Stupor, Man

Link To Today’s Strip

Incredible. Somehow, just out of nowhere, this nonsensical arc has become a comic book history lesson. Never saw it coming.

So, was Starbuck Jones an obscure cult classic or was it a huge sensation? Don’t ask Batom, despite it being his own personal fantasy he has absolutely no idea anymore. Maybe he should have created his little SJ universe BEFORE he started doing FW arcs about it, but the cat got out of that bag a long time ago. And now it’s all a big ugly mish-mosh.

And how does any of this relate to modern-day Pete and Darin’s situation? They didn’t create SJ, they were merely hired to work on an already-developed project. If Pete wanted a situation where he was in full control of his own creation, why did he leave his Mister Sponge gig in the first place? And as far as Boy Lisa is concerned, he’s fortunate to be involved with this idiotic movie at all. I’m not sure what the point here is supposed to be or even if there is one anymore.

Advertisements

22 Comments

Filed under Son of Stuck Funky

22 responses to “Stupor, Man

  1. SpacemanSpiff85

    I really think the only point is that Batiuk has the Sunday covers he’s determined to use, and he figures if he can fill up an entire week with barely related comic drivel, he’s going to.

  2. OK, so each panel has the photo corners that are the universal TB symbol of a flashback frame, but the first two panels are in color and feature a Pete Rooibos and a Durwood who are apparently conversing in the present day and playing with movie merchandise that only yesterday was a scribble on Durwood’s drawing board (merchandise which seemingly has nothing to do with Jupiter Moon). The third panel, as Epicus points out, comes completely out of nowhere, and makes zero sense. Who’s character was Starbuck Jones, anyway? Have we been introduced to him? Are Pete Rickenbacker and Duran perhaps reincarnations of the original artists? This is the ONLY way that this makes any sense at all.

  3. billytheskink

    These two schmos could always kill off Starbuck Jones in the next issue out of spite. I heard about a certain comic artist doing this a couple decades ago and it seems to help him sleep at night.

    Oh wait, this is a flashback featuring 10 cent comics, so it takes place before that character kill off happened (and likely before Siegal and Schuster’s story was common geek-culture knowledge), so there’s no precedent.

    Oh yeah, and this is the comic book industry where no character stays dead and “reboots” were a thing long before the term was invented.

    But, hey, that certain comic artist really did stick it to those money-grubbing suits that one time…

  4. Rusty

    This is at least the third time Batiuk has trotted out that Superman’s creators were screwed out of their rights story. It’s the equivalent of the Book of Genesis in Westview.

  5. Epicus Doomus

    So modern-day Boy Lisa and Pete are fantasizing about retro Boy Lisa and Pete, who were apparently screwed out of their SJ money despite knowing what happened to the Superman creators before them. This shit makes my head hurt. I think the bottom line here is that Batiuk is way, way far gone with his increasingly-detailed Batom Comics fantasies and he desperately wants to somehow squeeze them into FW but (unsurprisingly) he has no idea how to do it. So he’s just slapping some photo album corner thingies on it and calling it a night.

  6. I think this is another example of The Author’s need for an editor or someone to keep him from going off the rails and trolling his readers.

    It appears that the photo mounts mean panels one and two are meant to be taking place in the past despite their being in color (like Les’s time pool hallucination last summer) and the characters shown aren’t Pete and Darren but are the Starbucks Jones creators from his mythical Batom Comics history, Flash Freeman and Phil Holt. Which raises the question: Are we going to find out that this is also someone’s hallucination (Darren overdosing on whatever Funky puts in Montoni’s pizza to hook his customers perhaps)?

  7. Yeah, this isn’t the first time Batiuk has discussed the selling of the rights to Superman like it was some travesty or scam. Incidentally, you’d think he’d remember that Action Comics #1 was released near the end of the Great Depression when $130 would probably have fed your family or paid rent for good while.

  8. So basically we’re reading Batiuk’s personal, derivative fan-fiction about his fictional comic book company, right?

  9. @ TheDiva,

    You’ve hit the nail on the head. That’s about it.

  10. What he also forgets is that most people don’t actually give a crap as to who owns the rights to Superman.

  11. Continuity Police Alert: corner panel thingies, full color, flashbacks, zzzzzzzzzzzzz…….

  12. Rusty Shackleford

    The only thief here is Batty stealing from his syndicate. It’s not like anybody is going to try and steal his lame characters. Though I am surprised he hasn’t released a “Lisa’s Home Cancer Screening Kit”.

  13. Chyron HR

    OHHH, I get it, the first two panels are supposed to be the 1940s Darrin and Pete, even though the syndicate colored them which indicates that they’re the modern Darrin and Pete.

    I’d feel sort of bad that this publishing error made Batiuk look like an idiot, if not for the fact that the strip now revolves around “1940s Darrin and Pete”.

  14. @The Diva: It’s for those of us who have been successfully ignoring his blog. There is no escape.

  15. sgtsaunders

    Is there a Les Moore action figure? If so, I want to get one and let GI Joe beat his ass. But there are no FW action figures, of course. No one would give even $130 for the IP rights associated with the Funkyverse.

  16. $$$WESTVIEW ONCOLOGIST$$$

    The problem I have with this Schuster/Superman argument is that it’s completely 20-20 hindsight. How the hell were you supposed to know back in those days that comic books and merchandising would explode in such a way Or for that matter that Superman itself would even be a success. There were other characters that never even made it. . It’s like someone selling Apple stock in the 1980’s How the heck do you know that THAT particular company would succeed and not fail.

  17. Unrelated to today’s strip, but I learned a new word today that applies perfectly to a lot of the characters in this strip – Backpfeifengesicht.

  18. ComicBookHarriet

    Heyitsdave strikes gold again!

  19. So, Funky Winkerbean has basically become an advertisement for Tom Batiuk’s blog. Since it doesn’t have a link to said blog, it can’t be very effective.

  20. Money, money everywhere,
    If we’d only stopped to think,
    Money, money everywhere,
    And our bank accounts did shrink,
    Money, money everywhere,
    Nor any dime for drink.

    The Rime of the Ancient Whiner, by Samuel Taylor Batiuk

  21. Charles

    The problem I have with this Schuster/Superman argument is that it’s completely 20-20 hindsight.

    It also presumes that the people buying the rights didn’t do anything noteworthy in order to make the property as valuable as it became. They just bought it, made some derivatives and sat back as the dough rolled in from the work someone else did.