Is this going to be woke? It’s going to be woke isn’t it? I really don’t want to go to the LCS just to buy one comic tomorrow and I’d like to add this to my purchases. But I don’t want it to be woke. Anyone read it yet?
>>143328113I get the feeling it’ll be like the Perry Mason reboot, modernized despite being set in the past. That’s my biggest fear, at least. I won’t be buying issue one until I read a story time. Maybe if it’s good I’ll add it to my pull list. Given half of segura’s writing credits seem to be on Marvel Voices anthologies I’m skeptical.
>>143328279The fact that the only previews I can find online basically just show the first two or three pages and no cast drawings or other sequences kinda tells me there’s at least a few annoying changes that’ll be made. I mean for fucks sake DT doesn’t even speak in any of the preview pages. But they aren’t using the words “modernized” or “diversity” so I’m cautiously optimistic.
At least it's not Neovagina Tracy.
>>143328521KekNo-binary, non-denominational, externally-presenting genitalia Tracy
>>143328113Why don’t you just reading comics?
i was going to pick this up anyway and none of these things crossed my mind beforehand, explain the process behind this? its Dick Tracy literally who cares about this IP
>>143328725I’m talking about buying it not reading it for free, retard. >>143328769>its Dick Tracy literally who cares about this IPMe and many others. Are you a zoomer? Genuine question.
>>143328769>literally who cares about this IPWarren Beatty?
>>143328769This comes off as a shill post, >I was going to buy this>but who cares enough about the IP to actually be concerned about modernization>just consume and stop questioning things
>>143328792Only know him from Tracy Zooms In>>143328849Fair point
>>143328889It's modern? It would work better as a period piece. The 90s movie is kino
>>143328113>Is X woke?STFU
I can't imagine it would be any good. I hope I'm wrong though.
>>143328113>round up the usual suspects>they're all cishet white men with jobs
>>143328725Why read when you can create your own reasons to hate something?
>>143328113Yes, the writer is an untalented raging SJW diversity hire who shills other talentless diversity hires
>>143328113>Hears that a Literal Who published is going to print comics about a character from the 1930s (that's still in print newspapers)>"Is it going to be woke?"
>>143328279>You can’t modernise something Okay so you want it to fail.
>>143328113If by 'woke' you mean there will be characters who aren't straight white Christian (but only if they're Baptist) men, yeah probably.
>>143329786
>>143328113>Is this going to be woke? It’s going to be woke isn’t it?The American comics industry won't allow anything to be published unless it's sterilized. Which means that even if it's not politicized, it'll completely lack everything that made it great to begin with.
>>143330304My dude it was made in 1932. "What made it great" is stuff that's been done better elsewhere since.
Fed thread. Don't fall for the FBI's attempt to radicalize you.
>>143328113Here's a preview.
>>143328967Nah it’s set in 47 but it’s written by woke people i think
>>143328113maybe you should worry about it being good instead.
>>143332053If it’s good I’ll be happy. But if it’s gay or racially diverse it’ll automatically be bad.
>>143329786So the creators must want it to fail
>>143329705The comic is set in 1947. If it’s full of fags (meaning there’s a single one) or black people it’ll deserve to fail.
>>143328113Is it up on one of the pirate sites yet? If it’s good I’ll buy it and add it to my pull. If I miss issue 1 I won’t be buying any of it. Publishers like mad cave need to understand the value of storytiming
>>143332630>Publishers like mad cave need to understand the value of storytimingThis. I said this in the first lotus land thread and it feels like the shill genuinely didn’t understand that people will pay money for something if they enjoy it. Bought every issue because, despite them storytiming two weeks after it released, there happened to be a copy of issue 1 still at my shop. If it hadn’t been there I’d never have bought any of it let alone put it on my pull.
>>143330529>is stuff that's been done better elsewhere since.like?
>>143332630This. Not in the Win-O and not on the usual suspect sites either.
