face with blood on it on the front cover ???? quite enjoyed it really thinkit may have been The Watchmen or something ???? why'd you put read in quotation marks? because obviously there were more pictures than wordplay in the "novel"........hence I looked at the pictures more than "reading" the novel yes and that was the very fella !!!! I read it as if you were sayi8ng that the book was a laughable attempt at literature and so you daren't say that you read it, because to do so would garner Watchmen with a depth or ... (for the want of a better word) gravitas thatit didn't deserve. but now I know you didn't mean it like that I look like a pompous arse Edited February 25, 2007 by The Fish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radgina 1 Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 I was once loaned a graphic novel to "read"...cannot remember the title but it had a smiley face with blood on it on the front cover ???? quite enjoyed it really thinkit may have been The Watchmen or something ???? why'd you put read in quotation marks? because obviously there were more pictures than wordplay in the "novel"........hence I looked at the pictures more than "reading" the novel yes and that was the very fella !!!! I read it as if you were sayi8ng that the book was a laughable attempt at literature and so you daren't say that you read it, because to do so would garner Watchmen with a depth or ... (for the want of a better word) gravitas thatit didn't deserve. but now I know you didn't mean it like that I look like a pompous arse pompous arse !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mags 1 Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 Forget the swords and sandles...as was pointed out on another board it all men running about with muscular defined chests and abs.... a woman's version of the typical T&A... I'm so there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radgina 1 Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 Forget the swords and sandles...as was pointed out on another board it all men running about with muscular defined chests and abs.... a woman's version of the typical T&A... I'm so there. there's nowt like muscular chests and defined abs ..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 11121 Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 Forget the swords and sandles...as was pointed out on another board it all men running about with muscular defined chests and abs.... a woman's version of the typical T&A... I'm so there. there's nowt like muscular chests and defined abs ..... and the lads who post on this board have nothing like muscular chests and defined abs... except me of course Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radgina 1 Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 Forget the swords and sandles...as was pointed out on another board it all men running about with muscular defined chests and abs.... a woman's version of the typical T&A... I'm so there. there's nowt like muscular chests and defined abs ..... and the lads who post on this board have nothing like muscular chests and defined abs... except me of course photos...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mags 1 Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 Forget the swords and sandles...as was pointed out on another board it all men running about with muscular defined chests and abs.... a woman's version of the typical T&A... I'm so there. there's nowt like muscular chests and defined abs ..... and the lads who post on this board have nothing like muscular chests and defined abs... except me of course Claims like that require proof. Ante up there six footer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 11121 Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 Pervs the pair of you. you don't see the lads asking to see your jumperbumps now do you! we're not pieces of meat, we have feelings too you know! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catmag 337 Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 you don't see the lads asking to see your jumperbumps now do you! You normally ask me that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 11121 Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 you don't see the lads asking to see your jumperbumps now do you! You normally ask me that... don't need to ask to see your, you're a floozy and whop em out with disturbing frequency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catmag 337 Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 you don't see the lads asking to see your jumperbumps now do you! You normally ask me that... don't need to ask to see your, you're a floozy and whop em out with disturbing frequency. Only in your own mind whilst you're daydreaming! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now