Let me try to clarify: make no mistake about it, I love comicbooks and graphic novels. If you look at my reviews on Amazon, I have reviewed several graphic novels, including Neil Gaiman’s 1602, which was great. No, I would never say that Gaiman was inferior to The Clone Wars.

But I will say that I enjoyed The Clone Wars movie very much and that I hated the television show. The TV show is plotless, but at least the movie had a story.

The comicbooks thing in connection with 20 year olds is just one facet that is part of a whole mentality, and I don’t think you can mention the collecting of toys and the playing of video games without also mentioning the comic books and graphic novels, which have largely replaced traditional reading materials for them. I don’t think comics and graphic novels, no matter how good, can replace the printed word, whether we’re talking about highbrow literature or science fiction novels. There is no substitute for reading in the old fashioned sense, but I think that too many of today’s 20 somethings have ditched novels and replaced them with an infantile and immature cult of superhero worship. I do like superheroes, but the kind of near religious reverence for them on behalf of 20 year olds is a bit silly.

Hope that helps.

Yours,
John Ebert

In addition, on the Pat MacMahon program you expressed your interest in comic books and gave an interesting philosophy on it. Wouldn’t you say that by deeming graphic novels (the mature component of comic books) as something these “twenty year olds” do along with playing video games and their collection toys as opposed to watching Lucas’ attempt to cash (as well as take away all the great things made interesting by the original films) as a contradiction?