Talk:Shane McCarthy

"He is not a fan of the 2007 Transformers movie."
Too deep and complex a story for him, huh? --M Sipher 09:57, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm not a fan of him, but I hope that's not an unfair addition to his article. He's allowed his opinion of the movie. It was more of a continuation of how we note when somebody involved with Transformers (such as Neil Kaplan or Michael McConnohie, apparently) openly state their dislike of some other aspect of Transformers, particularly the ones they weren't involved in. --FFN 10:13, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

I can say with complete sincerity that I think it's a fascinating and fitting addition. --M Sipher 10:16, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

I personally find it ironic. From what I can tell so far, AHM is alot like what we saw in the movie: Decepticons blowing a city up and the humans as main characters, while the Autobots are around at the peripheries, just in case you forgot there were Autobots in Transformers. --FFN 10:19, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

I'd be willing to go one step further, FFN. I've been thinking for some time now that AHM reminds me a great deal of the '07 Movie so far, just that the Movie actually did it all entertainingly. :P Jeysie 15:09, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

So he cribbed it without realising? --FFN 16:26, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Either that, or decided to write his own version of the movie with all the "sucky parts" removed. Really, it does read like a version of the movie with all of the parts many folks complained about either taken out (the humor, the military guys being lionized, Autobots in suburbia, etc...) or changed to what they wanted (more Con screen time, more action, humans being ineffectual cannon fodder, etc). I'd like to think the result so far speaks for itself. Jeysie 17:00, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Primus, we're only three issues in. You people are animals.SolarisOmega 04:41, 4 October 2008 (EDT)

Hey Shane. Welcome to the TF Wiki. --FFN 08:59, 4 October 2008 (EDT)

Hi person. I'm not Shane. Jeysie knows me from deviantArt and the IDW boards. Hi, Jeysie. ~bloodandsteel ...SolarisOmega 04:41, 4 January 2009 (EDT)

*waves* I suspected that nick wasn't McCarthy, but I couldn't remember who it actually was instead offhand. :> But now I remember your alt nick/OC name. --Jeysie 06:30, 4 January 2009 (EST)

"Primus, we're only three issues in." - three issues, that sucked like hell, you forgot to add ;P Minime 04:54, 6 October 2008 (EDT)

Not to start off another debate here on this, but I'd rather address it here than just change it and start a whole hullabaloo... Is the comment on McCarthy's quote really nessessary? Yes, AHM has it's fair share of haters and I'm not totally sold on the series myself, but I honestly do feel that particular dig at the man is rather petty. --Darkspeed 13:15, 3 January 2009

Yeah, let's reserve this spite for people who commit real crimes. --ItsWalky 13:24, 3 January 2009 (EST)

You people are gutless :) --FFN 18:29, 4 January 2009 (EST)

And you won't stop beating a dead horse --Eire 23.42 4 January 2009 (UTC)

See, I'm all for calling a spade a spade. However, we're ranging into venom we usually reserve for, say, Pat Lee. Shane may be a hack, but he's no Pat Lee.--Rosicrucian^Talk 18:45, 4 January 2009 (EST)

Before this develops into constant edits, can i get an official saying if "Hissy Fit" is acceptable for this entry? --Darkspeed 19:03, 4 Jan 2009

Walky says to reserve spite for people who deserve it; Walky is an administrator. Ergo, I think his judgement overrules FFN's. --Monzo 19:02, 4 January 2009 (EST)

The "tells you not to buy his books" thing may have been too much, but fact remains that his behavior on the post in question was a hissy fit. Total Biscuit commented that in spite of what Shane said in interviews, nothing in AHM seemed to flow with what was previously established, and Shane replied with a "You're impolite and uncivil so I won't answer". --Detour 19:14, 4 January 2009 (EST)

Just to be picky here... Total Biscuit never actually asked a question in his post. He just started listing off a load of inconsistencies in a story that had only just begun, then accused McCarthy of not being able to follow on from furman's story when we already knew this was a soft reboot of the franchise. McCarthy's response was abrupt, but calling it a hissy fit is a big stretch IMHO.

Which is exactly my point. It's your opinion that it's a hissy fit, and it's mine that it's not. But the entry isn't for us to push opinions on, just to give the facts. So that's why I feel "hissy fit" is too much, and it should just remain "comment". Let people make up their own minds. --Darkspeed 19:44, 4 Jan 2009

I could swear that before AHM was released McCarthy claimed that the story was not in any way a reboot and it was always written to be in-continuity with Furman's storyline. Now they say it's a soft reboot? --FFN 19:47, 4 January 2009 (EST)

It being a "soft reboot" in no way conflicts with it being in-continuity and not an actual reboot. All a soft reboot signifies is a change of direction and tone. That's what the term means. G1 cartoon season 3 was a soft reboot. Beast Machines was a soft reboot. Energon and Cybertron were soft reboots. All were in-continuity, but a new start at the same time, with some alterations and some concepts dropped and others added. --ItsWalky 20:04, 4 January 2009 (EST)

I've tried to go the middle road by reproducing a little more of that exchange in the article's quote. Let people judge for themselves.--Rosicrucian^Talk 19:49, 4 January 2009 (EST)

I don't see any particular need for the exchange to be quoted in this article at all. --KilMichaelMcC 20:10, 4 January 2009 (EST)

I'll have to agree... Unless this is just a test for people's reaction, how it was before suited me fine aside from the comment on hissy fit. But if we are going to do that here, perhaps something like the quotes section on Pat Lee's page? --Darkspeed 20:16, 4 Jan 2009

I don't find the quote exchange at all informative or useful. --ItsWalky 20:29, 4 January 2009 (EST)

I'm going to say it here, just because I've really got no one else to say it to. AHM has been some of the worst comic reading experience of all time. Which is an incredible shame, as the Furman IDW continuity was some of the best. Pleh.

Caption

I'm totally loving the Top Gear gag in the mainpic caption. ---Blackout- 15:07, 7 November 2009 (EST)

I don't really, cos Top Gear is awesome and Hammond deserves better than being associated with this guy. Dead Metal 15:15, 7 November 2009 (EST)

Thanks, I like Hammond too. I was just struck by the resemblance in this photo, which is why I've not used more recent photos of McCarthy for this wiki. --FFN 16:59, 7 November 2009 (EST)

Also, is anyone else up for adding "Now read this caption in Jeremy Clarkson's voice" to that caption in parentheses? ---Blackout- 12:37, 9 November 2009 (EST)

I like that idea. Although I do have to say, I feel the same dismay associating an awesome show with the worse ever writer this franchise has encountered (That's a set in stone fact. The Maya predicted it). Metal Gear NOIZE 13:06, 9 November 2009 (EST)

That would kinda be belabouring the joke, I think. --abates 13:57, 9 November 2009 (EST)

Yeah, I agree. Most people who know who Richard Hammond is will be mentally reading it in Clarkson or May's voice automatically.--Rosicrucian^Talk 15:03, 9 November 2009 (EST)

Yes, less is more, people. --FFN 16:42, 9 November 2009 (EST)

That said we do need more Top Gear jokes but where would it be fitting?Dead Metal 14:44, 18 November 2009 (EST)

Riddler

The article takes time to point out that his Riddler reimagining didn't take. This isn't abnormal. It'd be more notable if it DID take! Point out that it didn't last give the impression that his Riddler being forgotten means it some pariah of comics, but this just isn't the case. --ItsWalky 18:37, 5 February 2011 (EST)

Can I at least call it a "short-lived reinvention"? --Detour 18:51, 5 February 2011 (EST)

"Temporary," maybe. --ItsWalky 18:52, 5 February 2011 (EST)

That works. For what it's worth, I'm not really aware of any other Riddler reinventions, since I don't follow Batman comics much (about 90% of my Batman comic collection dates back to when Alan Grant was writing them)... but McCarthy's reimagining as a metrosexual, non-riddle-using crime boss is kind of... baffling. --Detour 18:56, 5 February 2011 (EST)

Let's just say that after a year or two of Riddler being reinvented as a sort-of ally of Batman who just wants to solve crimes faster than he does, suddenly he showed up a month back as a long-haired goofball with a daughter. --ItsWalky 19:13, 5 February 2011 (EST)

Well the concept of him outsmarting Batman has been a constant one for a number of years, and Riddler never seemed as bad as some others, so having him go straight and try to beat Batman to solving crimes is an interesting direction. Sounds less like "reinvention" and more like "character development". Long-haired goofball, though, that's an unusual one. --Detour 19:24, 5 February 2011 (EST)