do people have less respect for prop comics or mimes?
815563
mimes, there have been no incredibly successful mimes but people can at least name a prop comic like Gallagher.
255168
Oh wow, what a really cool question! As far as comic hero stories, "Commies"  became the de facto government-approved baddies of the post-WWII era, what with the beginning of the cold war and everything, so McCarthyism probably just reinforced that dynamic. Now, the impact on the REAL world was much more interesting (and lamentable). As we all know, the 50's was a pretty lousy and repressive time, and in every repressive era there are always stringent calls for "decency." Remember, McCarthy was given a forum for his insanity under the pretext that he was,after all, protecting "decent" Americans from subversive pinko scum, and this attitude washed over into comics, manifest in the figure of a strange man by the name of Frederick Wertham - a psychologist who wrote a funny little book called "Seduction of the Innocent." read about it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_Wertham\nThat article talks about the "Comics Code," a voluntary censuring that the comic book industry adopted in order to escape being villanized as "indecent" in a time where that adjective was akin to "un-American." Many comic book fans, myself included, still roil over the lost potential that came about as a result of the "code," most notably the demise EC comics, who arguably put out the most well-written and certainly the most well-drawn material of the time - actually, a lot of that stuff still looks good by today's standards. So yeah, I think McCarthyism, with all the Senate hearings and fear-mongering, DEFINITELY contributed to comics getting the shaft by this Wertham fellow. Read the article, I think you'll be glad you did!
478937
I'm sure it's difficult for some of them. But these people are actors, and it's their job to pretend they're something they're not. Some may agree with the messages of the movies and others might not. I guess it really depends on who you're talking about.
775508
It's funny you bring this up because some co-workers and I were discussing should they make the Simpsons live action like they already done with many comic book characters.\n\nAnd my arguement was abso-f*cking-lutely NOT!\n\nThe reason, there are some things that the cartoon can get away with that if you were to do it live action would just come off looking REALLY really stupid and ridiculous.\n\nThat's why the Incredibles gets a lot of props from me because they decided to go full CGI instead of doing like those horrible X-Men movies and others that try and fail miserably to bring these characters to life.\n\nKeep them animated.
201794
omigod ur sooo write!lol\nbut unfortunatly those guys can be drawn and made to perfaction. in other words THEIR NOT REAL!!! disapointing i know but hey.
604027
I think all movies offend some people.  Should it be a religion, a race, an age or a size, or a location.  Whatever it is people can always find a reason to be offended.  Nonetheless we got to be able to handle it like entertainment, not like your bible.  Maybe it's the large voice the christian church is that gives them the ability to create a raucous like that.  But I think they are abusing their power.  Separation of church and theater, please!
158156
yes they aren't funny at all.\nit seems the only reason af publishing them, is this situation:\n\nhere they are:\nhttp://www.di2.nu/files/Muhammed_Cartoons_Jyllands_Posten.html
204934
Some would say that art merely imitates life, however, it also influences life. So I guess there's a circle of influence and portrayal. Don't you agree?
968301
Yes, I completely agree.  While many present-day comics are entertaining on the SURFACE, they're nowhere near the level of the legends from the past.  I'm no prude, but I get tired of obnoxious 20-something-year-old comedians prancing around on Comedy Central amid a virtual cloud of profanities, as if they thought "talent" was measured by how loud you can be and how many swear words you can use in one minute.  And furthermore, it seems these days that if you're a famous comic, you can do just about anything and the chorus of pancake-faced audience members will just applaud like morons no matter what.  Have you seen "Saturday Night Live" lately?  It's not even funny, but the people tune in to see their favorite stars anyway.\n\nWhile it may sound presumptuous, I feel that standup comedy is dying, or at least for me it is.  These days I find the majority of my entertainment in books, Internet, radio programs, and a select group of TV shows like "The Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson" and "The Office."  Comedy needs to get its act together.
860390
yes, there were a couple of things I thought were inappropriate in there.  It's sad that PG movies aren't what they used to be.  My daughter doesn't watch anything except for PBS cartoons so she hopefully doesnt understand the hidden meaning behind these things.\n\nYes, they do try and win adults...it's their way of getting us to the theater!
435652
Most of them actually. Talent has become secondary to image. It's about the sell out instead of the quality. How sad.
281876
Some people are under the (incorrect) belief that comics are for kids. The stories are far more deep than most people understand without having read them.
928289
I personally don't want to meet actors or actresses or musicians/singers that I admire.  I'm afraid that if I met them and they turned out to be not nice people, it would spoil my enjoyment of their work.  Every time I saw them in a movie or TV show or heard their music, I'd be thinking of them, not enjoying their work.  \n\nThat's one reason I don't get the way some people are so rabid to meet actors or actresses or musicians or whatever.  If they do work you enjoy and appreciate, why take the chance of spoiling that by meeting them?
138390
Sure they do.  There is a difference between a "screen" personality and one's private life. One is for the camera & publicity--because it elicits interest.  That doesn't mean that actors really live like their "screen images".
714013
I bet it's about 50/50.\n\nHalf the people thinking they make a hot cartoon version of themselves and the other half making an avatar in a fantasy version of themselves.
1146740
I think there needs to be a distinction made here between "Comic Book" movies and "Super Hero" movies.  Sin City, Ghost World, 300 (in production), A history of Violence (I know there are many I left out) are all good movies culled from comic books that do not involve super heroes.\n\nIf the filmakers stick with and properly utilize the source material there are plenty of good stories in either category to keep it going for a long time.  And why not.  It is about time comics were recognized for their literary and cultural contributions.  But Hollywood does have a tendency to take great ideas and dumb them down to affect a greater mass appeal.  It is up to the public paying to see these films to control this downward spiral.
290765
There is a number of reasons why the 90's have such a bad rap.\n\nThen came a certain artist named Rob Liefeld. He was barely out of high school, no art training, (barely any skill) and there he was, drawing the New Mutants. He drew huge superhero guys with enormous muscles, "hot sexy babes," barely any background, "dynamic poses," lots of action, splash pages and giganormous guns. His stuff was just very different from the traditional Jack Kirbiest style. For some reason that still eludes me, it stuck a cord with the fans and his stuff became inmensely popular. Then along came other "sensational" artist stars, such as Jim Lee, Mark Silvestri, Erik Larsen, Jim Valentino and Todd McFarlane. All distinguished by sexy babes, bulky guys, dynamic poses, splash pages... but their stuff was very unpolished and amateurish, lots of anatomy errors and weird composition. The fans loved the art so much, the house became more and more focused on the art, and the story (which had been declining in quality for some time as it was) got shunt to the background. People wanted shock and action, and storytelling was almost forgotten. \n\nSoon Marvel gave much more importance to its superstar artists, they started to give them plotting and writting priviledges as well. This was clearly a mistake, because these were mostly young people with no storytelling experience... or skill! This was the time were X-Force and the new X-Men series were launched, selling literally millions of copies. \n\nAlso, in the late 80's the first inter-house cross-overs were created. Crisis on Infinite Earths (DC) and Secret Wars (Marvel) were a huge success. So both companies started doing cross-overs like crazy. Again, it was all about the hype and sales, the stories themselves were usually jumbled and pointless, just an excuse to have a bunch of characters jumping around. Lots of people who just didn't have enough skill got involved in the creation of comics.\n\nAdditionally, 1991-1995 was witness to the boom and decline of comics. Around that time, the distributors made it quite easy for someone to open a comic shop. Also, collectors were starting to realize how old key comics from the 30's-60's were quite hard to find in good condition, and the prices of these comics went up to thousands of dollars. So people discovered: comics can be worth money. People would buy new comics 10 and 50 copies at the time. Shops would order hundreds of comics. A new company, founded by the Marvel superstar artists, called Image was founded, as well as Valiant and other independent publisher. Everyone thought all the new comics coming out would be gold. But soon people realized that their "investments" were printed in the hundreds of thousands, and they were so common, they couldn't even sell them for half cover price! Suddenly shops were stuck with tons of unsold copies, and most went  quickly out of business.\n\nComics just went through a rough time. Marvel made a lot of bad moves, but they drove the market at the time and whatever they did, DC copied. Marvel went throught a lot of ownership changes, each trying to make a quick buck and not worry about the product itself. Thus came hologram, foil, glow in the dark, bagged, fancy covers, because fans dug them and bought the comic... but the inside was never something to write home about. Lots of crappy new series were started to have volume and increase sales... bunch of them aren't worth the paper they are printed in today.\n\nAnother terrible decision by Marvel was to do its own distribution. Comics are usually distributed by a third party distributor. Marvel decided to conduct its own distribution duties, and it was disastrous. First of all, they couldn't handled it and comics started to arrive late. Then, the other distributors were so affected (they had just lost the business of distributing half of their product, which was Marvel), they folded one by one, unt