Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Death of Superman wasn't the problem, The Reign of the Supermen was. The Death of Superman was a great initial part of a saga, but Reign took the wind out of the sails.
Oh and it is debated if Deadpool is a mutant or not. He is very much in the mutant corner of the Marvel comics, but he himself isn't exactly a mutant himself. I agree, unless you talk about Deadpool the parent, the majority of Deadpool stories are just dumb fun.
No, it isn't. There was nothing else like it at the time. Arguably, there still isn't. It's aged well, too.
Just because there is “nothing like it” doesn’t necessarily mean it is good. There is nothing like tuna on pizza or mustard on chocolate ice cream. Yet they remain weird and nasty despite their originality.
Other than mustard on chocolate ice cream, WATCHMEN reminds me of Pink Floyd’s “The Wall.” I can see why people admire it. I admire a lot of the creativity that went in to it. Yet it remains self-indulgent navel-gazing pretentiousness. V FOR VENDETTA is superior to WATCHMEN in every way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AFtrEFkt
And, hey, let's not overlook Frank Miller's RONIN.
I haven’t forgotten it, but I don’t think I’ve read it in at least 20 years. But I remember liking it.
And yes, I love Frank Miller's early work. One of the all-time great comic book writers. Which makes it all the more painful that everything he's done for the past 20 years has been so awful.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AFtrEFkt
Also, you're completely wrong about the art looking dated. It's no more "dated by today's standards"
Not the drawing so much (which was excellent) but the coloring. All those bright pinks and yellows. Ouch. Totally glaring.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AFtrEFkt
I don't think it's overrated. The indestructible man meets his match. It had to happen, and it happened without kryptonite.
I’ll admit it’s been years since I read it, but you nailed exactly what disappointed me about it: It’s just two titans punching each other till one doesn’t get up anymore. That can be exciting for about 3 pages. After that it gets old. I found Doomsday a completely boring character. Still do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AFtrEFkt
Okay. Stop. Are you serious? WHY is it the "gold standard" of how to do a reboot?
Because it is perfectly paced story driven by developed and motivated characters. Yes, Bendis is overly fond of ellipses, but his dialogue is still great.
And I love Mark Bagley’s art. It doesn’t strive to be photo-realistic (I hate that dreck) but neither does it stray into being overly cartoony. And the expressions on his characters are able to convey emotions without a word of dialogue.
Bagley is in stark contrast to more popular artists like Jim Lee, who does gorgeous backgrounds and buildings but who can only draw one face with one expression; or Frank Quitely who draws so many kissy faces that it’s creepy; or Alex Ross, who might as well just be photoshopping over posed photos.
Just because there is “nothing like it” doesn’t necessarily mean it is good. There is nothing like tuna on pizza or mustard on chocolate ice cream. Yet they remain weird and nasty despite their originality.
That's our MarkuS, always going for the extreme example.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark S.
Other than mustard on chocolate ice cream, WATCHMEN reminds me of Pink Floyd’s “The Wall.” I can see why people admire it. I admire a lot of the creativity that went in to it. Yet it remains self-indulgent navel-gazing pretentiousness. V FOR VENDETTA is superior to WATCHMEN in every way.
Nothing wrong with an opinion. V is also a great work. I don't like it as much as everyone else (and I've known of it for longer than everyone else outside Great Britain, probably), but that's okay.
But why is it that 9 times out of 10 something overrated, according to you, was published by DC?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark S.
I haven’t forgotten it, but I don’t think I’ve read it in at least 20 years. But I remember liking it.
Pssst...there's nothing else like it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark S.
And yes, I love Frank Miller's early work. One of the all-time great comic book writers. Which makes it all the more painful that everything he's done for the past 20 years has been so awful.
The past 20 years? Not all of it. I have yet to read DKIII: The Master Race. I have them, I just haven't had a chance to read them. But that will be soon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark S.
Not the drawing so much (which was excellent) but the coloring. All those bright pinks and yellows. Ouch. Totally glaring.
That was '86. Colors hadn't gotten that bad yet. By '88, especially with the myriad X titles, Marvel's colors looked like crap.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark S.
I’ll admit it’s been years since I read it, but you nailed exactly what disappointed me about it: It’s just two titans punching each other till one doesn’t get up anymore. That can be exciting for about 3 pages. After that it gets old. I found Doomsday a completely boring character. Still do.
No problem with that opinion. But it did depict an event that hadn't been, er, depicted in fifty years of publishing. At least not like that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark S.
Because it is perfectly paced story driven by developed and motivated characters. Yes, Bendis is overly fond of ellipses, but his dialogue is still great.
What a generic statement. Looks like Batman: Year One is still the gold standard of reboots, then.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark S.
And I love Mark Bagley’s art. It doesn’t strive to be photo-realistic (I hate that dreck) but neither does it stray into being overly cartoony. And the expressions on his characters are able to convey emotions without a word of dialogue.
IMO, his art does stray into cartoony-ville. It steps just over the line, which, for me, is too much, unless you're drawing a parody or Captain Carrot. I don't like his faces.
Artists who did/do exactly what you just described, without an iota of cartoony-ness, who are far better, and more esteemed: George Pérez, Jim Aparo, Neal Adams, Brian Bolland, Joe Kubert, and the inimitable Jose Luis Garcia-Lopez, among others. Not just figures & faces, either: backgrounds, group shots, tone, perspective — the works. And since they worked largely before all the rampant computer effects showed up, they did it all by way of delineation.
But why is it that 9 times out of 10 something overrated, according to you, was published by DC?
Is it? I don't know. But at least in terms of the wider culture outside of nerd-dom, when it comes to comics that are widely praised, it tends to be DC titles more often than not. I don't remember the last time I saw a Marvel comic praised outside of nerd circles. Some of Claremont's X-Men stuff from the '80s maybe? (And those haven't aged particularly well.)
Pop culture often praises Marvel's characters and how they revolutionized comics back in the '60s. But when it comes to singling out a series of comics or a graphic novel for praise, it tends to be DC titles getting all the accolades.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AFtrEFkt
What a generic statement.
The fundamentals of a good story are rather generic and easy to define. Hard to accomplish, but easy to define.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AFtrEFkt
Looks like Batman: Year One is still the gold standard of reboots, then.
Is it? I don't know. But at least in terms of the wider culture outside of nerd-dom, when it comes to comics that are widely praised, it tends to be DC titles more often than not. I don't remember the last time I saw a Marvel comic praised outside of nerd circles. Some of Claremont's X-Men stuff from the '80s maybe? (And those haven't aged particularly well.)
Pop culture often praises Marvel's characters and how they revolutionized comics back in the '60s. But when it comes to singling out a series of comics or a graphic novel for praise, it tends to be DC titles getting all the accolades.
True. The last events which Marvel got any buzz for were House of M, Civil War and the underwhelming AvX. DC started the whole universe-churning event-epic trend with the wunnerful Crisis on Infinite Earths, and even though they sequelized it with Infinite Crisis and a multitude of connected prequels, tie-ins and limited series, it still seems everything Marvel's done since on that level, beginning with Secret Wars, is an imitation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark S.
The fundamentals of a good story are rather generic and easy to define. Hard to accomplish, but easy to define.
US-M didn't do anything many titles had done before it. DC had that ground thoroughly covered in the '80s. Wolfman's [Teen] Titans was amazing continuity- and characterization-wise.
True. The last events which Marvel got any buzz for were House of M, Civil War and the underwhelming AvX. DC started the whole universe-churning event-epic trend with the wunnerful Crisis on Infinite Earths, and even though they sequelized it with Infinite Crisis and a multitude of connected prequels, tie-ins and limited series, it still seems everything Marvel's done since on that level, beginning with Secret Wars, is an imitation.
I enjoyed House of M and Civil War, though I wouldn't consider either classics.
I got very tired of Marvel trying to reinvent the wheel every 3 years or so. Good, consistent storytelling went out the window in favor of "Big Event" stories. Big Events should only come every decade or so, but every time sales started to slag, Marvel decided to destroy the world again. And again. And again. It got old quick.
To the surprise of no one, a small crew that was assembled for pre-production in Atlanta, GA on Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 have been dismissed in the wake of James Gunn’s firing from the Disney/Marvel film, Deadline has confirmed. This was a crew left over from when Gunn was set to oversee the film.
I suspect that in reality Disney found out more than some old offensive tweets. If that's all it was, this seems like an extreme over-reaction.
If I am correct and the entire episode is sparked by a political hitter getting payback for the zero tolerance shown towards Rosanne then the whistle blower was no doubt going to use the Breitbart technique and drop the follow up outrage as soon as Disney said the initially dropped tweets apology was accepted and Gunn was forgiven
That's one helluva run-on sentence. The tweets were dug up by two alt-righters because Gunn constantly trashed Trump on his timeline.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
