Or by being legitimately nice. You’re reading waaay too much into that comment. Jess is referring to the fact that the Anthony character is seen by many as an opportunistic, selfish, passive aggressive manipulative jerk who’s been forced down our throats as “the perfect guy” merely because he’s a whitebread, dull homebody who was Liz’s first boyfriend. He’ll keep Liz safe and predictable at home, unlike the other more interesting options who’ve been character-assassinated over the past year or so.
choie: I think it’s one of two things. The effect is supposed to be that of a soap opera: cutting away from one storyline at a suspenseful moment, in this case, Julia saying “Go for it,” to a concurrent storyline, and then back again. But since that would still place the wedding on a weekday, it’s more likely that it was not originally meant to be like this. Shannon’s Sermon on the Lunch Table was probably meant to follow the wedding sequence, but at the last moment, someone realized that that would have school letting out in July. So the wedding was interrupted for Shannon, and recommenced once that was over.
As for the slow clap you mentioned. Well, slow claps don’t happen in real life, to be sure, but that was not a slow clap. What does often happen in real life, though, is people being sheep. I could see the cafeteria applauding after a stunned silence if it was the social leaders starting it, and then everyone else joining in because they’re sheep. But it would have to be a respectful applauding, like “Wow, that took guts!” (I could also believe someone other than Shannon saying that, but her saying it is yet another implausibility.) As it was, though, everyone leaping in the air and woohooing, as if the basketball team had just won the championship? Come the hell on. No way would teenagers go wild with adulation for the person who just told them they’re all a bunch of jerks.
[QUOTE=RikWriter]
ROFL! So a man who is NICE to women is now a creep??? Being nice to women is “weaseling” into her life???
That’s the most fucked up statement I believe I have ever heard.
[/quote]
[QUOTE=RikWriter]
The thing is, Jess used it to differentiate Anthony from someone who could (presumably from the tone) “legitimately” insert himself into a woman’s life by being good looking! Sorry, it’s still pretty fucked up.
[/QUOTE]
She used the term “sex appeal” parenthetically, but being appealing, even sexually, isn’t limited to looks. The problem with these guys is that they’re not appealling in anyway except their “niceness,” and they’re only nice to get something out of you, not out of any genuine concern for your well-being.
I went on dates with a couple of self-described “nice guys,” and there’s little more off-putting than a guy who uses his “niceness” to try to get under your defenses. Imagine dating a used car salesman: he’ll treat you like a king, but at the end of the day, he’s just doing what he can to put you behind the wheel of a '82 Dodge.
choie:
Was Warren character-assassinated? Or was he just dumped because she dumped him for Paul, who was in turn character-assassinated?
[QUOTE=choie]
If this is all supposed to be on the same day … holy crap, this is one freaking long day.
[/QUOTE]
You think this day is long? Try reading The Phantom! 
[QUOTE=Ferret Herder]
As for the criticisms about spending too much time analyzing a comic strip - why not? No one blinks an eye at book reviews, movie reviews, even TV show reviews. This series started in 1979; it’s not some little one-off doodle on the funny pages. It boasts a history, continuity, real-time aging for much of its run, and Johnston promotes her stances on various issues and topics she has addressed, like homosexuality, the Canadian Native/First Nations community, disabilities, and so forth. If the creator considers it a fairly serious matter, so can we.
[/QUOTE]
Absolutely. If someone stumbles in here just to complain about how we’re “obsessing” about a comic strip, just what exactly are they doing in Cafe Society to begin with? 
[QUOTE=Ferret Herder]
Finally, Johnston is heavy-handed in how she dismisses Liz’s other suitors, who fall all over her instantly, then show how unworthy they are nearly as quickly. Her escort at the wedding acts as if she’s so terribly interesting and lovely, then drinks himself into a stupor before the toasts are done. Her last boyfriend cheated on her, neatly glossing over how she ran away from commitment by not applying to stay in Mtigwaki (even though he applied for a transfer near her!) without even telling him. And so on, and so on. This match was inevitable and seen from miles away, in a fit of very poor storytelling and plotting.
[/QUOTE]
You are right on the money. And that’s the only thing that makes the “Liz and Anthony” thing palatable – the fact that they are both unlikeable losers who act without thinking about how it affects others.
[QUOTE=Jeep’s Phoenix]
I’ll bet he tries to drive home wasted, thus creating next week’s “don’t drink and drive” theme. (If the wedding was taking place during the day, I’d be willing to bet his car would t-bone a bunch of kids headed for that telethon.)
[/QUOTE]
Oh, good golly, I bet you’re right. Stand back, every one! We have a Very Special Episode coming up! :: barfy ::
[QUOTE=Gr8Kat]
I went on dates with a couple of self-described “nice guys,” and there’s little more off-putting than a guy who uses his “niceness” to try to get under your defenses. Imagine dating a used car salesman: he’ll treat you like a king, but at the end of the day, he’s just doing what he can to put you behind the wheel of a '82 Dodge.
[/QUOTE]
Come over here by me. I’m a self-described heel who will take frank advantage of you. 
I promise.
I don’t read FBoFW regularly any longer, but could Johnston be trying to teach the lesson of the title? Ie: some folks find happiness, but for others, it just ain’t gonna happen?
[QUOTE=El_Kabong]
I’ve no particular opinion on the predictable, tedious soap opera FBOFW has become (oh, wait, maybe I do after all), but I’ve got a question: how come everyone in the strip says "an’ " instead of “and”? Do Canadians routinely drop the d’s from spoken words? I know a few Canadians, an’ I don’t recall ever hearing that.
[/QUOTE]
Why yes, we often do drop the d’s off the end of words, in casual speech. And we often pronounce ‘t’ as something closer to ‘d’ as well: ‘better’ and ‘bedder’ are spoken almost identically in my dialect.
This thread reminds me… I haven’t read today’s FBoFW strip yet.
[QUOTE=Sunspace]
This thread reminds me… I haven’t read today’s FBoFW strip yet.
[/QUOTE]
Take whatever anti-nausea measures you can before you do…
[QUOTE=Jeep’s Phoenix]
I’ll bet he tries to drive home wasted, thus creating next week’s “don’t drink and drive” theme. (If the wedding was taking place during the day, I’d be willing to bet his car would t-bone a bunch of kids headed for that telethon.)
[/QUOTE]
I’m going with the idea that he comes to and sees Lizardbreath in Blandthony’s arms, and tries to deck either him or her.
If he tries to deck Anthony, Anthony will sidestep and gently dispatch with the drunken sod, as befitting his standing of A Gentleman.
If he tries to deck Elizabeth, then Anthony will defend her.
I’ve yet to decide which is more nauseating, and therefore more likely.
[Quote=cmkeller]
Was Warren character-assassinated? Or was he just dumped because she dumped him for Paul, who was in turn character-assassinated?
[/Quote]
Warren looked at some of Weed’s models at Mike’s party, which meant that he found pretty, well photographed women attractive. No, wait, that meant that he was obviously a cad with a wandering eye who would cheat on Elizabeth as soon as breathe.
Also, he horribly set her up to find out that Paul was cheating on her instead of spreading malicious gossip about her boyfriend. That was pretty terrible of him.
[QUOTE=Beware of Doug]
Come over here by me. I’m a self-described heel who will take frank advantage of you. I promise.
[/QUOTE]
I find your candor refreshing. Let’s go make out!
[QUOTE=Ferret Herder]
As for the criticisms about spending too much time analyzing a comic strip - why not? No one blinks an eye at book reviews, movie reviews, even TV show reviews. This series started in 1979; it’s not some little one-off doodle on the funny pages. It boasts a history, continuity, real-time aging for much of its run, and Johnston promotes her stances on various issues and topics she has addressed, like homosexuality, the Canadian Native/First Nations community, disabilities, and so forth. If the creator considers it a fairly serious matter, so can we.
Finally, Johnston is heavy-handed in how she dismisses Liz’s other suitors, who fall all over her instantly, then show how unworthy they are nearly as quickly. Her escort at the wedding acts as if she’s so terribly interesting and lovely, then drinks himself into a stupor before the toasts are done. Her last boyfriend cheated on her, neatly glossing over how she ran away from commitment by not applying to stay in Mtigwaki (even though he applied for a transfer near her!) without even telling him. And so on, and so on. This match was inevitable and seen from miles away, in a fit of very poor storytelling and plotting.
[/QUOTE]
I’m not criticizing; comics are just as valid an artform as any other. I’m simply amazed that fans show such loyalty to a strip, whose every aspect they evidently dislike … in detail.
Even, in some cases, to the point of writing lengthy essays as to why they dislike it - as in the essay someone linked above. A very well thought out piece of work, too.
So far, unless my memory is at fault, no-one has had anything good to say about the characters, the storylines, or the artwork. Yet you seem to know about the strip in exhaustive detail. What is it that keeps you fans reading this thing? It must have some merits.
To me, the reactions of the fans (as in this thread) are more interesting than the comic.
A lot of it is nostalgia. FBOFW used to be a GOOD strip. Reading the series with Farley’s death still tears me up. A lot of us grew up with the characters and feel that they’re “friends”, as much as, say, the characters on a long-running, beloved TV series would be. We love what FBOFW used to be, but are really, really irritated by what it’s become.
[QUOTE=Malthus]
So far, unless my memory is at fault, no-one has had anything good to say about the […] artwork.
[/QUOTE]
One interesting thing about FBOFW is that as the story has become less and less to my liking, the artwork has become much more realistic than it used to be.
[QUOTE=Malthus]
I’m not criticizing; comics are just as valid an artform as any other. I’m simply amazed that fans show such loyalty to a strip, whose every aspect they evidently dislike … in detail.
Even, in some cases, to the point of writing lengthy essays as to why they dislike it - as in the essay someone linked above. A very well thought out piece of work, too.
So far, unless my memory is at fault, no-one has had anything good to say about the characters, the storylines, or the artwork. Yet you seem to know about the strip in exhaustive detail. What is it that keeps you fans reading this thing? It must have some merits.
To me, the reactions of the fans (as in this thread) are more interesting than the comic.
[/QUOTE]
Reminds me of a few Simpsons threads I’ve read.
[QUOTE=jayjay]
A lot of it is nostalgia. FBOFW used to be a GOOD strip. Reading the series with Farley’s death still tears me up. A lot of us grew up with the characters and feel that they’re “friends”, as much as, say, the characters on a long-running, beloved TV series would be. We love what FBOFW used to be, but are really, really irritated by what it’s become.
[/QUOTE]
What he said. And in fact, I don’t spend much time on it. I read it in the newspaper each morning, along with the other comic strips I read, and I move on. If someone starts an interesting thread here, I might or might not post in it, much like with anything else I encounter.
[QUOTE=jayjay]
A lot of it is nostalgia. FBOFW used to be a GOOD strip.
[/QUOTE]
Sometimes, it still is. For my money, the strips involving the grandfather have been quite poignant. My own parents are suffering the ravages of age, and this isn’t an aspect of life that one often sees depicted in the comic strips.
The strips involving the kids, however, went off the beam some time ago. The drawback to having kids age is that eventually they grow up, and you have a family comic strip without a family.
To fend off that dread day, Lynn introduced April, who has never seemed as authentic as the earlier two (who were based on real children), and she won’t let Michael and Liz leave the nest. Michael perpetually teeters on the edge of insolvency, and Liz returns home to marry her high-school boyfriend.
It’s like watching a real-life mother who dreads nothing more than that her children might become strong, independent adults. It’s a little creepy.
[QUOTE=jayjay]
A lot of it is nostalgia. FBOFW used to be a GOOD strip. Reading the series with Farley’s death still tears me up. A lot of us grew up with the characters and feel that they’re “friends”, as much as, say, the characters on a long-running, beloved TV series would be. We love what FBOFW used to be, but are really, really irritated by what it’s become.
[/QUOTE]
Well, that makes sense.
Lacking that historic background, it just seems odd.
For example, I never felt any urge to write essays as to why I hated specific characters on the Family Circus - it was just a given that it was boring glurge, fit only for parody, and I assumed it always was.
[QUOTE=The Controvert]
What’s wrong with the Anthony character? Is he a serial rapist? Or people just don’t like him because he doesn’t conform to societal ideals of male beauty?
[/QUOTE]
People don’t like him because he’s a big weanie (and not in the good way). If he’d been drawn as good looking all along he’d still be a total weanie.
Weanie! Weanie! Weanie!