The Authority:What the heck?

[RDU Neil]

Re: The Authority:What the heck?

 

re: 'nuking Hiroshima'

 

If we had had a magic bomb available in 1945 that would have killed only Japanese Army combatants and let the civilians survive unscathed... *and*, right next to it, we had a perfectly ordinary nuclear bomb...

 

... would choosing to *still* drop bomb #2, as opposed to Magic Bomb #1, still be as justifiable as dropping the ordinary bomb was in our real-world history?

 

The two words that come to mind upon my hearing this question are "Hell" and "No".

 

Lighten up, dude. You always seem like you are trying to pick a fight. I actually agree with you, as that is part and parcel with the "ludicrousness" of the powerlevel they gave the Doctor. If was able to do that with the wave of his hand... why not just turn all the badguys into silly-putty... so I agree with your argument. If... OTOH, they had shown that to do such an amazing feat of raw power required amazing outlays of power, and that like Jennie and Apollo, the Doctor didn't have such fine control, and basically just explained it slightly more... "Look, a gross application of power that slightly phase shifts a large land mass to cause it to be wiped out by natural gravity/tidal/geo forces is one thing. A massive, highly selective transmutation spell... that is all together of a higher magnitude. I can't do THAT!"

 

That's all I would have asked for. To show that there were limits... very HIGH limits, but still limits... to the powers of the Doctor. It would have solved your issue (as so vitriolically stated above) as well as my distaste of ridiculous/ludicrous power levels that undermine dramatic storytelling. "If he can do that, why can't he just do anything he wants?"

 

Millar took this to new levels of absurd... another thing we have to blame him for.

[freakboy6117]

Re: The Authority:What the heck?

 

Thanks for the information chuckg

 

I agree with you there’s something very wrong and also deeply contemptible about lies like.

 

That doesn’t stop me appreciating wrights work and hoping I do get the last issue of storm watch. It’s really a shame he’s ruined his career with something so pointless and unnecessary.

[Tom McCarthy]

Re: The Authority:What the heck?

 

Way OT:

 

I think Micah Wright made a huge mistake by lying about his background and not subsequently coming clean.

 

Of course, if he had pulled a McSpurlock and documented how the lie did indeed reduce the protests against his work and then come clean about the lie and its beneficial effects, that could have been a very serious bit of social commentary.

 

I think there's something really wrong with the idea that political speech in the US will draw death threats from those who disagree. It is even more wrong that the same political speech is accepted and unchallenged if it comes from a military veteran.

 

We are talking about a country founded by people seeking freedom to practice their own beliefs (including pacifism, IIRC) without persecution, right ? Yet culturally, the most respected expression of patriotism remains military service.

 

And arguably, many of the most powerful politicians in America have been accused of exaggerating or lying about their military careers.

 

I find it a very interesting phenomenon because military service isn't really seen as a prerequisite for a political career in Canada.

[Chuckg]

Re: The Authority:What the heck?

 

> I think there's something really wrong with the idea that political speech in

> the US will draw death threats from those who disagree. It is even more

> wrong that the same political speech is accepted and unchallenged if it

> comes from a military veteran.

 

OK, now we really go into NGD territory here, but...

 

... it isn't.

 

For two clear counterexamples of your last statement, consider both current Presidential candidates. Both of them are veterans. Both of them get challenged the instant they open their mouths on anything... just by different people.

 

And it's not a 'preqrequisite for public service', either. That's only an illusion of this current election cycle, as one of the two candidates has chosen to make his brief tour of duty 30 years ago his primary -- indeed, pretty much his *only* -- job credential for seeking the office of President. Last two Presidential elections, the draft-dodger won, despite being up against a decorated WWII veteran both times.

 

And Micah Wright didn't lie about being an ex-Ranger badass as 'social commentary', or to 'isolate himself from criticism', or anything else.

 

He did it to impress people with the illusion of honor he never had, and valor he never showed.

 

Or to put it in simpler language, his mouth was writing checks his body never cashed.

 

Old story, really.

 

(addendum)

> And arguably, many of the most powerful politicians in America have been

> accused of exaggerating or lying about their military careers.

 

This is why I think it's a really good idea for candidates seeking office (ok, an important office -- I could care less about the military record of my alderman, unless he's actually a Nazi war criminal in hiding or something) to sign the Form 180 and release their military records. Some candidates do. Some don't.

 

As to the questions -- ok, the general rule is, if you say something in a campaign speech, your opponents, or the press, or any concerned citizen, is allowed to fact-check that speech. That's why they're public speeches, after all.

 

So if you don't want your war record being examined by your opponent... don't make it a centerpiece of your campaign.

[Rene]

Re: The Authority:What the heck?

 

Thanks for the information chuckg

 

I agree with you there’s something very wrong and also deeply contemptible about lies like.

 

That doesn’t stop me appreciating wrights work and hoping I do get the last issue of storm watch. It’s really a shame he’s ruined his career with something so pointless and unnecessary.

 

It gets worse.

 

Wright might be even sympathetic if his confession were motivated by a guilty-ridden conscience, but despite his claims he only confessed because he was about to be exposed by some newspaper.

 

Also, Wright's version of the facts kept changing *daily*, as more people started to disprove his tales. He basically lied when he tried to come clean about lying.

 

Even worse, Wright kept his arrogance until the very end. His non-apology apology about lying wasn't even contrite. He blamed everyone but himself. He kept mouthing off against "big business corporate media" for not exposing him (or not exposing him sooner) in a Jayson "ahaha I'm so smart" Blair kinda way, he kept blaming conservatives for forcing him to lie so people would be more receptive to his positions, he blamed Bush, he blamed oil, he blamed everybody but himself.

 

You know, I don't buy into the notion that all American leftists are paranoid weasely whackos who hate their country, but Micah Wright really seems to fit the stereotype. I find him beyond comtemptible. Chuckg was kind when describing him.

[Evil Toki]

Re: The Authority:What the heck?

 

Justify? No.

 

Explain? It might help.

 

I can't understand somebody who says 'oh, no, I don't take this seriously' -- and then proceeds to spend his valuable time debating me on something that I *am* taking seriously. Dude, if you ain't serious, then go pop in a DVD or get a beer or sniff some roses or do something that you *enjoy*, rather than hang around debating with cranky serious fans, all right?

 

I think you like picking fights.

 

... of course' date=' if you *enjoy* sticking around in threads to disrupt the proceedings when other people are trying to be serious and you couldn't give a damn... well, there's a word for that, too.[/quote']

 

Oh please, lets not resort to name calling, I enjoy the thread because it has information I enjoy reading about. Both positive and negative, every now and then like any red blooded American I like to throw my two cents into the mix. I have not read Authority, yet, but I will, mainly because of this thread.

 

I may not take my Entertainment to the serious level you seem to dwell in, but I enjoy discussion on the subject just the same. My passion is thankfully not your passion, but I enjoy the discussion nonetheless.

 

Now if it is alright with you, which I am sure it is not, I would like to continue lurking, and posting on this or any other subject I enjoy. Even if I don't go home and stab my Millar voodoo doll in the face while cursing the existence of the Authority...

 

By the way, I have a question. Is the Authority, Ultimates, Justice League: Elite a trend that you want to see, or do many people here on these threads yearn for a more holistic, Silver Age feel where no one kills, and well things are much more cleaner?

[Chuckg]

Re: The Authority:What the heck?

 

> Oh please, lets not resort to name calling, I enjoy the thread because it

> has information I enjoy reading about.

 

Last I checked, there was something called 'lurking'. If it's information you want to read, you can do that without having to post to people.

 

You can *especially* do it without having to post to them *repeatedly*.

 

Something I'm not serious about usually gets only one post, at best. Something I *am* serious about, I follow and reply to until the discussion runs out.

 

So please, spare me the 'you take this too seriously' routine. If you're still in discussion with me *at all* after this much time, you've forfeited the claim.

 

> Both positive and negative, every now and then like any red blooded

> American I like to throw my two cents into the mix.

 

When your 'two cents' adds up to very little aside from unflattering personal sneers about how superior you are, temperamentally, to people who take things 'too seriously' -- such as, oh, the vast majority of your recent post -- it ain't worth two cents.

 

[snip]

> By the way, I have a question. Is the Authority, Ultimates, Justice League:

> Elite a trend that you want to see, or do many people here on these

> threads yearn for a more holistic, Silver Age feel where no one kills, and

> well things are much more cleaner?

 

Make mine silver, please. Or at the very least, stainless steel.

[Rene]

Re: The Authority:What the heck?

 

By the way' date=' I have a question. Is the Authority, Ultimates, Justice League: Elite a trend that you want to see, or do many people here on these threads yearn for a more holistic, Silver Age feel where no one kills, and well things are much more cleaner?[/quote']

 

Makes no difference to me. I don't judge a superhero story's worth based on whether or not the protagonist kills. My hatred for the so-called Image style comes more from the interchangeable heroes, confusing art, and emphasis on guns/martial arts to the exclusion of all else. But I like the Ultimates and I think the Authority is shallow but fun. I also like Silver Age-y stories. I also like re-interpretations of the Silver Age, from "atacks" (Identity Crisis) to homage (Supreme). I like it all.

[Haerandir]

Re: The Authority:What the heck?

 

I'm with Rene on this one. I'm more interested in whether or not the story's any good than in whether the protagonist adheres to a particular code of conduct or has kewl powerz. To me, 'a good story' is one featuring a compelling protagonist who behaves in at least a superficially logical manner as he progresses through a coherent plot in an internally consistent setting. Ideally, the author will manage to convey some message or explore a theme (without resorting to the +12 Hammer of Obviousness) in the process, but I'm willing to settle for good ol' escapist entertainment, too.

 

I thought 'Watchmen' met these criteria. So did 'The Dark Knight Returns'. They weren't Silver Age, by any stretch of the imagination. The 'Change or Die' storyline in Stormwatch (which was, of course, pretty much a dry run for the Authority) was a fine story. I quite enjoyed it. I've got the first TPB of the Ultimates, I love it. Other modern comics that don't fit the 'Silver Age' vein that I think are great include 'Top 10', 'Powers' and '100 Bullets'. Frankly, I own far more 'Iron Age' (or whatever post-Iron Age period we're in now) comics than I do 'Silver Age', simply by virtue of when I started reading them (I really didn't read comics much when I was a kid).

 

By the same token, I'm a big fan of Astro City, which is often considered 'retro-Silver Age'.

 

Sometimes I think I'm aiming too high, but on the other hand, there's a bunch of titles on that list.

[nexus]

Re: The Authority:What the heck?

 

By the way, I have a question. Is the Authority, Ultimates, Justice League: Elite a trend that you want to see, or do many people here on these threads yearn for a more holistic, Silver Age feel where no one kills, and well things are much more cleaner?

 

As I have said before, its not the fact the Authority kills that bothers me. It is the manner in which they kill, their reasoning and reaction to that violence that puts me off. The casual use of it and almost childlike glee the character see to take in it. And yeah, some of them are so "Dark n' Gritty" its hard for me to call them heroes. There's a difference between proactive and aggresively arrogant. The Authority in their recent issues has danced right over that line for me. Then there's plotlines, the blatant politicing, the "We're so much more realistic than you!" attitude (though that is more the fans) and what I feel is an overinflated powerlevel. I actually enjoy The Ultimates and their line and some other Iron Age stuff. So no, its not the Iron Age I don't like. Its The Authority.

[Evil Toki]

Re: The Authority:What the heck?

 

Last I checked, there was something called 'lurking'. If it's information you want to read, you can do that without having to post to people.

 

You can *especially* do it without having to post to them *repeatedly*.

 

Something I'm not serious about usually gets only one post, at best. Something I *am* serious about, I follow and reply to until the discussion runs out.

 

Actually I only reply because it seems you have some kind of personal evndetta against my person, if you do, then please PM me, I would rather not pollute this thread with that kind of nonsense.

 

So please, spare me the 'you take this too seriously' routine. If you're still in discussion with me *at all* after this much time, you've forfeited the claim.

 

> Both positive and negative, every now and then like any red blooded

> American I like to throw my two cents into the mix.

 

When your 'two cents' adds up to very little aside from unflattering personal sneers about how superior you are, temperamentally, to people who take things 'too seriously' -- such as, oh, the vast majority of your recent post -- it ain't worth two cents.

 

Actually they are only in reference to yourself, Chuckg, the vast majority seems to be fine with discussion and not so much vitriolic personal attacks, but then again the written word without voice is prone to outrageous forms of interpretation, and if you think I am coming off as superior I apologize that was not my intent.

 

I am by nature a casual fan, my tastes change quickly, and for the most part any media I see as they apply to gaming, I use as source material, because it gives me ideas. That is why I follow the discussion and post, becuase this thread sparks ideas for me, for my own game.

 

[snip]

> By the way, I have a question. Is the Authority, Ultimates, Justice League:

> Elite a trend that you want to see, or do many people here on these

> threads yearn for a more holistic, Silver Age feel where no one kills, and

> well things are much more cleaner?

 

Make mine silver, please. Or at the very least, stainless steel.

 

Not too surprising, myself I am all about story like Rene, I enjoy the good story. I think I can get into too much of the older Silver Age stuff because the art does nothing for me, sadly, I was raised on Image, X-Titles and mang, so my preference for art is more or less the modern, computer colored style.

 

Which colors my choice of comics, hard habit to break, if the art in my eyes sucks I won't read it, comics by its nature is a visual form of storytelling. So I guess age does not matter to me, the artwork and story prevail for me...

 

Maybe I am shallow, but I am honest

[Chuckg]

Re: The Authority:What the heck?

 

> Actually I only reply because it seems you have some kind of personal

> evndetta against my person, [snip]

 

He don't know me very well, do he folks?

 

No, Evil Toki, it's not personal. I react the same way to *everyone* who behaves like you do.

 

As quite a few long-suffering residents of this domain can attest.

 

[snip]

> Actually they are only in reference to yourself, Chuckg,

 

And he /wonders/ why I don't seem to like how he's been behaving?

 

BTW, if you want it to go to PMs, send me one.

 

[snip the rest]

 

Or we can stop now.

[Evil Toki]

Re: The Authority:What the heck?

 

> Actually I only reply because it seems you have some kind of personal

> evndetta against my person, [snip]

 

He don't know me very well, do he folks?

 

No, Evil Toki, it's not personal. I react the same way to *everyone* who behaves like you do.

 

As quite a few long-suffering residents of this domain can attest.

 

[snip]

> Actually they are only in reference to yourself, Chuckg,

 

And he /wonders/ why I don't seem to like how he's been behaving?

 

BTW, if you want it to go to PMs, send me one.

 

[snip the rest]

 

Or we can stop now.

 

Stop now, I really don't care to know your "reputation" I would rather see more posts on this subject.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: The Authority:What the heck?

 

Actually I only reply because it seems you have some kind of personal evndetta against my person...

 

I could well be wrong, but my impression is that Chuckg's tirades are not directed at you, per se, nor are they evidence of any kind of personal animosity. If you liked the same comics he likes, or if you avoided mentioning comics he dislikes where he can hear you, I doubt he'd be making an issue of it. I could be wrong, but that's my impression.

 

[edit: rephrased to tighten it up and tone it down]

 

[edit: fyi, I dropped the word "hysterical" (among others) because I decided it was needlessly inflammatory -- not quickly enough, unfortunately. ah, well. it pays to reflect before hitting "submit".]

[Chuckg]

Re: The Authority:What the heck?

 

Actually, my 'hysterical tirades' are aimed at people who are so lacking in either facts or imagination that they can't find any way to defend their favorite comics other than by, either overtly or subtly, calling the critics names.

 

Such as 'hysterical'.

 

Your posts are on the same intellectual level of debate as "Anybody who doesn't like the Authority is obviously a doo-doo brain!" Dressing it up in fancier words won't change that.

 

Now find a reason to defend the comic based on something other than what alleged flaws you perceive in me or my mentality.

 

Or take it back to PMs.

[Agent X]

Re: The Authority:What the heck?

 

By the way' date=' I have a question. Is the Authority, Ultimates, Justice League: Elite a trend that you want to see, or do many people here on these threads yearn for a more holistic, Silver Age feel where no one kills, and well things are much more cleaner?[/quote'] I don't think you have to choose between dysfunctional superpowered jerks and Silver Age choir boys. Too many writers seem to confuse dysfunction and "realism" in a way that makes me wonder if they are a bit dysfunctional themselves and can't see past their own experiences. Or maybe they bought the hype or are simply pandering.

 

You can be a hero and be a flawed hero. You can't be a casual or semi-casual killer and be a hero. You can't be a date rapist and be a hero.

 

Also, there are some themes that I don't want in my entertainment. I prefer politics to be handled in the real world, not in comic books.

[Evil Toki]

Re: The Authority:What the heck?

 

Who cares it is a comic...

 

You people hate it or love it but either way I think Millar and Ellis set out to do what they intended make Authority famous or infamous...

 

This was the post that started it.

 

In what sentence did I say I was defending the Authority? I only said that Millar and Ellis did just what they set out to do, create a story that will create a strong reaction either positive or negative by taking the normal “team comic†conventions cranking them to 11, and then splashing vast amounts of violence.

 

Now I have not read this comic yet, I plan to, mainly because of this discussion, because to me it sounds interesting.

 

Your posts are on the same intellectual level of debate as "Anybody who doesn't like the Authority is obviously a doo-doo brain!" Dressing it up in fancier words won't change that.

 

Now find a reason to defend the comic based on something other than what alleged flaws you perceive in me or my mentality.

 

Now this is just not needed, I am not here to defend or attack anything. Maybe if you weren’t so vehemently opposed to those who do not follow your ideas then you would see clearly, that I am not here to join the shouting match of Authority sucks or not, and more less learn more about why this comic sparks so much hatred and love, over a medium that in the end is created for sheer entertainment.

 

You take it more seriously, so do Trekkie fans, which does not mean that I can’t find amusement in their mania.

 

AHEM got off-track.

 

I think if anything, the Authority sounds like it was a good thing at least early on. It shook things up in the mainstream, or at least turned a few heads. Successful or not it has had an impact, one that cannot be denied, and one that will affect comics in the near future. It may be only a phase, it may be a change, good or bad, I don’t know.

 

But if we get more comics like the Ultimates line, I am all for it. Over the top or not, Matrix, block buster feel or not, I enjoy that style of storytelling. I think Millar has done wonderful things with that line, and from what others have said, Ellis did great work with the Authority.

 

Can we just agree to disagree and leave at that?

[Chuckg]

Re: The Authority:What the heck?

 

> This was the post that started it.

 

Actually, the post that started it was your reply to my reply to that one.

 

Because in that one, I don't remember saying anything about *you* at all.

 

I said that I (strongly) didn't like your *position*.

 

Last I checked, I could do that.

 

> In what sentence did I say I was defending the Authority? [snip]

 

Are you going to claim that you /aren't/?

 

[snip]

> I think if anything, the Authority sounds like it was a good thing at least

> early on.

 

/Early on/, it was. You'll note that most, if not all, of the Authority critics here have qualified their statements with something on the order of "... but when /Ellis/ was writing it..."

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: The Authority:What the heck?

 

You can be a hero and be a flawed hero. You can't be a casual or semi-casual killer and be a hero. You can't be a date rapist and be a hero.

 

The subject is "superheroes", not "heroes". There is some overlap, but one does not completely encompass the other.

 

[Note: I have changed my mind about this. See my post further along.]

 

As for your assertions above, I agree with the sentiment, but I disagree with how you chose to express it. Still, it's close enough to describing how superheroes work in the source material that I wouldn't choose to debate it.

 

[edit: Added note, above.]

[nexus]

Re: The Authority:What the heck?

 

 

Now this is just not needed, I am not here to defend or attack anything. Maybe if you weren’t so vehemently opposed to those who do not follow your ideas then you would see clearly, that I am not here to join the shouting match of Authority sucks or not, and more less learn more about why this comic sparks so much hatred and love, over a medium that in the end is created for sheer entertainment.

 

You take it more seriously, so do Trekkie fans, which does not mean that I can’t find amusement in their mania.

 

Toki, I honestly think the section you are quoting where address to Bblackmoor and not you.

[Agent X]

Re: The Authority:What the heck?

 

The subject is "superheroes", not "heroes". There is some overlap, but one does not completely encompass the other.

 

As for your assertions above, I agree with the sentiment, but I disagree with how you chose to express it. Still, it's close enough to describing how superheroes work in the source material that I wouldn't choose to debate it.

How, pray tell, can you be a superhero without first being a hero?

[nexus]

Re: The Authority:What the heck?

 

The subject is "superheroes", not "heroes". There is some overlap, but one does not completely encompass the other.

 

As for your assertions above, I agree with the sentiment, but I disagree with how you chose to express it. Still, it's close enough to describing how superheroes work in the source material that I wouldn't choose to debate it.

 

You're welcome to your opinion, but I fail to see how having powers changes the qualities needed to be a hero. Its SuperHERO. You seem to be thinking superBEING which is a different concept. Hero implies, well, heroism. I don't think anyone would called say, Carnage, a superhero despite the fact he has powers. While he is definately a Superbeing or a superhuman. It isn't a matter of emtional baggage.

[Evil Toki]

Re: The Authority:What the heck?

 

> In what sentence did I say I was defending the Authority? [snip]

 

Are you going to claim that you /aren't/?

 

I am going to say I can't defend something I have not read yet. I know where you stand, once I read the Authority then I can formulate where I stand on the subject of that series. So far from what I have read, I think I might enjoy it as a story, not that I would agree with everything they do, but I don't have to agree with the heroes, I just need to be entertained by what they do.

[Evil Toki]

Re: The Authority:What the heck?

 

Toki' date=' I honestly think the section you are quoting where address to Bblackmoor and not you.[/quote']

LOL Damn the written word, I thought he was talking to me

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: The Authority:What the heck?

 

Also' date=' there are some themes that I don't want in my entertainment. I prefer politics to be handled in the real world, not in comic books.[/quote']

 

I can sympathize with that. I don't mind politics or some other semi-controversial themes in my comics in small doses, but it is very easy to overdo it. There was a comic that came out shortly after Kingdom Come called Uncle Sam, which I hated. I took it back to the store and demanded store credit for it.