|superboyprime (superboyprime) wrote in scans_daily,|
@ 2012-04-11 12:16 am UTC
|Entry tags:||creator: stuart immonen, event: avengers vs. x-men|
Now the first Infinite Comic, an Avengers vs X-Men tie-in/prologue, has come out, and while Marvel's technically right that it's not animation, I don't know, it comes too close for my tastes. What does everyone else think? Is this just poor man's animation?
For example, here's one "page" in the comic followed by the next.
A clever trick, and yeah, it's all static images, but a bit too close to animation, no?
Then there's this three "page" sequence:
Again, clever, and a nice example of something you couldn't do in a print comic, but is it really still sequential art?
In the next three panel sequence, Nova's heading closer and closer towards a collision with a helicopter before managing to use his powers to speed up his mind at the last moment, giving him the reflexes to evade the vehicle.
With each click of the mouse, the story progresses by one panel.
It's all static images, and yet...
And two more examples: These are two separate two-"page" sequences.
I get Marvel's point that the reader's still in complete control of the pacing, but can't I control the speed of a movie too by constantly pressing the pause/play buttons? So how is it really that different?
So what do the rest of you think? Genuine comics, or poor man's animation?