Haven’t read in years, but I’m very much in the minority - I liked Scott (well, that depends on how he’s written, as any character that old has had many personalities) and really do not like Wolverine much and very dislike the idea of him with Jean. As part of an ensemble, Wolverine’s fine, but not as the dominant character. Don’t care for a lot of modern Batman (BatGod, BatJerk), either, though I thought him well-balanced in the bronze age a few times since (again, BatGod is phenomenally popular and has made DC a ton of money). I’d go with Bruce/Selina, except she can never stay on the non-villain/trustworthy side (again, partially a consequences of open-ended story-telling - reformed villains don’t stay reformed). Which brings me back to the topic of the thread - I think it’s already been mentioned, but totally trusting and working towards a common goal with the individuals that have previously tried to kill you. Sure, governments do half that (working with), but how much do individuals do that?
Have you ever read Jimmy Corrigan? It’s a different kind of graphic novel.
Sounds very interesting. I’ll check it out.
I’ll admit I didn’t take graphic novels as a serious art form until I read Watchmen. The “test” to me is, what can you do in this medium that cannot be done in any other medium? I felt that way about Watchmen, From Hell and Maus. I guess those are more literary takes on the form. Well, this could probably warrant its own thread!
My contribution to this thread: Some minor act of retribution results in character’s brutal death.
Culprit in crime drama: “I didn’t mean for him to die! I just pushed him!”
I do too and I’ve puzzled over why since I love movies, as visual a medium as you can get. I was thinking it was because the decades of superhero stories has gotten tiresome but then Dark Horse came out with the Firefly GNs some years ago and I was left equally cold about them. It works the other way, too. I read Girl Genius faithfully but snap up the Agatha H. books as soon as I find they’ve been published.
It happens in a later Kingsman sequel, IIRC
Grace and Alan (mentioned above), were courting for years. Then he formed the opinion that their characters were past that life stage, with declining audience interest in will-they-won’t-they, and transitioned the characters to ‘married’.
??? I dont remember anyone names Grace or Alan on NewsRadio? Or are you talking about another show?
Like, when someone A poisons someone B, so B will be to sick to make cheerleading try-outs, but NEVER intended to KILL B?
I was in a creative writing class in college where someone tried to pull-off one of those. Fell flat.
Or try to pronounce something on the menu and order a blue pencil box.
It might work if the poisoner insisted that they carefully researched a sub-lethal dose for someone of the victim’s body mass, but didn’t allow for an interaction with a medicine that the victim was taking.
As it happens, online discussion has been full of that here in melb.vic.au, with a fatal mushroom poisoning court case dominating the news.
“Murder” requires intent, so the prosecution has to prove intent. But there are various forms of “negligent homicide” that are also murder in various jurisdictions. “Negligent homicide” is something like "You didn’t intend to kill them, but you knew the food you prepared would cause them to die ". (Then, depending on the jurisdiction, you have to discuss “knew it would probably kill them”, or “knew it would possibly kill them”).
The reason for having a negligent homicide rule in statute law, where it has been implemented in statute law, is because proving “intent” has sometimes been difficult.
There is also a different approach: just accept manslaughter, and where criminal negligence is proven, boost the penalty up to match murder. That doesn’t give you the death penalty, which is why it has not been historically popular.
Since today is the 50th anniversary of premiere of JAWS, I just wanted to let people know it’s okay to go back in the water.
Next week is the 50th anniversary of my first trip to Russia. Another member of my group brought a copy of the novel along with him and I read it between 25 June and 4 July. We went from Leningrad to Riga the night of 5–6 July and spent the 7th on the beach at Jurmala.
No way in Hell was I going swimming in the Baltic after reading that damned book! It scared the crap out of me! 
I’m assuming a confusion with Burns and Allen aka George Burns and Gracie Allen.
Yes. Sorry.
And, for what it’s worth, wasn’t 1961 also when that same comic showed us that Jay Garrick was a happily married guy who was still fighting crime and saving lives as The Flash?
Incidentally, are we allowed to count The Phantom? No, not the one who debuted in 1936; his married predecessor. (Uh, make that “predecessors.”)
Kind of hard to find a wife who’ll be happy with committing her son to continuing the cultlike mandate of her husband and his predecessors. What if you have five daughters in a row first? What if there are boy twins?
Just saw this in an episode of a show called Elsbeth the other day. A man who was coaching his tennis pro son dosed his son’s opponent to throw him off his game and ensure a win for his son. But he collapses on the court and dies. Turns out whatever he got dosed with interacted with industrial-strength Viagra he had been taking on the regular.
Similar plot on Poker Face involving the wrong dose of reptile laxative.
Career criminals who are SO good at deception they actually manage to get innocent cops thrown off the case or fired.
“Yeah the cops busted me transporting 50 kilos of cocaine, but he shoved me against a wall too hard and now I’m filing a multi-million dollar lawsuit against the department!”