#why do comics take so long to do even when i simplify it

[shroomerr]

chúc mừng năm mới, everyone !!! im a little late to lunar new year since it was two days ago ;; but i wanted to draw something to celebrate, so i give you hanh in a traditional ao dai + khan dong and a little comic with her and the boys. i hope you like <333 i wish you all good health, wealth, and prosperity in this new year!!

[somethingpersonarelated]

On simplifying Akechi

My brain was ridden with these ideas people have about Akechi that piss me off a little. Mostly ones that say he is "just crazy" or "just hates Joker." There's countless metaposts countering these arguments (and they are absolutely wonderful) but I often wonder WHY simplifying Akechi down is so appealing, even to people who are fans of his character. I can't say I've never been immune to simplifications of his character either, and I feel like that's important to admit. I don't even think it's necessarily a bad thing, but I was wondering about that why question.

TW: Discussions of mental health and child abuse

Source: A high schooler's holiday from the P5 Comic Anthology (read it here!)

I do think it's hard for all of the little things Akechi's character builds upon to be conveyed through a single playthrough. If you go in blind or don't finish his confidant, you may only get that surface level exploration of his character. Base Akechi is flashy and still gets the point across that it needs to: he's a foil to Joker and the PTs. However, by missing out on his social links and special events, you miss cultural, relationship, and personal context.

Many words have been said about the translation, particularly in the engine room, being faulty in areas. But some people still don't understand that Akechi's plan isn't to kill Shido, even when the text makes that clear. There's also this scene with Shido, which reads more as an exposition dump in a long section of the game most players will either tune out or skip. Not everything you see will always stick in your head, and Persona is a LONG game. I feel like it's easy to forget people just... forget canon sometimes. It's easier to put these details aside and say Akechi isn't affected by the system he's raised in. But the reality is, you miss what Lavenza says about Akechi's role, you miss that one exposition scene, and you miss the confidant: you believe Akechi had much more autonomy than was actually true. In conversations I've had with people IRL about Persona, 2/3 either skipped or did not finish Akechi's confidant. It isn't improbable, playtimes can range from 100-300 hours, most playthroughs take weeks. People will forget things. It isn't a maybe, it WILL happen.

When the game feeds you so much information, it's also easier to take what the characters say at face value. Doing this with Akechi will bite your ass. Those words in Rank 8 are directly expanded upon in No More What Ifs, the engine room, and 2/2. Maruki and Morgana confirm Akechi doesn't hate Joker, but you never hear Akechi say it himself. To me the game beats you over the head with this information (as the game has a tendency to do for certain situations), but I've also been in the rabbit hole for over a year now.

There's also this idea that recognizing that Akechi was set up by Yaldabaoth, his upbringing, and Shido means that all the venom is taken away from his actions. That isn't true, and Akechi holds to that in third semester. He doesn't give himself any grace for the situation he landed in, wanting to take accountability for it when it is undone without his consent. Akechi is by no means a perfect victim, and he doesn't believe that either. Recognizing that he had no choice, it was either homelessness and neglect or the plan he conjured himself only brings to light the tragedy of his situation, not whether his actions were morally incorrect. He wanted his father to be in his life, and he wanted his father to suffer. He wanted to have someone like Ren in his life, and he couldn't have someone like Ren because his plan would be jeopardized. It's a series of choices, some of which are forced upon him, some of which he chooses himself. That is an important distinction to make.

There's also this idea that Akechi is 'just crazy,' or never suffered from abuse or events that affected him long term. That he doesn't suffer from unspecified mental health conditions or trauma, and chose everything with a clear mind. When someone brings up this argument, it's usually in response to people talking about his life experiences. That somehow, the existence of trauma or a condition is an excuse for whatever he did. There's a double standard here: Akechi is someone who suffers from a condition that makes him 'plain crazy', simplifying his entire motivation and role in the story, while also removing him from the context of his mother, Shido, and his experience with the foster system. Actually interacting with these facets of his character brings to light the challenging things the story asks you to think about when it comes to Akechi: Is he a victim? Is he like the Phantom Thieves? What about his situation informed his choices? Interacting with this requires effort and an actual acknowledgement about what it means to be someone that suffers from trauma. Calling him 'plain crazy' not only is in disservice of textual analysis, but more importantly incorrect (and frankly, it falls straight into ableist tropes about mental health).

Sometimes internet debates/discourse lead to simplification, even just random headcanons may lead to simplification. That isn't always bad. There are many ways to say what I said here in fewer words. I, unfortunately, am not skilled enough to do that. But some of these simplifications lead to entirely incorrect judgements about a character, or even about mental health issues. When that happens, I wish people would learn to reflect about what that means when they interact with a piece of media. Or even with other people.

tldr: people should learn to say they just don't like things instead of coming up with excuses that make no sense. basically

[blueskittlesart]

Hi, I’m a huge fan of your art and I wanted to know a little bit about your comics. About how long does it take you to make one, and how do you stay efficient about it? Also, how do you decide which parts are black, which are white, and which are gray? And are any parts of the process particularly difficult? I think it’s really beautiful how you can get so much across in your comics without crowding too much in each panel, like in manga for example. Also how most of them are entirely black and white. I’m asking all of this because I have a story I’ve written, and I want to turn it into a comic, which I’ve done before. But I’ve always become discouraged when I overshoot and make it way too detailed from the beginning and not be able to get that same amount of quality with more complicated panels. Thanks if you answer this.

HIIII. so the time that it takes to do like one page of comic varies for me depending on the level of finish i put into it, but i'd say not counting the scriptwriting or layout, the actual art for one page usually takes between 1-2 hours to finish. any more than that is too much for me, personally, but one of the things i've learned at art school is that i work INSANELY abnormally fast, so that kind of pace might not be sustainable for you. (i'm currently doing 5 pages a week for my thesis which is the kind of pace that kills people. it might kill me. we'll see.)

my best advice for b/w/g placement is to have an idea of what you want your finished panel/page to look like BEFORE you start drawing it. if you're just drawing the lineart and then filling in the black and gray after the fact, it's going to be much more difficult and you're going to run into problems like tangents and legibility issues with your color placement. especially when working with a limited palette, knowing roughly where each color will go before even beginning the project helps a lot. I'd also suggest trying to limit your use of gray to like, 3 tones max. I usually only use 1 or 2 if i use gray at all. this helps keep things in high-contrast and therefore more legible. Line weight is also especially important when you're only doing black and white, because it helps create depth and ground us in space when there's no color to do so. in general, don't be afraid to go for big blocks of black, but try to think about where and why you're using them!

As for your comment about overshooting, my advice is to ration. we joke sometimes about how manga artists will use a much more simplified style up until like, a big climactic scene and then suddenly lock in, but that's a genuinely useful tactic sometimes. You don't necessarily need a background in every panel if the background isn't the focus of a scene, and that leaves more energy for you to go all out when you DO need a big fancy establishing shot or some complex perspective or whatever. obviously you shouldn't just be totally phoning it in on less complex panels, but don't try to kill yourself over the less important details. focus on what's most important to get your point across in whatever situation you're working with!

[assassyart]

What are your favorite outfits for Ratchet from the games?

Good question!

As far as the armors go, I usually never actually use them in the majority of the games I play (unless they're forced onto me, like Deadlocked's or 2016's). But I do have my favorites.

Holoflux

Shocking probably no one, Holoflux is the best. People often say it's their favorite, and that's for good reason— it looks incredibly good on Ratchet. I definitely don't enjoy drawing this armor that much, but I still will do it from time to time because I like it that much, and Ratchet gets pretty privilege.

It's also cool that this armor matches Azimuth pretty well, and I like that it has the "powered down" version in cutscenes. It makes the finale hit that much harder. This is the only armor where I know it's my favorite. The others are in no particular order.

Quest

Quest for Booty's armor was always rather charming to me, but it got even better once I recognized it had the Apogee insignia on the belt. I am a Talwyn and Ratchet stan at heart, so this pulled this armor above some others just because of that detail. But putting that aside, it also really fits the game it's in and makes Ratchet look like an explorer. He matches Talwyn quite nicely, too, which fits since she's his companion in this game.

Rebel

Oh my god this armor stole my HEART for so long. I am begging Insomniac to give us more casual fits in the next entry because this armor spoiled me so much. I love the graffiti Clank on the left hand, I love the little jacket, I love how the full gear doesn't cover his face... it's just adorable. Such a good fit that suits Ratchet so much and it's definitely my favorite new armor in Rift Apart.

Infernox

As far as armors that cover Ratchet's face go, Infernox was always one of my favorites as a kid. Something about its color palette and overall "flame" vibe just screamed early-Ratchet to me. I really like this one, and I definitely prefer it over the more popular Carbonox armor. Then again, I'm also a sucker for Up Your Arsenal. :P

2002

Not an armor but an absolute classic look. Of all the ones here, it's my favorite to draw since it lets me draw more of Ratchet's fur. It broke my heart to know that IG really wanted to put it in to Rift Apart, but was unable to find a way. I hope they try to do it for the next game, but I'll understand even if they can't. It's just one of the best looks for Ratchet. So iconic.

Marauder

Listen. This armor is really cool looking, and I like it, and I especially like that Deadlocked lets me take off the helmet too... but boy, this bitch is painful to draw. Simplifying it almost feels heinous to do, since it's just so cool looking but GAH!!!! If you ever wonder why I never update the Deadlocked Together AU, it's because of this!!! This painful armor!!!!!!

That aside, this armor fits the tone of the game so well. It's edgy, it's brooding, it's dark. I love it. The only thing I don't like is the fact they hide his tail :(

Tuxedo

Despite always playing Going Commando and Up Your Arsenal exclusively without armor when I play, you would never be able to tell because I love wearing the tuxedo Ratchet skins. Somethin about formal Ratchet makes me have heart eyes. Very kissable.

Robot Pirate

While I obviously prefer rebel, this was one of the only other armors in Rift Apart that I found myself using for Ratchet. The scarf really looks good on him, and I'm very fond of the chest plate. If it weren't for Quest armor's inclusion, I would always wear this armor when going to Ardolis.

Comics

Last but not least (because tumblr says I should stop adding images)... the comic outfits. Once again, the casual Ratchet outfits are always going to score higher for me. I loveeeee seeing my boy look more casual. And while the left image looks a lot like his normal outfit, I prefer it more for keeping it loose. That, and something about that blue chest piece never sat right with me. In a perfect world, I think it would have stayed green to keep his earthy tones in tact even after Tools of Destruction.

And the overalls are just. Mwah. Chef's kiss. What a dork. He's so cute. I love him.

Thanks for the ask!

[thankssteveditko]

An overly-simplified introduction to the "Marvel Method"

As I begin to cover Amazing Spider-Man, it's probably worth explaining the basics of this up front for anyone who isn't aware. Over on Thanks Ken Penders, I talk about comics generally made the "traditional" way. A writer writes a detailed script, and then it's handed off to the art team to draw what the script says, with perhaps a bit of interpretive wiggle room. That's what you'd expect, right? But back in the '60s, Marvel developed their own creative method that came to be known as... well, the Marvel Method.

It varied from team to team, but the steps of the Marvel Method (or the "plot script" method) are basically this:

The "writer" comes up with a basic synopsis of the story - not a full script

The "penciller" takes that synopsis and draws up the full story, determining the specifics of what actually happens

Finally, the art is handed back to the writer, who comes up with the dialogue based on what the artist has decided to draw

The argument for this process is that a comic artist should be a strong storyteller as well, and that the artist may know how to break the action down panel-by-panel better than a writer would. In reality, the actual explanation is that Stan Lee was working on way too many comics at once in the '60s, and so he offloaded some of the burden of storytelling to artists Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko because... well, they were Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko.

It should probably not be surprising that the Marvel Method created a lot of problems.

For one, before long, Kirby and Ditko were basically just plotting whatever they wanted for Fantastic Four and Spider-Man, then letting Stan fill in the dialogue... but Stan was still getting full credit as writer, making it seem like the stories were all his doing. (He would eventually start giving them credit for plotting.) Even when Stan did give them plots like he was supposed to, sometimes they'd go do something wildly different anyway. Stan intended to make the Green Goblin an ancient Egyptian demon found in a sarcophagus by a film crew, but Steve basically went "I'm not fucking doing that" and made him a human villain instead. Can you imagine a comic artist going completely rogue like that in this day and age? It's nuts! (But also, Ditko made the right call there.)

Because Stan had the final say when it came to dialogue, this also meant he could directly contradict the intent of the artists. Hilariously, I've found anecdotes about Stan both watering down Ditko's later attempts at giving Peter increasingly Objectivist views and also removing references to the ideology from a Kirby story seemingly intended to make fun of Objectivism. But while these examples are funny when juxtaposed like that, on the whole it's easy to understand how frustrating it is to have Stan Lee swooping in at the last second and completely changing the meaning of your story, then taking the credit for writing it.

Is it any wonder that Kirby and Ditko both felt they weren't being given their proper due at Marvel and left for other companies? Is it any wonder that the Marvel Method isn't used much in the modern age? But, basically, this method and this history of improper crediting are why it's difficult to determine exactly who did what for a lot of these early Spider-Man comics.

[s-sputnik-k]

me: starts watching x-men (2000), is excited to finally be getting into the proper xmen release order

also me: has to immediately pause and take a long sigh and repeat to myself "it's based on comics from the 60s, it's fiction, it's fun sci-fi/superhero stuff, it's fiction, it's made up" when the first line talks about evolution making humans the 'dominant species'

I think I just need to rant, bc I love x-men but even in the newer films the repeated talk about humans being superior or dominant just really irks me. like at this point I think it's not even malicious, it's just genuine ignorance or misunderstanding of evolution (or a rule of cool situation, which is fair enough because, again, it is fiction). but evolution is LITERALLY just becoming more suited to your environment through natural selection. that's all it means

like, first of all, what is the metric for superiority? is it complexity? because I'm sure there are single cell organisms that are extremely suited to their environment. there are also mushrooms with thousands of sexes (my information did come from tumblr, ik, misinformation central, but I do tend to read into the fun facts I learn here afterwards)--we are definitely not the most complicated organism we know of. hell, fungus is so complicated, we put it all in one category when really, we have no idea what most of it has in common other than the fact that they aren't a plant, animal or bacteria (simplified bc I'm not bringing up a classification chart for this)

so maybe it's about longevity. I mean, humans have only existed for, what, 300,000 years? there are so many living things that have existed for significantly longer! and even if we assume optimistically that humans will last much longer into the future, we still aren't winning on an individual lifespan basis. there are literal sea sponges that live longer than us

so, alright, fine, maybe it's about intellect--that is one of our best traits as a species. but intelligence is just one of many, many factors in a particular living thing's evolution. for many creatures, it's better that they aren't intelligent. I'd be willing to bet there are creatures that have evolved to be less intelligent after it became unhelpful. our massive, energy intensive brains are extremely draining (not to mention dangerous in childbirth); some animals can't even justify having colour perception, why would they need to be able to do algebra? it's like if honeybees decided to measure the evolution of all animals based on how well they spread pollen or make honey. like, it's just not a helpful or relevant metric unless you are a honeybee

so, yeah, humans aren't more evolved, we aren't better evolved, we're just. evolved. we are what we are, based on changes in our environment, random mutations and natural selection. and Charles would KNOW THIS but I understand that talking about human evolution and how it led to mutants having cool powers is an engaging way to start a film about, yknow, human evolution and mutants with cool powers

so, I do eventually finish my heavy sigh and unpause the film. because I love these characters and this story, so I will simply close my ears the next time charles says the word dominant, and pretend it didn't happen so that I can enjoy the film without going on another rant

[meanbossart]

A long over-due ask compilation (Art & Music)

It's vaguely based on a short story from the book "The Consumer" by Michael Gira, specifically "The Boss". I think it came up in conversation with a friend or something when I was picking a new username, so that's how we arrived at it - this was almost a decade ago so, my memory on it is a little hazy!

{MORE UNDER THE CUT]

HAHA thank you so much!!! Glad you enjoy what I do 😎🍻

I BELIEVE this little guide I put together over here might be helpful to you, also! I touched on pretty much everything you brought up.

As for reference material when it comes to facial expressions, I have a mirror next to my desk which I glance at often and make weird faces at LOL and for consistency, it's really a matter of learning to dissect and remember facial structure. It's just something you end up developing an eye for when you've done it for long enough! Naturally, if we're talking about drawing existing characters, it's always helpful to just look at some pictures of their mugs and take a minute to define what features about them make their faces recognizable - I touch on this at the link above as well!

I do plan on making a "drowstarion" (love that, by the way LOL) playlist eventually, life's just been kicking my ass and I hardly have the time 😭and when I do, I just wanna draw.

Otherwise I don't have any other playlists floating around at the moment, BUT the one my boyfriend made for his Vellioth comic can be found here, and it might scratch a similar itch!

Thank you! I believe this was in reference to this post. Something like that takes me about... An hour??? If we're talking just the colors, at least. Though that's a really rough estimate because I take a lot of breaks, so my sense of time when I work ends up pretty skewed. Even if the application of the colors themselves took less than 20 minutes I probably spent 2 hours just staring at it LOL.

My friend, I have no idea. I'm in a constant battle between "I want to draw more realistically" and "I want to simplify my art so I can draw more/faster". What you see is the result of that ongoing brain-tug-of-war.

Also, just the way I assume everyone else develops theirs - they see stuff they like and emulate it until their art is Frankensteinish enough to be it's own unique thing!

I'm far from a Type O Negative buff, BUT I'm happy to share some of my favorites with you! They're quite scattered across a couple of their albums so I'm not sure I have a favorite, but I would say October Rust is a good starting point.

In no particular order, these are my most listened tracks of theirs: -Love You to Death -Black N.01 -Haunted -She Burned Me Down -Can't Lose You -I Don't Wanna Be Me -Be My Druidess -September Sun -Tripping A Blind Man

Alas, I was one of those people who was already drawing in kindergarten 😅 though I would say I only started taking it seriously when I was around 15-16 years old. As someone who has tried their hand at several other hobbies since reaching adulthood, I get what you're saying that it can kinda feel like... You missed the wagon? I've felt that way about all kind of things lol

That said, I've seen adults managing to develop their art skills extremely fast and effectively before. Understanding where and how you need to improve, and how to follow lessons/guides best is something that is vastly improved by maturity and knowing how to best hone your time, attention, and resources - and those are skills we completely lack as children. So, I sincerely believe that as long as you commit yourself, you can definitely get to a point that you're happy with in a couple of years if not less.

JUST DO IT BUDDY we are all just people looking through a screen and you won't ever see, talk, or meet 99% of the folks who ever clap eyes on what you post. Whenever you start getting nervous about sharing something, take a minute to ask yourself why you're nervous, and if none of the reasons have any genuine substance besides being afraid of what people "might think", just go ahead and post it. You're no mind-reader after all, and if you are, I doubt you can hear what a guy from Argentina or wherever is thinking about the art you made.

Point is, nobody online can touch you 🤷and if someone doesn't like what you do, they can simply choose to not interact with it, and if they do you can block and move on. There are zero reasons for you to feel "bad" about putting up a doodle when our experiences on the web are so easily curated nowadays.

[phenomenalcosmicpowers]

THE ANCIENT EQUESTRIAN ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM - POST-MAKE YOUR MARK CHAPTER 4 EDITION

Hello there! I’m here to sort of give a follow-up to a post I made a while back about G5 after having established it has a connection with G4 how it might have to go forward about it. Ever since then, the G4-G5 connection  has been… inconsistent at best. The comics perhaps have the most direct link what with the Mane 5 meeting Discord which is never referred to in either Make Your Mark and presumably not in Tell Your Tale (I have not watched much tell your tale, though sorry. I feel like I just can’t get past the art style and the fart jokes I heard about they did with Sparky (Did they really have to do that to one of the most sympathetic characters in all of MLP? Misty did not deserve that one iota) absolutely was a deal breaker for me.)

And Chapter 3 while it did have the Twilight cameo and maybe a vague idea of how Opaline rised to power… it didn’t really give us a whole lot to go off of it feels like. So I didn’t really feel like giving much thoughts on it.

But Chapter 4 has certainly provided something that’s substantial enough to discuss… but I’m not confident it’s for all the right reasons.

For the sake of those who have not seen Chapter 4 of Make your Mark, I shall put the rest after a Keep reading line section. As the first thing you’ll see.. is a very significant image that is a pretty direct spoiler from Make Your Mark Chapter 4. If you have already seen Chapter 4, or don’t really care enough to avoid spoilers feel free to continue reading.

^Probably most G4 fans reaction to this image

Before I really dig into this thing, there is some speculation that this is all just more gas lighting by Opaline about her origins to Misty and none of the details are true since there seems to be multiple versions of how Opaline came to be a threat. But… I’m not sure I see any intentional use of the “Joker origin story” trope where everything Opaline has said about her origin is a lie. I’m not sure the writers will actually make that a plot point when it seems like they have it all simplified for children watching (They won’t even share what Zipp knows about alicorns to the audience for crying out loud!). I feel like the idea that Opaline may be lying about this entirely may be giving the writers of G5 a little too much credit here. If I’m wrong, I’ll fully own up to it. But for now, let’s presume that Opaline is telling the truth or at least mostly the truth.

So to get this out of the way…

WHAT THE BUUUUUUUCCCCCKKKKK?!

So… let me get this straight… Opaline has been around ever since Celestia and Luna were fillies. That in itself is hard to map out the time for that. But then you gotta start thinking. If she’s been around for that long? What in Equestria was she doing in the time since the royal sisters were kids up until G5? In short, what was she doing DURING the events of Friendship is Magic and so on and so forth? Why didn’t she say take advantage when the Celestia was the only ruler for about 1000 years?

And if she’s the one that ruined the peace in Equestria ultimately, why does she feel way too incompetent to have been the one to to have done so? Opaline doesn’t even find out Misty has betrayed her at the end, if she can’t even keep track of her ONE AND ONLY MINION. How in Equestria did she end the most peaceful era in Equestria’s history?

Another question that might be even worse? How come Celestia and Luna didn’t tell Twilight or the rest of Equestria about Skyros? I mean yeah, obviously neither Opaline or Skyros actually existed meta-wise when developing Friendship is Magic. But this is the kind of stuff that seems to prove that the idea of connecting G4 and G5 was always just an afterthought. This just doesn’t work with what Friendship is Magic has established even with it’s vague look at Alicorn lore. Apparently a land of the Alicorns exists now? Just how many Alicorns are there actually? Apparently the Journal of Two Sisters implied there was a place of Alicorns, but the problem of course is Friendship is Magic contradicted said journal with Flurry Heart’s birth in Season 6.

Also, if Opaline has lived that long. That actually makes it very possible for Celestia, Luna, Twilight, Cadence, and Flurry Heart to all be still around somewhere. Cause I guess G5 just confirmed that alicorns are truly immortal in terms of dying from old age. Honestly, at this point I wonder if things are about to get crazy and it turns out the rest of the Mane 6 got to become Alicorns too and are hanging out in Skyros or whatever just for an excuse to return all the beloved characters to G5. It’d be an utterly stupid thing to do, but it almost feels like it isn’t impossible the way they’ve approached the connection between G4 and G5 so far.

It’s just… ugh, ridiculous. Opaline was ignored by Celestia and Luna as fillies and she waits like how ever many years before bringing Equestria down during TWILIGHT’S reign rather then while Celestia (The one she probably blames more for why she plotted to take magic away) wasruling. Like why? Why did she wait so damn long? Perhaps it’s another case of simply being sealed somewhere for a definite amount of time just like Luna on the moon for a thousand years for all we know. But right now the details are sparse about this and it’s never been said that Opaline got out of some sealed space like Limbo or Tartaurus

But what is perhaps the absolute worst crime of the image…

WHY IS YOUNG CELESTIA’S HAIR NOT PINK?! RUINED FOREVVVVVVVVVVVEEEEERRRRRRRRR! #NOTMYMLP

(I’m kidding by the way, that’s just nitpicking lol)

Regardless, while Chapter 4 of Make Your Mark has some pretty decent and cute moments. It might even be the best piece of G5 media ever since the movie came out. However, any connection they make with G4 continues to be a headache that adds more questions than answers. There has been nothing to really downplay the idea that it’d have been much better if they had made sure G5 was it’s own universe just like G1 and G3 are entirely different universes from G4.

Another worry I have about G5 is actually something that might be out of Hasbro’s control. Netflix has a tendency to cancel shows, even if they’re doing well. How much time does G5 have before Netflix decides it’s done? Supposedly Make Your Mark has 1 more special and probably another Chapter/Season to go. But I wonder if the team behind G5 are going to be under the possibility that this next batch of Make Your Mark could be the last one if Hasbro and/or Netflix decide they’re not renewing for another season. Granted, even Friendship is Magic had to deal with that possibility. As Magical Mystery Cure would have been the series finale had FiM not been as successful as it was to get renewed for Season 4 and so on. But that was a time where Hasbro still had been very profitable, where as lately there’s been reports of them possibly selling some of their properties, not to mention laying off employees. How much can G5 of MLP carry on under these circumstances? There’s even fears that My Little Pony as a whole may end altogether based on how bad Hasbro has fallen financially. I don’t know if it’s quite that bad for them. But I wonder if it really says something for the company now that it looks like it has clearly not captured the same lightning in a bottle that G4 did.

Now obviously, I’ve said before that even if G5 turned out to be amazing it’d still have a hard time living up to G4 just because the peaks FiM achieved are unsustainable. Part of the reason FIM was so successful was the surprise that an MLP show grew such a diverse audience in the first place. But now that MLP has attracted a larger amount of fans then expected, it just becomes… the status quo that there are people who you normally wouldn’t think be watching a show about cartoon ponies. It’s no longer a shock that a grown man is watching a show about ponies with G5, that was part of what made G4 successful. People wondering why adults of all ages were watching a show presumably for little girls, some of whom became fans of the shows themselves as their curiosity grew. G5 wasn’t going to be able to capture that feeling all over again as a grown man watching MLP is now old news. That’s why even if it was great, it’d have a hard time repeating what brought so many to G4. 

It’s even harder when… it just doesn’t feel like G5 stands out much in my opinion. The Mane 5 (Or well, new Mane 6 now after the end of this chapter. In fact Misty just may very well be G5’s best character) are all fine characters in their own right, but the Equestria in G5 seems… lifeless compared to the one in G4. They’re almost always in the same 3 locations that have been there since the movie. There’s no sense of real exploration and real fantasy like there was in G4. While most of FiM takes place in Ponyville there was still the very idea that Equestria is a wide map, with even locations that are only mentioned and not ever actually gone to. That was a disappointment before in G4 where we never got see like Saddle Arabia for instance. But we still got plenty of other areas throughout G4’s run besides Ponyville, Canterlot, and Cloudsdale. And that's also ignoring the fact that besides Sparky and the animals, we've really not seen any other species from G4 still. (The cliffhanger of Chapter 4 seems to imply more dragons are coming but... I wonder if it's too little, too late at this point)

It feels like for me, the only reason to keep watching G5 is to see how Misty’s story plays through. And whatever is going to be Opaline’s final comeuppance. (Granted her own idiocy seems to be a comeuppance for her every episode). Izzy can still be fun to watch too, but otherwise the only other interest in terms of tying things with G4 just often makes things worse as with the story about Opaline knowing Celestia and Luna when they were fillies. Perhaps I’m just overthinking things too much, and I’m sure some may just insult me by simply calling me a G4 purist. Call me one all you like if you want. But something about G5 has not left me as invested with the series as I was with Friendship is Magic. I’ve given it a chance to try to warm up on me over time. But not much is doing it for me right now. I’ll continue to watch to see how Make Your Mark proceeds, as I mentioned earlier the next set could even be the end of G5 since I’m very aware of how much Netflix has canned things early alongside with Hasbro facing financial problems. I won’t say if I have a solution for MLP’s future as I don’t think I have a real solid idea. Every possibility runs it’s own risk. Like if G5 is considered a failure, and Hasbro decides Gen 6 is basically a reboot of Gen 4 with the Mane 6 we knew and loved for one last attempt to keep the Gen 4 fans invested or just pulling the plug and letting Gen 6 be entirely new even at the risk that it interests almost nobody.

Maybe it’s not quite THAT bad for G5 as of yet as it’s still only a few years since it started and I apologize if it maybe I'm overreacting to a small scene. Maybe depending on how many views Chapter 4 of Make Your Mark gets we’ll soon get news if Make Your Mark has been green lighted for more past what we know is still coming. For now though, G5’s only added more questions then answers for me personally since the last time I talked about the link between it and G4. And it may be at a point where it’s just too late to fix anything. Perhaps it’d be a smarter move to just try to ignore any reference to G4, or just to try to consider it an AU future of G4. Because I still have the same conclusion I had whenI last covered the “Ancient Equestrian Elephant in the Room”, G5 has some fine characters and content on it’s own. But if you take it as a Friendship is Magic sequel, then it has many shortcomings that currently look like they just can’t try to fix without making things worse.

I wouldn’t fault the G5 staff if they decided that they want to try to ignore G4 altogether. But I feel like at this very moment, Hasbro execs are breathing down their throats, and telling them that they must write a way to say… fit in the return of Twilight Sparkle in G5. And the dread of what else they could fuck up about the connection between the two generations getting even worse as a result.

[quirkle2]

If you don’t mind tho, would you have any clue where I could ask about this talk of the LU fandom/Jojo going out of line? I’m oblivious to whatever happened and I’m curious

it's a bit of a complicated and long story, but some of it has to do with fans in general just being rly pissy about characterizations. i'm not pointing any fingers or listing any names bc it's not a One Person kinda problem, and some people don't even notice/see the issue and don't think it's an issue at all. in the grand scheme of things, this first issue isn't rly that big of a deal

(this might get long, and might bring up some anxieties for people, so this break is for anybody who wants to avoid mentions of fandom discourse, including past belittlement of furries, otherkin, and systems. stay safe)

reminder: this is just me clarifying info bc somebody asked! i am not trying to dredge up old mistakes

^ some of the things im talkin about are like . people babying wind. people turning wars into a comic-relief character that only knows how to creep girls out. people turning twilight into an emo cowboy that constantly cries about his girlfriend that's now in another realm or whatever. people simplifying wild into a crazy arsonist who doesn't seem to have a brain. people taking the "bitter" part of legend and exaggerating it So much that he's literally just an asshole to everybody all the time for NO reason other than that "he's the bitchy one"

personally this isn't nearly as annoying to me as some others find it. but i think the Bigger one, for me at least, is jojo herself

in this post, jojo makes fun of furries and otherkin, which i do not agree with. i don't have a problem w jojo not wanting twi to be "furry-like" but she drew the furry purposefully disgusting and stupid-looking to make fun of them. i don't know much about otherkin, but i know it's wrong to make fun of other people, especially when they aren't hurting anybody <3

and in this post, while explaining four's characterization in the comic, jojo put the word system in air quotes, as if to suggest there's something wrong with systems or that they don't exist or something. that stirred up quite a lot of suspicion and doubt in the fandom, and many systems obviously did not like that. i am not a system, so that's all i'll put here—a lot of systems posted their own takes on it when it happened

jojo has since edited both the tumblr post and the insta post to not have the word system in quotes. she explained herself and apologized here and here (this specific one is, i Believe, referring to past mistakes such as the ones above), but some people still are a bit iffy on that whole debacle (me included)

there might be more, but that's everything that i personally know of as to why the fandom has sorta gone bad. this next reason (sorta two reasons) is a personal thing and i don't rly hold it against jojo herself:

silly reason: i just like familial bonds and Close relationships in fiction, and lu does not cover that. they call each other "brother" from time to time but that's not enough dammit i want them to cuddle and i want time to be the father figure and i want them to live in a nice ranch house together happily ever after OKAY!!!! /silly

a more serious reason: linkshipping

i DO NOT agree with people belittling others for posting linkshipping, and this happens in lu All The Time and it's appalling. im not gonna get into the whole "but it's against her rules" thing bc i have some conflicted feelings abt that whole topic and this will get ridiculously long if i prattle abt that, but . people r getting bullied. people r getting singled out and Called Out and hated on and, in extreme cases, Driven Off The Platform bc they posted two silly little fictional men kissing. that's inexcusable to me

it's a bit more complicated than that, but i am of the simple opinion that u should Never police how other people have fun, and this is all fictional and we should redirect our collective hatred toward Real World Problems instead of wasting our time on arguing about whether or not these fictional elves should kiss <3

if i do make a new au and get away from this fandom, i hope to provide a safe space for Everybody, including linkshippers

[thevindicativevordan]

This might be a bit out of your wheelhouse, but you've spoken glowingly about Kenan before, and I wanted to hear some of your thoughts.

What do you think it would take for DC to give Kenan the spotlight again, either in the form of his own comic or a feature role in an animated series? And how much do you think the sociopolitical optics of China impact his editorial interest/popularity or lack thereof? If Kenan was, for instance, Korean instead (an East Asian country that is generally viewed more favorably by the American public than the Chinese), do you imagine he would have gained more traction and gotten more coverage considering his powerset is not generic Kryptonian? Or do you think the fact that as long as he's a 'foreign' character, he's forever doomed to take a backseat to Clark, Kara, Conner, and Jon who are built in the All-American mold?

Also, as an addendum, do you wish his appearances in more mainstream title (Action Comics, etc) would feature more of his mystical and yin & yang elements of his design? What kind of potential do you think those powers give him compared to the typical Kryptonian flying brick?

Actually have spent some time thinking about this! Short version: Yang was too good at his job.

Kenan is steeped in both Chinese mythology and modern Chinese culture. If you're not someone who has spent a lot time studying the present and past of China like Yang has, it's going to be tough to use Kenan to his full potential. Sure there's other appealing traits Kenan has that make him stand out, PKJ mentioned in an interview that one thing about Kenan which interested him is that unlike the rest of the Superfamily, Kenan starts off as an asshole. He doesn't intrinsically lean towards good, it's something he has to struggle with, and that appealed to PKJ because it was a trait he could hone in on and keep in mind when writing Superfamily interactions. For a team book that's enough to make Kenan stand out, but for a solo book? You need more than that.

Think of how Kenan struggles to be a hero because of how he's torn between his father's democratic ideals and his mother's loyalty to the CCP. He doesn't have an inbuilt love for democracy, what does democracy mean to a young Chinese man who is more concerned with money, women, or food? Asking those kinds of questions about protagonists who aren't from America leads to interesting stories. Or look at how Yang explored the concepts of Yin and Yang in New Super-Man, how he avoided going for simplifying them as good/bad. That's the kind of mistake that someone not knowledgeable about Chinese culture might have made.

Most Big 2 superheroes tend to be American because that's what most of the writers working for DC and Marvel are. If Kenan were Korean instead, I don't think he would have gotten more use, it's that he's not American that intimidates some writers. And there's also the problem of Kenan being a late addition to a franchise that DC typically has no clue what to do with. When you don't even know what to do with your lead character Clark, who is one of the top 3 most iconic superheroes of all time, and you can't seem to stop screwing up other long-time Family members like Kara or Kon, no surprise that DC didn't know how to handle the latest addition.

Plus they already decided that Jon was going to be their guy for 5G, so why waste time pushing Kenan? He wasn't getting a movie or a cartoon or an HBO MAX show. Plenty of other attempts at adding new Superfamily members had disappeared, some like Linda Danvers had much longer runs on solo titles. What's Kenan's measly 24 issues to Linda's 80? I'm glad he was spared that fate because damnit, he's a much more interesting character than Linda or Cir-El or Chris Kent or any of those other guys were. He should be getting adapted outside of comics. In the wake of Jon being completely wrecked, and Kon still a question mark, Kenan is the best "heir" to Superman.

For now I'm just happy to have Kenan in Action, cemented as part of the Superfamily. Would I like him to get more focus, to see greater exploration on how his powers differ from the Kents/Els? Absolutely. If Yang was up for it, I would love a backup from him that explores Kenan's power and relationships. PKJ is taking influence from manga for Clark's fight scenes, would be great to see some of that same influence applied to Kenan too. All kinds of cool ways that Kenan's qi manipulation powerset could be showcased, I mean c'mon the Dragon Ball route is patently obvious. Kenan as the Goku of the Superfamily is a low-hanging fruit but what the hell, I think it could be fun!

[emmettkane]

Okay, I watched Hellboy (2004). long post time. First off: context. I didn't read any of the Hellboy comics when they came out, as soon as they came out, because I wasn't alive in 1994, so I don't know what a fan of them might have thought of Guillermo Del Toro's take on it when the first live action Hellboy film released. Note, that was in 2004.

I enjoyed the tale in a very modern way: by reading pretty much all of it in a few months through the omnibus collections. That gave me a pretty clear idea of the direction of the story and the arcs of the characters, one that I'm honestly not sure that Mike Mignola had the luxury of, and it made watching that first film jarring in so many fun (see, terrible) ways.

I'm not going to jump out and say that it was bad, because I did have some amount of fun watching it, and I have nothing but respect for Guillermo.

It wasn't Hellboy though?

Okay, that's Mister Mignola's decision to make, (I know, i know, death of the artist or w/ever, but I respect the guy) but I had some serious grievances with the handling.

(If you're going to read further, keep in mind that the film was based off of The Seed of Destruction, which is the first of the four Hellboy Omnibuses)

Lets start with some critical differences 1. The nazis don't get off-screened in a b-plot due to infighting (which was critical to the comics) 2. Kroenen is just a ninja mummy now for some reason 3. WHO IS THIS WHITE GUY? WHY IS HE IN THE PLOT? (to give the audience a relatable character, in Hellboy. Yikes)

and to me, the gravest of sins: 4. Hellboy uses a gun.

Mind you The Samaritan is a radical firearm, but HB uses guns like, twice in the whole of the comics, and they blow up in his hands or otherwise fail him both times.

I could go on, about how they blew up the romance and made it central in a way that deeply detracted from Hellboy's original arc, about the addition of more generic agent characters, about not using any of the actual interesting locations from the comics and instead hosting the entire story in [LARGE CITY], USA.

I can tell you though, that after a little thought and research, all that probably came down to two things.

#1: Mike had been trying to turn Hellboy into a film for ages by this point, and people kept shooting him down (lots of reasons for that in 2004, I guess) and he probably just wanted to make it happen at that point

#2: And this is influenced by #1, but...filming restrictions. Hellboy using a gun reduced the amount of choreography work, filming in a single city reduced travel/FX budgets, having the nazis directly involved in the story shortened shooting times and simplified the overall plot. I get it. I think.

Okay, so, look. I don't know if any of that stuff makes it not-pretty-terrible anyway, but I think it's important to at least try to remember the environment people were in when they made whatever creative decisions they made. History is, if nothing else, fascinating to study. Anyway, even if I didn't enjoy the piece, I'm glad that I watched it. The real benefit to looking at "the classics" isn't to see something you'll love, but to know where the things you do love came from.

[fumblingmusings]

Hi, I'm also not the original asakiku anon, but regarding Japan and China fics, I recommend downloading the Asia edition of the following historical hetalia zine. The artists/writers are predominantly Asian and other POC. There’re multiple entries about Japan and China’s relationships with other Asians, listed chronologically below. A number explore Japanese imperialism really well too.

Zine link: hwsrazzledazzle(dot)itch(dot)io/hwsrazzledazzle02

versailles, 1919: comic touching on china and japan’s historical relationship and sino-japanese tensions after WWI.  

a bird’s eye view of the taiwan expo: art and fic exploring japanese colonialism in the 1930s, features taiwan, japan and south korea.

1942: japan focused-fic, character exploration about propaganda, nationalism and imperialism after the battle of midway.

wild: poem written from mongolia’s perspective in the 1960s but with references to china’s influence on her history.

the long spring: fic about china and manchuria/the qing dynasty. alternates between 1970s china and older flashbacks over the centuries.

letter from india to china: india reflecting on his relationship with china over the 20th century on the eve of the new millennium.

I encourage you and anyone else to also read the contributors' historical footnotes, to understand their characterization of Yao and Kiku and why it differs from how western fandom often overemphasizes them being soft, shy, cute, or emotionally-repressed/stunted next to more expressive white characters. I get that most ppl incl you aren’t ill-intentioned and are maybe thinking it makes Kiku (or Yao) endearing. But some tropes that are innocuous for white characters are condescending and inappropriate for fics where Yao and Kiku represent old nations. Because they stem from harmful, historical orientalist stereotypes that simplify, fetishize and infantilize east asians in very problematic ways to be love interests for white characters, and this was a distinct problem with how Kiku was depicted in SPE.

Additionally, intra-Asian relationships are important to providing more holistic characterization, because another issue is when i) historical hetalia fics make Japan or China disproportionately trusting or devoted to a white fave, while minimizing irl racism/imperialism they faced from said Western country in the interests of romance ii) while downplaying or omitting intra-Asian relationships that were in reality equally or far more important to Japan and China to center whiteness. As a Sino fan, I ship Asian+Western characters too (Eng/chu, Ame/pan), so I'm not against that. What I mean is being mindful, acknowledging unequal dynamics/grievances that did affect ties between that Asian and Western country as challenges the characters have to work through (or fail to do so, with consequences), and also visibly integrating Yao and Kiku's important relationships with other Asians into their characterization. Just as I’m sure few England fans would dispute France’s importance to England, even if Fruk isn’t their OTP, and would include him as a character in an England fic. I hope this all makes sense.

Thank you for the link and the additional context and explanation! It absolutely does make sense, thank you for taking the time to explain and send over, I really appreciate it.

[yibennianyaji]

Recent Comics: Why Don't You Love Me? by Paul B. Rainey

I've written before about the "it's really good" problem—how to review, and direct audiences towards, a work that is simply gangbusters on every level, and seems to offer no access point for the reviewer wishing to praise it. The ecstatic reviews that persuaded me to pick up a copy of Paul B. Rainey's graphic novel Why Don't You Love Me?—the first great 2023 publication I've read this year, and already very likely to make my list of the year's best books—seemed to uniformly suffer from a subset of this problem: how to praise something exceptional without saying too much about it? Guardian reviewer Rachel Cooke wondered: "Will readers stick with [Why Don't You Love Me?] long enough to reach the twist that makes the effort of reading its first half worthwhile? I can't be sure that everyone will – and yet, I must not spoil this twist, even in the cause of encouragement."

I demur a little from Cooke's concern. Why Don't You Love Me? has a tremendous—in both senses of the word—twist around its midpoint, which lands the book firmly in the realm of science fiction, and which I will do my best to avoid spoiling. But to me what makes the book remarkable is what comes both before and after this moment. It's clear almost from the first page that something more is going on here than initially appears. The pleasure of reading comes not only from figuring out what that something is, but, once you've done so, from gaining a new understanding of the path that led to that realization.

Right from the start, Why Don't You Love Me? sends mixed signals to readers about the kind of comic, and story, it is. The book is presented as a compilation of newspaper strips, originally published on Rainey's website, but hewing very closely to the rigid format of the mainstream funny pages. Each page has three rows of panels, with the top row made up of a large title panel followed by two potential throwaways, and two additional rows with an almost uniform box format. Each page describes a single vignette in the protagonists' lives, and culminates in a punchline. But the style of the art puts one more in mind of subversive, indie comics—thick black lines depicting simplified interior scenes, deliberately unpretty characters, and a lot of emphasis on the accouterments of vice like cigarettes, empty alcohol bottles, or distracting TV and computer screens. The punchlines are more often bleak or gross rather than funny.

Even this gesturing at a familiar style, however, obscures something entirely different. To begin with, Why Don't You Love Me? feels like yet another entry in the very well-populated subgenre of indie comics about how awful middle class suburban life is, and how the people who live that life are constantly seeking to fill the void in their souls with TV, substance abuse, and inappropriate sex. Our heroes are Mark and Claire, a suburban couple with two small children who seem to hate their lives and each other. Claire is barely functional, regularly drinking herself into a stupor and flying into a rage when asked to participate in the running of the household. Mark puts on a more normal front, but inwardly he's flailing, utterly at sea both at home and at work. Neither one seems particularly committed to their marriage vows—Mark flirts with a woman he meets on the long dog walks he takes to get away from his family, and Claire briefly emerges from her drunken haze and starts playing the role of a devoted parent when she meets the attractive father of one of her daughter's friends. Otherwise, the two are wildly neglectful parents, constantly shocked to realize that they're expected to keep their children fed, clean, and in school.

There's a similar move here to the one deployed so successfully in the first season of The Good Place, where behavior that would normally be horrifying and even criminal, such as Mark repeatedly forgetting his son's name or Claire sending her grade-school-aged children to the shop to buy alcohol and cigarettes, is normalized because it's assumed to fall within the tropes of a comedic format. But right from the start, Rainey establishes that this isn't entirely what's going on. "Christ! Do you mean all this might be real?" Claire asks Mark in the book's first page, and very quickly it becomes clear that the two aren't simply forgetful or neglectful, but genuinely ignorant. Mark has no idea how to do his job as a website designer and keeps complaining that he's actually a barber. Claire doesn't remember her friends' names and remarks to her mother that she'd hoped her deceased father would be alive. It very quickly becomes obvious that the reason the two are so incapable of functioning as a couple isn't that they're estranged, but actual strangers.

Beyond this general impression, there aren't a lot of hints in this part of the book as to what might actually be happening. Which, we eventually realize, puts us in a similar headspace to Mark and Claire, who have experienced some sort of rupture that they are at a loss to even define, much less explain. Even the major twist at the book's midpoint doesn't really answer our questions. It is, however, a jumping-off point to a careful working out of the book's premise that takes up much of its latter half. Eventually, Rainey reveals a thought-out, shocking SFnal McGuffin which is both enormously satisfying when you finally understand it, and gobsmacking when you realize what it spells out for our heroes. (It also makes Why Don't You Love Me? a pleasure to reread, as certain implications that are never spelled out become clearer on a second pass.)

Still, what's most interesting about this part of the book is the way it makes you reevaluate what came before, seeing it not as a gag about marital dissatisfaction, but as an extreme trauma response. In the second half of the book, the circumstances of Mark and Claire's lives change dramatically, giving them space to not only understand what has happened to them, but to grapple with how they behaved in the initial shock of their lives being so thoroughly disrupted. Not all of these stories are particularly dramatic. Claire gets a rather satisfying storyline about learning to stand up to an abusive boss, while Mark debates between the old dreams of his teenage years, and new dreams triggered by his recent experiences. Eventually, they reconnect and are able to forge a new, more honest relationship—one that is completely unromantic, but also the most meaningful bond they have in their lives.

One possible reading of Why Don't You Love Me? is as a metaphor for how depression and mental illness can render us strangers in our own lives, and how in their aftermath we may find ourselves struggling to make amends to the people we failed while in their grip. I think there's a lot of truth to this reading, which gets at at least some of what Rainey is trying to do. But to me, the SFnal component of the book is not merely an allegory, but fundamental to its story, which is about how people cope with having been roped into a science fiction narrative, and how they respond to their own response.

Mark and Claire have both experienced something otherworldly, and this causes them to reevaluate not just their lives, but how they want to live in the future, even under the threat of more SFnal shenanigans. Much of the couple's emotional grappling in the book's second half is about understanding why they treated each other so badly in its first, and in particular, acknowledging how they mistreated their children. It's impossible to say more without really venturing into spoiler territory, but what Why Don't You Love Me? becomes by its end is a deeply compassionate story about ordinary people learning to cope with the unimaginable, finding solace in the most unexpected of places, and figuring out how, even in the face of complete upheaval, to keep going.

[sapphiresonstrings]

Yes, the designs are both boring as hell. What is the deal with faux-medieval settings and giving every character brown clothes? Do these artists believe that colours were invented in the 1900's?

Also the hooded cloak is a lot of detail that would take time (and therefore money) to draw over and over again in comic panels. That's not even mentioning the belt pouch, dagger, and so on. It's interesting that the skimpification of the outfit is remarked upon when all that was done was to move a few lines around (her clothes were already skintight and there are few details on the lost fabric of the shirt or her skin, so without color they're identical), whereas the much larger structural changes go without comment.

I can easily imagine a guy in an office somewhere who was given the originals and told "Make a few small changes so this costs less and earns more money".

I can easily imagine that guy going: "OK, basic editing pass. I'll just simplify out all these unnecessary details, give her a bigger head, and give her a sexy outfit to put front and center on the cover so that our target audience of 13-year-old boys will pick this up in the comic book store. Boom, doubled our profit margin right there. That's why they pay me the big bucks."

And that guy would be 100% correct. It would earn more money that way. And as long as that is true, it's futile to bemoan the changes that guy will inevitably make. If you aren't the one buying the comic books, then corporations won't design them to appeal to you. They'll design them to appeal to whoever is going to buy them.

My friend showed me this and I think it's a fascinating example of something some artists have told me on this blog in the past, which is that the weird poses/outfits/sexiness in a lot of commercial stuff are often changes (sometimes requested from higher-ups) from more interesting original designs.

Here, we can see what Linsara originally looked like and what the final "sexy'd up" version looks like. Not only did her top get a lot smaller but her design got a lot more generic imo because I think the hooded cloak and her pose adds a lot to her visual characterization.

From the first page, if you can't read it: "This is the original design for Linsara. Typical thief wardrobe that was later "sexy'd up" for the comic book by showing off more midriff."

(Pages from Tales of the Realm #5, CrossGen Comics)

Originally posted at EscherGirls.com

[orderforbrian]

ouuugghhh this comic is OLD but it's still one of my favorites 💖 i made rough blocks when the liveshow came out because jon and martin's meet cute/ugly is SO in character and so wonderfully funny

[Start ID: A two page comic of Jon and Elias from the Magnus Archives with Martin as a side character. Jon is a Persian man with short, dark curly hair and rectangular glasses. There are streaks of grey in his hair and eyebrows. He is wearing a green jacket with a grey sweatervest, white dress shirt, and green tie. Elias is a tan white man with slicked back brown hair, there are streaks of grey in his hair. He is wearing an expensive looking blue suit jacket, vest, dress shirt, and tie. He is also wearing long gold earrings in the shape of a closed eye. Martin is a mixed Polish/Korean man with dark wavy hair and glasses, and a beauty mark on his left chin.

1st panel: Jon slams open the door to Elias' office, looking the picture of rage. He is gripping a piece of paper angrily in one hand. A thought bubble shows a meme image of Spongebob choking Mr. Krabs from the series Spongebob. Elias appears unfazed by the interruption and greets Jon, "Oh! Hello, Archivist. I was wondering when you would finally catch me at my desk, haha."

2nd panel: Off panel, Elias asks "How was your first day?". Jon pushes up his glasses, gripping the paper even tighter and responds, "Undoubtedly horrendous".

3rd panel: Elias gives him an apologetic smile with his hands folded in front of his chest. He says, "Oh dear, that dreadful? Apologies you had to endure such unanticipated distress. What exactly happened to cause this reaction?". There is an arrow pointing to Elias that says "As if he didn't spend relish in every chaotic second".

4th panel: Jon begins to list things off, pointing to each finger as he does. Elias responds intermittently to these.

"Well, to start, the Archives is an ungodly mess. It's going to take ages before it gets sorted out. Why you didn't fire Gertrude is beyond me."

"Mm."

"None of the statements are compatible with modern technology so we've had to resort to using archaic tape recorders."

"Oh."

"And-"

"Oh, there's more."

5th panel: Jon tightens his fists in rage, gradually yelling, "I spent a large portion of my already stressful workday chasing after a bloody dog that your library transfer let loose into the Archives!"

6th: Jon begins to rant, shaking one hand back and forth in frustration. "Why is he there? What qualifications does he have? And absolutely what right? He's from Library, why do we need Library in the Archive staff, much more why him specifically? I requested Tim and Sasha who are far more competent than that - that bumbling idiot! Mr. Bouchard, I'd hate to overstep my boundaries but I really must say this was an unwise decision-". Elias cuts him off, a dialogue bubble with a simplified person smiling. "Oh dear - Archivist..."

Next page

1st panel: Elias gives Jon another apologetic smile. "I sent someone from Library because the Archives desperately needs someone skilled in cataloging. And, evidently, he has a Masters in parapsychology so give him time to prove himself a necessary addition to your assistant team."

2nd panel: Jon appears disgruntled and crosses his arms, grumbling, "Mmn. Well, he has quite a lot to prove after today...Apologies for doubting your decision, but if he continues to hinder our progress I will make my objections very clear." Elias says off panel, "I believe that's a fair compromise. Well, apologies again. As always, I'm open to feedback."

3rd panel: Elias continues off panel. "I'm a bit surprised though...". Jon looks up with wide eyes, a bead of sweat on his face. "Huh?". Elias continues, "You didn't find him the least bit charming? I thought he was rather amused the day of his interview, haha."

4th panel: Jon pushes up his glasses, attempting to hide a blush, and says, "A-as of my current opinion, no. I did not find his ineptitude charming if you'd kindly, Mr. Bouchard."

5th panel: Elias says off panel with a simplified smiling face, "Well, I do hope you all get along soon enough...". Jon presses the paper in his hand to his chin, looking off to the side. He appears disgruntled and is blushing too. Thought bubbles of Martin surround him. One is Martin appearing flustered, his eyes appearing as swirls within his glasses. Another is Martin hovering over Jon, asking if he is okay. Another is Martin looking up with a hand to his chin, stating "I mean...yeah, probably!". The last is Martin holding his glasses and giving a flustered smile, saying "Haha, s-sorry!". Jon thinks to himself, "Hrmm...He might be cute, but he's a complete airhead! Ugh. Hopefully today was just a singular incident."

End ID.]

[vermutandherring]

Warning: This article contains descriptions of death and images of blood.

The first part of the review: ORIGINS The second part of the review: THE PLOT

There are small spoilers that do not reveal the plot of the game, but only separately highlight certain moments in the game.

In my opinion, of all the arts, theater holds on to its academic base the strongest. We see a lot of bad painting, just as much sculpture, listen to even more bad music. But I have never seen a bad performance. Being completely honest, I visited only world classics. But agree: in order for the work to evoke emotions, it must be correctly played by modern actors. Sitting in the front row of Vampyr, I had a strange feeling from the first minutes. This state, as if everything is fine, but you do not feel completely satisfied with what you see. It was clear that the game was trying to be poetic. Jonathan's dramatic speech and the visual scene of his transformation into a vampire are reminiscent of a poem. Laconic but eloquent form, good means of expression and incredible power of the actor's voice. I love lyrics. But at the beginning of the scene I feel awkward. After playing the game, when I was making screenshots for my reviews, I started the game over. The second time, I no longer had this feeling of mild-cringe. I think the biggest reason for that was the visual part - animated cutscenes, to be more precise. Why was such a strange style chosen to tell certain moments of the story? Perhaps the experience of working on the previous project of the Life is Strange developers with a more stylized design showed itself here. It also obviously simplifies the production process and reduces production costs and time. But I didn't like this modernization of the vampire story, because it looks more like raw sketches.

At one time, I was impressed by the way of storytelling in Yakuza. Periodically, we see shots in which the characters are static, but not completely frozen. We hear them talking, but their mouths don't move. Only text and visual 'graphic' effects. In fact, this is a method borrowed from comics or manga, if we are talking about a Japanese game. Yakuza isn't the only game to use this technique though (Bayonetta seems to have a similar tool). But it looks quite organic in a bunch with realistic graphics, unlike Vampyr. Here, these static frames are replaced by artworks. I am not saying that they are bad. They just stand out from the general atmosphere for me.

Oh, what an atmosphere! The smell of baked blood and dry half-decomposed bodies, the suffocating ash of burnt flesh and the crunch of bare bones. What a strange place to be born again! Thirst. Thirst torments all of us from the first seconds of birth. It is so insatiable that it blinds your eyes. And like a blind kitten, overcoming terror, he goes to its call to take a sip that will bring the desired comfort. But no. His soul will not rest. Pain and anger, guilt and despair of loss - this is what brings with it the long-awaited quenching of thirst. This is the price of being a vampire. And now we have to guide our hero along this path.

I like the beginning of the story. It resembles a climax taken from Shakespeare. In Jonathan's life journey, the role change was indeed a turning point. In the past - a brilliant doctor who once saved lives with his reinvention of blood transfusion. And now - a cursed creature that has to drink blood to save its own life. The creator of our main character claims that death is not God's punishment, but a gift. If so, why from the first minutes we appear in all the tragic before our new gift? God level drama. But Jonathan does not believe in divine providence, he relies on his own mind and believes in the power of science. Because at the moment when humanity raised its hands in supplicating prayer to God, religion betrayed them, leaving them in the vortex of voracious disease.

The game continues to use the game space as a theater stage in cutscenes. The characters are emotional, their speeches are full of drama and have well-accented intonations, complemented by an accent. The figures are arranged in the frame as if in a well-organized performance, and the angles create the impression that we are really in the first row of the parterre. The same feeling is observed in the usual dialogues with the characters, when the camera is directed from behind Jonathan's back to the interlocutor, as if we are watching the action. This fourth wall is broken by the game itself in the section where you enter directly into the theater. Your fight with the boss and the conversation take place on the theater stage, among the red curtains and the remains of the velvet decoration.

I think that when starting to write a story, we all at some point have the desire to choose a distant era, filled with the rumble of carriages and the rustle of long hems. For vampire works, England of the 19th and 20th centuries is generally like a forbidden fruit - you really want to touch it. Dark streets, cold brick of Gothic cathedrals and the Thames bathed in moonlight. England is such an obvious place for the development of your good story that at one time the developers of the game Sherlock Holmes: Chapter One transferred Sherlock Holmes, the most English character, from the streets of his native London to a fictional island called Cordona. It was a very good move, I must say.

But Vampyr does not need to resort to such tricks. The entourage of London drowned in chaos suits the story and is its addition, not just a pretty background. By 'pretty' I mean well-executed, atmospheric enough to immerse yourself in the game, and with good, intuitive level design. Because 'beauty' is not the word that can be applied to this nocturnal horror of dirty streets and ragged houses that create a miserable appearance. Quarantine reminders and posters with calls to join the army are hung on the walls and doors, littered with junk. I'm sure Jonathan had wild flashbacks every time I stopped to read them. In short, I like the forlorn look of Greater London with its gloomy silhouettes of houses against the night sky.

You can even see the silhouette of Tower Bridge

Again, returning to the visual component. I don't know how authentic the developers tried to make them. But like the inserts in the cutscenes, they stand out from the general context, seeming too modern for the beginning of the 20th century. In my article about how games introduced me to art, I mentioned a few words about the paintings in Lady Ashbury's castle. In one of the conversations with Jonathan, not wanting to fully reveal her age, she says that she can be found on the canvases of great masters. In particular, these are Vincent Van Gogh and Jan Vermeer. I don't know whether it was by chance or specifically that the artist logically included the works in-between the works of these artists. For example, we know that Vermeer, the master of the genre scenes, painted only one portrait in his entire life - Girl with a Pearl Earring. Let's not talk about all the theories of creation, because in this context it is not important. The date of creation is important - 1665 - 1667, the late period of artist's creativity. Vermeer's portrait of Elizabeth was painted in 1666, that is, in the same time period. The picture in the game is written in a free manner. The image has the appearance of a sketch and tends more towards DaVinci's sfumato technique, besides, it has a strange and uncomfortable perspective. It is very surprising for a representative of Dutch painting, whose artists have always been famous for canvases written to the smallest detail. At that time, the public simply would not have understood a work in such a technique. This is exactly what happened to Rembrandt, who, due to his new painting style, was left without clients, poor and forgotten at the end of his life.

I forgot to take a screenshot of Van Gogh's work. I think the website where I found this picture made a mistake in the date, because the year 1666 is also indicated there. With regard to the painting technique, here we also see only an imitation of the form with a complete disregard for the content.

The same applies to the work in which Lady Ashbury is depicted with her lover Lord J. Blackwood. You won't see this type of portrait on 18th century canvases, where a full-length couple is walking against a blank wall. I don't see the slightest need for Elizabeth to be portrayed by famous artists. In the same article about art in games, I gave an example of games that successfully quote art or individual works. Vampyr's attempt to do this feels misguided. These works do not have any symbolism, do not fit with the plot and are carelessly made. I see only one benefit from them - they emphasize that Lady Ashbury is a typical Mary Sue.

Elizabeth is perfect from start to finish: a mysterious red-haired vampire who captivates the main character immediately after several meetings. She is so ancient and, moreover, incredibly charming that she's on the canvases of great masters (unexpectedly). She is noble and rich, has a talent for painting, restrains her thirst (because she is not some vampire, but a proud ekon), and is also important to the plot. But if she were a person in another work under different conditions, her role in the plot and influence on it would not change at all. Because her character does not move the plot in any way, and is practically not revealed during it. However, if Lady Ashbury has any virtues that are completely irrelevant to the story, the game will let you know about it. At some point, she simply becomes the central protagonist, around whom everything revolves, like the Sun revolves around the Earth in the heretic's imagination.

Jonathan has no reason to have feelings for her, and their romance has no reason to exist. This relationship between the mentor and the student does not develop in any way, does not undergo significant tests that could bring the characters closer. Her image generally resonates with a bunch of heroines in novels of the 19th century, where the characters are beautiful only for some imaginary purity, care, fragility and masculine determination, 'uncharacteristic of the feminine'. The two-day marathon of Dracula reminded me again why I no longer touch fiction unnecessarily. Endless descriptions of heavy sighs, exhausted faces of ladies, their awe-inspiring looks, gentle voices, easy naivety and wisdom. They do absolutely nothing, but only need male guardianship, in order to eventually reach the hero as the main prize for all his suffering. Take away Lady Ashbury's fangs and her title, and she's no different from Mina Harker.

I like absolutely every female character more than the charming vampire Lady Ashbury, about whom everyone speaks with such piety that I want to shrink away from all that with a crucifix. While browsing the Internet, I came across a comment that Lady Ashbury has that same vampiric charm that makes you immediately fall in love with a heroine who doesn't put any effort into it. Vampire charm is a concoction of modern pop culture that romanticizes ancient sponger pests. I don't see any sense in this, because instead of a complex personality, we get an absolutely flat image of a beautiful lover who can live forever at the pleasure of its beloved. In Le Fanu and Stoker, this 'charm' is the embodiment of sin, everything carnal, forbidden by religion and modern morality. That is why Carmilla and the transformed Lucy captivate others without making an effort. Because they are the personification of lust, living human passion and desire. Lady Ashbury is just a log against their background.

Nevertheless, I cannot say unequivocally that Lady Ashbery is a spoonful of tar in this beautiful story. At some points, the game finds justification for her virtues, her penchant for charity and painting. But it happens too late. The end of the story, which finally reveals Lady Ashbery, does not impress and does not make (at least personally) sympathize with her and her fate. In the whole situation, her father seems more of a victim than his long-suffering daughter. This remorse, this wringing of hands and dramatic speeches about one's own guilt… All this tired me even when I read Dracula and once again related Ashbery to Harker for me. Although Mina's help in the development of the plot is still incomparably greater than the fluttering of Elizabeth's soul.

Against the background of the gray figure of Lady Ashbury, the character of Mary is much more interesting and meaningful. The first minutes of the game, so sorrowful and filled with regret, stretch for us for the first couple of chapters, and for Jonathan - for the rest of his existence. She reminded me of my own thoughts when I tried to imagine what it would be like to live forever. When the terrible pain of losing the closest people remains with you until the end of time. When you constantly accumulate past mistakes that can neither be corrected nor forgotten. How memories of the betrayal of a loved one eat away the remnants of common sense, turning you into a monster. Mary's story arc is interesting, it really is imbued with that gothic and mysterious flair found in the works of Le Fanu and Stoker. The tragic nature of her image raises a natural question: is eternal life really better than one-time death? Is it worth going through hell again and again, or is it better to end the torment instantly? I cannot despise her even after what she has done, because we all want inner peace. But in Vampyr you have to pay dearly for this peace.

And while Mary's character is great in that respect, her reveal also makes me a little sad. Everything happens too quickly, too hastily, pulling on some dubious motives. Mary throws her motives in our faces in an instant, and instead of being pleasantly enlightened by the truth after a long investigation, all I can say is 'Oh. Wow… Poor thing'. Unlike the rest of the main characters, you don't get to decide what Jonathan should do with his sister. And maybe it's for the best. As I already noted in the first part of the review, in those cases where you have a choice, you want to do the most 'right' thing without hurting anyone. And often you only do worse, being burned by your own desire to do justice. Mary still deserved mercy, no matter how cruel it was. After all, as Dr. Van Helsing said, "But if the most blessed of all, when this now UnDead be made to rest as true dead, then the soul of the poor lady … shall again be free. Instead of working wickedness by night and growing more debased in the assimilation of it by day, she shall take her place with the other Angels".

It would be possible to talk a little more about other key characters, talk about side characters, complain about the monotonous design of buildings and premises. But I advise you to try it yourself and form a personal impression of this wonderful game, despite all its flaws. I can also mention the music separately. I know absolutely nothing about music. But an ordinary player does not need it. After all, a well-made work can evoke clear and understandable emotions subconsciously. The compositions perfectly support the general tone of the game, emphasize the right moments and set their own intonations. The deep sound of the cello sings in unison with the gloomy atmosphere and mood of the characters. Modern notes are also heard in the compositions. But unlike drawn inserts, they do not spoil the work, but really modernize the story.

That concludes the Vampyr review. It was very exhausting and I'm not sure I'll ever do such a detailed review of a game like I'm writing a research paper. And although a lot was left out (for example, the sources of inspiration of the developers), I covered all the aspects that I wanted to. I may still do a review on Vampire The Masquerade, but it won't happen anytime soon.