Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
Linsel Greene (Portland, OR)
Published Letters: 34 Editor's Choice: 4
$75 dollars doesn't seem overwhelming to me. I mean, it's 3 volumes. I didn't hesitate to pop down 20 dolloars a pop for Top 10, or any of Moore's other works. Simple math means this isn't so outrageous. I'm sure that the higher price also comes of the fact that it's intended to be kept out of the hands of the underaged.
By putting it all together, and slapping a initially daunting price tag on it, you also lend it credibility as artwork. If it was released one issue at a time for a run of 25 issues at 3 bucks a pop, it'd have a really different feel to it.
I don't suppose people would have anything to complain about the price of it then though. That'd be pretty much standard cost for comics these days.
Labelling the Wire as "Educational TV" is bound to ruffle a couple feathers. For my part, it immediately puts me off it, cause I've never been a fan of anything educational.
But I can honestly say that this show is the most consistently excellent on television right now.
Personally, I love the fact that it doesn't spoon-feed you anything. There are some cliched ideas there (the dirty cop, the corruption of politicians, the ex-con with the heart of gold, etc.) but the language and complexity of the storylines is so rich, so solid, so full - you just can't help but get hooked.
Personally, I have to remain so focused to watch the Wire, cause the dialogue is so unfamiliar (both the cops and drug dealers' slang) and is delivered so quickly, that I can't multitask at all while I watch.
I love this show.
On your #2 ad, you mention that the commercial uses the Squirrel Nut Zippers track "Have you had enough".
Though the vocals on the track have been changed, the original is actually called "Put a Lid on it" which seems like it might still have been appropriate for the context :)
Keith,
in the last panel, are you supposed to be resigning yourself to missing the catch by walking forward and giving up, or are you supposed to have just miscalculated?
In that last panel, it looks like you're taking a step forward, suggesting that the former explanation is correct, but it seems more in your style to just show you messing up.
When was Clive Owen in a bad film??
Two words for you:
King Arthur
Oh Five more words for you:
I'll Sleep When I'm Dead
But, in all honesty, I love the guy. I saw the formentioned films precisely because he was in them.
This looks great.
Keef,
As a former Angelino, I am happy to say, "Good Luck" to you, even if your decision makes me wince just a little bit. I really hope that your deals work out.
But I would be remiss if I did not give you my two favorite quotes about L.A.
One is from Ashleigh Brilliant, the creator of Pot Shots Postcards who wrote,
"It's a simple decision. Life, Death, or Los Angeles."
The other is from long time Southern California native, Bob Hope who once said,
"Los Angeles? Well, it's a nice place, but I wouldn't want to visit."
For my part, I could never live in Los Angeles again. I hear that they don't even eat Bacon down there anymore! Ridiculous!
...I just didn't want it.
I think WayLay has officially moved from "Weekly comics I'll check if I'm bored" to the realm of "Comics I actively pass over". Yup, we're talking about the same realm as Garfield, For Better For Worse, and Luann here.
I used to appreciate the little smile "Story Minute" would bring, including those clever ironic snake-biting-its-own-tail bits, but WayLay has descended over the last two years. Unlike Keith Knight and Tom Tomorrow, Carol Lay seems to be moving a more abstract direction, and though I can respect it, I don't really care to read it. It certainly doesn't entertain me at all.
Maybe Salon should consider one of the other excellent semiregular webcomics around.
I'd recommend Partially Clips
http://www.partiallyclips.com/index.php?id=1473
or
Wondermark
http://www.wondermark.com/d/250.html
King is white?
Am I the only one who thought that he was black or at least bi-racial?
I've seen this in football as well. The problem isn't that we need more refs. Referees are forced, by the nature of the game, to make quick, snap judgements based on a situation. I have seen games where one ref made a quick call, and it was clear, based on the reaction of the other refs, that that call was not considered unanimous. But, the nature of these games is that the refs cannot often stand together and chat about what they saw. This is especially true in basketball.
If someone calls a charge, another ref who might have had a better angle can't say "No no! It wasn't a charge Bob. Keep playing guys!"
But flopping is still a problem. And I propose two solutions. The notion of a foul for flopping is meant as a deterrent. They don't want players to have to stop the game any more than normal. They just want players to stop.
Well, since flopping is, unlike so many fouls, an intentional act -- a conscience decision -- how bout we treat it like an intentional foul. The league can decide, after the game, based on the footage of the game, that a particular play in the game was a flop. Then they can levee a fine against the player, and a warning. Records can be kept, and a player who is fined for flopping 3 times in a season can be subjected to a game suspension or the like.
In this way, it can be made public, highlighting consistent floppers, and penalizing them for it, without putting it in the hands of the already overloaded referees.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
