Not So Comical
I found Armond White’s review of The Incredible Hulk (“The Impenetrable Hulk,” June 11-17) to be somewhat rude [since], in his final line, he seems to suggest that fans of comics are immature and culturally unsophisticated. Perhaps he didn’t enjoy the new film adaptation of The Incredible Hulk; however, that is no excuse for suggesting fans of the comics need to “grow up and become cineastes.” The idea that comic book fans are immature is somewhat archaic as adult-orientated comics and graphic novels have been in production for years.
While it is certainly true that some comic books are immature, basic in storytelling and broad in their characterization, others have produced intricate plots with rounded characters backed by serious thought and hard work on the part of the writers.
Alan Moore’s Watchmen is widely recognized as a fantastic and mature read. His The League of Extraordinary Gentleman is peppered with references to classic literature from A Princess of Mars and The Tempest to Bleak House and The Call of Cthulhu. I suppose this should have gone over my head, as I am a fan of Hulk comics and therefore far too immature to have read, much less spot references to, historical works of adult fiction. Of course in the case of The Hulk there are years worth of comics to get through and, as such, the quality is inconsistent; but I would recommend Jeph Loeb and his Hulk: Gray as a decent jumping off point. I watch and appreciate what I consider to be a pretty decent variety of films. Does that mean I’m a cineaste and thus have to abandon an appreciation of any other form of storytelling—as film is the one true way? Or perhaps I’m not welcome in the cineaste club as I openly read comics. I take offence when I read a review by someone who, clearly seeing himself as an intelligent and culturally aware writer closes their film review by belittling the fans of an entire medium based on outdated preconceptions and no attempt at understanding. I would suggest Armond White take his own advice and grow up rather than looking down his nose and belittling people that have a fondness for things he doesn’t.
—Rob Grundy, U.K.
Hulk You
Wow, I have never read such a vitriolic and spiteful review before in my life. Your review was not about The Incredible Hulk movie; it was about all the insane little metaphors YOU attributed to the movie. Perhaps it was lost in your “I need to sound intelligent, so I’m going to try way too hard” pretentious prose, but I don’t think I saw three opinions about the movie itself. Instead, you rant on and on about the political b.s. that you gleaned from the movie, so that even after plodding through your unreadable tripe, I still have no idea what you actually thought of the story; other than the fact that it reminded you of all your own biases.
Get another job, because you’re a terrible reviewer. And here’s a prime example of why: “Now there’s a new film version titled The Incredible Hulk, starring actor-auteur Edward Norton; it’s the crappy summer blockbuster Marvelites probably deserve.” When you go out of your way to insult people you obviously know nothing about—as a fan of Marvel, I still have little interest in this movie—then you’ve failed as a reviewer.
—Joshua O’Neill,
Howard Beach, Queens
Dead Horse, My Ass
I just finished reading a rebuttal letter to Russ Smith from a guy named Don Stitts (“Die and Find Out,” June 11-17) concerning Senator Kennedy and his illness...I kinda take offense at Mr. Stitt’s asumption that the “Chappaquiddick” incident is a dead horse that cost Mr. Kennedy the presidency. Do you think the Kopechne family feels the same way?
I’d venture to say that there are many people in prison who did similar things and they never aspired to the presidency. The statement Mr. Stitts makes confirms the double standard that exists. Was Mr. Kennedy drunk? Did he leave that woman to die? It seems to be the facts, but he got off because he is a Kennedy, and the Kennedys have never lived in the real world that middle class America lives in.
I know, as a middle-class American, I wouldn’t run off and let someone die in my car for a mistake I made. If Mr. Stitts thinks that not being able to be president is punishment enough for Mr. Kennedy, then I can only hope he says the same thing when one of his family members suffers the same fate as Mary Jo Kopechne. I bet he’d sing a different tune then. Life experiences define the person we are, and I wouldn’t be defined by the fact that I left a woman to die in my car to save my own political ass.
—Larry Nava, Jersey City, NJ
I found Armond White’s review of The Incredible Hulk (“The Impenetrable Hulk,” June 11-17) to be somewhat rude [since], in his final line, he seems to suggest that fans of comics are immature and culturally unsophisticated. Perhaps he didn’t enjoy the new film adaptation of The Incredible Hulk; however, that is no excuse for suggesting fans of the comics need to “grow up and become cineastes.” The idea that comic book fans are immature is somewhat archaic as adult-orientated comics and graphic novels have been in production for years.
While it is certainly true that some comic books are immature, basic in storytelling and broad in their characterization, others have produced intricate plots with rounded characters backed by serious thought and hard work on the part of the writers.
Alan Moore’s Watchmen is widely recognized as a fantastic and mature read. His The League of Extraordinary Gentleman is peppered with references to classic literature from A Princess of Mars and The Tempest to Bleak House and The Call of Cthulhu. I suppose this should have gone over my head, as I am a fan of Hulk comics and therefore far too immature to have read, much less spot references to, historical works of adult fiction. Of course in the case of The Hulk there are years worth of comics to get through and, as such, the quality is inconsistent; but I would recommend Jeph Loeb and his Hulk: Gray as a decent jumping off point. I watch and appreciate what I consider to be a pretty decent variety of films. Does that mean I’m a cineaste and thus have to abandon an appreciation of any other form of storytelling—as film is the one true way? Or perhaps I’m not welcome in the cineaste club as I openly read comics. I take offence when I read a review by someone who, clearly seeing himself as an intelligent and culturally aware writer closes their film review by belittling the fans of an entire medium based on outdated preconceptions and no attempt at understanding. I would suggest Armond White take his own advice and grow up rather than looking down his nose and belittling people that have a fondness for things he doesn’t.
—Rob Grundy, U.K.
Hulk You
Wow, I have never read such a vitriolic and spiteful review before in my life. Your review was not about The Incredible Hulk movie; it was about all the insane little metaphors YOU attributed to the movie. Perhaps it was lost in your “I need to sound intelligent, so I’m going to try way too hard” pretentious prose, but I don’t think I saw three opinions about the movie itself. Instead, you rant on and on about the political b.s. that you gleaned from the movie, so that even after plodding through your unreadable tripe, I still have no idea what you actually thought of the story; other than the fact that it reminded you of all your own biases.
Get another job, because you’re a terrible reviewer. And here’s a prime example of why: “Now there’s a new film version titled The Incredible Hulk, starring actor-auteur Edward Norton; it’s the crappy summer blockbuster Marvelites probably deserve.” When you go out of your way to insult people you obviously know nothing about—as a fan of Marvel, I still have little interest in this movie—then you’ve failed as a reviewer.
—Joshua O’Neill,
Howard Beach, Queens
Dead Horse, My Ass
I just finished reading a rebuttal letter to Russ Smith from a guy named Don Stitts (“Die and Find Out,” June 11-17) concerning Senator Kennedy and his illness...I kinda take offense at Mr. Stitt’s asumption that the “Chappaquiddick” incident is a dead horse that cost Mr. Kennedy the presidency. Do you think the Kopechne family feels the same way?
I’d venture to say that there are many people in prison who did similar things and they never aspired to the presidency. The statement Mr. Stitts makes confirms the double standard that exists. Was Mr. Kennedy drunk? Did he leave that woman to die? It seems to be the facts, but he got off because he is a Kennedy, and the Kennedys have never lived in the real world that middle class America lives in.
I know, as a middle-class American, I wouldn’t run off and let someone die in my car for a mistake I made. If Mr. Stitts thinks that not being able to be president is punishment enough for Mr. Kennedy, then I can only hope he says the same thing when one of his family members suffers the same fate as Mary Jo Kopechne. I bet he’d sing a different tune then. Life experiences define the person we are, and I wouldn’t be defined by the fact that I left a woman to die in my car to save my own political ass.
—Larry Nava, Jersey City, NJ
