Keskustelujen arkisto

I think it would be nicer if the narrator had spoken slower. It is a bit difficult to follow. I imagine it would be VERY difficult for someone who is not a native English speaker AND also not familiar with Carl Barks and his work.
I love Barks' 10-pagers, but also love his epic adventure stories. I think that he was at his best in the better examples of both. I think he was a terrific storyteller, and artist. His work was the inspiration for all 3 of my careers. I owe him a lot, and am glad I was able to meet him and spend time with him and have him follow my career to a slight extent. His work brought a LOT of joy to a lot of people. He made The World a better place.

So, you can't praise Barks without bestowing equal (or greater) praise on Rosa? What is this, some kind of duck-comic affirmative action? There's no comparison between the two creators; Barks' artwork and writing--both of them deft and precise, with no wasted ink in either area-- are miles ahead of Rosa's long-winded writing and ugly, over-detailed artwork. Rosa has turned out some entertaining stories, but his self-consciousness, pomposity and mis-characterization of Scrooge, Donald, and the Nephews drag his work down heavily. Rosa (as he himself has said more than once) is really just a very successful "fan artist," while Barks is one of the greatest figures in comics history.

Quote from user: Synthetic HermitThis is the 2nd or 3rd video that guy's done about Barks, and between them, the only comment he's made about Don Rosa was a short, snide remark.
What's the problem?
Should there be a Don Rosa video for every 2nd Carl Barks video?

Where is the "short, snide remark" about Rosa? (Min. and sec., please.)
(This video was quite stressful so I didn't watch it all. Sounded like he was in a hurry.)

The remark may be a bit snidely phrased, but it happens to be quite true as far as Barks is concerned. So, you don't like Barks to be discussed unless Rosa is mentioned as well? It's this ridiculously cultish attitude on the part of Rosa's fans that tends to make a lot of Barks fans (myself included) more hostile to Rosa's stories. We like some of his stories, we just don't believe that he's on a par with Barks or that he deserves to be eternally twinned with him in Every Single Commentary on Barks.

Quote from user: Gyro GearlooseThe remark may be a bit snidely phrased, but it happens to be quite true as far as Barks is concerned. So, you don't like Barks to be discussed unless Rosa is mentioned as well? It's this ridiculously cultish attitude on the part of Rosa's fans that tends to make a lot of Barks fans (myself included) more hostile to Rosa's stories. We like some of his stories, we just don't believe that he's on a par with Barks or that he deserves to be eternally twinned with him in Every Single Commentary on Barks.
Must the distinction be made between "Barks fans" and "Rosa fans" as though they were mutually exclusive? I consider myself a fan of both of them, and it's more than a little insulting to be considered otherwise.

I thought the delivery here was great though, especially with how much he's cramming in. There's nothing more painful than hearing someone speak so painfully, painfully slowly. He explains his points very well, and it actually gives me some new appreciation for Barks' gag stories. Didn't get far enough in to the video to see the whole thing, though, since it looked to be more recap than anything.

I think Barks' best stories were his adventure tales, but I can't really back that up with anything more than personal preference. I just like them more than his gags for the same reason I'd rather watch 1776 than Die Hard. Both are good, but I have my preferences! I wouldn't ever deny the ridiculous amounts of creativity in his work, or his satirical strength, which are arguably strongest when you read his gag stories.

Erm...focusing on the topic at hand, I saw this previously and I thought it was pretty good. The speed of his talking wasn't an issue to me personally, and while it was long, it pretty much stuck to the point. I think it served its function well being to serve as a taste of Carl Barks to an audience that probably hasn't experience much or at all of his work first hand, and why it is good. Keep in mind that a good bulk o his audience is probably the same people that watch AVGN, not Disney comic fans, but he didn't make it so simple for people that have read them to be bored... or at least, I was interested the whole way through. Also, I think it was best that he kept JUST to Carl Barks, in fact I wouldn't have brought up Don Rosa until a later video. Not undermining Don Rosa by any means, but it is after all about Carl Barks. How confusing would it be to people that never knew much about Disney Comics in the first place to be thrown names left right and center just becuase they draw comics too? Why not have William Van Horn in there too? Vicar? Everybody else? It would distract from the point, which is "why Carl Barks is good", which I think it delivered.
As a bit of trivia, he is also the guy that did a game cheat video for Ducktales for the NES. I still want to try some of those out. I'm looking at you, Scrooge getting his head cut in half cheat.

Quote from user: ArildQuote from user: Synthetic HermitThe snide remark goes something like "Scrooge's life story was never meant to be told in full, no matter what Don Rosa may think". I can't recall where in the video it was said.
He knew that comics were just to have fun with. And taking things to seriously spoils them. It's the same reason why Scrooge's life story was never given in plain chronological terms. No matter how much Don Rosa insisted otherwise.
It's not snide to me. It's just a statement of facts.
Well personally that sounds like heavy opinion territory to me (mostly the spoiling part), but to each their own. I don't think he was out to bash Rosa either, just stating he thinks how Disney comics should be. Is he right? Who knows? I don't believe that there is a clear answer for that. After all, the opinions of the degrees of how serious the chronological terms should be varies from person to person.