The OFFICIAL Unofficial Achewood Message Board
Trivial Pursuits => Arts & Entertainment => Topic started by: side_show on March 20, 2011, 02:04:08 pm
-
My god, our local print comics have gotten so terrible. I read them because they come with the paper, but they're just so disappointing these days. I was actually angry this time around - they were all especially bad. It's got me thinking, are most syndicated comic strips crap? Is this what happens when the creators hit a rut but still want to collect their paychecks?
Here's what's in our local funny pages:
Page One:
For Better or Worse (http://www.fborfw.com/strip_fix/), which is just re-runs of old strips. I hate when they do this.
Dilbert (http://www.dilbert.com/), which is still readable, but pretty boringly repetitive these days. People are incompetent some times. I got it.
Page Two:
Doonesbury (http://www.doonesbury.com/), which isn't terrible, I suppose. I don't read it regularly, so I don't typically know what's going on most of the time with this one.
FoxTrot (http://www.foxtrot.com/), which is readable I guess. This is one of the ones I typically tolerate reading.
Archie - there might as well be a hole in the middle of the page because I haven't read Archie in years.
Baby Blues (http://www.babyblues.com/archive/) - usually terrible, but I tend to read it for some reason.
Page Three:
Get Fuzzy (http://comics.com/get_fuzzy/)- I usually don't mind this one, but this is probably related to being a pet owner on some level.
The Born Loser (http://comics.com/the_born_loser/) - I've skipped over this one for years. Total lack of interest on my part.
Family Circus - this dialogue from the movie Go summerizes my feelings about Family Circus pretty well. (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheFamilyCircus)
Marvin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvin_%28comic_strip%29) - oh my god, I never intentionally read Marvin, but I do occasionally glance at it in hopes that the whole family is getting violently slaughtered. Maybe one day.
Page Four:
Garfield (http://tailsteak.com/arbuckle/index.php?date=780619) - as a remnant of my childhood, I'm drawn to reading it like a moth to a flame. Terrible.
Beetle Bailey (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beetle_Bailey) - I usually skip this one - not surprised it's been around since the 50's -- it seems like an antique.
Dennis the Menace - again, there might as well be a hole in the middle of the page. This is one of those ones that's there for the kids I think, but I think it's pretty far off the mark when it comes to relevance these days.
Wizard of Id (http://comics.com/wizard_of_id/) - I read this one sometimes, but it seems like the same tired old shit.
Page Five:
Pooch Cafe (http://poochcafe.com/) - this is the newest addition to our local comics. It's not bad. Not great, but not bad. It's one of those niche comics that appeals to some dog owners I guess.
Shoe (http://www.shoecomics.com/): never bother with it. Not interested.
Pearls Before Swine (http://comics.com/pearls_before_swine/): ditto
Page Six:
SlyLock Fox and Comics for Kids (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slylock_Fox_%26_Comics_for_Kids) - my husband and I have this thing where we each do the "Find the six differences" part and comment on how easy/hard it is this time around.
Sherman's Lagoon (http://www.slagoon.com/cgi-bin/sviewer.pl) - I read this one. It's not that bad most of the time. Saying something is "not bad" isn't the same as saying it's good though.
Page Seven:
Crankshaft (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crankshaft_%28comic_strip%29): okay, I like Crankshaft. Being that I'm a fan of things tinged with melancholy, I suppose it makes sense.
Blondie (http://www.blondie.com/story.html): Seriously? This comic is still running? I had assumed they were re-running old strips until my husband pointed out they were making contemporary references at some point. WTF?
Hi and Lois (http://hiandlois.com/) - again, might as well be a hole in the page. Also, what a terrible website!
Non Sequitur (http://www.gocomics.com/nonsequitur/) - this is also a fairly new addition to our comics. I read it for a little while, but now I've sort of lost interest and only read it occasionally.
-
I have pretty much stopped reading the comics in the paper. Every so often I'll flip through them on Sunday, if I am sufficiently bored, but really if I want to read a strip I'll put it in the RSS reader.
Is Cul de Sac (http://www.gocomics.com/culdesac/) syndicated nationally, or is it just a Washington thing. It's good.
-
The Washington Post has two pages packed with comics and nearly every one is crap.
Two exceptions:
Cul de Sac: read it at the crappy site:
http://www.gocomics.com/culdesac/
and if you like it, he also has a blog:
http://richardspooralmanac.blogspot.com/
I am trying to think of a way to describe it that won't make you think it's been done before. It is a strip about little kids and the surreal world they live in. It's really good.
And one that isn't awful is Frazz:
http://comics.com/frazz/
I think Frazz is kind of supposed to be Calvin grown up. This is a more normal strip about school-age kids.
I do still read Dilbert and Doonesbury but I think I am on the verge of giving up Dilbert. We have Sherman's Lagoon only on Sundays, and I read that. We have Get Fuzzy but I stopped reading it a couple of years ago. Part of the thing is, the comics are tiny and the OK ones sre so surrounded with crap, it's hardly worth the trouble to search them out. If there was a page where Get Fuzzy and Pooch Cafe and Sherman's Lagoon were right next to each other every day, I'd probably read them, but they're not quite worth scanning over the crap to locate.
-
Simultaneous Washingtonians shouting out for Cul de Sac. I think it is syndicated. But who cares, you know, we have the web, right?
-
I pretty much hate all newspaper comics.
Back when I first started working up here, I worked on a three-man crew with a guy who was pretty badly damaged in the head. We used to make horrible, horrible jokes about Luann (http://comics.com/luann/).
I'm in agreement with all the assessments of the comics that I know anything about, other than Pearls Before Swine. I like that comic. Also, Get Fuzzy is usually readable, but it never has the payoff it ought to. The writer is about 70% of the way to where he needs to be (unless he's doing it on purpose as a sort of performance art thing or something). He sometimes stumbles a bit and the punch fizzles because he didn't wind it all up to really hammer it home in the final panel.
-
my favorite print comic is mutts (http://muttscomics.com/).
-
my favorite print comic is mutts (http://muttscomics.com/).
Never heard of it, but it seems to have a simplicity and old-timey charm.
I like that comic. Also, Get Fuzzy is usually readable, but it never has the payoff it ought to. The writer is about 70% of the way to where he needs to be (unless he's doing it on purpose as a sort of performance art thing or something). He sometimes stumbles a bit and the punch fizzles because he didn't wind it all up to really hammer it home in the final panel.
You hit the nail on the head there. It's basically about being newspaper friendly. I think if he didn't care about being syndicated he'd be better, but then I wouldn't be reading it anyway.
-
For me Foxtrot is one of those nostalgic strips. I have all the books but the newest one and I still read them in the bathroom once every year or two.
-
I'm a fan of the ferret contingent.
Mutts is a great and beautiful comic, and I hate that animals get put to death in shelters and shit, but I'd like it better if he laid off on that a bit more. I think Get Fuzzy should be online only. He'd be able to get a little more sideways, and I think it'd work better all the way around.
-
I used to really love the newspaper funnies, but now they really really suck hard. I don't know if It's because I've changed or they have. I think it's a little of both, actually. If you are like me, This website (http://joshreads.com/) is for people like us.
The only print comic I still enjoy and actively seek out is Doonesbury (http://www.doonesbury.com/strip). I started reading Doonsebury pretty much right at the beginning. It's where I first learned about the Vietnam War. After it's long hiatus I didn't pick the strip back up again until I found it online about 5-6 years ago. It's not as good as it was back in the 70s, but I still like it.
Is this what happens when the creators hit a rut but still want to collect their paychecks?
It's even worse that that actually. In many cases the original creator/authors have long since retired/passed away and the syndicate is keeping the series alive with hacks.
Archie - there might as well be a hole in the middle of the page because I haven't read Archie in years.
You should learn to appreciate the AJGLU-3000 (http://joshreads.com?p=5104#archie). (You'll have to scroll a little bit)
-
You should learn to appreciate the AJGLU-3000 (http://joshreads.com/?p=5104). (You'll have to scroll a little bit)
I do have to give a hat-tip to Archie for referencing the AJGLU-3000 on more than one occasion.
-
I like the art in Mutts, but the writing is way too saccharine for me.
I like Pearls Before Swine, but it's another one that doesn't quite nail it.
I'm sort of gradually reading this biography of Sparky Schulz. (http://www.amazon.com/Schulz-Peanuts-Biography-David-Michaelis/dp/0060937998/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1300668370&sr=8-1) Fascinating. I'm just to the point where he's starting to have some success. It's weird to think of how ubiquitous Peanuts was (is) and of what its cultural significance is. The only more modern analog I can think of is The Simpsons. I'm not sure we have anything filling that cultural niche right at the moment.
-
Mutts is a great and beautiful comic, and I hate that animals get put to death in shelters and shit, but I'd like it better if he laid off on that a bit more.
agreed
-
I'm pleased there are a few near-fans of Get Fuzzy here. My grandmother actually introduced me to it, and otherwise I haven't read print comics in years. I love that out of all the shitty comics she reads, she knows me well enough to know it's the only one I would like. I don't love it and only read it when I visit my grandparents and she hands it to me, but it's always enjoyable.
-
I've had the first Peanuts strip on my office wall for several years:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/69/First_Peanuts_comic.png)
As a kid, I read Crock, Wizard of Id, Born Loser, Shoe, BC, Garfield, Hi & Lois, Hagar the Horrible, etc. Jesus those are some insipid comics. Actually, way back when Wizard and BC weren't bad, but dude started pushing an agenda and the quality of the funny when directly and abruptly downhill. I think you can get away with shitty jokes more if your art is there. Later I read C&H, Bloom County, Doonesbury, etc - some stuff that stands up a little better. Peanuts has always been ok. Blondie and Beetle Bailey actually used to be ok, too.
-
Yeah, Wizard of Id and BC used to be pretty dang funny.
-
Say, Washingtonians, have you seen the horror that is Reply All (http://comics.com/reply_all/)? It's like a horrible webcomic, but it's syndicated and looks even worse in print than it does online! I don't know how this happened.
Oddly enough, the motherfuck*ng Phantom (http://www.seattlepi.com/fun/comic.asp?feature_id=Phantom) is really good. It's an action comic, it's drawn well, it's got real story arcs, and it features the motherfuck*ng Phantom, who is awesome. A story arc's wrapping up, wherein the motherfuck*ng Phantom (who is awesome) has just rescued his wife from being imprisoned after her death was faked, and is now about to go have a chat with Chatu, the guy who did all that. It's about to get real.
Dick Tracy's just had an artist/writer transplant last week, and at the very least is competently drawn now.
Brewster Rockit: Space Guy (http://www.seattlepi.com/fun/comic.asp?feature_id=Brewster) is more hit than miss, I think. It at least manages to be current without trying too hard.
Hear me out on this one - Sally Forth (http://www.seattlepi.com/fun/comic.asp?feature_id=Sally_Forth) is kind of good now. Francesco Marculiano (http://mediumlarge.wordpress.com/) has taken over as writer and it has a sneaky unexpectedness to it.
So yeah. I don't get the newspaper. I miss what comics were, and what they are isn't worth the time, money, or dead trees to me.
-
Say, Washingtonians, have you seen the horror that is Reply All (http://comics.com/reply_all/)? It's like a horrible webcomic, but it's syndicated and looks even worse in print than it does online! I don't know how this happened.
I just looked at this for only the second time since they started it and remembered why I never look at it.
Yeah, it's like one of those desperate old-media attempts to be "with-it" without getting what the web is about. It's not enough for the art to be bad, you know?
-
Is Cul de Sac (http://www.gocomics.com/culdesac/) syndicated nationally, or is it just a Washington thing. It's good.
So why does the Post not seem to have it in their comics section? The hell?
-
It's on page 2 of Style with Doonesbury in the print edition, and in the magazine on Sundays. This is better placement than with the dreck on the comics pages.
-
It's on page 2 of Style with Doonesbury in the print edition, and in the magazine on Sundays. This is better placement than with the dreck on the comics pages.
I haven't seen a print edition of the post in 10 years so I'll take your word for it. Right now the Post seems to just be showing a Sunday strip from like 2 years ago.
-
I just subscribe to the Cul de Sac blog. Once a week or so he'll link to all the previous week's strips, with commentary, and he'll post old "Richard's Poor Almanac" stuff.