>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Unbeatable_Squirrel_Girl
>Critics have praised its comedy as well as the empowering portrayal of Squirrel Girl.
>Reception
>Issue #1 was published on January 7, 2015 to positive reviews. The Unbeatable Squirrel Girl was praised for its comedy, and the character of Squirrel Girl was seen as empowering for being likable, smart, and having an average appearance unlike that of typical superheroes.[6][7] The Guardian in particular applauded the cartoon-like artwork by Erica Henderson as unique in Marvel's publications.[8] IGN regarded the series as "one of the best new debuts of recent memory".[6] Reviews of issue #2 were positive, with PopMatters calling it a "breath of fresh air: funny, charming, quirky, strong, brave, unbeatable".[2]
>>77668393
Some people like it, good for them. I don't know why /co/ hates this book so much.
>>77668459
Because the story is shit and the art makes me want to shove needles into my eyes.
>>77668459
You forgot to mention tumblr in your post, anon.
I'll let you off with a warning this time, but don't let it happen again.
>>77668393
Seriously, I am not a person that go on its way to hunt SJW.
I am not a person that cant apreciate simpler designs and more juvenile humor for different demographics.
I am a cool, reaseble guy.
But how the hell this piece of shit gets so much praise? Its mediocre at best, and compkete garbage at worst.
I wouldnt care a thing for it, if people didnt praised it like some extraordinary thing. What am I missing?
Also, /co/ never stoping talking about it, making threads and fanart, helps this shit to become stronger.
>>77668459
It's been said so many times why people hate this that I can't imagine how you "don't know why".
>>77668483
>>>/r9k/
I don't have that image of a skeleton saying "I accept it", but at this point there's just no use in caring.
It don't matter; None of this matters.
I suppose all that's left is hoping that Squirrel Girl does better in New Avengers and that the other books using the setting aren't as shit.
>>77668483
>I love how being "unbeatable" is a plus for Squirrel Girl but the first complaint normies have for Superman.
That's stupid. You're stupid.
Superman isn't a comedy character.
>>77668508
>helps this shit to become stronger
Now here's something I don't know. Why do people think that's a thing?
/co/ talking about it hasn't made it "stronger", if anything it's entirely inconsequential to this things popularity.
>>77668393
By that same logic, Scott Snyder is the greatest Batman writer ever because his comics sell and critics love him. The same for Dan Slott on Spider-Man.
And of course, Whor and Harley Quinn.
Now please kill yourself, you stupid sheep.
>>77668508
You forget that the people who pick this up barely read comics.
>>77668393
Its so strange that DC has so many GOOD comics lately, that will never be noticed by the big public, while shit like this is praised....
>>77668393
Why is all this shit in the Wiki article, but no "there has been criticism of the poor dialogue and artstlyle?"
>>77668644
but anon, people on /co/ barely read comics
Sure love them Americans and how they think they're pushing the boundaries of social justice via popular fiction.
>Lets support Squirrel Girl. It's uninspired piece of shit, but boy is it empowering to ugly women.
Meanwhile in Japan a female writer (and a female character designer) have no issue with portraying a space harem in a nuanced, not judgmental way.
Europe has feminists too, but they don't go around bitching over every nipple they see on TV and in video games, because they have better shit to do.
Honestly, the rest of the world would collectively wipe their ass with Sasquatch Girl. So maybe that gives you guys some solace.
>>77668791
It'll be removed because "non-notable source".
I hate the character Squirrel Girl but the book is harmless and I want it to keep going because of how it triggers /co/
>>77668791
because anonymous randos don't count
>>77668538
THIS T B H F A M
>>77668791
Because every comic book critic gives the book high acclaim because 1. It's a Social Justice/Feminism book with strong female characters and 2.it's a marvel book
Regardless of sales, the book is guaranteed high scores on Comic Book Review Sites.
>Squirrel Girl gets adapted into an animated series
>lead character design and animation director Erica Henderson
>mfw not a day goes by where Marvel does something that makes /pol/ look better
Can't wait for Captain America to defend a BLM protest soon
>>77668459
The art is shit and the writing is even worse. That's all there is to it.
>>77668717
Quality doesent sell, pandering does
>>77669135
Why do comic reviewers like Marvel though? DC, IDW and even fucking Image have consistently better books.
>>77669135
Comic review sites would give it a positive review if it were DC, bro. It's because they're pressured into giving positive reviews by comic book companies so they can continue to get exclusive content from said companies. Remember, comic book review sites gave Ultimatum positive reviews at first and only started shitting on it when popular opinion was so overwhelmingly negative they couldn't hope to whitewash it.
Proofs: http://web.archive.org/web/20100806050608/http://weeklycomicbookreview.com/2008/11/05/ultimatum-1-review
>>77669219
The mouse
>>77669219
Good PR and MCU
>>77668791
>>77669135
Most mainstream hobbist reviewers are shit with just basic knowledge of the medium they cover.
Same thing with videogames, reviewers don't understand why a RPG with restrict dialogue choices is bad, don't get why an action packed hack'n'slash needs a high framerate, etc...
No critical sense of artstyle, writing, nothing. They have shit taste and populist opinions.
>>77668483
don't you dare mention Superman in the same phrase you mention that dirty piece of subhuman trash abortion that is Squirrel girl!I don't even like Superman
Your guy’s salt over a comic none of you read is hysterical.
Please, keep posting about this. Pure comedy gold
>>77668459
Why we hate it?
Well here goes a list:
SJW.
tumblr.
Kate Leth, whore-princess.
Shit, horrible, cheap, art.
Shit, horrible, dumb writing.
Kate Leth, the whoremonger.
Ruined a fun character.
Kate Leth, feminazi fuhrer.
Look at that art, goddamn, it is horrible.
Kate Leth, the whore whisper.
Tumblr:the SJW comic.
>>77669540
>ruined a fun character
This. And you just know that the writer hadn't even heard of her before the comic. They only write her book because they wanted to say they wrote Squirrel Girl.
>>77669539
do I smell tumblerine's tears?
Oh yes I do, it smells like hypocrisy and censorship.
And cat shit, don't forget the cat shit
I bought all 8 issues.
>>77669585
I'm sure you are a special snowflake, congratulations.
probably you have the special edition DVD of that live action Jem Movie they launched.
>>77669582
Nope, I'm not a squirrel girl fan but laughing at /co/ never gets old
>>77668393
>empowering
I can't believe this word became mainstream.
>>77669621
>Nope, I'm not a squirrel girl fan
Jesus, calm down, no one accused you of being a fan of that pile of hot steaming sjw,heterophobic, feminazi garbage of a comic book.
Damn, that would be worst than saying you are a child molester, Christ.
Actually, I cant think in anything more hideous and disrespecting one person could say to another in this world, I mean, suggesting that you like SG???
Not even Hitler would be so vicious.
>>77669699
See, this post is hilarious. Your salty tears are amazing
>>77668459
>/co/ hates this book
/co/ loves it. Why do you think it's posted so often? /co/ is just being tsundere
>>77668542
>>77669731
I see, you are disturbed and ashamed.
Is hard, to be a white, straight, catholic, blonde little boy in a world full of tumblr shit.
But don't lose your way.
tell all bitches to go back to the kitchen.
and call dumb people retarded.
and dress like a Mexican at Halloween.
>>77669752
>/co/ loves it
Ah Jerry, you are killing me!
>>77669787
I don't know what any of this means
>>77669841
it means you are a fucking idiot.
No one uses those reaction pics except for tumblr.
you should be honest about coming from tumblr, if you are going to post all their reaction image memes
>>77668393
Anon, are you saying that oldfag comic book nerds are so irrelevant that their opinion doesn't even count as notable source?
It's no surprise that Marvel and DC have started pandering to everybody but them.
>>77668393
When did penny arcade start making squirrel girl?
@77669540
Your post reads like a shitlord bigot got mad and your shitty Kate Leth jokes are so fucking sexist I can't even
>>77669860
I only ever go on Tumblr for porn. Any reaction gifs I have came from random 4chan boards.
>comic reviews are shilled
More news at 11 casuals
>>77669908
oh, look.
a retard.
Or should I say, a special needs poster?
>>77669908
I miss subtly.
Then why don't you guys start Comicgate?
You can't possibly lose any harder than /v/.
>>77669860
>Too Schway for Words
>A macro that was literally created in a thread here where we were capping Batman Beyond and making macro images
>tumblr
get the fuck out newfag
>>77669925
>tumblr
>porn
>SJW headquarters
>porn
...ew
so you are from tumblr after all. please don't give any more details about your filthy habits.
it is kinda gross and sad
>>77670012
Tumblr exists for only a few things. Fan clubs, sjws, and porn. But mostly porn
this thread reeks tumblr.
I can't understand why anyone who goes to tumblr return to 4chan.
they gotta be insane.
>>77670034
stop, is filthy and grotesque.
>>77668610
there was that girl who talked about feminism in videogames who was made popular by /v/ hating on her and constantly making threads on her
>>77670071
>Implying you don't look at porn so where on the internet
>>77670089
so now every tumblerina comes to 4chan, shit everywhere, make disgusting SJW and SG threads, hoping to draw enough attention on the web to become famous.
of course they forget to post using their names, so everything is a big waste of time.
>>77670138
I only look at good normal porn, not the dirty shit from tumblr.
you sicko
>>77669810
>/co/ makes constant threads to talk about it
>but we don't like it I p-promise
>>77670173
You just used that reaction image.
like, five minutes ago.
CAN'T YOU PUT SOME EFFORT ON IT?
also I didn't really read your reply, sorry
>>77670173
If it bothers you so much, why do you keep bumping the thread? Or, if it bothers you so much why do you continue to post in this thread?
There are better ways to fellate your ego than this.
>>77670231
I don't think you will
>>77670253
to be honest, I am bored.
>>77670259
True, I might run out eventually
>>77670296
no, its not that.
hey try to guess why I think you will not post Oglaf for some time?
>>77670335
Most likely because I'm going to get bored
>>77670366
naw. I will give you a tip
"R"
reading this thread has given me an idea. Why doesn't /co/ start an actual comic review site, where anons can submit their reviews to the site owner, who takes the general consensus from anonymous reviews to make a larger review showing what a comic has going for it if you take away the sjw propaganda which pulls in the sales.
/co/ always (rightfully) complains about critics and how many of them are simply paid to praise anything progressive until there isn't a single originalwhy the fuck didn't marvel kill off some characters in secret wars and use the opportunity to replace them with legacy characters sjw's like, or just to help with the MU overpopulation?character left in comics, but it seems like nobody here has done anything about it.
>>77668393
How's that an "empowering portrayal"?
>>77670403
Yeah, bored now. Have fun with the Circle jerk guys
>>77670456
that is contrary to our anonymous doctrine, you filthy n00b.
also, general consensus?
more like bullshit.
>>77670456
>/co/
>doing work
kek
>>77670456
i've tried forever and no one cares or wants to do it
>>77670456
> /co/ fighting for ethics in comics journalism
This is going to be fun.
I can understand getting upset over bad portrayals of big-name characters, but who's getting upset over the "ruining" of a 4th-string joke character?
>>77670576
what realy rustle our Jimmies is that those shit head tumblrs keep making those Squirrel Girl threads, no matter how much we tell them we hate that crap.
is the new Tatsuya, utter garbage shit posting aimed only to rustle our Jimmies and mods don't stop them from doing it
>>77670545
That is not going to happen in /co/
GG was always agaisnt women, hell it was started because an ex boyfriend harrased a woman.
Then the fuckers tried to invite every board (including /co/ /toy/ /pol/ and /b/) and that is when they got banned.
I remember that even some guys were telling everyone that comicsalliance was the kotaku of comic books (but it isnt, comicsalliance is awesome)
>>77670748
>comicsalliance is awesome
you gotta be trolling or tripping.
maybe both
>>77670783
What's wrong with comics alliance?
>>77670841
Nothing, /co/ hates it because it as run by a woman named Laura Hudson, she was pretty great
>>77670841
its utter garbage.
are you joking?
see, only on those SG threads we have this kind of shit opinion.
some assholes come in advertising Sqirrel Girl like the next big things, then they never fail to advertise how awesome Comicalliance is.
even when they shit over comics that are not "politically correct" and promote only their own tumblr cronies and try to tell everyone what is right and what is wrong.
it's worst than those tatsuya threads.
fucking asshole come only to advertise that shit cunt that work on both CA and SG, those kind of threads should be banned.
Why does /co/ find it so hard to fathom that other people may have different opinions?
>>77670914
>Laura Hudson, she was pretty great
the great tumblr circle jerk has started.
>>77670914
they've gone through like 2 or 3 editors since Hudson dude. She works at wired now I think
>>77668459
Because /co/ can't the fact that they aren't the audience for every book ever.
I mean I don't get anything out of the book, so I don't read it, but other people obviously do, and that's cool. Getting angry about it is fucking stupid.
>>77671048
>Because /co/ can't the fact that they aren't the audience for every book ever.
and still people come and make threads about comics that we don't like, and we don't want to see around here.
and somehow is our fault that we don't change our opinions and worship those fucking comics that are not for us or about things we like.
seriously, how can we have more squirrel girl threads than threads about Prequel? that's bullshit and should not be tolerated, those SG threads are only people trying to get some angry reactions from us while they advertise the work of someone we don't like nor respect
>>77670253
it doesn't bother me. I actually like the book too.
>>77671129
> we
> we
> we
I thought pretending to be a spokesman was a tumblr tactic?
>>77671164
yeah.
4chan is dead.
nine years lurking here to see it die in the hands of tumblr-fags.
>>77671175
who cares, as long they stop making this same thread every fucking monday
>>77668393
>>77671301
What the fuck just happened?
Somebody needs to put the comichron numbers on that page. You just need to point out in the talk page how it's common practice to do that for WP articles on modern comic books beforehand, and most editors will go "Well, fair enough then".
USG crybabies start bitching about how mentioning the nosedive in sales triggers them? There's channels you can go through with WP's higher-ups to put those kids in time-out. This isn't impossible, it's just a little time-consuming.
>>77668393
>this shit is a bestseller because of "le strong female protagonist"
>Prez barely selling 6,000 per issue
Well gang, I'm calling it. There's no hope.
>>77671400
Nerve gas
>>77671428
So this comic isn't doing well in sales? That's what I'm getting from your post, at least.
>>77671400
It got shot in the top of the head.
It was already dead when the nervous system went berserk.
>>77671437
>Bestseller
Fuck off
>>77670748
Hey this is copypasta. This is copypasta. This is copypasta.
>>77669606
The what what what, now?
>>77671480
The floppies don't sell well, no. I would assume it at least has decent digital sales, but we don't get numbers on that, and apparently the trades sell well.
>>77671480
Sales pretty much halved after the very first issue.
>empowering
I'm sick of this word. It's similar to "representation", it's just part of the recent trend of SJWs and people of that ilk/under their influence to need to be seen to be looking out for minorities. Fuck, not just minorities, but the entirety of the female gender. Or maybe SG is empowering to people with downs, I dunno.
My point is, when people are harping on about how empowering something is, or how it gives a much needed boost for the representation of [whatever], are these people really affected by that? No, they just like to be able to say it. They hold themselves above those people but want to be seen as with them.
Never does anyone say it as a past participle. No one says "I feel so empowered by Squirrel Girl", no one says that anywhere, but instead everyone's pointing out just how much it's empowering for other people. But who are these people? Is actually empowering to them...?
>>77671600
Sorry I hurt your feelings.
>>77668393
>Critics have praised its comedy as well as the empowering portrayal of Squirrel Girl.
Squirrel Girl has always been portrayed as strong and empowered her. This new run doesn't do anything truly new.
>>77671958
I've always found it interesting how the only place /co/ pretends to be concerned about minorities is when discussing a comic they hate and SJWs like.
>>77671480
It sold worse than Morbius The Living Vampire, a book that was cancelled at issue nine despite Marvel having a policy of giving every ongoing at the time at least 12 issues.
>>77672941
I didn't claim to give a shit about minorities, I'm just tired of empty SJW rhetoric. I find it "problematic".
>>77672941
Of course /co/ cares about minorities. Haven't you seen all the brown girl threads?
Does SG's audience even know about Bandette?
>>77672941
How did you even reach this conclusion?
>>77669540
Kate Leth has zero involvement with SG. Are you just confusing her with Erica Henderson? Leth is the writer for the upcoming Patsy Walker comic
>>77672274
You're wrong, stop pretending SG is actually successful in any way. You're shilling the book
DAAAAAAAAAAAAAH
OH NO! NOT MUH ACORNS!
It's a New York Times Bestseller
>>77674159
>>77668393
>>77673778
She did the "review" that made it "popular."
>>77669163
BLM is objectively correct, kill yourself.
>>77673890
Fine, I was misinformed, I'm sorry, but you don't have to be a dick about it.
>>77674694
>being this retarded
>>77668393
>average appearance
downs syndrome is not average
