Did the divorce really cost that much that he had to give in for multiple tv shows and selling off bunch of his stuff?
https://www.dallasobserver.com/arts/neil-gaiman-auctions-memorabilia-in-irving-raises-1m-for-nonprofits-18863340
 |
 UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
|
>neil gaiman, penniless?
Deserved for allowing this shit
>pennisless?
That's a given
I think he allowed it BECAUSE he's short on money.
If I had a nickel for every time a character who was literally paper-white was played by a black woman I'd have two nickels
Which isn't a lot, but considering how much I love pure white skin, it is incredibly irritating
This only bothered me because the comic design is based off a real person.
>second oldest being in the universe
>SHE SHOULD BE WHITE
What color are Snowflakes?
Aren't all of the Endless homosexuals just lead face makeup white anyway
Not Destruction. He's a trad white European CHAD.
>What color are Snowflakes
Do you think he needs over $1M in deductions whilst simultaneously being poor?
Fair enough, she should be an undescribable monstrosity from a planet orbiting a start that died billions of years ago
The stars and planets were sentient before mortals, Anon. Read the comic
I understand you autists being mad about this sheboon but she's kinda hot and she's got a fat ass
I usually never care about race swaps. but this one depressed me and made me so fricking angry.
I was legitimately fricking bothered and sad
death is one of the most iconic. characters ever made and also extremely recognizable to everyone. even if you don't read sandman you know her.
like Domino. what a fricking awful change domino was.
Ariel the little mermaid I can understand because she's in the Caribbean by the sun all day long. I can see a Caribbean mermaid.
but death was fricking bullshit. it's supposed to be the grim reaper. a fricking skull of death pale white
>Ariel the little mermaid I can understand because she's in the Caribbean by the sun all day long. I can see a Caribbean mermaid.
The Little Mermaid is not set in the Caribbeans thoughbeit.
Wanting to see beautiful women is not hate speech.
Its just fricking lazy production wise. She would've looked fine with a pale body paint on top. Would've helped the show stand out from other Netflix shows in the show list but nope. Death is now black because diversity and because show runners can't be arsed to have makeup effects, Dream doesn't have his iconic eyes either for the most part.
late to the thread but did they not even give her Death's iconic eye makeup?
she was a fine actress but the costume department should have been sacked, she looked less like a goth and more like she was going jogging
But it was literally the exact same outfit she wears for that scene in the comics: dark jeans, dark tank top and an ankh necklace. You think the costume department should be sacked for following the comic too closely and not giving her extra goth-y clothes?
yes. it was a goth look in the comic because she had chalk white powdered skin and some kohl eye makeup on, as well as crazy souxie hair. none of which you can put on a black chick.
so she just looks like a normal woman going grocery shopping. there are black goths, i don't know how they fricked up that bad.
Craziest part is, she was the best casting decision in the show. Sure she's black, but she's a believable death. No other actor captured the energy of their role.
i thought the eternally alive guy was fun. hobb?
>the best
That's complete bullshit and you know it. Don't even (You) me.
I thought the Sandman dude captured his whiny melancholy well.
she's attractive but
>would have been fine with one raceswap, but there were many
>doesn't use white make up in the same pattern that the comic character had black make up
it wasn't just over the top woke, it was also lazy
I honestly wouldn't have even minded this if they just gave her a goth outfit and makeup.
Instead it just seems lazy.
Yep.
you gay, homie
Damn, he really fricked up hard.
Here's why that's a good thing- empowering women to take what they deserve from the unfair sex. Kneel, Gayman.
>Did the divorce really cost that much that he had to give in for multiple tv shows and selling off bunch of his stuff?
Anon, read the fricking article.
>With proceeds going to The Hero Initiative benefiting comic creators in need and the Authors League Fund, the auction allowed Gaiman to pay it forward to fellow artists who weren't as financially fortunate as he is. And the grand total of $1,029,392 will go a long way to doing just that. For collectors, owning an iconic piece of comic or literature history was a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.
No you're not supposed to actually read the article, you're supposed to look at the headline and laugh!
Even headline says that he donated all of it.
Nah, that's the subhead, anon, who's got time to read a subhead?
It's a beard. He kept some of the money. That's how these "charity" auctions work.
it's literally fraud if you do that
you should report him to the IRS and get yourself on the cranks who make bogus reports list, you fricking moron
I report your mom for giving birth to you.
They don't need to. They claim the charitable donations on taxes.
You fricking moron.
>Anon, read the fricking article.
Anon, read between the fricking lines. Donating to charity is literally a tax write-off. And he just turned his junk drawer into a $1Million+ tax write-off. You people are so fricking stupid it hurts.
>N-no, you guys. He's really broke! Go woke go broke, right???
So broke he needs to donate one million to charity to offset his earnings? I hope to be that broke one day
donating charity is for cucks yes its why he is going broke
I repeat, I'd love to be that broke one day.
Couldn't that offset what he has to pay for alimony? Maybe he'd rather give it to charity than to his loving ex wife
It could do both! But neither would indicate he's broke; they'd indicate the opposite, in fact.
Oh, I don't think that homie is broke. He seems the type to be extra spiteful about alimony though
>IT'S OVER, SPIDER-MAN! I DEPICTED MYSELF AS THE SMILING CHAD AND YOU AS THE CRYING VIRGIN!
Not even close to what I said, but thanks for proving me correct that you're a moron!
>HE'S P-P-P-POOR!
Did you little kids look that up on the internet or do you have his actual bank account balance? Fricking. morons.
If you think someone with no money needs $1 million in tax writeoffs, you're obviously underage and have no idea how taxes work.
Putting aside the stupidity of "he needs 1M in writeoffs... because he's poor!" he's been doing fundraisers and shit for things like Authors League Fund and Hero Initiative for decades. It's kinda his thing. He doesn't just write books, he turns around and directs money to causes he believes in. Sometimes he even does work specifically for a cause.
Hell, back in the day he managed to get a whole host of comic creators to make a for-charity book protesting Thatcher's shitty anti-gay laws (got Frank "oh right he's a liberal on lots of issues, just not Islam" Miller to contribute to it, giving us a wonderfully bad-but-his-heart-was-in-the-right place" Gay British Robocop parody).
And yet he needed Marvel to fund his lawsuit against Todd.
Furthermore, he's divorced now. More than likely paying alimony and child support. Speculation is the netflix series only happened cause he needed fast money now.
18m net worth getting cut in half after divorce is an ugly thing.
> And yet he needed Marvel to fund his lawsuit against Todd.
Because he could just write all of 1602 on a plane ride. He could get away with not putting his own skin in the game. He’s a very money oriented person and that includes making money smarter and risking less
>making money smarter and risking less
No risk
No reward
Fortune favors the brave. That's why Todd owns Angela, the Count, and Medieval Spawn.
Well, yeah. Todd was rolling in cash and willing to fight. I'm not saying Gaiman was hyper-rich enough to easily take on the most financially competent Image Founder during the 90s. Besides, any time you CAN get a corporation to foot the bill you should.
>18m net worth getting cut in half after divorce is an ugly thing.
Yes, that poor man, still a millionaire but less of one.
Yes
If you wanna read something funny, the Gayman only got 1.1m in the settlement with Todd. Funnier is the Gayman had to pay his own legal fees so who knows how much of that money just went to the Marvel lawyers.
In the end, Angela, Cog, Medieval Spawn, Dark Ages Spawn, Tiffany, and "Man of Miracles" are owned in whole or in part by Todd who will continue making bank on comics and toys. Meanwhile Knells gets to write Miracleman for Marvel which is something I really don't get but I'm not a cuck.
I can smell the culture war on you.
>Speculation is the netflix series only happened cause he needed fast money now
Yeah, perpetuated by fricking idiots who are grasping at straws to find something to shit on Neil and the TV show. The deal with Netflix was made in 2019 before the separation and divorce even happened.
why do we never hear about animation philanthropy? this is the first time I've ever heard of anyone in showbiz donating money to the artists.
why are the people on top so selfish and greedy?
OR maybe they are donating money to artists but its all behind closed doors and a certain tribe? makes you wonder...
>refuses to sellout to DC and Hollywood
>is doing just fine
He's doing "fine" cuz his a hobo living in the wilderness
It's worse than that.
He lives in Northampton.
does he "own" anything worth selling out for?
He did sell out ages ago, and he seethes about it every day.
>Donates DC royalties to BLM
>Doesn't get royalties from anyone else
Is he seriously just living off of Lost Girls and From Hell reprints?
IIRC he's only donating the film royalties, not the comic royalties.
>the film royalties
so like a buck a year?
>Donates DC royalties to BLM
eww i never knew that respect completely lost
Does he even still do that after it came out that the vast majority of BLM donations were basically embezzled?
the fact he did it in the first place makes him a cuck not worthy of respect
the fact he did it in the first place makes him a chad very worthy of respect
no he fricking isn't it makes him an absolute homosexual cuck and so are you go have a nice day
yes he fricking is it makes him an absolute alpha chad and so are you go make lots of babies
no it dosn't homosexual i already told you to go have a nice day you wienersucking homosexual
That's the least relevant part of why that's a respect killing move.
>Donates DC royalties to BLM
wow i never knew that respect completely regained
thats because you're a homosexual israelite literally have a nice day
thats because you're a stud white literally love yourself
nah you're a homosexual cuck have a nice day
I hope you change someday.
Wow I never knew that my level of respect is completely unchanged.
>is doing just fine
except mentally
I honestly don't know if I could tell the difference between him and a crazy homeless heroine addict on a street corner.
And what would he sell? He dosen't even own his most obscure titles
For a man so foccused on "creator control" he never worked on anything truly Independent
People who don’t know what the frick they’re talking about really should shut up rather than humiliate themselves by making posts like this.
He never owned his DC stuff but he specifically got tricked into selling Watchmen. DC used the not-yet popular TPB format to keep Watchmen indefinitely.
He went indie in the 90s, but that fell apart. A Small Killing didn't do well, and it's supposedly one of his most personal comics. Big Numbers was left incomplete because his artists had personal life problems. From Hell had three publishers during its original run, or something like that. Then he signed up to do ABC under WildStorm, but Jim Lee sold it just before he got started. He was able to keep LoEG, but the rest of ABC belongs to DC.
He liked working on comics too much to do the business side of things properly.
I read somewhere that he wanted to do a straightforward Western comic with Glenn Fabry, and also an Ant-Man comic for Marvel, but neither ended up happening. There are probably loads of unrealized projects aside from Halo Jones and Big Numbers, both of which were gearing up to be as good as his best comics. What could have been.
>He never owned his DC stuff but he specifically got tricked into selling Watchmen.
This isn't correct. The truth is the people that got the British Invasion to work at DC were a close net of people and it really was built on a bunch of relationships, friendships and acquaintances. He didn't necessarily get tricked, he was given assurances that the work would return to him and contractually they would but because the work proved so popular they kept it in print preventing this from ever happening. With the movie and later the prequel comics they tried to bully him with new agreements and used the fact his friend's brother was dying against him. As well as using a bunch of his friends to try and pressure him into signing.
It is really personal.
people telling this version always skip the part where DC flat out refused to renegotiate the contract, a courtesy they did extend do the likes of Frank Miller and Neil Gaiman, who basically control their every DC property
I'd think the main thing is(outside of Ronin, which Miller DID take with him and just drew a new series of a few months ago), Miller and Gaiman's DC properties are anchored to the DC characters in some way. Watchmen can be completely removed from DC and suffer nothing in terms of licensing. It gives him a leverage the other two don't have. at the same time. He also came before Gaiman and Miller's deals and took his ball home before they really got their sweetheart deals, so it's likely him leaving is exactly why they were better to the latter.
>Completely removed from DC
If you hadn't noticed, DC has this thing where they buy heroes and incorporate it into their universe. Fawcett, Wildstorm, etc. Watchmen is even dumber in this regard as it was originally going to be the old Charlton Comics heroes being deconstructed. I call Shenanigans on Moore given his best known works (League of Extraordinary Gentleman, Watchmen, Lost Girls) are basically fanfiction.
Taking a moment from shitting on the Gayman, he did succeed as a novelist. That can't be taken away from him. Same with Frank Millar having a slew of successful indie comics under his belt (Love me some Big Guy and Rusty) even if he is best known for The Dark Knight. Can't say the same for Moore.
Out of everyone, I honestly think Moore has more than a few skeletons when it comes to his negotiations. I mean, why else do we not have The Violator mini-series collected as a trade? At least Angela got that much before the lawsuit.
>Can't say the same for Moore.
Except you can.
>Watchmen is even dumber in this regard as it was originally going to be the old Charlton Comics heroes being deconstructed.
Ok but the final book isn't. The rest of your post is just angry schizoposting. The Violator mini isn't collected because it didn't sell well.
>Didn't sell well
You do know it got a sequel, right? Violator/Badrock.
That doesn’t mean it’s worth reprinting saleswise. Otherwise Moore’s avatar press stuff would remain in print. His name alone doesn’t sell books
Just so you understand EVERYTHING Spawn has gotten a reprinting via trade and/or Omnibus at this point. Except for Violator and Violator/Badrock, for whatever reason. Dark Ages Spawn was in similar situation due to the lawsuit but is now finally getting a trade.
Also not up for digital for some reason. That I'm not sure given the old contracts couldn't have foreseen digital comics being a thing.
>his best known works
>Lost Girls
Nobody has read this.
I've read it. I thought it was an somewhat interesting take, reinterpreting stories about young girl's adventures in fantastical lands as a representation of their sexual awakening, that most often gets dismissed as "lol edgy rape" by people who clearly haven't actually read it and just think it must all be rape because it's a Moore comic.
He's literally a millionaire from his work and still receives checks.
is this guy still alive? im pretty shure Cinemaphile said he died some years back
>I say KNEEL, Gay Man
>Charity? I think I know her. She worked the strip club back in the day, right bud?
Don't you have more AI slop to approve for cover art Todd?
Based Todd the GODD putting nuCinemaphile and nu/toy/ on perpetual seethe.
Reminder that the only time Spawn was any good was when HBO edited out most of Todd's cringey dialog and allowed the action scenes to make a lick of sense
Yeah but they also ruined one of the best scenes in the comics by doing hacky "If you kill him you'll be just as bad as the pedo who kills kids!"
Todd was right
Neil was wrong
Neil only won because he has LE Charming Accent and Todd is a lunkhead
>Someone selling off memorabilia with all profits going to charity is equivalent to being poor
only in Cinemaphilehio
He only became success because he was kicking it during the right place at the right time.
He became a success because people really liked his art. Marvel gave him his own Spidey book that didn't cross over with the other 3 just to keep him happy because he made them money hand over fist. McFarlane, Lee & Liefeld were HUGE losses in the 90s because people bought their books just to look at the pictures. You didn't actually think literal children liked Chris Claremont soap opera dialogue, did you?
>McFarlane, Lee & Liefeld were HUGE losses in the 90s because people bought their books just to look at the pictures.
They were successful because of the speculator market that Marvel catered to in the early 90s. What, you actually think those guys actually sold on the merit of their skills and not a soulless corporate entity pushing them?
If Spawn didn't manage to be a top seller with minimal gimmicks, I'd be more inclined to agree with you. Yes, variants, gimmicks, and polybagged books got speculator dicks hard. But then there's issues 2-12 that won't have those.
When I was a kid in the 90s, my local comic store would bring in the #1s, but not 2-12. I didn't realize until a few years ago that Wildcats #2 actually got made, let alone #3 to #50. When I went to buy the 2nd one, the dickhead behind the counter told me it was cancelled.
That sucks. I'm sorry that happened to you. I need to remember that just because something didn't happen to me doesn't mean it didn't happen to others.
Marvel's biggest attempts to target the speculator market were focused around their star artists because those guys were popular and sold books. People who hate Todd, Rob and the others keep trying to write a false narrative where they weren't ever really popular with kids, and were just in the right place at the right time to be part of the speculator boom.
They were successful because they understood their audience and made things that audience liked. Believe it or not there was a time when publishers and studios actually made things for their existing male audience instead of a purely hypothetical female one.
>men only care about breasts and big guns and edgy spikes
How very misandrist of you.
Damn, Infinity Inc was that important?
>donated proceeds to charity
OP didn't even read the subhead contained within his shitty phone screenshot, is a homosexual
journalists do not deserve to be read
dont justify your moronation
What a fricking moron you are, Satan.
I always hate it when some book I actually care about get's a foreword by Gaiman.
I've actually bought older versions of the same books just to avoid having to own shit by him.
Dude's like the biggest hackfraud in fantasy books.
>hack
He's got 'em all fooled, huh?
>Awards based on merit lmao
The man is great at navigating Hollywood and successfully made a brand for himself in a crowded pool of authors, of course he has tons of awards.
I can't stand Gaiman but still think the Goldfish Pool is a good story, he has an A+ understanding of LA
Despite OP not actually reading the article he posted, it IS notably the case that Gaiman has become hungry for money in the last few years. Like, that Sandman Netflix show was clearly a piece of shit, and Gaiman for years said he'd only approve an adaptation if it was "exactly right." Clearly that went out the window with the Netflix show. Is it because he was hard up for cash and needed money right then and there?
Yes, you, a seething fanboy clearly knows better.
>Makes a comic that is super progressive for the late 1980s
>Gets made a show runner on the adaptation 30 years later
>Updates it to be even more progressive
You can say a lot of things but not that Gaiman's fingerprints aren't all over Netflix's Sandman.
Remember when casualgators thought Gaiman would join them in their fight against the dreaded SJWs? Fun times.
Gaiman has always been a performative homosexual, he's snobby as frick in person and nothing like the humble sage act he pulls
>he's snobby as frick in person
anon that's just his British accent setting off your inferiority complex
Nah, he's just a very b***hy diva that let the fame go to his head
what did they expect? his surname is literally GAY MAN
Stop being moronic. With propaganda and SEO working the way it does, odds are sky high that those 4 articles were all from sjw fellating shitholes like polygon.
That doesn't change the fact that a moronic casual thought Gaiman would be against SJWs despite obviously always having been one himself, you moron.
That has nothing to do with my criticism of his so-called research. If he had actually looked into it properly instead of skimming the first 4 sjw propaganda articles he might have changed his opinion.
>the guy who's been an SJW since the 80s would totally have joined my anti-SJW crusade if he just read the right article!
casualgaters are fricking delusional, film at 11
just a reminder that neil is pro e-girl showing that he is actually capable of rational decision making. it's hardly implausible to think he'd be incapable of changing his mind if he did proper research instead of skimming the first 4 propaganda pieces israelitegle threw at him
>thought Gaiman would be against SJWs despite obviously always having been one himself
Gaiman isn't an SJW or at the very least didn't use to be, he was a liberal but that's not the same thing.
Being "woke" or "SJW" is not the same thing as being liberal or progressive the main difference being that one (liberals) are open minded and believe in a live and let live worldview while SJWs are prejudicial towards anyone who falls outside of the limited stereotypical behaviors they find acceptable and rejects anyone they see as being outside their bubble.
Again he's not/wasn't an SJW
>you can't call the guy who put positive gay and trans characters in stories in the 80s woke or an SJW because I just made up a new definition of the words that include being prejudiced against other people that nobody but me uses
yeah okay
Not him, but how you would define a SJW/woke?
I kinda know how you're gonna respond, but I'm hoping you're not a complete moron.
Anyone who thinks the races, sexes or sexualities are equal.
Bad bait, 3/10 apply yourself.
>like you.
I literally wrote I was not the same anon, you paraonid schizo.
>meaningless buzzword
There we go, knew that was going to be your angle.
I mean, it IS another word for liberal, at least those of today, but that doesn't make it a buzzword.
Well I used to use the old definition of SJW, where the main part was someone being hypocritical and just talking a big game about social justice online, but I've had to abandon that because morons made it into a meaningless buzzword that's basically another word for liberal. Same with woke. For Gaiman to not be classed as an SJW or woke I'd have to ignore literally every single article about what woke/sjw creators or studios are doing because that's what Gaiman has been doing for his whole career. Or just make up my own definition that nobody else uses, like you.
>I just made up a new definition of the words
It is the only definition that matters and it isn't new.
>you can't call the guy who put positive gay and trans characters in stories in the 80s woke or an SJW
Because neither of those are inherently woke, they are merely inclusive.
>that include being prejudiced against other people
Being prejudicial is inherent to wokeness, the basis of wokeness is marxism, wokeness recontextualizes race relations and relations between minority and majority groups through a marxist lens where the only solution to discrimination is revolutionary violence.
Liberal concepts like inclusion and reconciliation cannot exist under a woke framework.
Gaiman's past works were all based in people of all backgrounds and lifestyles coexisting despite their differences, if his work were based in woke ideology there wouldn't be any coexistence instead the minority characters would shun greater society and either destroy it or create their own separate society.
A definition shouldn't be defined by how the worst actors use it, otherwise no word would mean anything and language becomes useless.
>the main difference being that one (liberals) are open minded and believe in a live and let live worldview while SJWs are prejudicial towards anyone who falls outside of the limited stereotypical behaviors they find acceptable and rejects anyone they see as being outside their bubble.
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
I still can't get over the fact that casualgate started because some morons on twitter threw a massive tantrum over women drinking milkshakes
No, it was Joe Glass trying to get some guy's youtube channel taken down by filing fake strikes only to get caught redhanded by being moronic enough to announce it on twitter.
Ya boi Zack only took off thanks to multiple Streisand Effects (see Mark Waid interfering with his publishing deal with Antarctic Press). Every stupid attack only made him stronger. And that's ignoring the EVS stuff.
Now watch a supergay troony mod delete the thread now that this subject has come up. Nevermind that its kinda on topic given Neil donated $100 to Mark Waid for the lawsuit.
Milkshake Lunch in memory of Flo Steinberg at that. Who none of these frickers know because they don't read comic credits.
seriously the amount of mongoloid 40+ year old comic fans who don't bother to check credits on comic book besides penciller is ridiculous. You can talk to people with longboxes for decades who don't know comics editors at all. Their engagement with the medium is incredibly surface level.
>Who none of these frickers know because they don't read comic credits.
I'll admit that I don't really pay attention to comic credits. I only know the big writer names like Moore, Mignola, Gaiman etc or the names of smaller writers I really like the style of, mostly because I'm shit at remembering names, and most of the time I just read a story because the blurb sounds interesting and pay zero attention to writers or artists. HOWEVER, I also don't go on reeing sprees about the industry that I'm paying zero attention to and I'm not watching any youtubers who claims to be telling me about their dark secrets because why the frick would I give a shit? I seriously don't understand how there's this huge contingent of people who don't know shit about the creators but still spend all that energy being mad at them.
Neil Gaiman was a huge freedom of speech campaigner in the eighties and nineties when he was the one on the end of threats of censure over being “offensive” or “controversial”
Now that his people are in power, he has no problem with censoring and going after those evil offensive folx. He has no convictions whatsoever
E. Michael Jones has pointed out that israelites display this pattern of behaviour.
have you considered that maybe Gaiman is being consistent and the things you're upset about are imaginary.
>Teams up with Marvel i.e. the buttholes who have screwed over many creators over the years over his spat with Todd McFarlane
>Wanted rights to Miracleman, a character he didn't create
NTA but its clear the Gayman is just self-serving. That said, only Dave Sims has kept the "creator's rights" bit to heart. Everyone else understands that writers and artists are liars and buttholes which is why contracts exist.
That has literally nothing to do with what those anons were talking about, Mr. Mcgaylane. Learn how to read instead of just responding with your autistic special interest.
Mr. Gay was not just "pro-trans" or whatever, I mean he was, but he was verily open against any form of censorship. Now he clearly isn. So no, he's not consistent.
You didn't even watch the show, gay.
Take your meds, schizotroony.
Being against censorship =/= supporting hate speech
Oy vey! You tell 'em, transistor!
You’re joking but this is probably what h tells himself. Even though the exact same arguments used today to restrict free speech because it’s offensive were being used against him 20-30 years ago
He never cared about free speech. Just being able to push his personal agenda
It’s not about being offensive, it’s about being discriminatory.
Kneel Gay Man
>we can offend the Christians and whites, just not anybody else
Powerful
shouldn't you be pretending you aren't an extremist coomer homosexual shitting his pants on the internet?
>It’s not about being offensive, it’s about being discriminatory.
You just said the same thing twice
Businesses getting rid of language sane people who don't agree with your fringe nonsense isn't censorship, it's business. The government isn't restricting your speech no matter how hard you cry and scream that you're the victim of some boogeyman who has never done anything to you or anyone you know or have heard about ever.
>You didn't even watch the show, gay.
This isn't Cinemaphile. I read the comics. Destiny came first, then Death
>He has no convictions whatsoever
He doesn't, it's just he's so good at pretending to be this wise old sage. This dude has the kind of Teflon reputation that could survive being caught picking up on 13 year old Death cosplayers (those doesn't exist anymore) at cons and he'd still not get cancelled. The only way he'd ever fall out of favor is if he started openly being a TERF or something
he edged close to it for 'queerbaiting' before he shat out s2 of good omens where it made the angels gay.
It's 2024, who gives cares about those morons?
You don’t get it anon. It’s offensive to fans of a progressive work if you address and acknowledge things you failed at and update them in an adaptation. Neil is a sellout because he made characters more diverse and gay because that is not staying true to the spirit of the comic! Also, Death’s skin colour matters more than anything else about her, including acting performance and words she says. Neil is taking a stinky shit on his dead friend by going woke and casting a black woman. FACT!!!
You're breathtaking.
My favorite part was the ancient moon entity telling the troony he'll never be a woman.
Back in the 2000s Gaiman could pick up any miniseries he wanted at Marvel/DC for a decent sum. But since those companies have gotten cheaper I think they can't afford his rates anymore.
The man has written a huge number of books and screenplays. He brings in monthly royalty checks no matter what.
Even if he never makes another thing again, he still likely draws a decent income in the $80-90K range through royalty payouts alone. He's just not crazy wealthy Hollywood party elite in this day and age.
And yet he needed to get on his knees and BEG Marvel to help him sue Todd McFarlane. Whatever royalties he's getting, it ain't much. And whatever he is getting, his ex-wife is clearly taking most of it.
He makes more than that.
A lawsuit like that costs 10s of millions of dollars which you will never see a penny off of.
And yet Todd didn't have to beg for assistance from DC or anyone. The fact that he was going through a bankruptcy at the time just goes to shows how much of a Cuck the Gayman was.
And in the end, Todd won. He gets to reprint whatever he wants while the Gayman is busy getting dicked by Disney Marvel.
Todd owns his own toy company. Which is actually decent unlike his shitty comics. Merch matters way more.
Todd might've not made Span ass successful as Marvel or DC..but at the end of the day, his name is on his own paycheck headers.
Irrelevant, a bankruptcy was a bankruptcy. Funny thing tho, the Gayman only got one million in the settlement but that may or may not have been eaten by Marvel via attorney fees.
Goes to show how little the Gayman was making on his writings.
Considering he can give a million to charity he probably has around 10 million in assets. The chances that he has to pay a lot to Amanda palmer is probably nonsensical since she's pretty rich already. He didn't want to burn his own money and it's not like he was going to self publish so for him it was a win-win just to spite mcfarland.
>Had to do work for Marvel despite refusing to do so in the past
>Marvel owns the rights to Miracleman
>Sold Angela only for Marvel to redesign her and NOT use Todd's design
>Spent ten years in litigation
>Had to settle with Todd who gets to make more bank on Spawn reprints/Compendiums now
>Angela, Cog, Medieval Spawn, Dark Ages Spawn, and Tiffany are owned by Todd
>Is now stuck being a slave to Disney Marvel who will ruin Miracleman in time
>Gets divorced while Todd continues to have a happy Christian marriage
The Gayman didn't have money to burn. That's the simple truth of the matter.
They hate you because you tell the truth
Signing off on a second and third season of Good Omens is pretty ghoulish
I haven't watched the second season of Good Omens because I found Gaiman's whole
>this was totally what Terry and I were planning you guys, such a shame he isn't here any more, but trust me, this is absolutely definitely 100% what he would have wanted
shtick in the publicity to be somewhat off putting.
And besides, the original novel (and the first season) wrapped up fine. I never felt the need for a sequel.
yeah man Pratchett would never have written an unconventional couple that works as an allegory for gayness even though the beings don't have a gender
I don't really get what point you're trying to make here. Maybe try being genuine and just say what you mean, instead of writing like some snarky twitter reject.
Like I said, I haven't seen the second season. II don't even know what it's about, apart from them adding more gayness and an angel in a wheelchair. I simply avoided it from the outset because I was put off by Gaiman saying it was absolutely what him and Pratchett would have done had they ever gotten round to writing that sequel, when obviously, even if he's working off of a plot outline they did together, the finished product is ultimately still going to be 90% Gaiman. And I'm just not that interested in that.
>instead of writing like some snarky twitter reject.
It's funny because the Twitter dialect makes it obviously the same lone homosexual defending Gaiman
I also thought putting words in a dead man's mouth was tasteless, like he's such an butthole that he can't just be modest about continuing the story without Terry
It literally says he donated the profits to charity. I can’t even tell if people are legitimately this stupid or if they cynically know that the only way to get replies is to make idiotic bait posts.
I am inclined to believe both by now. Also, they don't just "believe it". It's true. Look at the amount of replies. I quickly ctrl+f "donate and that's 15. So even ignoring anything else, you have a beautiful 25 to 1 moron ratio.
Why would you get married as a man unless to raise the kid you accidentally made?
Do you know how I can tell you're in the lowest bracket?
Neil Gaiman is in the upper bracket and he's just as fricked as everyone else. It's not a bracket thing, it's a woman's entitlement thing
You think he's earning that much a year when he doesn't have material coming out? I'm not saying it's a bracket thing, I'm saying you don't and will never earn enough to understand
Understand what? That men at higher levels of income get preyed upon by women?
Understand how you minimize your income to lower your tax burden. Step one, prenup.
Prenups negate the problem he's going through, which is probably a pretty harsh alimony
Very good! Now do you understand why I brought it up? I'll give you a banana sticker if you can.
>the problem he's going through
He's literally going through zero problems, though. He's not John Cleese desperately doing anything to make money, he's just doing the same shit he's been enjoying doing for literally decades. Probably because his wife is a rich pop singer and not stay at home mom with zero income.
There are no upsides whatsoever.
To satisfy the compulsive gambler inside.
expectations
If he is penniless then why did he donate $1m to charity to benefit actual penniless comic creatives?
Because american "charity" is fake. It's a tax deductible admission fee to the holier-than-thou rich people club. No people living paycheck to paycheck allowed. Those rich enough to donate shitloads do it because they get to rub elbows with other rich people, not because they're genuinely good and wholesome.
Did you read the article you fricking moron?
>he had to give in for multiple tv shows
yeah man Neil Gaiman never liked doing screenplays for movies and tv shows before his divorce, he absolutely hated it, and he was never involved with any charities either
What is it about Gaiman that makes comic casuals seethe so hard? With Moore you get people angry at his beliefs and thinking Watchmen ruined comics but with Gaiman it's just this weird aimless seethe where they have to pretend he hates his life or is forced to do things he's been doing on his own for decades.
They think he's too pretentious. He isn't but they think that because he writes above their reading level.
Gaiman’s reading level is American high school level. I know because read all his crap in highschool, he’s about as “advanced” as Stephen King. At most he’ll throw in some English lit allusion on top of whatever mythology he’s ripping on at the time
Funny because I read him mostly in junior high/high school, too, and really don't like his stuff now. His work is simple shit that feels refreshing at that age, like his Youtube essayist tier opinion on Susan in that Narnia short story
Also lol'd when I found out his quote about fairytales being important because it shows dragons can be beaten was ripped from GK Chesterton. Fricking shameless
Neil Gaiman is a pathetic fly circling Michael Moorwiener's and Terry Pratchett's shit. He's never had an original idea. But not content to stay in his Tumbler hugbox, he has to go and write gay little forwards and blurbs to other authors books so he can get his name on the cover of another mans hard work.
Thanks for giving us an example of the weird seethe.
Not a fan of the Gaiman, because you want Moorewiener? This has to be a troll post
I loved Terry Pratchett as a kid and read Good Omens and was wondering why I didn't like it that much
Then I read American Gods and it all made sense
I love Pratchett and American Gods but can't stand Good Omens. It's the worst of both of their writing worlds.
What's wrong with American Gods?
I've seen A LOT of people complain about Shadow not reacting realistically or being too okay with everything that happens, not realising he's that way on purpose to show he's depressed and dead to the world and only going along with things.
Gaiman is like Kevin Smith. He succeeded based on his timing more than his writing, and now he trades on a nostalgic association with a bygone, less shitty era.
I disagree, Sandman still holds up. The problem is that Gaiman is a one-trick pony, as most of his subsequent work just feels like it's repeating tropes from the Sandman, but more watered-down.
Then why has Gaiman continued to be successful in a mainstream level and Kevin Smith just bleeds a dwindling cult fanbase? Smith has had like 2 movies critics can agree are good, Gaiman has had more award novels than Smith has had award winning films.
I don't think you understand or you're pretending to be asleep. People read and loved the Sandman who don't read comics. People have discovered him and love his works who have never read Sandman. I'm not going to pretend he's the best writer ever but he can tell a gripping story.
Nah, Kevin Smith is way worse and a much lesser writer.
Spoken like someone who only has a fifth grade level reading skills. Gaiman has been a successful novelist for several decades at this point. Writing comics is basically slumming for him, he makes way more prestige and money doing actual literature.
> actual literature.
He does genre stuff, he’s about a notch below Stephen king and a notch above Zane, the author of sex novels for middle aged black women. Just writing books doesn’t put you on Cormac McCarthy’s level
Genre literature is still literature, dear seetheling.
>he’s about a notch below [the guy who sold so many books that he made up a new author name to publish his stories under just to see if they'd still be a hit and then they totally were]
oh wow how terrible for him, thank god he's got comics going for him
he's israeli, his family was involved in scientology (i believe he has a sibling who still is), and he has written gay and trans positive material
Can't tell if bait or genuine schizo.
check out wikipedia fren
I always assumed it was the fans in another Jhonen Vasquez type of situation. where the guy who made the thing was okay enough, but the fans were so fricking insufferable, that it made people retroactively hate the creator for unleashing this shit upon humanity.
I like to think that Neil would approve of all the alternate universe fanfics people write about him being poor, broke, and miserable. It's a creative exercise, after all.
>fights a sandman adaption tooth and nail for 20 years knowing all he can ultimately do is refuse to give it his seal of approval because he doesn't actually own sandman
>divorce looming
>suddenly accepts a shitshow of a n*tflix adaption with a wokemaxxed failcast and even runs damagecontrol for it, begging people to keep rewatching it to boost numbers
Truly it's a mystery why anyone could think he's a homosexual that has lost all integrity.
>a wokemaxxed failcast
Gaiman has always been woke. There's nothing about that cast that would go against his sensibilities.
>There's nothing about that cast that would go against his sensibilities
It's about respecting the source, you contrarian doublehomosexual. Do I really need to bring up the quote about it not being batman anymore if it's just a man with a raincot and a pet bat?
Is Batman not Batman because he has rubber muscles or body armor? Because that's what the change in Death amounts to. Her fashion is the same. Her role is the same.
Look if you just dislike black people and think they're ugly and smelly and have big nostrils and lips and low IQs and don't want them in your adaptations, just say that. You don't have to try and do gotchas
A black Batman would ironically be way worse than a black Death because the Wayne family's high station in Gotham would make so much less sense, where you'd have to make it so that racism was never a problem in Gotham, while The Endless change their looks all the time and it has zero to do with their roles in the universe. If they ever did a live action Black Batman movie I'd have a problem with it because of that part.
>Black Batman
You rang?
Did the Waynes not get killed in that universe?
They did.
Then who the frick are the old people sitting around the table?
The Fox family. Read a damn comic
>reading capeshit comics instead of Graphic Novels™
lol no
Then stay confused
This was one of those "5G" books where they planned to replace everyone. Black Batman is Jace Fox, son of Lucius Fox. With the real Batman going into the public domain soon, they were gonna replace him with a token black dude cause diversity and shit.
Didn't work out cause if Batman ain't Bruce Wayne, dem sales go away.
kek what a dumb idea. Did they plan to make everyone black in DC?
Not white, not straight, this was the 5G Future state WTF they were planning before Didio got gone.
>Look, rich doctor could never marry a black woman! FACT!!!
Holy shit, anon. Could you be any more racist?
I don't think anon meant a half black Bruce
She's chalkwhite for 99% of the source, and outright says that's her preferred form. There is no non-political reason for the change.
>if you don't agree with me ur rayciss xd
Aaaand we're done. Thanks for outing yourself as a (You)farming contrarian. homosexual.
Chalkwhite people don't exist, Anon
Make-up does.
What he meant was clear, it just that he used a bad example (despite being a writer) and shoot himself in the foot. The idiot.
>Her fashion is the same.
It isn't.
>You're entirely focused on her skin not being stylized.
He's right to do so, because her skin's color is an integral part of her design and a representation of her character.
Then don't talk about the show.
>Her fashion is the same.
>It isn't.
She wears an identical outfit to the one she wore at the park in the comic. You're delusional.
And you're a blind moron. She lacks the eyeliner, the spikes around the belt... it's a much plainer, boring look, and not goth at all.
And if being faithful to her first appearence was what they were going for, why is Morpheus different?
About what? Being mad at a strawman you made in your head?
>About what? Being mad at a strawman you made in your head?
You seem confused. My post had three sentences in it and you couldn't follow?
>Then don't talk about the show.
I still wasn't wrong.
>her skin's color is an integral part of her design and a representation of her character
You can change the skin colour and you are still able to tell it’s Death. Change her clothes and take away ankh and it’s just a random white coloured woman.
They could've gotten away with goth black chick Death, Gaiman just doesn't see black people as people that could engage with his 80s subculture
It's more like if you tried removing the ears on Batman's cowl. You can try to tell people it's Batman, but that's not what he looks like.
Death doesn't look like a girl with big hair and black clothes?
Your complaint is closer to Batman's cowl not being blue with a stylized shadow over the eyes and eyebrows in 89
You're entirely focused on her skin not being stylized.
Please do, it will be hilarious because you clearly don’t understand what Neil was saying.
They didn't even use makeup or post-production effects on their Morpheus actor, anon. How lazy did Gaiman's sensibilities become?
They tried the look and it looked like shit to have people be paper-white and so they abandoned the idea and settled for Morpheus simply being pale, because television is actually a completely different medium from comics and so designs don't always translate perfectly. Gaiman's probably the comic writer who best knows how different mediums require different approaches, because of how he's made stuff for comics, books and television.
no, it's the same actor vanity and cowardly directing that results in dumb shit like masked superhero characters taking off their helmets every five seconds so you don't forget that tom hanks is mysterio or whatever the frick
Having people walk around with shining white skin among normal people is nothing like a dude wearing a mask. You seriously think the dude who played Morpheus was too vain to be CGI'd and so they didn't do it? Stop being moronic.
Not being a SQW dipshit and making McFarlane fork over the rights to Marvelman (which Todd only clung onto because he wanted to make an action figure) are pretty much guaranteed to make casuals seethe, expecially if they're the kind of morons who think 90s XTREEEEM art is "soulful"
Not saying I love everything he's ever done (to this day, I still have no idea what Harlequin Valentine was about) but watching casuals huff the copium isn't even funny any more...
i'm disappointed in him because netflix sandman should have been animated, with only one raceswap instead of several, and he should have known that
It was out of respect that he removed John Constantine. I was shitty that he gender swapped Hellblazer but 1) they removed the fact that Sandman takes place in a pre-crisis DC Universe and 2) Gaiman and Moore are friends and Moore really doesn't like his characters appearing in live action. So it was my own hang up and it did not change the story.
Ultimately, none of the changes were anything but window dressing. It was still the Sandman, just that a lot of people said the thought boxes out loud. And no Despair breasts, even though Despair is a troll lady and I should be grateful.
Constantine was Lady Const., not John, because israelite israelite Abrams was developing a blackwashed tv show for HBOMax at the time and they prevented Netflix using him.
Best Gaiman-written and Cinemaphile-related movie coming through.
That was Gaiman??? I'll be damned.
I was just as surprised when I first saw his screenplay credit. Say what you want about the dated CGI, the script is still nice.
Another weird thing that surprised me when I first found out is that he wrote Neverwhere as a BBC Miniseries first, then he wrote a book based on the script and THEN it got a comic adaptation written by Mike Carey. It's the exact opposite turn of events that you'd expect from a big comic writer. It would make one hell of a tricky quiz question.
I had a friend who worked on this. He took film classes at Columbia Chicago and he and his class was tasked with painting a lot of shit green. They weren't allowed to see the filming or meet anybody but they had paint and a bunch of props. Someone would pop their head behind the curtain to be like "WE NEED A CHAIR!" and they'd paint a chair green. Because it was through the school, they get a thank you and he has no screen credits.
But yeah, Gaiman writing this and adapting Princess Mononoke surprises me. Then again, he gets a lot of work. People REALLY liked Sandman.
>Fun fact: A lot of hate Gaiman gets in the industry is jealousy because Wizard said he was the best writer for like six years straigt
Gaiman lost his touch
>I had a friend who worked on this. He took film classes at Columbia Chicago and he and his class was tasked with painting a lot of shit green. They weren't allowed to see the filming or meet anybody but they had paint and a bunch of props. Someone would pop their head behind the curtain to be like "WE NEED A CHAIR!" and they'd paint a chair green. Because it was through the school, they get a thank you and he has no screen credits.
wew lad, your friend knows how the interns who draw 99% of any given manga feel
I worked on a project for an entire year once and because I didn't start a week earlier I didn't get my name in the credits even though the credits were altered and refactored often and people who had bullshit jobs like "Head of Human Resources Finance" and had zero actual creative input into the final product made it in
Not that I even wanted my name in the credits, but if I did that would be upsetting
He wrote Beowulf? how old is the bastard???
>He wrote Beowulf? how old is the bastard???
He wrote the screenplay and did a clever thing with the original saga by making it exactly like the story as told but making Beowulf an unreliable narrator
Beowulf doesn't really kill Grendel's mother but instead bones her (Can't blame him, prime naked gold plated Angelina Jolie) and the dragon that kills him 50 years later like in the saga is actually their son - which is exactly what happened to Hrothgar with Grendel
That sounds like something Eli Roth would write lmao.
ITT: Midwits who only read headlines
KWAB
Today I learned the Gayman was in an open marriage and a literal cuck for eleven years.
Do you think he will Bourdain himself?
It's clear the kid isn't his so he could go Will Smith at any time.
Funnier if someone Boeings him
>two horny people who like to frick around get together and continue fricking around when they're not in the same country
They ended it during Corona because they were forced to be in the same tiny cottage together for too long, so things were obviously better when they had a marriage like old sea captains had. What I really don't understand is all the young Death cosplayers who'd frick him at every con he went to. He may have had the "bad boy comic writer" reputation but he's just looked like an old man for ages now.
Women’s attraction to men is 40% physical and 60% personality, and status. Even if Gaiman wasn’t a rich, acclaimed writer he’d have people thinking he was a hot nerd DILF
It doesn't seem like he picked up at cons.
ah yes, he's a cuck after all. not surprising...
>man declares himself to be in an "open relationship"
>gets cucked
>doesn't actually frick nearly as much as his woman
>woman eventually divorces him
This has happened with every single "open relationship" I have encountered in the wild. It even happened to a buddy of mine. Why do men still go in for this shit? You'd think most of us would have learned our lessons by now. If your partner starts talking about an "open relationship" that should be setting off alarm bells in your head.
If you read it you'd know that she wanted to close it back up and he didn't.
Anyone who somehow doesn't think this is a pure declaration that the woman wants to frick someone else and that's that is just deluding themselves the entire time.
Whoever wants an open marriage is likely already cheating and just doesn't want to keep it a secret.
>woman eventually divorces him
Anon Gaiman flew across the entire world during the height of the Corona lockdowns just to get as far away from her as possible. I assure you it wasn't just her going for a divorce.
don't get married to begin with
How does this mean penniless? The article claims he just sold a bunch of old shit he did not care about for a decent amount.
What part of that means he is hurting?
Gaiman's best work was in Smoke and Mirrors.
Moral of the story is crazy sex parties are not worth it in the long run.
?si=exjFeUWJluqj2Pcr
Would
She has very kino armpits. She turned me onto hairy pits.
I mean you literally posted an article headline that says he donated it. Next time, inspect element remove it, edit it or crop it.
Reminder that Based Norm liked his Sandman comics.
Did his mom sell his comics?
>so broke he donated a million dollars to charity
Why do people keep calling Gaiman a Disney slave when his work for Marvel has been a critically acclaimed evergreen TPB and finishing a story he has wanted to do since 1993. If anything, it feels like a monkey paw wish
>You finish your entire Miracleman saga
>It is published by Marvel
Because they are desperate to smear Neil’s character and best they can come up with is call him a slave for Disney, a company they also hate because le culture wars told them to.
TSMT
Haters can stay mad
the coons certainly are staying mad
>calls someone a snowflake.
>YOU'RE A SNOWFLAKE
>calls someone mad
>YOU'RE MAD
Damn this guy knows all the moves
>ITT: People who never watched Sandman complain about Sandman
Looks like you make more money owning your own stuff.
Well duh.
shoo shoo go away poltard
>Is he so broke he has to resort to selling his stuff?
>Posts an image saying he donated shit to help others
Can you even read, you fricking idiot?
nah he would need to call them israeli for that homosexual
But israelites are white
no they are disgusting hellspawn
That’s no way to talk about your mother
nah im talking about your mother
I already said they were white, calling them disgusting hellspawn was unnecessary
literal who
Neil...Gaiman? That is a name I've not heard... in ages...
Usually they say...Neil Gayman.
His family is Scientologist so he either
>(1) is a Scientologist himself and donates a shitton of money to them
>(2) is coerced into donating a shitton of money to them to be able to have any access to his family
>write seminal troony support scene in your comic.
>if published today, he'd be cancelled for transphobia.
Hilarious
People do complain about that bit today.
back in old days, the way they portrayed minorities was someone being something-ist to the minority and them reacting back to it.
in these new days, the preferred method is to have a minority and it's never questioned or commented on in the narrative
zoomers throw a fit if you present them with option A. because the idea a book is more than the author freely vomiting his/her subconcious onto the page has never occurred to them.
And Neil always kindly tells them to reread the story because it's clear that the horrific face nailed to a wall through the eyes is not actually a good guy speaking universal truths, nor are the Gods who are just created by mankind. Whether they're people complaining or people who bring it up to praise and ask why he's gone back on his old beliefs and "become" an SJW.
He tells them to reread the story cause he has no real defense in current year bullshit. The story itself is perfectly fine i.e. a man in a dress on hormones is not a woman. Is not an XX but an XY so the gods aren't gonna let that slide. Even with magical gender change bullshit, they ain't gonna let that slide.
Good thing those people don't actually read or they'd notice the ending where it says Alvin/Wanda gets to actually be a woman after dying. Again, perfectly fine (cause soul without a body) but post-Randy Stair is, what do they say, "Not a good look".
>so the gods aren't gonna let that slide.
Some Gods won't give a shit and some will be bigoted, on varied subjects, because the Gods in Sandman are all just a bunch of gays created by and sustained by human belief. A moon goddess created by people obsessed with the connection between the moon and periods isn't going to like anyone who doesn't menstruate, for example. She'd naturally consider a hysterectomy sacrilege that cuts you off from the Gods. But any of the countless Gods who do genderfluid stuff isn't going to give a frick about chromosomes, nor are the ones who like to change people's bodies when they wish for it.
>NOOOOOOOOO YOU CAN'T PROVIDE CONTEXT GAIMAN BAD BECAUSE... GAIMAN BAD GAIMAN BAD GAIMAN BAD GAIMAN BAD GAIMAN BAD GAIMAN BAD GAIMAN BAD GAIMAN BAD GAIMAN BAD GAIMAN BAD GAIMAN BAD GAIMAN BAD GAIMAN BAD GAIMAN BAD GAIMAN BAD GAIMAN BAD GAIMAN BAD GAIMAN BAD
>regularly scheduled trannoid meltdown
>Gayman's ex was only worth 5 million
>Married long enough to get alimony
The Gayman is getting fricked by child support, ain't he?
only cucks pay child support
spousal support is the dumbest shit imaginable
Celeb worship in America is crazy.
Give them some credit, at least they're not as crazy as royalist Brits.
nah, even the brits dont have 1/6 Martyrs
>Neil is broke because he threw away his trash for charity
I hope he gets slow gradual health problems too.
Go Woke, Go Broke.
Maybe he shouldn’t have shilled for Netflix slop to appease Twitter.
Hated American Gods anyway
feminism is powerful.
Which is a bad thing for everyone.
The purity spiral will spare no one.
>Cinemaphile in charge of literacy
Speaking of Gaiman and Moore, today's TCJ article is about Cinemaphile's favorite two big two authors:
I have more respect for the lone artist who refuses to bend the kneel than to the homosexual grifter doing it for the easy buck that no one will remember or care about in their passing
probably why capitalism is the ideology for the sociopathic
She's got the same amount of eyeliner and there's no gloves, man. All they lost was a belt. Would the inclusion of that belt with like four metal studs on it have turned her Goth?
The eyeliner is much deeper, the lipstick is different and lighter in live action... they literally avoided giving her a goth look. And again, if that's the straws you want to grasp, tell me why Morpheus is different.
I guess not, I don't speak schizo rambling.
>I guess not, I don't speak schizo rambling
Then you made a fool out of yourself by engaging in someone you believe is speaking gibberish?
No trouble for me in calling out someone for acting like a homosexual.
I imagine not, probably second nature to you with the amount of time you engage with them
True enough, I post on Cinemaphile after all.
But you don't speak rambling schizo?
Evidently I don't post enough.
Haha, don't worry... I'm just fricking with you, haha
>tell me why Morpheus is different.
He's only different to the same degree that she is. He wears dark shoes dark pants and a dark coat, with a dark shirt as well instead of a light one like in the comic. It's absolute nitpicking to claim his or her fashion is different because of the miniscule details you bring up like the eyeliner not being as deep. Don't pretend like you weren't thinking of that image from later in the comics where she does have gloves and the Eye of Horus eyeliner, that was always posted on here when people were b***hing about her casting.
They tried giving him hair as wild as in the comic but it looked like ass because sometimes stylised things that look good in a comic look like ass when they're live action, so they toned down the hair and skipped the chalky white skin for the Endless because it only looked goofy or too distracting in real life standing next to real people. Gaiman talked about that while they were making the show.
>He's only different to the same degree that she is.
So Death is different because they tried to replicate her looks in her first appearence... but Morpheus is different because they didn't want to with him? You're not making any sense.
>Don't pretend like you weren't thinking of that image from later in the comics where she does have gloves and the Eye of Horus eyeliner, that was always posted on here when people were b***hing about her casting.
Of course, that's how her design became defined later on. They weren't really going with "we want to make it look exactly like it was in the comic at the time" with anything else, except MAYBE Lucifer.
>They tried giving him hair as wild as in the comic but it looked like ass because sometimes stylised things that look good in a comic look like ass when they're live action, so they toned down the hair and skipped the chalky white skin for the Endless because it only looked goofy or too distracting in real life standing next to real people. Gaiman talked about that while they were making the show.
>goofy or distracting
Ah yes, god forbid we make adaptions from comics look like the source material instead of real life. The same spiel that was used with the first X-men movie costumes, and now people are celebrating Wolverine in yellow.
Your argument boils down to "they're different because of practical reasons... except Death, she's different because they wanted to be faithful", which is contradictory. I can buy that they wanted to be more "practical" with Death, but that doesn't mean it was a good choice. Therefore, that doesn't mean Death looks good.
You seem to tip-toe around Occam's razor: they wanted a black chick in the main cast, everything else came after.
>they wanted a black chick in the main cast, everything else came after.
My favorite thing about Gaiman is that he's a true performative SJW. He doesn't give a single shit about any race other than black, they all go under the same umbrella as "colored folks"
They both are dressed like in the issue where they're at the park, except for completely superficial shit like Morpheus' shirt being a different shade and Death not wearing a belt. When people complained about her not having the Eye of Horus Gaiman pointed out again and again that she didn't adopt that bit until later in the story, showing that they WERE thinking of that shit. Neither of them are chalky white because it looked off in live action. How hard is this to follow?
Do you honestly believe that if they'd cast a white chick they would have made her chalky white, despite not doing that with Morpheus, and given her a belt and a little bit more eyeliner? Something they apparently couldn't do because they cast a black chick?
So they both dressed like they were in the issue at the time... except they weren't... because of superficial reasons... that are superficial because it doesn't support your (or Kneel's I guess?) argument. There's a few holes in that reasoning, I hope you can see how it can be hard to follow.
>Do you honestly believe that if they'd cast a white chick they would have made her chalky white
No, but I do believe they would've made her a goth. Something that they believed they couldn't do with a black chick because... and I'm trying to think like a really dumb liberal fricker here... would undermine her race.
She's different from her first appearence in everything but pants and tank top, at what point do these differences become superficial?
>that are superficial because it doesn't support your (or Kneel's I guess?) argument.
No they're superficial because we're talking about a fricking belt and Morpheus' shirt being black instead of grey. The rest of the outfit is the same and you're reaching gay-levels of makeup obsession with her lipstick being a slightly different shade of dark and her eyeliner being marginally less heavy, treating it all as if she showed up in a polka dot dress with yellow lipstick.
>a fricking belt
And the lipstick, and the eyeliner, and the boots, and the hair... again, you claim they attempted to be faithful when the only thing left of Death in her are the pants, the tank top and the ankh. Either she's faithful to her appearence or she isn't but "it's okay because the changes are superficial". You can't try both arguments, it's one or the other.
The overall point I'm making is not that they got her wrong because her lipstick isn't black, it's that they got her wrong because she isn't a goth, and she isn't a goth because (again with the razor here) they cast a black woman in the role, and they chose a black woman for "diversity".
>They got the character wrong because she looks 5% different
This is how you spot a superficial fans. Complete obsession over looks and no interest in anything else.
>5%
You're either deluded or moronic or both. Enjoy your crappy adaption, I'm sure Kneelhimself would pat you on the back.
The skin is supposed to be unnaturally white to reflect the color palette of the grim reaper, doesn't really work with any other color.
But they did both options anyway, so however you look at it it's shit.
Haven't you ever heard of the Black Death?
I guess netflix's Death would work if she only killed victims of pestilence then.
that's racist
I read the show was expensive as it is and any extra effects would've driven up the cost even more. Gaiman has to say something like "Well it looked bad so we left it out!" because "making Dream look otherworldly was too much money" sounds shitty
Death is based image wise off of a real life person who is dead now
Remember when Gayman was based
Kat Dennings made a good death too in the Audible drama.
The show simply missed the point.
Who cares about some dead cracker. The show needed diversity to fix the shitty original comics lack of it
I wanna see an adaption of his short story changes.
The Netflix show stinks. End of story.