Marvel flew Dann and me out to L.A. last weekend to the world premiere of "Avengers: Age of Ultron." I loved the picture, and had a great time viewing it. It was gratifying to see the strong take that director Joss Whedon has on both Ultron and The Vision. Naturally, I hope both return. I suspect the Vision, at least, will.
And it was considerate of Whedon to work in a fleeting mention of me... in lieu of a Stan-type cameo. Stan says this is his favorite cameo, although my favorite is the one from the first "Avengers" movie, in which he scoffs at the idea of "super-heroes in New York"... when he's the guy, more than anyone else, who put them there.
Also in the mezzanine where we sat were Jim Starlin, Gerry Conway, Kurt Busiek, and the director of "Guardians of the Galaxy." Much of the cast of "Agents of SHIELD" were around, too. Stan and the stars of the movie, I take it, were in the other theatre that was showing the movie, across Hollywood Boulevard. There was even popcorn. I can't watch a movie without popcorn.
I'm impressed by the way Ken Feige and his people are pursuing a conscious version of the growth of the Marvel Universe, duplicating (with understandable differences) what Stan, Jack, and we early folks did instinctively, feeling our way. When they made a hit out of "Guardians of the Galaxy", I knew those people knew what they were doing.
Scoffers of the idea of an "Ant-Man" movie (Stan and I definitely NEVER among them) will, I hope, have their minds changed by the upcoming "Ant-Man" film. I don't expect that movie's Yellowjacket to be as close to what I had in mind in 1968 as Ultron and the Vision were, but that's okay.
And I look forward to seeing what they do with Gil Kane's and my Iron Fist on the Netflix series... a character we created but only did one story of.
En una interesante entrevista para Comicbookresources, Thomas pone el dedo en la llaga sobre la continuamente vilipendiada Continuidad:
Continuity just came naturally to me.
If you're trying to get readers to take your world seriously, it seems to me that you have to take your world seriously enough that you treat it like a real world. Therefore there has to be some continuity.
I cannot take seriously a universe in which Batman -- and maybe this is true with Marvel characters, too; I don't know -- becomes a rorschach test for whatever writer or artist.
One time he's fairly well adjusted and in this story he's a raving maniac. They don't even seem like the same person to me. I have never been able to get interested in the modern Batman for that reason. If they were consistent and he's a raving maniac all the time, I can go with that. [Laughs]
But I can't go with the fact that every time a writer comes along he puts his own spin on it and thinks he has to "redefine" the character. That awful word, redefine.
As if everybody else before him was a clown who didn't know how to define the character.
It may not make any difference nowadays. The modern readers may not care so much about continuity.
Every year or so it seems like they start everything all over again and wipe out continuity. Another awful phrase: "Everything you know about X is wrong." I just get so sick of that.
Durante muchos años me ha parecido una lástima que un talento como el de Roy se hallase alejado del mundo del cómic; hoy en día comprendo totalmente su postura.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario