3.03.10 Reviews (Part 3)

Punisher MAX: Butterfly (Marvel): Valerie D’Orazio and Laurence Campbell really need to be commended for this tour de force performance. It saddens me to think that this might fly quietly under everyone’s radar and go unnoticed as yet another meaningless spinoff tangent of a title, when it is clearly so much more. Right from the title page, the lettering of which made me feel like I was watching the opening credits to the movie SE7EN with that Gravity Kills song playing, I felt like I was in for something slightly different, something which has been more carefully orchestrated and mapped out. That feeling only intensified as I flipped the pages with captivated enthusiasm. Maybe the first thing that really settles into your brain is the perfect style and tone of the art. If you like artists full of thick inky gloom, like Michael Gaydos, Michael Lark, Matthew Southworth, or Alex Maleev, then Laurence Campbell is clearly your new go-to guy. Get this guy a contract already. I’m a big fan of D’Orazio’s blogging and her script flows affably along, humming with realism, found voice, and piercing, revealing, self-referential lines like “I hate writing,” or clever turns of phrase like “flipping memory switches” which just demand appreciation. The narration is desperately convincing, exploring the hidden corners of a shared universe. There’s some tough subject matter to be found here, everything from erotic asphyxiation to child abuse, not to mention all of the sex and grisly murder along the way. What differentiates this cornucopia of deadly sins from so much found in the market is that it’s handled in a subtle and smart fashion. It’s never in your face or gratuitous, and it sounds counter-intuitive to say considering the explicit content, but I’m impressed by the restraint shown here. D’Orazio’s script is full of paranoia, delusion, and psychological leanings, as well as thinly veiled references to her experiences with DC Comics that she wrote extensively about online, now seeping into her cathartic work here, and it’s just so evident that she poured a great deal of care into the writing. It happened quite quickly, but D’Orazio is ready to ditch the Punisher (I mean, shit, he only appears in something like three single panels here) and create an original crime book of her own. If there’s more where this came from, then she can easily hold her own with the likes of Greg Rucka, Brian Michael Bendis, Brian Azzarrello, and Jason Aaron. This book was very weighty and absolutely worth the $4.99 price tag, feeling like a novel’s worth of content hiding in the confines of a pamphlet, transcending those disposable trappings. This is something unique and extraordinary. I can’t wait for her next project; I wonder if she has an ongoing in her or this was an isolated explosive bout of creativity. Either way, I’ll cherish this. Oh, and BTW, this is the type of book that Marvel needs to get behind to showcase the unexploited female talent lurking on the fringes of the industry, not that Girl Comics pap you’ll read about below. Grade A+.

Invincible Iron Man #24 (Marvel): It’s funny, I really liked this issue, but I feel like I don’t have much to say about it. Maybe I was just waiting to exhale, knowing that the denouement was inevitable and we’d finally navigated the path to get there. It’s taken Matt Fraction two years to break Tony Stark and literally put him back together again. It’s really a good lesson in long form storytelling, not everything needs to be in tidy 5-6 issue arcs, "written for the trade,” but can be the length necessary to suit the story you want to tell. Oh, and by the way, you can have one writer and one artist for the duration of the run - imagine that. Speaking of the art, Salvador Larroca’s pencils are a treat here, with stunning mental vistas, energetic action, and a cast of strong supporting characters that are always depicted well. Tony finally makes his way back through his unique brand of mental purgatory, mental and physical planes converging to some degree, all the while considering his identity, his legacy, his technology, his parents, his friends, his lovers, his guilt, and his aspiration. I’m not quite sure why Ghost couldn’t kill Tony as he was laying there (and decided to monologue instead), nor am I quite sure how Ghost was transported to Seoul and what became of him, and I’m not sure why Pepper’s threatening call to H.A.M.M.E.R. was effective (was Ghost operating in a rogue capacity? I forget...), but it’s not that important. The larger thrust is all about Tony. It’s his story, and the gap Fraction creates between the time he backed-up his mind and what’s happened in the Marvel U since creates a nice bit of tension to jump forward from. The story is now about a man slightly displaced from the timeline, like a smaller scale version of Cap returning to the “modern” world in the Silver Age, and now we see Tony deal with it too. It’s a nice set up for his re-entry into the shared world that he’s a main player in, and the impending Heroic Age. As Fraction and Larroca close the door on one era, I can only hope the next is equally as strong, and a worthy successor. Grade A.

Girl Comics #1 (Marvel): Conceptually, this is a wonderful opportunity to showcase women (girls? really?) creators and their capabilities. But out here in the real world, sadly, the pieces featured just aren’t that good. Colleen Coover’s rousing intro, done in her wonderfully cute style, is actually quite clever and would have set the tone quite nicely, provided there was anything of consequence to follow it up. Instead, we get "Moritat" from G. Willow Wilson and Ming Doyle. I will say that Doyle’s artistic style is quite interesting (a sort of Paul Pope meets Becky Cloonan thing happening), but when the text is riddled with annoying unclosed quotation marks, it becomes a throwaway piece. Trina Robbins and Stephanie Buscema’s story about Venus has an adequately sassy tone and a retro aesthetic that works, but the text is way too dense and goes on waaay too long. My eyes glazed over by the fourth page, and at that point I was only about halfway through the debacle. I enjoyed the Spotlights on Flo Steinberg and Marie Severin. "A Brief Rendezvous" by Valerie D’Orazio and Nikki Cook delivers a Punisher story with quite a poignant punch, but it really doesn’t have anything to do with the Punisher per se, capable of using nearly any street-level protagonist as a stand-in, and I’m sorry, but the art varies from merely ok to downright atrocious. Cook is capable of delivering much better, as seen in brief stints on Brian Wood’s DMZ series. I know it’s homage, but couldn’t we have really done without the pin-up of She-Hulk with pseudo-bondage overtones? In this book? And how about a damn TOC page so I know who did the one piece that actually worked a little, the cute Doc Ock short? The book is such a mess in that regard. Some pieces are credited, some are not, some credits are up front, some are at the end, some pieces are titled, some are not, just show up and do whatever you want with no oversight, I guess. There are some pieces that I still have no idea who penciled or wrote them, even after reading the creator bios in the back, which don’t make an effort to link to the pieces in any way. The Franklin and Val piece has a great visual style (this artist is ready for a career illustrating children’s books, to be sure), but I glossed over due to the text heavy approach. "Headache" by Devin Grayson and Emma Rios takes us out, and I’m going to go ahead and go for the obvious joke – it left me with a headache trying to figure out what was going on. The piece only begins to make any sort of sense once you get to the end, but by then I was so mad I didn’t care why Scott’s uniform was popping on randomly, Logan’s mask disappearing, or the goons changing from black to red uniforms, helicopters, motorcyles, and full blown Sentinels crashing into the little room. Oh, and of all the characters depicted on the cover, a whopping ONE of them appears in the book – Wolverine, because we totally need more of him in the world. Overall, not only do the majority of the pieces fail to work in any way, but this doesn’t function properly as a gateway book for the creators or properties involved. Aside from Valerie D’Orazio’s Punisher MAX: Butterfly one-shot that came out the very same week, what books can I buy featuring these creators or properties? Even if they were compelling in any way (and let’s be crystal clear – they’re not), there’s nowhere for me to go as a consumer, so it just looks like a one-time, gimmicky, terribly isolated pet project of an exercise with no revenue generating potential. Where can I buy Colleen Coover’s kids book in the Marvel U? Where can I get Ming Doyle as a regular series artist? If I liked G. Willow Wilson's piece, I guess I can go buy Air from DC/Vertigo(!). I loved her Batman: Gotham Knights work, but does Devin Grayson even write anything any more? Where can I read about Nightcrawler if I liked that particular piece? Where are the real superstars anyway? Where is Colleen Doran? Carla Speed McNeil? Does Marvel feature any book with the art of Nikki Cook? Agnes Garbowska??? I’m a guy and I’m not terribly proud of this book as a representation of the women working in the industry I love, I can’t imagine a woman who would be either. It also feels very chintzy on the financial end; between the house ads, text pieces, and Venus story running 8 pages long, there’s just not a lot of content there. It’s certainly not worth $4.99. It isn’t even that the book employs horrible strategy, there’s just NO strategy. By the time I threw it down, before I started banging away in frustration on the keyboard, I was muttering to myself an exasperated “this is awful.” Only because it’s a concept that “could have been,” Grade C-.


At 11:42 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Easily hold her own with the likes of Greg Rucka, Brian Michael Bendis, Brian Azzarrello, and Jason Aaron?" Are you fucking delusional? "A+?"

It seems you, IGN, and G4 are the lone trinity of positive reviews on the net. Congratulations.

CBR gave it "1/2 out of 5."

The only reason this girl even got a job writing comics is because she bitched her way inside.

Kissing her ass won't get you a job.

At 10:57 AM, Blogger Justin Giampaoli said...

Jersey Troll,

"Delusional?" No, I just know what I like. And then I explained why.

"...lone trinity of positive reviews..." Nope. Inaccurate. TWO reviewers at IGN, Blair Butler @ G4, me, Randy Lander, Larry's Comics, Has Boobs Reads Comics, Comics Con Queso, iFanboy, Bleeding Cool, etc... the list goes on and on with positive reviews. And I suspect they'll keep trickling in once people find out about this sleeper of a book.

As for CBR, their reviews are hit and miss with me, depending on the particular critic. Sometimes we agree, sometimes we don't - which proves yet again that reviews are inherently opinion oriented. If you disagree, it doesn't make the other person delusional, that's quite an uninformed leap. Besides, Greg's (reviewer @ CBR) main points of contention with the book were 1) that it didn't feature the Punisher, which I didn't mind since I'm not that into the character - in fact, I thought it was clever to only use him in three panels, and 2) that Valerie heaped on the traumas in the woman's life, which didn't push me out the way it did him. Past that, we both liked the art. In my opinion, his review of .5 stars out of 5 seems a little harsh if those are his only gripes. But hey, it's his opinion.

I fail to see how "this girl" (way to be pejorative) writing quite successfully about her experiences online equals her "bitching," or how that would get her a job. They're different companies and one has nothing to do with the other. That just doesn't pass the common sense test. It's a logic fallacy, Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc, "It Happened After, Therefore Because Of."

I'm not sure how me giving something I like a positive review equals "kissing her ass," and barring her becoming an editor, I'm not sure how she'd possess the power to give me a job in exchange for it.

So, all in all, your tone is way off base, as is the lack of logic and any type of constructive feedback in your arguments. It's amusing to me that judging from the hit tracker, you've obsessively checked back every few hours since you left the comment, probably wanting to argue or get the last word in, inciting some type of subtle anti-women flame war over... not liking the book very much?

It's, like, the very definition of trolly behavior.


At 11:38 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Reviews from major, respected comic book sites. Aside from IGN and G4, you and everybody else don't count.

I loved all the comments on "Bleeding Cool," by the way. Pretty much summed it up.

Nice black and white xerox comics, too. Impressive. Can't score any real work, huh?

Respond away. I won't be back.

At 3:00 PM, Blogger Justin Giampaoli said...

Jersey Troll,

So... just to sum up your impotent little diatribe, your point is that two "major, respected comic book sites" gave the book favorable reviews, which somehow supports your unsubstantiated opinion that... it sucks? Brilliant.

Yes, I have published some black and white mini-comics. Great retort. Great debate tactic. If someone totally obliterates your argument, change the subject and attack THEIR work instead.

When you have the balls to create something yourself and stop hiding in anonymity (a blog, a mini, an adult opinion), I'd be more than happy to offer an objective review. Until then, keep trollin' away, I can see that "real work" is totally working out for you.

It doesn't surprise me you enjoy the comments over at Bleeding Cool. They, too, seem to be a bunch of poor sentence-constructing, knuckledraggers who shout erudite things like "FEMINAZI" at the very mention of Val's name, with no regard for the actual content. Like attracts like, I suppose.

I'd say "good riddance" as you claim retreat from a losing argument, but can your fragile ego really resist the temptation to respond? You can either lose the moral high ground or the argument itself. It's your call. You respond, I win. You don't respond, I win. Winners never troll, and trollers never win. It's quite a corner you've managed to back yourself into.


PS - Oh, Jersey Troll, the hits, the hits just keep on coming! In the time I wasted responding to you, it seems Mutant A Day, All About Comics, ComicList, and Newsarama have put up positive reviews for Val's book.

At 5:37 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You might want to check the Newsarama site again for the REAL review, not some stupid blog on the site anyone can post.

Again, out of the Mickey Mouse sites you listed (like yours), Newsarama is the only one with any real credentials or notoriety.

Punisher: Butterfly #1 (Published by Marvel Comics; Review by David Pepose): It's weird, as Valerie D'Orazio actually had two Punisher stories out this week, with the other being in this week's Girl Comics. Comparing and contrasting the two is enlightening -- the Girl Comics short story was a wonder of irony and timing (and indeed was my favorite of the bunch), but Punisher: Butterfly left me cold. It starts out strong and has a neat sense of structure, but ultimately, as the parallels to D'Orazio's own life and career become more and more transparent, the book waxes either autobiographical at best, or self-indulgent at worst. In many ways, this book feels less like a story and more of a manifesto -- or even an exorcism. And without that truly engaging story, Laurence Campbell's moody, shadowy art, while technically similar to someone like Michael Lark, doesn't have much to hold onto. If you've read D'Orazio's blog, you know what she's talking about -- but ultimately, fictionalizing her stories may open her up to more readers, but at the cost of diluting the message.

Here's the link:

Sorry, my "fragile ego" couldn't resist.

I'll give you credit, though, posting negative or opposing responses on your blog -- Valerie doesn't post any.

So, aside from the fact you're not good enough to write real comics, at least you don't completely live in a fantasy world where everything smells like roses.

At 9:03 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Valerie is also a firestarter and a liar. That's why I despise her.
For instance, just today she posted a doozy of a remark about how I threatened violence against her on a post, saying "she needed to be bitch slapped" -- which is totally untrue.

She posted her reviews with the heading: "and now, the pimpage" (or some such), to which I replied:

"While we're on the subject of pimping, how about a nice bitch slap?" Then posted the bad Newsarama review she tried to cover up by posting some guys blog instead.

I tried to reply to her, but I can't. I'd reply with my real name but I'd take a royal ass-chewing by my employer for giving her shit to fuel her fire of lies.

Here's what I said in my recent attempted reply post:

"That's NOT what I said AT ALL.

I said "while you're on the subject of pimping, here comes a good bitch slap." Then I posted the bad review.

I NEVER threatened you. PERIOD. Where do I say that you "should be bitch slapped?"

Clearly, you're an intelligent person. You honestly can't be that stupid to interpet that as anything other than a metaphor."

You can post it to her if you want.

Like I said, Justin: at least you have the guts to post peoples' responses, even if you don't agree with them or they inflame you. And to be honest, I came off like a jerk with you, and I'm sorry.

Valerie's BS pisses me off so much -- as it does most other guys and gals in the comic industry -- that I took it out on you and your site.

I know breaking into comics can be tough. However, Valerie has NOTHING to show for the reason she got a gig at Marvel. She's never WROTE a comic book before, like 99.9% of Marvel's staff -- not even a Xeroxed comic! She didn't get in by talent, or proving herself. She got in by creating controversy. And there's plenty of people that call bullshit on it -- to what "really" happened to her at DC.

Case in point: what just happened to me on her site. I'll never bother that psycho bitch again.

At 9:55 AM, Blogger Justin Giampaoli said...


I see you're back again. Look, it seems to me that we're going to just have to agree to disagree. The more you ramble in a misguided attempt to garner support, the more I take issue with so many of your statements.

You say that sites like Newsarama have "real credentials," but what does that mean? It's so subjective. Bottom line, there is no such thing as a "real credential" to write comic book reviews or commentary. It doesn't exist. The fact that some outlets are recognized as "legitimate" media sources is an arbitrary line drawn in the public's consciousness. That's the great thing about the interwebs, it's an equalizer.

Similarly, you apparently claim that mini-comics aren't "real comics," which is a totally lay, ignorant, and uninformed position. What makes a comic "real?" The fact that Marvel or DC publish it? That's ridiculous. I'm not saying all mini-comics are great - in fact some of them are shit. However, some of them are much better than the repetitive genre crap published by The Big Two. Because they don't happen to have Dan DiDio or Joe Quesada's name in the credits, we're not supposed to recognize them as "real?" That's such a novice thought. Laughable, dude, laughable.

You can despise Val all you want, you're entitled to your opinion, but not your own set of facts. You can say you don't like her politics or her writing, but when your slander is factually inaccurate or a venomous personal attack, I'm not the type to let it slide.

You also have to consider delivery. Isn't it obvious that when you call a person's site "Mickey Mouse," or that they aren't "good enough" to do something, it comes off as insulting and is immediately combative? Again, it's the very definition of trolly flame-starting behavior. When you resort to calling someone a "psycho bitch," it, aside from the violent degrading overtones, completely devalues any legitimate argument you could make and renders your whole shtick meaningless.

In my opinion, Val was able to break into the field as a writer by drawing attention to herself online. Right or wrong, that's the path and it works for some. Matt Fraction is a prime example. He drew insane amounts of attention to himself by writing for Savant Magazine online back in the day, fast forward to a critical darling like Casanova, and now the dude is writing Uncanny X-Men and Invincible Iron Man. He attributes much of his breaking in to drawing attention to himself online first. So, whatever works, there's that.

Anyway, I think you were indeed a jerk, as you admitted, and I still maintain that some of your ideas are ludicrous and sorta' creepy, but that said, it takes some gumption for a person to apologize, so I accept that to some extent, though it's hard to be conciliatory in the face of such wanton antagonism.

At the end of the day, if you don't like Val's politics or her writing, why keep reading her and posting on her blog? Move on. At this point, I'm not feeling intellectually challenged by this exchange anyway. It's kinda' boring now. So many of your opinions are so out there, that I can hardly dignify with with a response.


At 11:53 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't like her because she's a liar.

Because she purposefully bends the truth on her site and doesn't allow people to reply or defend themselves so that she always comes out on top.

Now that's "creepy". And pathetic.

Case in point, my latest post.

Can you imagine, had I posted my real name or used my e-mail and she said that I "suggested she be bitched slapped," what the backlash to me personally would have been? Because Valerie lied, slandered me, then wouldn't let me defend myself by reposting?

And why?

So she could champion her self-indulgent cause to be queen of the mountain on her her own delusional pile of bullshit.

(And you wonder why a lot of people that have actually dealt with her don't believe half of the shit in her "memoirs.")

Now, if you don't let slanderous comments slide -- and there's a difference between slander and opinion -- then I would ask your pal Valerie to show you a copy of the REAL post.

She won't do it, though, because she can't. Because she lied and made it up.

Which is why I don't have to worry about her tracking me down legally, because the post never said that.

She'd have to show the REAL post to the authorities.

And that's something Valerie D'orazio would never do because she wouldn't come out on top.

At 12:20 PM, Blogger Justin Giampaoli said...


With every post, you just dig the hole a little deeper and your "cause" loses all semblance of credibility. Let it go.

I don't want to fuel the irrational obsession any longer. I don't want to get sucked into a semantical debate and mince words over something inapppropriate you said to Valerie and are now trying to back away from. I don't want to deal with the childish attempt at condescension that your use of terms like "pal" offer.

This is no longer a conversation, it's just you venting bile atop your rickety little soapbox. It's clear to me now why Valerie has been forced to moderate her comments.

I'm officially done.


At 1:34 PM, Blogger Matt Clark said...

I haven't read the book, but since your response was infinitely more articulate and reasoned Justin, I think I know what side of the fence I'm inclined to sit on!

Sometimes you wonder why comics geeks get a bad rep outside of their own little sub-culture; other times it becomes blatantly clear why they do.

At 1:54 PM, Blogger Justin Giampaoli said...


How refreshing to see another post in here that is not a cowardly anonymous rant.

You should check the book out, man. I'd be curious to see what an objective third party had to say. I know you dig crime, so it might be up your alley. All that should matter is the content, all of this other crap is just white noise.



At 2:02 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wow, taking down my posts to defend myself with?

In my country, the USA, we allow people to confront our accusers.

I take back everything I said about you and your Xerox minis.

You're just as big a bitch as Valerie.

At 2:08 PM, Blogger Justin Giampaoli said...

Jersey Troll,

Gosh, you fell right into my trap didn't you? It’s amusing (disturbing?) to me that you keep obsessively coming back, keep compulsively trying to leave comments. I guess when I said “I’m officially done,” I should have added “…and so are you” to the end of that sentence. That’s my fault for assuming you’d understand a subtle point.

I have to say that I have never believed in censorship, but your bitterly abusive ranting really leaves a person no choice. It’s just flaccid white noise. I will no longer allow you to co-opt my blog as a platform for your intense personal vendetta against… a woman who writes comic books(!).

So, you keep on posting here, and I’ll keep on deleting your comments as they troll in. You are not in control. Oh, I know you desperately want to be. It must be frustrating that you can’t construct a proper sentence, let alone influence people with the power of your words and ideas. In lieu of the rational, you try and force them to side with you by kicking and screaming louder and more unhinged, by flinging your tired little barbs. If everyone around you consistently takes an opposing position, is it more likely you’re the lone voice of reason, or the lone nut? Is it really more likely that EVERYONE is wrong, or that it just might be you? It’s too bad reality doesn’t bend around your personality disorder. You keep waging that futile little war inside your mind.

To answer your question, yes, I worked in federal law enforcement. One of the things I learned is that often times, rape isn’t about the sex, it’s about control. Chew on that.


At 2:22 PM, Blogger Hysan said...

"Again, out of the Mickey Mouse sites you listed (like yours), Newsarama is the only one with any real credentials or notoriety."


Seriously, after that, I just stopped reading. :)

At 2:25 PM, Blogger Justin Giampaoli said...

HAHA! Well, I didn't want to go there in the middle of that dust-up, but I totally agree with the sentiment.

Thanks for the support!


At 6:18 PM, Blogger Unknown said...

Wow! That was certainly entertaining. I'm kind of hard pressed to understand how someone could write a confessional "tell all" with a lot of negative information about the comics industry and somehow use that to "bitch her way inside" the same industry.

Especially since it seems an almost hermetically sealed little world where many of these people know and socialize with each other and she'd eventually be forced to rub elbows with people she discussed.

So for me, I always thought doing the opposite of that would be more effective-- you know, kissing industry ass. I actually thought Valerie's actual professional experience as a comic editor, freelance copywriting and her work with Friends of Lulu had a lot more to do with opening doors for her to write, along with her obvious talent.

Turns out I was all turned around on the subject!

I also don't understand why living in the US being able to "confront your accusers" (i.e., in a court of law) gives someone the absolute right to post a lot of hate-filled insults on someone's blog and the blog-owner is supposed to stand there and take it and give that person a free forum for their lunacy. Is that in the Constitution? Somewhere in the back, in an appendix?

Along those lines, posts full of a lot of name-calling, undocumented/unfounded accusations and rage so palpable it destroys one's ability to form coherent, grammatically-correct sentences aren't the best way for someone to go about defending oneself in the first place.

It actually comes off more like someone with a dangerous personal obsession in serious need of a visit to a mental health professional.

And finally, I'm kind of wondering, too, how someone without a name can call another person out as a liar. That's like a guy in a mask saying, "Trust me." Disturbing.

Anyway, great job Justin! I followed this here from the comments on the OS blog and you really showed a lot more tact and patience than I ever would have. Sorry about the length of this comment!

At 8:07 PM, Blogger Justin Giampaoli said...

Hey Joel,

No worries on length. It's great getting some balanced feedback and you bring up a lot of well-reasoned points. I love blogs (like Val's) where some of the comments can actually be as intelligent and thought provoking as the primary content.

As Valerie and I discussed in some of the comment threads at OS, unfortunately reason doesn't hold much sway in the face of such an unreasonable attack that was clearly motivated by personal angst or some other deep-seeded clinical issue.

Thanks again, thanks for reading. As far as I'm concerned, there's no such thing as bad press, and if this insane exchange gets even a handful of people to seek out the actual book that spawned it all, I'll gladly champion that effort, despite the occasional troll in the online gene pool!



At 8:04 AM, Blogger DMonkey said...

This was great. I read your stuff Justin and I haven't bought a comic in 20 years. I just appreciate your writing and perspective...and you're my friend. So, along those lines let me keep it simple and knock Jersey Girl's teeth out for you. I got your back brotha.

Take care. Mother ship out.

At 9:22 AM, Blogger Justin Giampaoli said...

Rugby Hooligan,

Hey brother, good to hear from you. Thanks for chiming in regarding the ass clown's behavior. Don't forget, "I seen your girl." Ha!

Cutter Out.


At 10:09 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

It’s ok, you don’t need Valerie to get any real work. You got a real bangin blog there.

“Chew on that.” LOL

What a sissy.

At 9:23 AM, Blogger Justin Giampaoli said...


(Nope, not Justin Timberlake, still Jersey Troll)

Wow. It’s really a sickness, isn’t it? I see multiple hits since the last time I checked, not to mention the attempted comments. You’re blog-stalking even at 12:30am, and that’s PST, not JTT (Jersey Troll Time). I wasn’t around then to thwart your petty outburst; I have a life outside the recesses of the trollosphere. I’m not sitting alone in the darkness of my parents’ moldy basement, tending to my psychosexual dysfunction, plotting cheap revenge fantasies while scarfing down Cheetos and masturbating to the characters of Babylon 5. The inability to get the last word in must really push a button with your psychosis. It’s losing that precious control you covet. It’s that respect you can’t seem to earn legitimately and try to forcibly demand instead.

I’m still rejecting the entire premise, deleting the nonsensical posts of a twit, a walking stereotype. It must torment you that I unpredictably let one slide by every so often, giving you juuust enough rope to hang yourself. I suppose I’d have to lower myself to the level of your petulant 4th grade wit and call you “a sissy” or “a bitch” or “a whore” for you to understand that you’ve been shut down. BTW, the psychological profiler in me finds it very telling that most of your wannabe insults revolve around degrading terms for women. It’s not coincidence that you subconsciously project that. Did mommy not say “I love you” enough? Did mommy’s spanking emasculate you? When you’re man enough to do anything requiring an ounce of public creativity instead of hiding behind a mask of anonymity and sniping, how ‘bout I come visit and we can do this all over. I’ll keep on baiting you into id traps, you’ll quote misinformed legal terms you gleaned from A-Team reruns and show off your pop culture ignorance and social misogyny, you can fumble around with the English language with all the bluster and fury of Foghorn Leghorn, and I’ll verbally bat you around like the ferocious widdle bunny wabbit you are. “Awwww! Who’s a widdle bunny wabbit? Oh yes, you are! Yes, you are!”

One of the downsides of the proliferation of opinion on the web is that you can just troll out until you find one that confirms what you think you already know. You get lazy and lose the willingness to actively seek out anything that challenges your faulty assumptions, which is how normal people learn and grow. I can have a lively debate with just about anyone – provided that logic is the ground rule. Any given set of agreed upon scientific or philosophical tenets enables a meaningful exchange. 2+2=4. But, if your all-consuming mindset of distorted deflective denial (does the New Jersey Militia teach alliteration?) informs your outlook that 2+2=75, *and* that you’re never wrong, *and* that’s the basis for our entire interaction – then it’s futile to continue. Your warbling random word collages lack civility, cohesion, or reason. Any attempt to illustrate an idea or counter a flawed statement is doomed to fail if you don’t have the cognitive ability to process it, but in its stead the attention span and social disposition of a tsetse fly. Reasoning with the unreasonable is, to borrow the way Valerie described dealing with your antics, like sliding “further down the rabbit hole.” If that literary analogy is too difficult to… oh, why do I even bother…

The only way left for me to characterize this bizarre encounter is to quote Will Ferrell as Harry Caray on SNL:



At 5:39 PM, Anonymous Jules said...

Hi, I thought I'd break up the crazy for a moment and drop a line. I found this blog through the link on Occasional Superheroine and I must say I found your review informative and insightful. I'll try and swing by the store and grab a copy of Punisher Max (even if he only does appear in three frames). As for Girl Comics, I'll try to borrow that from a friend. I'm still curious to see what it's about, but now I'd rather preview it through someone else.

So, uh, yeah, thought I'd throw that down. Happy troll batting!

At 9:38 AM, Blogger Justin Giampaoli said...

Hi Jules!

Breaking up the crazy is always welcome, ha!

It delights me to think that people will check out the book due to my recommendation. Come back and let me know what you think of it!




Post a Comment

<< Home