Dark One

There's also the whole "Damian is a knife freak that would be more suited to apprenticing the Joker" bit.

But ya, I have to agree with Foamie. On the upside, there's years worth of Legend of the Dark Knight, Nightwing, Robin, Gotham Knight, and other stuff still to read.

Except for, ya know, wiping out everything from the last event that people may have started to like...

When Raven was in the bed trying to seduce <Name Withheld>. She was shifting forms and for a second, she shifted into a more adult version of herself that looked quite a bit like Rebecca Romijin from the first three movies. MentalMaden confirms my seeing of the cameo.

Well, wasn't she listed as "<forget the char name> Sister/Emma" in the credits?

They did Emma's diamond form pretty well. They showed her machinations decently enough. It's the actress we were discussing. She was simply, IMO, wrong for the part of Emma Frost. One can play the role "right", yet still be the wrong person for a part.

To me, the character was pushing at least mid 30's. It was little details, like around the eyes and the mouth that just basically shouted, "This isn't a woman in her 20's!". That's fine and all, but the character should've been cast more age-appropriate for the show, especially if they want to age it-up for sequels later on in the careers of the mutants.

But like I said, spoiled by the art from guys like Greg Horn, Andy Park, etc., in regards to Emma. According to wiki, a woman named Alice Eve was originally supposed to play her, and looking at the pics...wowza.

Even positing the possibility of cosmetic surgery, Emma in the movie was a bit on the...mature...side. She'd be (probably) in her 70's around the time of X-1.


I believe he was in the first one. Hot dog seller on the beach, iirc. He was listed as an executive producer on this one, so figured he'd be in it somewhere.

I thought it was more along the lines of Chuck mind-riding in Shaw. That would allow him to see/hear Erik, like it appeared to be. Sorta like when he was mind-riding that Ruskie guard. It's probable that the pain experienced by Shaw would be transferred to Chuck. Imaginary pain, but pain nonetheless.

Apparently, there is a different definition of the word "reboot" used amongst the DC offices than is used amongst the community at large. Resetting everything and ignoring what's come before? Try and spin it any way you want, it's a reboot.

Ya, I believe that about as much as ED was in the works for a long-time before it hit the servers.


If DC is wanting to bring in new, younger readers, then why are they abandoning pretty much every iconic female outfit in favor of pants? Do they really think young male readers are going to be interested in Wonder Woman: Office Lady? Are they really expecting mass loads of strident feminists who think female heroes are little more than sex appeal to suddenly say, "Thank you for removing the sex appeal from this character, I will now read this comic!"?

If the problem was, say, Supergirl flashing on every page, that could be solved by having your artists learn to draw scenes such that she isn't. Continuity wide reclothing is not the way to go. What's going to happen to characters like Power Girl? I mean, hell, even in that promo pic, Wonder Woman looks like one sharp sneeze will send her into wardrobe malfunction territory, but she just HAS to have her legs covered...

I'll pick up the remaining back issues of things that I've missed, like Gotham City Sirens and whatnot, but I think this'll kill any interest in DC for me.

Which is a shame.

Image/IDW/Dark Horse/and manga publishers are it. DC needs to realize they and Marvel aren't the only game in town any more. This is the classic case of taking the bird in the hand for granted and chasing after the two in the bush that they'll never catch...

Straw that broke the camel's back.

Come on. If a person is nigh-invulnerable, why would they cover themselves head-to-toe or beyond what is socially "acceptable" (or acceptable to their character)?

This adds yet more fail to the pile. But, I can at least thank DC because now I'll be saving more money. Maybe I'll buy trades, maybe not. I'll complete the collections of previous titles that I have (just finished the Cassie Cain Batgirl series!), but new stuff? Meh.

As to the whole argument that people can't follow the characters or understand stuff...here's a hint...

QUIT WITH THE YEARLY CRISES/CROSSOVER/MASSIVE SUPER ULTRA MEGA ZORD EVENTS THAT CHANGE EVERYTHING BUT NOT REALLY! How many different "events" have happened in the last five years? I'm a decent comic buyer/reader, but I have no fething clue of what's going on.

Tell stories that don't require a person to buy 18 different comic series to just get the full thing! If I'm buying a Batman comic, I don't want to see, "Continued in Blue Beetle #23!". An argument could be made that other Bat-titles is fair game, provided that something is shown in the comic that would make it relevant to the other title (Detective Comics continued in Nightwing for example).

The first Starship Troopers movie is enjoyable enough if you don't have the knowledge of the books there (the Skinnies, the power armor, etc). Doesn't hurt that one of my friends from college was an extra in it.

If you want a more faithful adaptation, look up the Starship Troopers CGI cartoon. Called the Roughneck Chronicles. Quite a neat little show.

Pollution, by-products from manufacture, smell, deforestation. Lotsa stuff.

I've not seen real film in a long time. My last actual film camera was one of those with the drop-in canister. Local stores don't stock the stuff anymore. Kodachrome is dead, as well. Instant film is limited to FujiFilm and a group that bought up Polaroid's manufacturing equipment.

You may be buying blank tapes, but actual movie are no longer made on them. The last major VHS-released movie was A History of Violence.

I feel bad for laughing, I really do.

Savage was one of those guys that was just fun to watch in the ring.

Because as your electronics go bad, you'll invariably have to replace them. Replacing them can mean that the "new" one doesn't support that older format that you had with the older electronic item. The manufacturers really have no real impetus to continue to support "old" formats, especially when there tends to be a monkey see, monkey do attitude amongst the makers.

Reading an e-book on a computer. That's just really kinda sad, IMO. Meanwhile, contributing to electronic waste and such by replacing that reader.

No, you don't. You don't own those any more than someone buying a game on Steam actually "owns" that game. Say that they want to stop providing a redownload service for that book. You are suddenly limited in how/when/where you can replace it.

For how much longer? Remember VHS? Ya, no one's really selling those anymore. Nor real camera film.

But that e-reader only tends to do ONE thing...read books. Meanwhile, you're juggling your phone, making sure that your mp3 (if not the same thing) is playing the right song. Gotta make sure you don't scratch the screen or spill your $8 extra tall, nonfat, skim whip, Madagascar cinnamon, half-decaf, fair trade macchiato on it.

And why would I be carrying around so many books? If I'm not in my home, then I'm out for a reason.

Sitting in a motel room listening to music that you brought from home...sounds like a real vacation to me.

If you lose a book on a vacation, are you going to be mad? Or are you going to shrug your shoulders and get on with it? Conversely, if you lose an ereader (or it gets stolen, a much more likely scenario), you're going to be out a fair bit of cash. Rather than $5 for a paperback.


I'm done arguing with you. Please, feel free to have the last word if that's important to you. I won't respond to you further in this thread.

And how many MP3 players have you had to buy because the battery mysteriously starts to stop functioning or starts to lose its charge? My mp3 player is on the way out because it's charge can be measured in fractions of an hour. Cheaper to buy a new one than a new battery.

Except for when places like Amazon decide they want to delete books from it. Accept the fact that you don't own that copy when you buy a file.

Arbitrarily changing formats and functions is what electronics peddlers DO. Why sell or let people have something that'll work forever, when you can sell them something with planned obsolecense (sic) and have them buy a NEW thing. You can see that with DVDs and Blu-Rays. They want you to have to buy the "new" format so they can charge you for the same content again.

And do you have an iPod? An iPad? A laptop? Along with all the other gadgets people tend to accumulate.

Why would you want to? Pick one or the other. If you go hiking, are you listening to an mp3 player while doing so? Why? You're missing everything else in the environment so you can listen to the latest manufactured pop band auto-tuned to someone else's lyrics.

No, it's not. It might be the "same" when you consider that it's the transfer of the words to your brain, but all the other bits of the activity are different.

I never have to buy another e-reader because they stopped supporting that format. Replacing a paper book is a lot cheaper than replacing a reader.

I never have to worry about breaking DRM or being accused of copyright violations. Nor do I have to ever worry about making sure that the ever-increasing number of gadgets are compatible or kept up to date.

You do however have to worry about having all your eggs in one basket.

One person sees clutter, another sees good usage of space that is otherwise worthless. My bookcases are along the edges of the room. Space that would otherwise not be used.

All my books are right at my fingertips too. If I'm on a vacation, I'm not taking along ANY gadgets other than a camera. No readers, no ipods, no ipads, no game devices. Just a camera to record things. It amazes the hell outta me when people go to other countries, but spend their time fiddling with a PSP or playing around with an ipod. Might as well stay at home if that's all you're going to do.