The meek was pretty interesting story, the first page that popped up was random but it gets you interested right away. However, my favorite thing about this comic has to be the art. The style is awesome and the characters are very well designed. One of my favorite web comics, however, is a parody series of the pokemon games called super effective. They're really short but they are always funny.

All star superman takes a really interesting look at the character. I actually saw the animated movie on the comic and I have to say it was one of the greatest adaptations of clark kent I have ever seen. Most versions of clark kent have been really obvious and involved a somewhat different hairstyle and glasses. Even if it is just a comic book the logic behind superman's secret identity has always been a bit ridiculous. However, the clark kent that was shown in all star superman (more so in the animated version) could actually be another person. He doesn't just have different hair and glasses but the way he acts, the way he holds himself, even his posture and the way he walks is different. He doesn't just wear a disguise he becomes a different person. It was a really well thought out and welcome change.

Anya's ghost is a really clever concept and despite it's supernatural premise manages to have a somewhat relatable story and character. It's about a girl who doesn't quite fit in who finds what most of us want, a friend or someone who can magically show up to give us all the answers. but sometimes the easiest solutions don't always do the most good. I also really love the art style in this book is awesome. Its cartoony, funny, stylized, and at times maybe even a little dark.

So i took a look at Alice in sunderland. Not gonna lie it was all kinds of weird. And I thought the original was creepy. There is no real story and it is just a bunch of random bits that tell the reader a little bit about sunderland. The only thing I can say I really like about it is the art isn't that bad. Still not exactly my cup of tea but not the worst style i have seen.

Scott Pilgrim Vs the world is literally one of my favorite movies of all time. And the manga was just as good. In fact after reading the manga there were a few things i wish the movie did a little differently. For one I don't think they got the right actor to play scott. Don't get me wrong Michael did a great job and plays the role just fine but i feel as though there could have been better choices. The movie was able to capture the manga's feel and theme so well it is almost too perfect. From the sound effects to the pop culture references. They didn't try to make it realistic or that relatable they made exactly how they should have random and illogical as all hell! I would love to get my hands on the other copies of the manga so i can do more comparisons.

I can't say that I rather enjoy the art style of Persepolis but it definitely fits with the story. The style itself is really childish and plain but then again it is a story being told by a child so the simple shapes fit really well in this aspect. I find that this topic in particular (women in the middle east) is something that I do not think I will ever understand. I know that other cultures are allowed to have different beliefs but the way they make women hide has always been confusing to me. Women are treated so poorly and are forced to hide themselves at all times. Having clothes to cover your naked body is one thing but only being able to see someone's eyes how is that a form of respect. Women are the reason we have life. they give birth, if anything they are most likely the most important part of life itself.

Stuck Rubber Baby deals with both racism and homosexuality. Although it was published in the mid 90's subjects such as homosexuality were still not entirely accepted. Even today certain books are being banned because they discuss homosexual issues. So to see a graphic novel tackle this is a powerful thing and I applaud Cruse for giving it to us. However, being an artist I feel as though I have to talk about the art used for the book...It wasn't very good or at least in my personal opinion, pleasing to look at. The characters were poorly drawn with proportions and faces that looked warped as well as and overuse of dots to show shading. The women characters and men characters seemed to blend together to the point where everyone just looks like men in drag. I know to most people it is the story that is important but when you are reading a graphic novel the pictures are just as important and if your readers feel as though the art is disturbing they are less likely to keep reading regardless of how good the story may be.

Maus Was one of the best comics I have ever read. The art was simple and sometimes a little rough but the story was amazing! It was so personal and had such meaning to it. The story told to a son by his father. And the animals were a very clever idea. When you really think about it the story itself is so simple. A son sits down with his father and asks him about his life. Its like a biography in the form of comic book where all the people have become animals. One of the weirdest parts is the animals don't really ever bring up the fact that they are animals. which kind of makes you wonder why he drew them that way. Yes it is an artistic choice and it does have symbolism behind it but it doesn't exactly serve a purpose to the story. The animals could have easily been replaced by humans without even changing any of the dialogue. Don't get me wrong though I love the fact that they are animals but i still have to wonder how and why he came up with the idea to draw them like that. The idea that his father went through all of this is amazing. It is a story that could as easily have stood on its own as an autobiography.

I'd like to discuss the animations we watched in class recently...I am pretty sure I will be having nightmares. I can't remember the name of one of the animations but I do know that it was the weirdest piece of animation I have ever seen. Parts of it actually made me look and go... what? I mean the old man was having sex with a horse woman! Other weird ones were Quasi at the Quackadero and Make me Psychic. Although these two were not as bad they were still pretty freaky and uncomfortable. However, Yellow submarine was of course classic and I loved watching every minute of it!

Sorry this post is a tad late things have been real busy. Anyway After seeing the interview in class between Stan Lee and Will Eisner, which was absolutely amazing, I decided to take a better look at will and his work. Specifically the Spirit. I may not exactly read a lot of comic books but I do consider myself a superhero fan, if I don't read all the comics I at least make it a point to look up information on the ones I enjoy the most. The spirit is one of the only superheroes I know who's identity is mentioned very rarely and who is basically given permission to fight crime. Yes I do know that batman and commissioner gordon have an agreement but as portrayed in "year one" and plenty other comics, gordon does all of this under the table. However, during the time the spirit was introduced there was less realism in superhero comics. Superheroes were still praised in their comics even if it was technically breaking the law. Another thing I found while searching the spirit was that they made a live action movie based off the character in 2008. It received pretty poor reviews from critics and fans alike claiming that Frank Miller, who directed the picture, was simply using the same theme from his last movie "Sin City". It also apparently had bad action scenes. I have not seen it yet but I would like to soon!

I took a look at Art Spiegelman's Jack Cole and Plastic Man and realized that I had seen this character before. I was first introduced to plastic man in an episode of Batman: The Brave and the Bold on Cartoon Network. He was actually a reoccurring character on the show and appeared in quite a few episodes. The show was famous for using characters and villains from the silver age of DC comics. So I assumed plastic man was a DC character from the earlier years. However, after looking at this book I realized that DC did not originally create Plastic Man. Originally the comic was published by  Quality Comics in 1941, but In 1956 when the company shut down DC comics picked up most of the characters including Plastic Man, incorporating him into the DC universe. Plastic Man has also had several short animated short stories and a saturday morning cartoon show. The comics themselves are obviously meant to be comical as the character's personality certainly reflects. Our class discussion also made me remember the Duck Tales cartoon that premiered on the disney channel when I was a kid. However, the show focused more on uncle scroodge and the kids with little to no use of donald in the story. The show had the catchiest theme song too and to this day it is almost impossible not to hear it without having it stuck in your head for the next week and a half. Another thing that I found interesting is the fact that they never seem to explain who these kids are. They call Donald uncle but back then that was simply used as a form of respect to a family friend and not just and actual uncle. But either way its never really explained who their parents are or what might have happened to them. disney in general seems to do this a lot. Having parents out of the picture for no reason at all. A good example is Goofy, who has a son named Max. However, Max's mom is never really brought up in any form. We're just supposed to put the pieces together ourselves. Most of the time we can just assume they've died but why not just say that? I know these stories are meant for kids but kids go through death just like the rest of us so there's no reason they can't give a little back story.

Calvin and Hobbes in my personal opinion is absolutely one of the greatest comics of all time. I never read many books as a kid because I found them boring, but I loved comics. My favorites were Garfield and of course Calvin and Hobbes. I would read books after books of those two sometimes more than once. Calvin and Hobbes is one of favorites because the characters and situations are not only charming and most often times absolutely hilarious but they're also incredibly relatable especially for kids. It dives into the world of imagination through the eyes of a young boy and his stuffed animal. The adventures this kid had were amazing and inspiring, what he lacked in brains or social skills he made up for in creativity which was, I'm sad to say, very relatable in my case. The obvious positives about Calvin and Hobbes is that it is funny for practically any age. the jokes and adventures stand the test of time and to this day are a strong reminder of what it was like to be a kid, to have the whole world to explore. However, the comic also had its deep moments often depicting very real and often very emotional situations seen through the eyes of a young boy. Calvin often acts tough and out of line and a lot of his adventures are extreme and exciting so at times you can forget he is just a kid, but there are moments where he even cries or goes to his mother and we are reminded that yes he is still a kid and he deals with tragedy like a kid. The range that this comic had was endless, showing perspectives from different characters and seeing the world through different eyes. Thats what is so great about comic books, Its one thing to describe something someone is imagining but to put that vision down on paper is another thing entirely. We get to dive into impossible worlds and even as adults when we can read these comics we feel something even after all these years our imaginations take over and we go back to the world we knew before growing up. That is why Calvin and Hobbes and comics in general will stand the test of time itself.

After taking a look at Understanding Comics I was surprised to find that I already knew most of the information being given. I wouldn't consider myself the biggest comic book reader or any comic book reader at all for that matter (although when I was a kid I Garfield and Calvin and Hobbes like it was my job) but I still found that most of what Scott McCloud was saying was common knowledge, or at least to me. However, there were several points in his book that did grab my interest. The first of which was the fact that he teaches you about comics with the use of a comic. I know we touched on this a lot in class but it really is the option that makes the most sense. Some people, myself included, learn better either by doing or with the help of imagery. One point I found interesting was the way McCloud broke down different comic book styles in terms of realistic to abstract. He had a whole pyramid dedicated to showing this. He also showed a diagram in which he takes a realistic looking drawing of a face and breaks it down piece by piece showing the different stages in between realistic and abstract. Another point he made was that the general or basic idea of a human face in its most abstract form can be found in a lot of everyday items such as an electrical socket or soda can. It just made me think just how much humans build and create things in their own image. One other topic that I actually found very interesting is the discussion about the gutters in between each panel. I never would have though of using them as a gateway to fill in time between each panel. Knowing it now it seems obvious but I always just saw them as a way of breaking up the images without getting them mixed up or canceling one another out. But the example in class about someone aiming a gun at someone in one panel and having the guy shot in the next leaves us to fill in the image of the person with the gun pulling the trigger almost like we are the ones responsible for his death. That is really deep and it dives into an idea that will forever change the way I view comics.

THE ARRIVAL

Comic books like Shaun Tan's The Arrival do not need words to tell their story. In fact a good comic book should be able to tell the story through the pictures alone, the reader must be able to clearly tell what is happening in each panel regardless of the words attached to them. The Arrival uses vivid and detailed pictures to describe an action or an event. Much like storyboards that blueprint scenes in a movie. Although some storyboards do have dialogue at the bottom the point of them is to see if the visuals will go along with the dialogue, or more importantly to see if the images themselves can tell the story on their own without the help of the dialogue. The thing that makes comics different from normal reading material is in fact the use of pictures, therefore the pictures themselves must tell the story just as well as the dialogue can. In a lot of Tan's stories the images are drawn in such a way so the reader knows exactly what is happening without the use of dialogue. For example, one section of his comic depicts an elevator floating to the ground, and then a man stepping out of that elevator as the wings attached to it disappear and the man walks away. Its more than easy enough to tell what is happening without the writer telling us. The point of words and books is to tell a story, to describe events and situations in detail so that we may imagine them in our heads. The only thing Tan is doing is making it easier and simply giving you the image that you most likely would have seen in your head. Even though what everyone reads might be interpreted differently the general idea and premise of the situation is the same. Basically the premise of Tan's book is just the opposite of other books or novels, instead of giving us words to help create images in our mind he gave us pictures to help us create words like when i just described the section of the comic book using my own words.