No joke: I drove through the book of Genesis chapters 6-9 on the way home from work yesterday. Just coasting along, minding my own business, when suddenly I notice the Wall of Gloom™ I'm heading straight into, and, being on the Howard Franklin Bridge, cannot avoid. Seriously, the sky looked like a massive box of Prismacolor French Greys exploded for as far as the eye could see. It was weather a Ferengi could be proud of.
That being said, it's a given that a bunch of inconsiderate SUV drivers go zooming by like it's another sunny day at the beach, splashing copious tonnage of rainwater all over their surroundings. And here I am, in my Hyundai Elantra, which has great gas mileage but is just a shade taller than R2-D2. Not only do I have to deal with the deluge from the heavens, but now I'm under a horizontal aquatic assault, like some third-world island nation with lots of oil or something. Screw you, inconsiderate SUV drivers.
Anyway, I was very glad to finally get home, and now I must get ready for work. Happy Friday.
Friday, September 25, 2009
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Programming is Really Good for Me
My last post dealt with the physical toll that my extended programming sessions take on me. Now I want to mention how much programming benefits me, because the pros far outweigh the cons, in my opinion. Programming tends to knock me around physically, but that's just due to poor habits. If I would just resist the urge to snack while I'm coding, and take reasonable breaks, and learn to stop at key points in development, I'd be fine. "Hey, I finally got this crap to compile without errors. I'm gonna rest now and wait til morning to actually run the program." This is the kind of rational statement that never seems to find its way into my head when I'm coding. I type and I code and I hack and I test and I debug until I collapse.
But oh, how I enjoy the process. It's like going to a personal trainer. The trainer whips you mercilessly and makes you wish they'd never been born, but afterward you feel so invigorated, having flexed muscles that went unused for what seems like ages. That's exactly how I feel when I'm programming. I get to stretch my brain in ways that just don't present themselves in day-to-day activity. The feeling of accomplishment once I've completed a coding task, no matter how trivial (and at my current level of competence they are usually pretty trivial), is almost indescribable. There's nothing like the feeling you get when you know that a week ago, there was only a problem, and now, thanks to your hard work, there's a solution. That applies to any skill, I suppose, but my labor of love happens to be programming. It's just a shame I don't get to do it very often. The regular daily grind really leaves my mind feeling sluggish and thirsting for stimulation, and programming always manages to quench it.
I think the only other thing that gives me the same sense of satisfaction is my other passion - art. I consider it a gift and a curse that I can invest myself in both the analytical and the artistic. It's probably the reason why I've never absolutely excelled in either of them; if I could consistently focus on one or the other I'd probably get somewhere. Drawing and coding are on different ends of the spectrum, but they do have a lot in common. There's an art to programming, and there's a definite method and logic involved in art. In both cases, you are creating something of value that wasn't there before. I could go on, but I'm tired.
Programming offers so many avenues to explore and things to learn that I find it impossible to not get sucked in if I even start to dip my toes in it. The yen comes and goes in phases, but when I'm in it, I'm in it up to my eyeballs. It's frustrating that there's so many languages to learn and so much potential for writing code, because I never know where to start. Then a particular project comes along and I zone in on it, always striving for that Billy Madison "I AM THE SMARTEST MAN ALIVE" moment when I finally have a finished product. And then I want to show people "Hey, check this out. Click here, enter some input, click there, and BAM! Magic!" And then I go, "ooh, wait, I can throw in another button, a few more subroutines and it'll kick 43% more ass!" Or "hey, I bet I can refactor this sloppy code, get it running faster and leaner" and I'll dive right back into it.
That rush of accomplishment is a real confidence and self-esteem booster. Plus, being a dad, I need to keep my wits as sharp as possible. I mean, Emily is two years old, and I can just barely manage to outsmart her now. What am I gonna do when she's a teenager if I don't stay spry? See, that's it. Stuff like programming, or any kind of brain teaser, is the mental equivalent of doing wind sprints to build speed and endurance. So coding is good for me after all.
But oh, how I enjoy the process. It's like going to a personal trainer. The trainer whips you mercilessly and makes you wish they'd never been born, but afterward you feel so invigorated, having flexed muscles that went unused for what seems like ages. That's exactly how I feel when I'm programming. I get to stretch my brain in ways that just don't present themselves in day-to-day activity. The feeling of accomplishment once I've completed a coding task, no matter how trivial (and at my current level of competence they are usually pretty trivial), is almost indescribable. There's nothing like the feeling you get when you know that a week ago, there was only a problem, and now, thanks to your hard work, there's a solution. That applies to any skill, I suppose, but my labor of love happens to be programming. It's just a shame I don't get to do it very often. The regular daily grind really leaves my mind feeling sluggish and thirsting for stimulation, and programming always manages to quench it.
I think the only other thing that gives me the same sense of satisfaction is my other passion - art. I consider it a gift and a curse that I can invest myself in both the analytical and the artistic. It's probably the reason why I've never absolutely excelled in either of them; if I could consistently focus on one or the other I'd probably get somewhere. Drawing and coding are on different ends of the spectrum, but they do have a lot in common. There's an art to programming, and there's a definite method and logic involved in art. In both cases, you are creating something of value that wasn't there before. I could go on, but I'm tired.
Programming offers so many avenues to explore and things to learn that I find it impossible to not get sucked in if I even start to dip my toes in it. The yen comes and goes in phases, but when I'm in it, I'm in it up to my eyeballs. It's frustrating that there's so many languages to learn and so much potential for writing code, because I never know where to start. Then a particular project comes along and I zone in on it, always striving for that Billy Madison "I AM THE SMARTEST MAN ALIVE" moment when I finally have a finished product. And then I want to show people "Hey, check this out. Click here, enter some input, click there, and BAM! Magic!" And then I go, "ooh, wait, I can throw in another button, a few more subroutines and it'll kick 43% more ass!" Or "hey, I bet I can refactor this sloppy code, get it running faster and leaner" and I'll dive right back into it.
That rush of accomplishment is a real confidence and self-esteem booster. Plus, being a dad, I need to keep my wits as sharp as possible. I mean, Emily is two years old, and I can just barely manage to outsmart her now. What am I gonna do when she's a teenager if I don't stay spry? See, that's it. Stuff like programming, or any kind of brain teaser, is the mental equivalent of doing wind sprints to build speed and endurance. So coding is good for me after all.
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Programming Is Bad For Me
Having just wrapped up my own personal low-budget Weekend of Code, I have come to the realization that programming isn't doing my health any favors. My typical code-writing session, which are waaayyy too few and far between lately, consists of me maintaining ridiculous waking hours, with painfully sporadic sleep; sitting on my ever-widening tush in front of my computer, rising only to find something processed, cheesy and/or salty to shovel into my face.
Seriously, the cycle goes something like this: think think munch type type nom Google type tweak reconsider nom nom nom type type scarf subroutine munch reference lookup pace pace ponder pace gobble type type type save eat eat execute runtime error curse nom nom scarf munch nom debug chow gulp refactor save devour hack hack swear nibble nibble regexp nom crash repeat
That's a rough approximation. The point is, I have this nervous sort of focus when I'm programming where if I'm not actually typing but working things out in my head, my body has to keep busy and what I always instinctively gravitate toward is eating. That, plus eight to ten straight hours of coding not leaving much time for exercise, plus the fact that what little sleep I do get is anything but restful because my brain CAN'T STOP THINKING ABOUT THE CODE, equals damn, programming is bad for me.
It doesn't help at all that I'm a bad programmer, either. I mean, the project I spent all weekend on is something I should've been able to do in half a day during my junior year of college if I'd applied myself more and taken crap seriously. And why do I have to be such a perfectionist when I just barely even know what I'm doing in the first place? Sorry, that's the self-loathing coming out. I hate being so very out of practice, but my overall well-being won't take much more of me brushing up on my skills before I just keel over. I love programming, and all it wants to do is kick my ass.
Seriously, the cycle goes something like this: think think munch type type nom Google type tweak reconsider nom nom nom type type scarf subroutine munch reference lookup pace pace ponder pace gobble type type type save eat eat execute runtime error curse nom nom scarf munch nom debug chow gulp refactor save devour hack hack swear nibble nibble regexp nom crash repeat
That's a rough approximation. The point is, I have this nervous sort of focus when I'm programming where if I'm not actually typing but working things out in my head, my body has to keep busy and what I always instinctively gravitate toward is eating. That, plus eight to ten straight hours of coding not leaving much time for exercise, plus the fact that what little sleep I do get is anything but restful because my brain CAN'T STOP THINKING ABOUT THE CODE, equals damn, programming is bad for me.
It doesn't help at all that I'm a bad programmer, either. I mean, the project I spent all weekend on is something I should've been able to do in half a day during my junior year of college if I'd applied myself more and taken crap seriously. And why do I have to be such a perfectionist when I just barely even know what I'm doing in the first place? Sorry, that's the self-loathing coming out. I hate being so very out of practice, but my overall well-being won't take much more of me brushing up on my skills before I just keel over. I love programming, and all it wants to do is kick my ass.
Saturday, September 12, 2009
Kid drives a hard bargain.
Today my daughter ran up to me as I was messing around on my computer. She was brandishing the two Care Bear plush toys that she's had for at least a year, but for which she has only recently developed an inexplicable fondness.
"Daddy, daddy," she says.
"Emily, Emily," I wittily reply.
"Fi dollars" she barks at me, like a drill sergeant giving orders. She's waving the bears, at arms' length on either side of her.
"What?"
"Fi dollars!"
"Are you trying to sell me your two Care Bears for five dollars?"
"Uh-huh," like it's the most natural thing in the world.
"I don't know, baby, those bears look kind of worn. I'll give you three dollars."
"Nuh-uh. Fi dollars." At this point Emily kneels down and puts the bears face-down on the carpet, rubbing their noses into it. Maybe she's trying to extol their many uses, one of which is apparently "household cleaning implement."
"No, five dollars is too much."
Then my wife starts laughing her ass off from the kitchen, and Emily walks away, having lost all interest in haggling. This ain't the county fair, she's got serious business to conduct.
It's just as well, I guess. I don't have any cash on me and Emily doesn't take debit cards.
"Daddy, daddy," she says.
"Emily, Emily," I wittily reply.
"Fi dollars" she barks at me, like a drill sergeant giving orders. She's waving the bears, at arms' length on either side of her.
"What?"
"Fi dollars!"
"Are you trying to sell me your two Care Bears for five dollars?"
"Uh-huh," like it's the most natural thing in the world.
"I don't know, baby, those bears look kind of worn. I'll give you three dollars."
"Nuh-uh. Fi dollars." At this point Emily kneels down and puts the bears face-down on the carpet, rubbing their noses into it. Maybe she's trying to extol their many uses, one of which is apparently "household cleaning implement."
"No, five dollars is too much."
Then my wife starts laughing her ass off from the kitchen, and Emily walks away, having lost all interest in haggling. This ain't the county fair, she's got serious business to conduct.
It's just as well, I guess. I don't have any cash on me and Emily doesn't take debit cards.
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
So I hear Disney bought Marvel...
Being a huge comic book geek, I feel obliged to add my little insignificant voice to the discordant clamor over Disney purchasing Marvel Entertainment for $4 billion.
Just to get it out of the way right off the bat, I don't particularly like Disney. They're in the "big nasty corporation" category that I simply can't bring myself to stomach. I can't help it, I find it very hard to trust any person or entity with a grossly disproportionate share of the wealth, popularity, and/or influence pies.
That said, I think that there's more good that can come from Disney buying Marvel than bad, as long as we limit speculation to the realm of honest probability. The fanboys shouting "mouse ears on Spider-Man" or "Hannah Montana joins the Avengers" with anguished consternation aren't very convincing. The way I see it, the publishing arm of Marvel just isn't worth enough money to Disney to justify them dorking around with it much. More on that in a minute.
In my uneducated opinion, the main reasons Disney mortgaged the House of Ideas are: film distribution and licensing rights. With the success of the Iron Man movie and the relative (to Ang Lee's version) success of The Incredible Hulk, Disney smelled profit and jumped. If that means a bigger budget and/or more talent for future films based on Marvel properties, then I'm all for this deal. Disney's acquisition of Pixar hasn't caused any ripples in the quality of Pixar's output, and while everything Pixar's released since they got bought was pretty much already in the can by that point, I'm sure the Mouse still had plenty of time and opportunity to stick his meddling, kid-gloved fingers into the mix and foul things up if he really wanted to. And near as I can tell, that didn't happen. Further, Disney also owns Miramax, which has put out some fairly edgy films, so I don't have any real fear of Disney suddenly watering down every superhero movie they distribute from here on out just on principle, or because they're "family-friendly." That's not to say it won't happen, just that I give Disney enough credit to recognize that doing so would be a kick in their bottom line's crotch.
As for licensing - yes, Disney will slap The Mighty Thor on any plastic piece of crap they want and sell it for like a 950% markup at their stores and in their parks. Fine, the various companies who've licensed Marvel properties are already doing that (albeit with a bit less markup) and it doesn't affect my affection for the characters. The only difference between the Disney situation and the status quo, in terms of character marketing, is that now I'll probably see a t-shirt with Cyclops high-fiving Goofy before I die. And I will shake my head and walk away from it.
Oh, and what's Disney best known for? Animation. Look, my favorite cartoon right now is (unsurprisingly) The Spectacular Spider-Man, and it is aired on Disney XD. And while it didn't start out there, the fact that the spirit and core of the show didn't change a bit when it switched over is encouraging. Perhaps those episodes were already in the can too, so the future remains to be seen. At any rate, the point I am clumsily ambling toward is that association with Disney can potentially help Marvel properties in many ways when it comes to animated series. Like it or not, Disney is the undisputed king in (Western) animation in terms of technical prowess, if not necessarily story quality or appeal to the over-13 crowd. The 90s Spidey and X-Men cartoons were pretty entertaining at the time, but the animation completely sucked. The Spectacular Spider-Man and Wolverine and the X-Men are considerably better in this regard, but there's still plenty of room for improvement, and who better to do it than the masters with decades of collective experience? I won't even go into the tangible joy that envelops my brain at the thought of a Pixar Spider-Man production, because that's just too much to hope for.
But hey, even if I'm completely, horribly wrong about those points, I'll be happy as long as Disney doesn't start screwing up the actual comics that their newly acquired intellectual property is based upon. The comics are all I really care about. Movies, TV shows, and animated series all deviate from the original source material to various degrees, and so they can be scoffed and/or ignored if they're not up to snuff. Spider-Man 3 didn't "ruin" Venom. The real Venom is still right there in the pages of my comics. Likewise, stupid merchandise doesn't make a dent, and I couldn't care less if a big animatronic Uatu or Galactus makes a new home of Space Mountain. The good stuff is between the pages, in the panels, and Disney had better keep it that way. There's no real reason for them not to; comic books, as much as I love them, haven't exactly been a cash cow in well over a decade. No amount of meddling to make the books more "wholesome" will change that, and thus won't net the Mouse a significant return on his investment.
It would be far more in Disney's best interest to let the pros handle the creative side of the comics, and offer nothing more than financial backing. It would be phenomenal to see Marvel's budget propped up a little, to allow them room to expand and experiment. We'd see more diverse work come out, and given a chance to breathe, rather than get canceled after a scant six or seven issues due to low sales and tight budgets. Niche titles would get a second wind, because not every cult following has the weight of numbers that Spider-Girl's fans had (although ultimately Mayday did fall under the axe). And dammit, more books like Nextwave need to be given a chance to live. I really believe the reason DC is able to put out so much niche, edgy (read: considerably less profitable than Batman) content like the Vertigo line is due to their being a subsidiary of AOL-Time Warner. Disney's big umbrella made of money could easily offer the same opportunity to Marvel. And hey, while you're at it, Disney, why not toss the hard-working writers and artists a bone or two? Like, I dunno, better benefits, or perks that people at "real jobs" take for granted? Maybe even a profit-sharing and pay structure similar to what CrossGen put in place before it collapsed as a result of spreading itself too thin too fast. Only, you know, more realistic (kind of funny how Disney ended up with most of CrossGen's assets). That's probably a pipe dream, but hey.
If Disney's gonna muck about at all in Marvel's publishing business, it would really behoove them to try and engage a younger audience. I don't mean by dumbing down the webhead and pals, at least not in their usual monthly titles. A kid-friendly line funded, at least in part, by Disney coffers would be tremendous. Marvel's had various lines and titles aimed at kids and teens, and they all seem to kind of fade away because they just don't bring in enough money to stay afloat. That kind of money is less than chump change to Disney, though. A solid, long-running, consistent brand of Marvel comics geared toward kids would not only benefit Marvel and Disney, but the entire comic book industry. Too much of Marvel's output is aimed at the aging fanboy crowd, and while I love the more "mature" storylines (when they work and don't simply fall flat), I also realize that ignoring younger generations is slow suicide for comics. There simply isn't enough mainstream comic book material catching kids' eyes, and if anyone can help change that it's Disney, who can afford to operate at a loss for a bit while building a fan base that will just maybe grow up loving comics and wanting to ride that sweet new Black Panther coaster at Disneyland and begging their parents to buy them all the action figures based on the badass new Inhumans animated feature film that they've already gone to see three times. See how that works? Seriously, the amount of capital Disney would lose in publishing some kid-friendly Avengers books could be offset by selling a few extra Jonas Brothers Trapper Keepers. Do they still make Trapper Keepers?
My only fear is that Marvel's edgier lines, Max and Icon, may get watered-down or eradicated completely. I don't think there's a big chance of that happening, given my previous points, but I reserve that modicum of paranoia. I needs me some Powers. Don't take away my Powers, Disney.
All of this may just be unwarranted optimism, and if I'm wrong and Disney does demand that Ghost Rider's head be enveloped in cotton candy instead of flames and the Punisher's guns fire only rubber bands, then I'll be the first one lighting torches and sharpening pitchforks. But look, Marvel went through bankruptcy and came out on the other side smelling like roses. What's more, it was a bankruptcy brought about by a scheming, greedy fat cat who knew nothing about comics and sought to turn Marvel in to a poor man's Disney. I doubt that the people who brought the House of Ideas through that ordeal would willingly walk into a lynching, fist-bumping the guys holding the nooses. Marvel didn't need this deal, and I am holding out hope that they made it with the intent of bettering their properties and not just putting more cash in the Mouse's pockets.
But, as always, I could be wrong.
Just to get it out of the way right off the bat, I don't particularly like Disney. They're in the "big nasty corporation" category that I simply can't bring myself to stomach. I can't help it, I find it very hard to trust any person or entity with a grossly disproportionate share of the wealth, popularity, and/or influence pies.
That said, I think that there's more good that can come from Disney buying Marvel than bad, as long as we limit speculation to the realm of honest probability. The fanboys shouting "mouse ears on Spider-Man" or "Hannah Montana joins the Avengers" with anguished consternation aren't very convincing. The way I see it, the publishing arm of Marvel just isn't worth enough money to Disney to justify them dorking around with it much. More on that in a minute.
In my uneducated opinion, the main reasons Disney mortgaged the House of Ideas are: film distribution and licensing rights. With the success of the Iron Man movie and the relative (to Ang Lee's version) success of The Incredible Hulk, Disney smelled profit and jumped. If that means a bigger budget and/or more talent for future films based on Marvel properties, then I'm all for this deal. Disney's acquisition of Pixar hasn't caused any ripples in the quality of Pixar's output, and while everything Pixar's released since they got bought was pretty much already in the can by that point, I'm sure the Mouse still had plenty of time and opportunity to stick his meddling, kid-gloved fingers into the mix and foul things up if he really wanted to. And near as I can tell, that didn't happen. Further, Disney also owns Miramax, which has put out some fairly edgy films, so I don't have any real fear of Disney suddenly watering down every superhero movie they distribute from here on out just on principle, or because they're "family-friendly." That's not to say it won't happen, just that I give Disney enough credit to recognize that doing so would be a kick in their bottom line's crotch.
As for licensing - yes, Disney will slap The Mighty Thor on any plastic piece of crap they want and sell it for like a 950% markup at their stores and in their parks. Fine, the various companies who've licensed Marvel properties are already doing that (albeit with a bit less markup) and it doesn't affect my affection for the characters. The only difference between the Disney situation and the status quo, in terms of character marketing, is that now I'll probably see a t-shirt with Cyclops high-fiving Goofy before I die. And I will shake my head and walk away from it.
Oh, and what's Disney best known for? Animation. Look, my favorite cartoon right now is (unsurprisingly) The Spectacular Spider-Man, and it is aired on Disney XD. And while it didn't start out there, the fact that the spirit and core of the show didn't change a bit when it switched over is encouraging. Perhaps those episodes were already in the can too, so the future remains to be seen. At any rate, the point I am clumsily ambling toward is that association with Disney can potentially help Marvel properties in many ways when it comes to animated series. Like it or not, Disney is the undisputed king in (Western) animation in terms of technical prowess, if not necessarily story quality or appeal to the over-13 crowd. The 90s Spidey and X-Men cartoons were pretty entertaining at the time, but the animation completely sucked. The Spectacular Spider-Man and Wolverine and the X-Men are considerably better in this regard, but there's still plenty of room for improvement, and who better to do it than the masters with decades of collective experience? I won't even go into the tangible joy that envelops my brain at the thought of a Pixar Spider-Man production, because that's just too much to hope for.
But hey, even if I'm completely, horribly wrong about those points, I'll be happy as long as Disney doesn't start screwing up the actual comics that their newly acquired intellectual property is based upon. The comics are all I really care about. Movies, TV shows, and animated series all deviate from the original source material to various degrees, and so they can be scoffed and/or ignored if they're not up to snuff. Spider-Man 3 didn't "ruin" Venom. The real Venom is still right there in the pages of my comics. Likewise, stupid merchandise doesn't make a dent, and I couldn't care less if a big animatronic Uatu or Galactus makes a new home of Space Mountain. The good stuff is between the pages, in the panels, and Disney had better keep it that way. There's no real reason for them not to; comic books, as much as I love them, haven't exactly been a cash cow in well over a decade. No amount of meddling to make the books more "wholesome" will change that, and thus won't net the Mouse a significant return on his investment.
It would be far more in Disney's best interest to let the pros handle the creative side of the comics, and offer nothing more than financial backing. It would be phenomenal to see Marvel's budget propped up a little, to allow them room to expand and experiment. We'd see more diverse work come out, and given a chance to breathe, rather than get canceled after a scant six or seven issues due to low sales and tight budgets. Niche titles would get a second wind, because not every cult following has the weight of numbers that Spider-Girl's fans had (although ultimately Mayday did fall under the axe). And dammit, more books like Nextwave need to be given a chance to live. I really believe the reason DC is able to put out so much niche, edgy (read: considerably less profitable than Batman) content like the Vertigo line is due to their being a subsidiary of AOL-Time Warner. Disney's big umbrella made of money could easily offer the same opportunity to Marvel. And hey, while you're at it, Disney, why not toss the hard-working writers and artists a bone or two? Like, I dunno, better benefits, or perks that people at "real jobs" take for granted? Maybe even a profit-sharing and pay structure similar to what CrossGen put in place before it collapsed as a result of spreading itself too thin too fast. Only, you know, more realistic (kind of funny how Disney ended up with most of CrossGen's assets). That's probably a pipe dream, but hey.
If Disney's gonna muck about at all in Marvel's publishing business, it would really behoove them to try and engage a younger audience. I don't mean by dumbing down the webhead and pals, at least not in their usual monthly titles. A kid-friendly line funded, at least in part, by Disney coffers would be tremendous. Marvel's had various lines and titles aimed at kids and teens, and they all seem to kind of fade away because they just don't bring in enough money to stay afloat. That kind of money is less than chump change to Disney, though. A solid, long-running, consistent brand of Marvel comics geared toward kids would not only benefit Marvel and Disney, but the entire comic book industry. Too much of Marvel's output is aimed at the aging fanboy crowd, and while I love the more "mature" storylines (when they work and don't simply fall flat), I also realize that ignoring younger generations is slow suicide for comics. There simply isn't enough mainstream comic book material catching kids' eyes, and if anyone can help change that it's Disney, who can afford to operate at a loss for a bit while building a fan base that will just maybe grow up loving comics and wanting to ride that sweet new Black Panther coaster at Disneyland and begging their parents to buy them all the action figures based on the badass new Inhumans animated feature film that they've already gone to see three times. See how that works? Seriously, the amount of capital Disney would lose in publishing some kid-friendly Avengers books could be offset by selling a few extra Jonas Brothers Trapper Keepers. Do they still make Trapper Keepers?
My only fear is that Marvel's edgier lines, Max and Icon, may get watered-down or eradicated completely. I don't think there's a big chance of that happening, given my previous points, but I reserve that modicum of paranoia. I needs me some Powers. Don't take away my Powers, Disney.
All of this may just be unwarranted optimism, and if I'm wrong and Disney does demand that Ghost Rider's head be enveloped in cotton candy instead of flames and the Punisher's guns fire only rubber bands, then I'll be the first one lighting torches and sharpening pitchforks. But look, Marvel went through bankruptcy and came out on the other side smelling like roses. What's more, it was a bankruptcy brought about by a scheming, greedy fat cat who knew nothing about comics and sought to turn Marvel in to a poor man's Disney. I doubt that the people who brought the House of Ideas through that ordeal would willingly walk into a lynching, fist-bumping the guys holding the nooses. Marvel didn't need this deal, and I am holding out hope that they made it with the intent of bettering their properties and not just putting more cash in the Mouse's pockets.
But, as always, I could be wrong.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
