You not understanding, AGAIN, that just because I don't like something is already a classic. Btw, how could Luigi fly? Come on, explain that one.

*that just because I don't like something doesn't mean I don't understand it. You did the same on the Hulk book.

@Merlyn - Luigi could fly because he had a Legion Ring. Read the last conversation again about "returning the ring". It's right there... Cheers.

Merlyn - As Mr White astutely points out, Luigi had the Legion ring because Chance lifted it from Booster during their conversation. The Smallwood art even points it out by zooming in on the ring on Booster hand in one panel before showing it missing in the next. That would require paying attention and comprehending what you read and that’s so much harder than throwing up a “1” score and shitting on a writer you don’t like.

The fact that you doubled down on your misunderstanding under my review, rather than attempting to see how you could be wrong is FANTASTIC.

@Mr. White: Cheers, mate, you're right about that one. @Loafy: While that's correct, it still doesn't make any ounce of sense, Guy Gardner wouldn't give up the ring to Hal, even like that. I guess you're just okay with contrived "explanations". Just as you were okay with the Hulk thing where "oh he killed some people but he was just asleep lol". Anyway, happy new year, maybe next year you'll stop being so bitter and douchy!

That’s a really impressive goalpost move there bud. No, we both know EXACTLY what you meant the first time AND second time around. Just admit you were wrong and misread the book in a rush to slander it

Also not sure how the explanation for what happened what contrived. Chance nicked the ring from Booster, gave it to Luigi and they pulled a quick on on an embarrassed Guy Gardner. It took me one sentence to explain it again to you. Keep up buddy

Holy shit my autocorrect had a stroke lol. * Also not sure how the explanation for what happened is contrived. Chance nicked the ring from Booster, gave it to Luigi and they pulled a quick one on an embarrassed Guy Gardner.

Yeah, either you don't get Guy Gardner or just have such a hard-on for King that you don't give a crap how he writes characters as long as you're in awe of his work. He's done the same to Booster Gold, Wally West, Batman and other characters, it's not even anything new. But keep pretending he gets these characters. Anyway I'm done here.

Cool, run away with your tail between your legs again. This is a Black Label series you dip shit and you don’t seem to have a clue what that means. King can play loose with the continuity here and FWIW,l this depiction of Guy is pretty damn spot on. Especially considering the first date he took Ice on (in your precious continuity) they went to a porno theater. I’d bet good fucking money you didn’t know that and just want to fling shit around like the angry Neanderthal you are.

“kiNg DoEsNt GeT tHe ChaRActErs.” You people are so fucking tiresome

Even on New Year's Eve, so full of anger and hate, it must feel so sad to be you, you truly are pitiful. :(

Pot, meet kettle. You came here to my review, doubling down on your completely incorrect read of the book and got put in your place. And then you poorly moved the goalposts to “WeLL gUy IsNt ChArCTeRiZeD RiGhT” and you didn’t even get that right for numerous reasons, that I just explained. Just take the L already little dude and run along

Actually you were the one who commented about my review because you are obsessed with me. So yeah, sorry, the whole "you started this" doesn't work. Not that logic was ever your strong suit.

I pointed out you were factually wrong on my review because it’s funny that you’re basically the “If those kids could read” meme come to life.

Mhmm. Notice how I never once "point out" anything about your reviews? It's called "not giving a shit". As in, I don't give a shit about you or your reviews. You, on the other hand, are obviously not capable of doing the same, hence your obsession. Make up another fake acccount or something, you started the whole trend, remember? Byyyye.

Here I made one just for you https://imgflip.com/i/5zmxf9

That’s because my reviews aren’t full of obviously incorrect statements about the book. You’re making a false equivalence

Yeah, Loafy, learn to not give a shit. Merlyn clearly doesn't. Only someone who cares would argue in the comments of your review and Merlyn didn't do that.

And the squabbles continue…. And as a huge Guy Gardner fan, this is the “surface level version” that only grabs one bit of Guy and exploits it. It’s his story and Black Label, but please don’t say this is “spot on”. While some say King doesn’t get characters, I say he finds the one thing that he can over exaggerate and runs with it. My issue with all of King’s stories is he rarely will show a character has evolved past their negative aspects, but instead he, and them, dwell on the negative.

Just to point out… Guy is a pig headed jerk, but that’s what is crazy about him being a hero. That’s the sort of psychological bit I think King usually misses. This portrayal of Guy is not wrong, it’s just the 100% generic portrayal that any casual fan will go with because that’s all they hear from other casuals. He did the same thing with Phantasm - instead of expanding the character in her 1st comic appearance, she is a cog in the story like Guy is here, so he goes generic

And.. there is an argument to be had on whether Tom King writes Black Label because he has more freedom, or DC makes him write Black Label because his stories, characters and continuity is whack. Remember, Strange Adventures was announced as in-continuity and was changed to Black Label after DC read the scripts.

Strange Adventures was advertised as Black Label from the beginning. Also, I don’t know how many times it has to be said before you people get it, these books are not in continuity so they don’t have to rigidly abide by continuity. It’s a simple concept. Also congrats, you figured out that Guy isn’t the main character in a book titled “Human Target.”

I’d like to see you explain what is wrong with the characterization of Guy. You’ve said not to call it “spot on” and called it “generic” and said King’s characterizations are “whack” which are clearly statements in conflict with one another. I feel that this characterization of Guy felt natural when looking at his JLI days, which this book is influenced by, and the history of his relationship with Ice.

Guy literally took Ice to a porno theatre on their first date and the entirety of their relationship in Giffen and DeMatteis’s books was super weird and a little creepy. But god forbid King tap into that in an out-of-continuity book where Guy is 3rd billing at best.

To quote myself from another Forum: “Don't really get why people are bent out of shape with King's writing here especially knowing: (1) It's King and history has proven he writes/ approaches stories in a particular manner; and (2) it's an Elseworld tale. The major issue people have is "[x] is not written in character". While I don't think it's really to be expected, I do think they are in character (the underlying base at least) albeit, an (extremely?) exagerrated version of them…

...Also, as some others have pointed out, he's just telling a specific story (D.O.A) using popular characters where everyone is playing a (stereotypical) role. As I often say to people, if you continue reading it, TRY to enjoy it for what it is as opposed to what you think/feel it "should" be."

Look it up @loafy, they changed it to black label after it was already announced https://www.comicsbeat.com/dcs-strange-adventures-rebranded-under-black-label/

I can see why these stupid arguments keep going because I don’t think you read everything people say. I said this characterization of Guy isn’t wrong, it’s just the generic version, “Guy is a jerk” that gets rehashed all the time. He uses it with a lot of his books as a shortcut with characters. I am a Damian Wayne fan, but most writers just write him as the generic “jerk” as well and I find it lazy

Maybe you could take this argument to the discord.

I am not aware of a discord

If you want to join: https://discord.gg/xJz6buvNFZ

No, I read what you said and you’re wrong. DC originally solicited Strange Adventures as a Black Label book. It was always Black Label. Just read the damn book and try to explain how it would ever have worked in main continuity. Your extrapolating too much from one quote from an editor before the book was even at the printer.

I also don’t think the characterization was lazy, I think your argument is. Guy IS an asshole. It’s baked into his character, specifically during the JLI era.. So if King characterizes him like every other writer did for a decade, you say it’s lazy, and if he tries to do something slightly different and new, then you pull out the tried and true “he doesn’t get the characters.”

Also Guy appeared in what 10-12 pages of this comic? That’s pretty quick to pass interpretation on an interpretation of a character in a BLACK LABEL book.

You accusing me of “not reading” is pretty funny when you refuse to read the Black Label stamp on the cover of the book.

Excellent review. This is Guy if I've ever seen him. If I described this character and his actions to someone with even a passing knowledge of DC, without naming the character, they'd be able to tell you it was Guy very quickly.

Clever review. I like it.

Thank you!