h a l f b a k e r yLike you could do any better.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
1. Buy a comic book.
2. Photocopy every second page.
3. Cut out each individual panel.
4. Re-arrange panels to make a completely new story.
Easy peasey. You can use Tip-Ex (Whiteout in the US, I think) to blank out speech balloons and write your own dialogue, but real purists keep the existing
lettering intact and still create an intelligible (and very different) tale.
Extra brownie points for subversion, role-reversals and general creativity.
Wikipedia: Cut-up technique
http://en.wikipedia...ki/Cut-up_technique
[jutta, Jun 28 2006]
[link]
|
| |
i like this, and the fact that you still have
the original comic book is a plus. anything
that helps to increase the spread of comic
books works for me. i just really hate how
comics have become collectable items,
driving up their value, and making it
harder for me to get them to read. |
|
| |
Used to do this in art class with Action comic. |
|
| |
Love it, but why only every second page? |
|
| |
Every second page because cutting out the panels would ruin the next page. But after I read [tcarson]'s anno, leaving the original comic book intact does make a lot of sense. |
|
| |
Also raises the possibility of (literally) cutting and pasting a new comic strip as a reply to the (still intact) original. Using the exact same artwork. |
|
| |
I just like the omission of the 2nd page to confuse stuff. woof! |
|
| |
woof indeed, po. I'd like to see a re-telling of the spiderman story where the radioactive spider, having wiped out all arachnid-based criminality in its general vicinity, chooses to pass on its powers to a human host. |
|
| |
"My work here is done - may peace now reign in all the future webs we weave. It's time for me to pass this gift on to another species..." |
|
| |
(-) Sorry, but I have trouble enough following a conventional narrative structure. |
|
| |
[jutta], I think these modified comics could be intelligible if the original narratives and characters were already very familiar, so readers could concentrate on appreciating the twists, and could fill in the gaps from what they already knew. |
|
| |
I think oral poetry (and, to a lesser extent, Greek tragedy) worked a bit like this; everybody knew who the gods and heroes were, so each poet could do different things to them with minimal back-story. |
|
| |
I envision this as a set of 100 square refrigerator magnets, each with an action packed image. No dialogue. You could stick them to the fridge or other handy metal surface and rearrange them to make your story. An overhead marker could dangle nearby, if a little dialogue was crucial. |
|
| |
//There are already some very talented cartoonists and artists on the halfbakery, and some of them have drawn their own or other people's ideas as struck their fancy. |
|
| |
If a halfbakery regular were to turn their own ideas or ideas from others who agree to donate them into a strip, that would be fine. |
|
| |
But paying someone who has no intrinsic interest in the site to draw it, in order to attract a wider audience that also isn't normally interested in the site, would definitely be trying too hard.
// |
|
| |
// I liken it to a little spring cleaning in the attics of our minds. Going for the easy laugh is one thing, trying too hard for one is another. As oft' repeated, the 'bakery is a unique environment of our own making, courtesy of the creator of our little heaven on earth and certainly, wherever else we care to roam - somewhat realistically. It stands to reason that the audience might chatter amongst themselves - creating (melo)drama and/or comedy during (inadverdent pauses of) the comedrama contained within any given idea. Guilty as charged. |
|
| |
I believe anyone who has been given pause and is introspective will *not* think the site is going to lose any of it's inherent charm for this necessary transition/maturation into it's much higher stage of evolution we're all going to be pleasantly surprised by (Mark my words). We played with the junk in the attic - now it's time to play with the soon to be uncovered, treasured keepsakes. I'm really looking forward to seeing where our imaginations can truly take us.
// |
|
| |
//true and not true. The vote was for devloution and 52% of those who voted, voted for devolution. But then the British government changed the criteria to mean it required 50%+ of the entire population, not just those who voted. Given no country (other than the old communist ones) ever have 100% turn out, this somewhat stacked the odds against devolution. |
|
| |
Oh, and the vote was 1 March 1979// |
|
| |