What's your take on having novelists jump aboard comic writing?

>>87410505
It draws in people who don't read comics but like the works of the author in question.

>>87410505
R.L. Stile is a "manufacturing" writer, who pick ideas that were already used in twilight zone episodes and cheap horror movies, than he uses the formula that created Creepypasta and is used since Lovecraft shorts.

"Kid finds thing, Thing goes apeshit, everything comes back to normal, PLOT TWIST Just kiding, everything is still fucked"

And like the Sherlock Holmes/Arsene lupin/ Agata Christ formula got to Batman and Detective comics. (Go to place, find silly clues, go to the villain, explaim clues? Lovecraft shorts formula got to early Horror Comics.

So yeah! Hacks can do what other hacks do

>>87410505
I see he still has that gross looking mole on his forehead.

File: gaston.jpg (89KB, 600x429px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 600x429px

>>87410505
>>87410538
>>87410797
Give the old bastard some credit. He's in his 70s and has hundreds of millions of dollars, he doesn't write because he has to, he does it because he wants to, so clearly this is something he thinks he'll enjoy.

Now, his comic will probably be hacky and juvenile, but you know what? It probably won't be as bad as Bendis, so I've got more important things to bitch about.

>>87410538
basically this

>>87410878
>>87410878
>Now, his comic will probably be hacky and juvenile

So like 95% of comics then?

Jonathan Lethem did a good job on Omega the Unknown.
>>87410505
>Is the the pool for new talents from the new generation of comic enthusiasts who wants to be in the industry that low and incompetent that they have to resort to established names from another medium?
No and novelists usually comics for fun/as an experiment.

Get Stephen King.
Now that's a trainwreck I would love to see.

>>87410505

The people in the so-called talent pool are way more ambivalent to working for the Big 2 than they once were. They're very aware of the horror stories of dealing with editorial and creators rights. Those people would rather make money telling stories in other mediums and creating comics on the side. There's a reason why Ellis only writes 5-6 issues at a time for Marvel.

>>87410505
>not mentioning Chelsea Cain and Margaret Stohl

>>87410949
>I haven't read American Vampire and am so out of touch with comics I don't even know what it is! But let me speak condescendingly anyway.

>>87410966
American Vampire is shit, like everything King and Snyder ever wrote.
The fact that you think it's good only shows how shitty horror comics are.

>>87410949
Stephen King has written some pretty awesome comics. His son, who's also a novelist, has as well.

>>87410505
>What's your take on having novelists jump aboard comic writing?

I rather have TV writers or screenwriters try comics. It'll be a lot easier to adapt to the style. And most of the adjustment will probably be researching on the characters and universe.

>>87410966
>>87410995
It blows my mind how few comics fans read anything else, even popular novels.

>>87410949

>le Stephen King is a complete Hack meme

He's gone downhill in later years but he's a better writer than anybody at Marvel and DC right now

>>87410878
>This comic will be shit but at least it won't be an even bigger pile of shit
Marvel apologists. When will they learn?

>>87410995
>has written some pretty awesome comics
Get some fucking standards, please. Trash like Dark Tower doesn't even deserve to exist.

>>87410989
>Batfags still bitter

Fuck off and read the swamp thing run

>>87411051
>b-but he's a pile of shit that stinks less
And he never "went downhill".
He was always terrible.

>>87410964
I can't wait to see another trainwreck Captain Marvel under Stohl. I wonder how this whole Cain-Mockingbird fiasco affects her and Marvel in terms of editing and handing off established characters to noncomic writers who does not reasearch.

>>87411063
>thinking I care about Batman
Fuck off and read actual horror literature and not washed-up uncreative idiot hacks.
>non-Moore Swamp Thing
>worth reading
You're not helping your case.

When's DC going to give China Miéville a new project?

>>87410505
>R.L. Stein

inb4 a vampire story about a young boy who hunts vampires but was really the vampire all along.
And then everyone turns around and have eyes and a mouth in the back of their heads, and a mask comes to life when it's put on a puppet or some shit.

>>87411146
God, I wish /pol/ had never been made.

>>87410878
>Now, his comic will probably be like a comic

Fify.

>>87410505
I dunno, if it was someone that failed at being a book author I'd say they're falling back on a back up plan. But Stine can live off of royalties from reprintings alone. Maybe the old guy just thinks it'll be a nice change of pace for him.

>>87411010
>most of the adjustment will probably be researching on the characters and universe.

Or they could just do it like the writers at the big two now and do no research at all.

>>87411233
>big two now and do no research at al
> big two
> DC and Marvel
> pulling DC into Marvel's shitstorm of non existent editors

at least DC tries and attempts

>>87411051
This is what King has come down to. Genre fiction writers are the same as capeshit writers anyway.

>>87411160

And then everyone turns out to have been a dog.

>>87411119
>Moore Swamp Thing

Not make me barf kid. What "Hip-Comic-Pop-news-that-every-geek-should-read" is giving you tips? Linkara?

>>87411141
DC was fucking stupid to cancel the series halfway through.

>>87411280
>I have no argument, better call him a kid
Go read more of the garbage your talentless hack wrote.

>this thread
Great, as if /tv/ subhumans weren't enough, now we have /lit/ards.

>>87411301
>That is a very buzzword argument! You Buzzword, Buzzword son of a Buzzword!

>>87411333
>WAHH WAHH WHY DOES HE SHITPOST ONLY I CAN SHITPOST
Pathetic.
>Snyderfags
>Kingfags
>human

>>87410505
I uhh vaguely remember R.L. Stine. He writes children's horror stories, right?
And is that Morbius behind him? It looks like Morbius to me, unless he's some character who just looks like him from R.L. Stine's books.
I was hoping to see more of Morbius, he's special to me.
But I'm not happy to hear that R.L. Stine will be writing him.
Nothing but disappointment, Marvel, as always, every news I get from them, evoke a feeling of disappointment.

Didn't Liu write novels? Romance novels?

Horror never made any real contribution to literature for being horror. Even in cinema, people just found the acting and effects the new hot thing and Frankestein had to gain whole new tractament for the mediocre "One moral over and over" shit that Mary wrote in her spare time. Any real classic horror was in the list beacause of the lyricism or symbolism.

Horro was born on tropes and mediocrity, just like detective adventures

File: FR-xenos[1].jpg (84KB, 650x822px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 650x822px

>>87411395
yes she did.

Also Abnett writes fucking amazing 40k novels

>>87411447
Can you rec some for a 40k newb.

>>87411426
This post comes off insincere.

>>87411362
>WAHH WAHH WHY DOES HE SHITPOST ONLY I CAN SHITPOST

Sounds like the posts you've been making so far.

>>87411659
I know you are but what am I?

>>87411703
Easily triggered, that's for sure.

>>87411721
I know you are but what am I?

>>87410505
It's because Marvel doesn't give a shit about people who care about the books and characters. Just the prestige of being a "real writer" and usually fitting under a nonwhite or nonmale identity. Stine is likely for the prestige. "Hey look guys! Our next big thing is monsters and do you know who we got?!"

>>87411751
It's not like he can be any worse than Slott or Hopeless. Right?

>>87411751
>people who care about the books and characters
This is how you get Tumblr writers. Stine is a proven kids' writer, so he can write capes well.

>>87411178
Nothing to do with /pol/.
Women are objectively less intelligent than men.
>lower IQs
>smaller brains
I don't know what other proof you need.

>>87411741
See? Easily triggered.

>>87411807
[Citation needed]

>>87410505
>What's your take on having novelists jump aboard comic writing?
If it leads to stuff like Charlie Huston's Moon Knight, I'm all for it.

>>87411935
I know you are, but what am I?

>>87411807
>lower IQs
>He hasn't heard

>>87411956
A simple wikipedia search wouldn't take you that long, faggot.

>>87411994
Biased PC studies don't count.

>>87410505
>What's your take on having novelists jump aboard comic writing?
It's a real downgrade for the novelist
Working on capeshit is like rock bottom for writers

>Is the the pool for new talents from the new generation of comic enthusiasts who wants to be in the industry that low and incompetent that they have to resort to established names from another medium?
I don't think the term 'talent' really goes with comics
Or the industry, but that's neither here or there

>>87412007

[citation needed]

>>87412007
>Science doesn't count if it hurts my feelings, abloobloo!

>>87412018
>meme responses

kek

>>87410989
I'm sure King and R.L. Stine are enjoyable for people who aren't hipsters looking for a reason to hate them.

>>87412024
I love how that irony escapes you.

>>87412023
Want to act obtuse, keep at it.
It's not like I'm getting paid for spoonfeeding you.

>>87412055
But weren't you unable to come up with a source?

>>87412069
You're saying a simple wikipedia search would take you too long to do.

>>87410505
>What's your take on having novelists jump aboard comic writing?

Am not against artists jumping from one medium to another as long as they understood and respect the culture of the medium they are trying to enter.

If it's an OC, then go ahead you have full freedom on whatever you'd want to do. Drown it in agenda ridden plots and preachy dialogues if you want. BUT if you're given a character than has existed for decades and has been in the hands of other writers, please please research and write for the character.

>>87412070
Not wanting to spoonfeed lazy idiots =/= being unable to come up with a source.
It takes 3 seconds to enter google and look up "sex and IQ" on the wikipedia. If you can't do even something that basic, you should go back to your short bus.

>>87412055
There's no irony. You're going off of outdated research, and you're blaming PC culture for results you don't like.

>>87412082
>n-no u
White knights are predictably retarded.

>>87412084
> If you can't do even something that basic,

But you didn't even do it.

>you should go back to your short bus.

Why, to keep you company?

>>87411314
Fucking elitists. Still stuck in the time when integration is not practiced in art forms?

Filter the thread. You're not obliged to participate.

>>87412084
>Psychology
>Science

>>87412093
>White knights are predictably retarded.

>It takes 3 seconds to enter google and look up "sex and IQ" on the wikipedia. If you can't do even something that basic, you should go back to your short bus.

You're saying you're a white knight?

>>87412090
>outdated research
Whatever makes you feel better.
>w-who cares that independent unbiased studies were consistently proving that women on average had 3 or 5 less IQ points than men
>these new totally not fabricated studies are suddenly correct
I bet you're the same sucker who keeps falling for the "cell phones are not dangerous" meme because phone companies influence researchers.

>>87411991
Easily triggered.

ITT: let's derail this thread to a sex/gender war.

>>87412114
>>87412097
>n-no, he owes me the information I want and can easily look up
Get fucked.

>>87412116
>were consistently proving
Yeah, they were. They don't anymore.

>>87412103
>if you ignore cancer, it goes away
Fuck off.
>/lit/shitter
>calling someone else elitist

>>87412093
i think that's a triggered femanon

>>87412142
>I d-don't have the information, I-I'll insult him s-some more by implying he's a retard like me

kek

>>87412144
>i-it's totally not fabricated, I swear
Keep acting obtuse.

>>87412153
I agree, >>87412093 is a triggered femanon

>>87412151
>/co/
>not cancerous by itself

/lit/ and /tv/ has more integrity in thier art forms that you

kek

>>87412156
>I refuse to look up something that might hurt my feelings
>better act like I'm still winning and it won't show
Kek.
>>87412153
Explains the passive-aggressive typing and stubborn attitude.

>>87412170
You're the one who's acting desperate. The gap in IQ test scores has been closed. I don't know how you think that's fabricated.

>>87412180
>n-no u
Go back to your shithole and whine about how much you hate LE EBUL GENRE FICTION instead of shitting up other boards.

>>87412173
Well, there's certainly a triggered femannon here.

Trigger source: >>87411146

>>87412206
>I-IT'S BEEN CLOSED, I SWEAR
The only desperation I smell here is yours.

>>87412191
>Explains the passive-aggressive typing and stubborn attitude.

>>87412142
>n-no, he owes me the information I want and can easily look up
>Get fucked.
>>87412116
>Whatever makes you feel better.
>I bet you're the same sucker who keeps falling for the "cell phones are not dangerous" meme because phone companies influence researchers.
>>87412055
>I love how that irony escapes you.
>>87412007
>A simple wikipedia search wouldn't take you that long, faggot.
>Biased PC studies don't count.
>>87411807
>Women are objectively less intelligent than men.


i think these posts really were made by a triggered femanon

>>87412216
Why were you triggered by that post? What's wrong with it?

>>87412173
>>87412228
You lost. Leave gracefully and stop making a laughingstock out of yourself.

File: IQ.jpg (52KB, 600x422px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 600x422px

>>87412222
https://www.aei.org/publication/chart-of-the-day-scottish-iq-test-scores-by-gender-reveal-the-greater-variability-of-male-intelligence/
>“There were no significant mean differences in cognitive test scores between boys and girls, but there was a highly significant difference in their standard deviations (Prob. < .001). Boys were over-represented at both the low and high extremes of cognitive ability.”
Low end, AKA you.

>https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/beautiful-minds/201207/men-women-and-iq-setting-the-record-straight
>So they certainly equaled men, and perhaps were slightly above. This has been distorted in the news of my saying that women are incredibly more intelligent than men. As you can see, this somewhat goes beyond what was claimed.
>I suspect that is a characterological trait. They are also more focused in the testing room just as they are more focused in the classroom. So my conclusion is the sexes on the Raven's is probably dead equal for cognitive factors and there is a very slight female advantage for characterological traits.

>>87412241
Learn to comprehend. I'm not triggered I'm pointing out the source that instigated this whole debacle of M vs F shit on this thread. Holy shit work your brain cells.

>>87412274
>It takes 3 seconds to enter google and look up "sex and IQ" on the wikipedia. If you can't do even something that basic, you should go back to your short bus.

It looks like it took you more than 3 seconds

>>87412286
>m-muh Wikipedia!
You can stop now.

>>87412282
But why were you triggered by that post? Didn't you write it yourself?

>>87412243
You didn't provide a source.

>>87412296
But you were the one who brought wikipedia up.

>>87412274
>shitty biased studies on psychologytoday and a shitty site no one heard about
Might as well post Gawker while you're at it.

>>87412323
>But you were the one who brought wikipedia up.
Nope, it was the other guy. I came in at the point where he said that mens' IQs were higher.

>>87412327
I didn't know you're a fan of Gawker.

>>87412299
Why are you putting words in my mouth. I am not triggered by that post. How fucking idiotic by you.

I pointed out the post that seems to be the source of another anon's tirade. Saying that anon was triggered by it does not automatically equals to me being triggered by it.

How old are you and have you no formal education to teach you reading comprehension?

>all great writers are men
>all great artists are men
>all great scientists are men
>w-women are smarter, I swear

>>87412348
You must be if you take psychologytoday seriously

>>87412353
>I am not triggered by that post. How fucking idiotic by you.
>How old are you and have you no formal education to teach you reading comprehension?

You sure sound triggered by that post right now.

>>87412327
I mean, you can plug your ears all you want, but as far as I can tell, I've got support for my argument, and you don't have shit.

>>87412354
If you take psychologytoday seriously, then why do you object to >>87412274

>>87412366
Not that post by you. Pls please learn to comprehend. Which part of my posts talk about that post vs talk about you misunderstanding me? Come, point out my arguments against that post. If I have one.

>>87412375
>two shitty studies against numerous ones that were proving me right for years.
Yeah, great support.
>>87412382
Acting childish on the internet doesn't make you cool.

>>87411478

Not him but if you are still looking I strongly recommend the Horus Heresy series. It's a long ass read but you can grab the entire Audiobook series off PB and, from a dude who absolutely hates the Space Marines, it is a fucking great read.

>>87412405
Okay in your post in >>87412216
you said that >>87411146 was done by a triggered femanon because of the passive-aggresive typing and stubborn attitude. But that post is yours.

>>87412414
>were proving me right for years.
You were right for years. Now you're wrong, and you can't deal with it.

>>87412414
>At one time it was overwhelming consensus that there were no sex differences in g factor or general intelligence. However, researcher Richard Lynn challenged this consensus on two arguments: that (1) males have bigger brain size in proportion to their body, and that (2) there are little or no sex differences up until the age of 16 because males have slower developmental maturation.[37] A 2004 meta-analysis by Richard Lynn and Paul Irwing published in 2005 found that the mean IQ of men exceeded that of women by up to 5 points on the Raven's Progressive Matrices test.[8][38] Lynn's findings were debated in a series of articles for Nature.[10][11] Jackson and Philipe Rushton found males aged 17–18 years had average of 3.63 IQ points in excess of their female equivalents on the Scholastic Assessment Test.[12] Irwing (2012) found a 3-point IQ advantage for males in g from subjects aged 16–89 in the United States on the WAIS III test favouring men on the information, arithmetic and symbol search and favoring women on the processing speed[39] A 2005 study by Ian Deary, Paul Irwing, Geoff Der, and Timothy Bates, focusing on the ASVAB showed a significantly higher variance in male scores, resulting in more than twice as many men as women scoring in the top 2%. The study also found a very small (d' ≈ 0.07, less than 7%, of a standard deviation) average male advantage in g on the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery test.[17] Another study with Richard Lynn conducted in Sudan found 16-18 year old males scored 5 points higher on the Raven's Progressive Matrices.[40] Another study by researcher Jianghong Liu also found 3 points higher male scores on the WISC which is the children version of the WAIS III. He explained that greater male performance on items such as Picture Arrangement, Object Assembly, Picture Completion and Block Design are because they measure visual–spatial abilities in which males typically perform better than females.[41]

cont.

>>87412414
>Acting childish on the internet doesn't make you cool.

You mean like you're doing right now?

>>87412423
but hey, SUDDENLY two studies somehow "undo" that.
You have to be a retard to not see that it's biased shit.

>>87412431
>telling the truth is acting childishly
Okay.

>>87412436
>telling the truth

That's usually the excuse someone who hasn't told the truth yet usually resort to.

>>87412436
>but hey, SUDDENLY two studies somehow "undo" that.
Nothing has been undone. IQ scores have been going up for years, it's just that women's IQ scores have gone up faster.

>>87412436
>SUDDENLY two studies somehow "undo" that.

Didn't you claim to have studies that prove you right? Where are they?

>>87410505
I mean, wasn't that a thing for a while now?

Neil Gaiman is well known for his comics. And Fight Club 2 happened, but let's not talk about it.

>>87412484
>And Fight Club 2 happened, but let's not talk about it.
That bad, huh?

>>87412456
>IQ scores have been going up for years
Yeah, sure. That's why there's almost no women in the fields that actually require intelligence. Not artificial at all.
>inb4 old "we can't deal with the sexism in those fields" bullshit excuse. Which is the same as "we contributed nothing to society because men didn't let us" even though contemporary societies were never accepting of geniuses (see Copernicus for instance) so that excuse doesn't fly.
Man, women love making excuses for their inferiority.
>>87412468
>I'm too dumb to scroll up
Ok. I bet you're a woman.

>>87412489
I thought it started out ok, but then it was obvious Chuck wasn't taking it seriously with his "so meta" joke.

>>87412502

>I'm too dumb to scroll up

Where?

>>87412502
Wew, lad that's a lot of "no argument" in one post.

>>87412533
>NANANA I CAN'T HEAR YOU
That's what you're doing and yet accusing me of doing the same.

>>87412550
What are you talking about? You're saying nothing.
>IQ is a metric based on a specific test
>say Men score higher on average
>It's false
>B-but women aren't in the smart sciences and it's definitely not because of historical sexism just believe me guys!
You've lost at what you were trying to prove, and now you're trying to change the subject, and doing it poorly.

>>87411788
He's written gamebooks and Fear Street had potential.

>>87412550
I know you are, but what am I?

>>87412575
>men are scoring higher on average and has been for years
>b-but here's two shitty studies one of which measures 11 year old kids despite the fact that females mature earlier and therefore it's unfair to compare kid IQ results to adult ones and the other is so obviously biased, it's not even funny, that proves you wrong
Kek.

>>87412627
>two shitty studies
>one of which measures 11 year old kids
What's shitty about the other one done by the world renowned expert in IQ?

>>87412751
Speaking or world renowned experts in IQ.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1274952/Men-ARE-brainy-women-says-scientist-Professor-Richard-Lynn.html

File: Owl Going to break your back.jpg (134KB, 329x500px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 329x500px

>>87410505
Young me probably would have been psyched. Current me is just confused why Marvel would hire this guy, he's not even that great a writer he's just "Le every chapter must have a cliffhanger man", fuck he already admitted that he has ghost writers, heck his more "mature" line weren't even that good. And if we're talking charisma, he's no Owl Goingback

>>87411285
Should have listened to Slott, Brevoort, and Bendis and ordered 10 copies a month then

>>87412852
>men ARE more brainy than women (and more stupid too!)
Well right off the bat, I can see that this article is actually supporting something a study I already posted claimed, so good job on that, genius. Yes, males have more variance in IQ scores.
>The undeniable, easily measurable fact remains that, by the time both sexes reach 21, men, on average, score five IQ points higher than women.
And this statistic, published in 2010, is exactly the one that is no longer the case. So good fucking job.

>>87412926
>the one that is no longer the case
Keep telling yourself that.
I like how you ignore the comments to your own article that bring up some really good points.

File: Black and yellow laughter.jpg (166KB, 655x624px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 655x624px

>>87412953
>I like how you ignore the comments to your own article that bring up some really good points.
>The comments section

>>87412980
>they disagree with me, must be wrong

>>87412984
I love how that irony escapes you.

File: chuckling deeply.png (115KB, 276x230px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 276x230px

>>87412984
>The comments section

>>87412998
You don't get to talk about irony escaping someone after this entire thread.

File: 1402891475048.png (107KB, 230x199px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 230x199px

>>87413026
>The
>comments
>section

>>87413046
>>87413013
>WAHH WAHH
Maybe explain what's wrong with those posts rather than being a faggot?

File: 1397277557576.gif (171KB, 375x375px) Image search: [Google]

171KB, 375x375px

>>87413064
The
coments
section

It's definitely a good thing and can definitely help the medium.
Imagine a famous author like Rowling writing a comic, shit would make a fuckton of money.

And I learned that's Neil Gaiman wrote novels and I had no idea. I haven't read Sandman sadly but I only heard good things so I will give a try to his novels who are much less expensive.

>>87413083
Quality post.

>>87411058
epic!

>>87413026
I love how that irony escapes you, too.

>>87413090
>famous author like Rowling
Fuck no. I hope she kills herself for spawning Harry Potter and shitty detective stories.

>>87410505
>Is the the pool for new talents from the new generation of comic enthusiasts who wants to be in the industry that low and incompetent that

yes.

>rl stine writing a comic? lets see what /co/ has to say....

I'm not even surprised but jesus christ

>>87413103
I love how the irony escapes you in general.

>>87413090
Not all novelist can transition to comics that way Gaiman did. Screenwriters would have an easier time cause screenplay and storyboarding has so much similarity to comics unlike writing walls of text.

>>87413123
>jesus christ
Yes? You called?

>>87413148
Gaiman worked in comics before doing novels.

>>87413083
>Scott, your article effectively, but unnecessarily, destroys a notion that few well-informed people still believed. But it leaves another, even more crucial notion untouched.

>Rather long ago it was quite firmly established that the MEAN IQs of men and women were roughly equivalent. Any male chauvinist still insisting otherwise is willfully ignorant. But, the very same studies establishing those similar means also indicated that the STANDARD DEVIATION was considerably greater for males than for females.

>Even a novice at statistics knows what this means--among approximately equal populations of males and females, there would be more, in fact many more, VERY high and VERY low scores among the males. It takes a relatively small difference in standard deviation to produce enormous differences in absolute numbers at the extremes (both high and low) in large populations like those of the US and Europe.

>Why is this important? Because, obviously, it is at the extreme high end that revolution-producing genius is found.

>The number of people capable of doing genuinely breakthrough work in mathematics, theoretical physics, etc. is tiny--perhaps a half dozen, maybe a dozen in the world at any given time in each field. Even a small difference in standard deviation would insure that virtually all of these would be men. And a quick glance at the list of breath-taking accomplishments in these fields SINCE WOMEN HAVE ACHIEVED EDUCATIONAL AND OCCUPATIONAL EQUALITY shows no reduction in the historical male dominance.

>Why must this fact be pointed out? Because the present, and undoubtedly future, male dominance (to the point of virtual exclusivity) in the pantheon of true luminaries in these fields IS NOT and WILL NOT BE indicative of continuing discrimination at the societal or familial level but just a genetic fact of life.
There is literally nothing wrong in that post.

>>87413203
My bad but I doubt my statement would be negated by that fact. It's not impossible but between writing novels vs writing screenplay, the transition will be in favor for those that writes screenplay.

>>87413125
I love how the irony escapes you in general.

Two anons here needs a thread of thier own in /pol/

I think this post wins Most Derailed award.

File: 1398549528406.gif (2MB, 300x290px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 300x290px

>>87413205
>Rather long ago it was quite firmly established that the MEAN IQs of men and women were roughly equivalent. Any male chauvinist still insisting otherwise is willfully ignorant. But, the very same studies establishing those similar means also indicated that the STANDARD DEVIATION was considerably greater for males than for females.
I already acknowledged this here
>>87412274
and here
>>87412926
Variance was never in question. Men are "smarter" in the same way they're "dumber".
>Why is this important? Because, obviously, it is at the extreme high end that revolution-producing genius is found.
Just an assertion of opinion. You could say by the same token that banal idiocy at the low end is how the world falls into disarray. Also
>The comments section
L E L

>>87410505
>Is the the pool for new talents from the new generation of comic enthusiasts who wants to be in the industry that low and incompetent that they have to resort to established names from another medium?

I think there is an outrageous number of talents out there - art and writing alike. I think the big 2 just don't want to take the risk of an untested talent especially on the writing side.

Other than that I also think the talent themselves shy away from the big two knowing thw current state of both - especially that of Marvels.

>>87410505
oh boy I can't wait for night of the living webshooter and say DOOM and die

>>87410949

Is Marvel still doing Stephen King comics like The Dark Tower and The Stand?

>>87411051
>He's gone downhill in later years
I think it's a combination of having said everything he had to say (but being unwilling to give up the spotlight) sorta like you see with aging musicians, and the fact that he's about the wordiest son-of-a-bitch who ever put pen to paper. He DESPERATELY needs an editor and it's obvious that no one is willing to do the job so you end up with shit like Gerald's Game where he takes what would have been an alright short story and crams it into several hundred pages of novel.

Also: while he's an absolute master of mood and tone and character ... his plots have never been anything to write home about. Christine is a memorable book IN SPITE of the fact that it's about a haunted car, not because of it. Seriously. Compare the classic "inspired by" Shining with the much more faithful tv miniseries Shining. Or pretty much any non-shining Steven King Movie (vs the various adaptions that don't have his name plastered all over the poster like Stand By Me, Shawshank Redemption, and Green Mile).

>>87411141
Dial H Vol 2 for Young Animal, when?

>Enter thread genuinely wanting to discuss RL.Stine
>jk thread is now about men and women IQs
get out /co/mblr.

>>87413812
>King
>mood and tone
King is a master of very bland and dull horror. The only thing that separates him from Stine is the age of his audience.

>>87413723
I can't wait for a boy and a girl to get trapped in Morbius's house

>>87414137
0/10 - you're not even trying, anon.

>>87414159
>to get trapped in Morbius's house
More like: forced to cower in the basement/attic/closet because they lost track of time (due to silly arguments/squabbling) after deciding to go investigating about an hour prior to sundown.

Fucking tryhards in this thread shitting on Stephen King.

I bet they've never read a horror novel in their life because they're /lit/ faggots who have to pretend to hate all genre fiction.

>>87415593
>I bet they've never read a horror novel in their life
I've read Poe, M. R. James, Hawthorne. Ligotti, Shepard... Do I get your blessing?

>>87413793
Dark Tower is still going. It's pretty much an ongoing, there are occasionally a few months pause between minis but it's been going continuously since 2007.

>>87415643
Alright, so you've got a boner for classical Gothic horror and for authors who influenced the Lovecraft Mythos.

I'll give you points for Poe, but you're still ultimately a tryhard.

ITT: If this was happening to DC comics we'd be pretending it was a good thing.

File: paddy.jpg (10KB, 233x242px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 233x242px

>>87415825
>if you don't read cheap bestsellers, you suck
I can read some Laymon or Guy N. Smith if you want to.

>>87415850
It's always okay when dc does it.

>>87416018
Read what you want. You're gonna miss out on a lot of good fiction with that tunnel vision you got though.

File: ygos01e46.png (87KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 320x240px

>>87416224
>good fiction
I already am reading it, anon. The classics, not that hack Stephen King.

>>87411160
>inb4 a vampire story about a young boy who hunts vampires but was really the vampire all along.
So that original Hannibal King story, but without the noir coat?

>>87416386
Would like to point out why you think he's a hack?

>>87416516
>dat anime reaction pic
Nvm anon, I just realized why you don't like King.

>>87416568
I honestly thought that guy was quoting the goosebumps movie

>>87415593
> putting King on a pedestal

>>87411447
>40k novels
>amazing

>>87418266
>shitting on him because someone saide he was hacky and never really gave him a chance

Gotta love them hivemind mentalities.

>>87410505
I hope every issue ends on 'and then a skeleton popped out' and then the next issue starts with revealing the skeleton was just somebody in a costume, just like how the Goosebumps books did their chapters.

File: ectokid.jpg (59KB, 414x640px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 414x640px

Remember that time Marvel gave Clive Barker his own imprint?

>>87419326
The BOOM books are great.

>>87411051
>>87410949

Stephen King is turning a weird corner in his writing. He's funneling all his shit into his realistic works leaving us with pretty decent to above average paranormal books. Bazaar of Bad Dreams was great and Revival was his best novel in years.

File: Sidakarya.jpg (44KB, 350x343px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 350x343px

>>87420015
>King wants to be considered a real writer instead of a bestseller one

I'm always a little hyped when a non comic book guy comes and writes a comic but it's almost always crap

>>87410505
>Is the the pool for new talents from the new generation of comic enthusiasts who wants to be in the industry that low and incompetent that they have to resort to established names from another medium?

No but comics is a dying medium under the firm grasp of old greedy men. Why would you attempt to make a career from it?